Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory: Proceedings of the Workshop Held at 10th Icaane in Vienna, April 2016 (Orea) 9783700182054, 3700182058

Citation preview

Jörg Becker – Claudia Beuger – Bernd Müller-Neuhof (Eds.) Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory

Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-historische Klasse

Oriental and European Archaeology Volume 11

Series Editor: Barbara Horejs

Publications Coordinator: Ulrike Schuh

Jörg Becker – Claudia Beuger – Bernd Müller-Neuhof (Eds.)

Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory Proceedings of the Workshop held at 10th ICAANE in Vienna, April 2016

Accepted by the Publication Committee of the Division of Humanities and the Social Sciences of the Austrian Academy of Sciences: Michael Alram, Bert G. Fragner, Andre Gingrich, Hermann Hunger, Sigrid Jalkotzy-Deger, Renate Pillinger, Franz Rainer, Oliver Jens Schmitt, Danuta Shanzer, Peter Wiesinger, Waldemar Zacharasiewicz

Picture on the opposite page: Sculpture with depictions of clothing, found in a rectangular building located at Göbekli Tepe’s southwestern hilltop. The cone at the lower part allowed for the sculpture to be set upright into a floor or bench. (photo: D. Johannes, © DAI)

This publication was subject to international and anonymous peer review. Peer review is an essential part of the Austrian Academy of Sciences Press evaluation process. Before any book can be accepted for publication, it is assessed by international specialists and ultimately must be approved by the Austrian Academy of Sciences Publication Committee.

The paper used in this publication is DIN EN ISO 9706 certified and meets the requirements for permanent archiving of written cultural property.

English language editing: Hazel Harrison Graphics and layout: Angela Schwab Coverdesign: Mario Börner, Angela Schwab

All rights reserved. ISBN: 978-3-7001-8205-4 Copyright © Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna 2019 Printing: Prime Rate, Budapest https://epub.oeaw.ac.at/8205-4 https://verlag.oeaw.ac.at Made in Europe

ORIENTAL AND EUROPEAN ARCHAEOLOGY

Vol. 1

B. Horejs – M. Mehofer (eds.), Western Anatolia before Troy. Proto-Urbanisation in the 4th Millenium BC? Proceedings of the International Symposium held at the Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, Vienna, Austria, 21–24 November, 2012 (Vienna 2014).

Vol. 2

B. Eder – R. Pruzsinszky (eds.), Policies of Exchange. Political Systems and Modes of Interaction in the Aegean and the Near East in the 2nd Millennium B.C.E. Proceedings of the International Symposium at the University of Freiburg, Institute for Archaeological Studies, 30th May–2nd June, 2012 (Vienna 2015).

Vol. 3

M. Bartelheim – B. Horejs – R. Krauß (eds.), Von Baden bis Troia. Ressourcennutzung, Metallurgie und Wissenstransfer. Eine Jubiläumsschrift für Ernst Pernicka (Rahden/Westf. 2016).

Vol. 4

M. Luciani (ed.), The Archaeology of North Arabia. Oases and Landscapes. Proceedings of the International Congress held at the University of Vienna, 5–8 December, 2013 (Vienna 2016).

Vol. 5

B. Horejs, Çukuriçi Höyük 1. Anatolia and the Aegean from the 7th to the 3rd Millennium BC. With contributions by Ch. Britsch, St. Grasböck, B. Milić, L. Peloschek, M. Röcklinger and Ch. Schwall (Vienna 2017).

Vol. 6

M. Mödlinger, Protecting the Body in War and Combat. Metal Body Armour in Bronze Age Europe (Vienna 2017).

Vol. 7

Ch. Schwall, Çukuriçi Höyük 2. Das 5. und 4. Jahrtausend v. Chr. in Westanatolien und der Ostägäis. Mit einem Beitrag von B. Horejs (Vienna 2018).

Vol. 8

W. Anderson – K. Hopper – A. Robinson (eds.), Landscape Archaeology in Southern Caucasia. Finding Common Ground in Diverse Environments. Proceedings of the Workshop held at 10th ICAANE in Vienna, April 2016 (Vienna 2018).

Vol. 9

St. Gimatzidis – M. Pieniążek – S. Mangaloğlu-Votruba (eds.), Archaeology Across Frontiers and Borderlands. Fragmentation and Connectivity in the North Aegean and the Central Balkans from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age (Vienna 2018).

Vol. 10

E. Alram-Stern – B. Horejs (eds.), Pottery Technologies and Sociocultural Connections Between the Aegean and Anatolia During the 3rd Millennium BC (Vienna 2018).

Preface by the Series Editor

7

Contents Preface by the Series Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Jörg Becker – Claudia Beuger – Bernd Müller-Neuhof Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory: An Introduction . . 11 Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East: A Contribution to the Reconstruction of Ancient Living Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Bérénice Chamel – Eric Coqueugniot Human Self-perception and Self-expression during the 9th Millennium calBC: Funerary Practices and Symbolic Meaning of the Human Representations at Dja’de el-Mughara (Syria) 57 Miquel Molist – Anabel Ortiz – Anna Gómez-Bach Symbolic Artefacts in the Syrian Euphrates Valley in the Middle and Late PPNB: Contributions of the Tell Halula Project in an Interpretative Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Karina Croucher Plastered Skulls: Evidence of Grief and Mourning? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Claudia Beuger Clothing and Nudity in the Prehistoric Near East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Bernadette Drabsch Nude, Robed and Masked Processions: Considering the Figural Images in the Teleilat Ghassul Wall Paintings, Jordan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Bernd Müller-Neuhof Signals from the Past: Gestures in South-west Asian Anthropomorphic Iconography – Preliminary Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Oliver Dietrich – Laura Dietrich – Jens Notroff Anthropomorphic Imagery at Göbekli Tepe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Jörg Becker Figurines of the Halaf Period – Early 6th Millennium calBC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 Goce Naumov – Peter F. Biehl Chalcolithic Human Representations at Çatalhöyük . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 Trevor Watkins When Do Human Representations Become Superhuman Agents? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237

8

Preface by the Series Editor

Preface by the Series Editor

The 11th volume of the OREA series addresses ‘Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory’ and represents the outcome of a workshop held on 28th and 29th of April 2016 at the International Congress on the ‘Archaeology of the Ancient Near East’. The 10th anniversary conference of the ICAANE (International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East) took place from 25th to 29th of April in Vienna and was hosted and organised by the Institute for Oriental and European Archaeology (OREA) at the Austrian Academy of Sciences. While the general proceedings of the sections were published by the Harrassowitz Publishing House in 2018, the experts’ workshops appear as separate volumes of the OREA series which are generously supported by the Austrian Academy of Sciences Press. The present volume is edited for our internationally peer-reviewed series by Jörg Becker, Claudia Beuger and Bernd Müller-Neuhof who also initiated and organised the workshop about ‘Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory’. The editors brought together 18 authors for 12 contributions focussing on a topic that will be of considerable interest to many archaeologists concerned with prehistory not only in the Fertile Crescent but also in other world regions. The subject of human self-reflection and the symbolism of prehistoric art have always been fascinating fields in research but have been lifted to new levels since Göbekli Tepe and other monumentalised Pre-Pottery Neolithic sites in Southwest Asia have been detected. The whole new world of a complex symbolism of sculptures, reliefs and depicted pillars opens the window onto past societies and their beliefs, magical practices as well as ritual and cognitive behaviours. Despite all obvious difficulties in dealing with these numinous meta-spheres and symbolic meanings in illiterate societies, the time seems right to benefit scientifically from the value of the massively increased amount of archaeological evidence in the Near East. The editors aim to use the new data to go beyond the well-established and long-debated aspects of fertility and divine representations by applying several well-thought-out strategies. The longue durée approach of the collected articles demonstrates the changing of the people’s cognitive behaviour represented in self-reflection, physical self-awareness, burial practices and ancestral veneration to mention but a few of the discussed aspects. The discussions cover the time-span from the first sedentary groups in the Natufien to food-producing economies in the PPN to surplus-producing economies in the Ubaid horizon and offer the reader a broad spectrum with clear changes of practices, habits, signs and narratives over about 8000 years of human depictions. Most of the papers additionally focus on the contextualisation of the archaeological evidence as a methodological approach including treatments, deposition, spatial conditions, state of preservations, intention and others. And finally, the editors also point to the interdisciplinarity necessary for dealing with these topics in future, partially fulfilled in this volume. The collection of articles is organised into the three main topics of physical anthropology and mortuary practices, self-perception and self-expression of the human and finally symbolism and iconography to help the reader through this complex world of human iconography in past societies. It can hardly be surprising that the analyses of some of the most spectacular new evidence of prehistoric imagery of the famous sites in South-west Asia do not offer clear answers at the present stage of research. However, the authors have provided new data, contexts and thoughts and therefore vividly fulfilled the editors’ aims for this volume by going beyond the long-established interpretations. My sincere thanks for financial support for the 10th ICAANE conference go to several Austrian and international institutions which are the following: The Austrian Federal Ministry of Europe, Integration and Foreign Affairs, the University of Vienna, the City of Vienna, the Vienna Science and Technology Fund (WWTF), the Institute for Aegean Prehistory (INSTAP), the Austrian Orient Society Hammer-Purgstall and the Austrian Academy of Sciences. I would

10

Preface by the Series Editor

like to thank Ulrike Schuh for the coordination and editing, Hazel Harrison for language editing, Angela Schwab for the layout and the Austrian Academy of Sciences Press for supporting the publications of the 10th ICAANE workshops in the OREA series. Barbara Horejs Director of the Institute for Oriental and European Archaeology Vienna, 5 July 2019

1. İkiztepe; 2. Uluçak; 3. Kuruçay; 4. Hacılar; 5. Höyüçek; 6. Çatalhöyük; 7. Köşk Höyük; 8. Domuztepe; 9. Gaziantep; 10. Sakçagözü; 11. Kilisik; 12. Çavi Tarlası; 13. Nevalı Çori; 14. Gritille; 15. Lidar Höyük; 16. Titriş Höyük 17. Göbekli Tepe; 18. Şanlıurfa; 19. Yeni Mahalle; 20. Kazane Höyük; 21. Tülintepe; 22. Çayönü Tepesi; 23. Girikihaciyan; 24. Körtik Tepe; 25. Tell Kurdu; 26. Tell Qaramel; 27. Ras Shamra; 28. Shir; 29. Hama; 30. Fıstıklı Höyük; 31. Tell ‘Abr 3; 32. Tell Kosak Shamali; 33. Tell Halula; 34. Jerf el-Ahmar; 35. Dja’de el-Mughara; 36. Tell Banat; 37. Shams ed-Din; 38. Tell Cheikh Hassan; 39. Mureybet; 40. Tell Abu Hureyra; 41. Tell Sabi Abyad; 42. Khirbet esh-Shenef; 43. Tell Zeidan; 44. Tell Tawila; 45. Tell Fakhariyah; 46. Tell Halaf; 47. Tell Aqab; 48. Chagar Bazar; 49. Tell Kashkashok; 50. Tell Umm Qseir; 51. Yarim Tepe; 52. Kharabeh Shattani; 53. Tell Arpachiyah; 54. Tepe Gawra; 55. Nimrud; 56. Hajji Firuz; 57. Jarmo; 58. Tell Bouqras; 59. Mari; 60. Umm Dabaghiyah; 61. Tell es-Sawwan; 62. Tell Hassan; 63. Tell Songor; 64. Choga Mami; 65. Ganj Dareh; 66. Uruk; 67. Tell el-Oueili; 68. Tell el-Ubaid; 69. Ur; 70. Eridu; 71. Susa; 72. Choga Mish; 73. Tall-e Bakun; 74. Byblos; 75. Tell Ramad; 76. Tell Aswad; 77. Beisamoun; 78. Yiftahel; 79. Kfar Ha’Horesh; 80. Munḫata; 81. Sha’ar Hagolan; 83. Meggido; 82. el-Hammeh; 84. Gilgal; 85. Cave of the Warrior; 86. Jericho; 87. Teleilat Ghassul; 88. Horvat Duma; 89. Nahal Mishmar; 90. Nahal Hemar Cave; 91. Basta; 92. ‘Ain Ghazal; 93. Dhuweila (map: M. Börner/OREA)

Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory: An Introduction

11

Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory: An Introduction Jörg Becker 1 – Claudia Beuger 2 – Bernd Müller-Neuhof 3 The iconography of humans has so far only been treated in excerpts on Near Eastern prehistory. For research purposes, the focus was on the study of figurines of the Late Neolithic in South-west Asia and on aspects of the fertility cult and divine images. In this regard, special mention has to be given to the ‘mother goddess’.4 In the discussion of the ‘revolution of symbols’,5 the bull, which is also represented in the Neolitic settlement of Çatalhöyük,6 has often been regarded as the male counterpart of the maternal deity. Due to the fact that the excavations of the last 30 years have significantly expanded the spectrum of anthropomorphic representations in South-west Asian prehistory, it is time to renew the discussion on this subject. The geographic focus of this volume is directed to the area of the so-called ‘Fertile Crescent’, the region of rain-fed agriculture in South-west Asia, consisting of the Levant and the southern mountainous regions of the Taurus and Zagros, where the process of Neolithisation originated. The chronological context covers the period from the late Epipalaeolithic (Natufian) to the Chalcolithic (about 14,900 to 5700 calBP). Restricting the period to this section of the prehistory of the Near East is justified by the fact that during this period the essential foundations of life for the later civilisations of the Near East were laid which, in turn, had an effect on human self-reflection and human coexistence and which furthermore affected the iconographic representation of the human-being. However, a major argument for restricting our volume to this section of prehistory is the immense increase in anthropomorphic representations in this period. While for the late Epipalaeolithic (c. 14,900–11,800 calBP) only a relatively modest inventory of human images is known,7 from the pre-pottery Neolithic (PPNA and PPNB, c. 11,800–8400 calBP) onwards, numerous anthropomorphic sculptures, reliefs, terracotta figurines, busts and masks, made out of different materials, have come to light, mostly in excavations such as at Göbekli Tepe,8 Jerf el-Ahmar,9 Nevalı Çori10 and in ‘Ain Ghazal.11 This large number of anthropomorphic representations might support the quest for a greater understanding of the functions and meanings of these representations which are currently not (yet) sufficiently accessible to us, also because of the lack of written records. Resolving this mystery is

1

2

3 4

5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Seminar for Oriental Archaeology and Art History, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Germany; joerg. [email protected]. Seminar for Oriental Archaeology and Art History, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Germany; claudia. [email protected]. Deutsches Archäologisches Institut – Orientabteilung, Berlin, Germany; [email protected]. Overviews on human iconography in South-west Asia can be found in Ucko 1968; Helck 1971; Broman Morales 1990; Bienert 1995. More recent attempts on the interpretation of Late Neolithic figurines are published, for example, in Verhoeven 2007; Croucher 2013; Kielt Costello 2013. – For similar studies on material from Europe and from other Neolithic regions see, for example, Orphanidis 1998 (Neolithic Europe) or more recently Bailey 2005 (for Neolithic Europe), Hansen 2007 (concerning South-east Europe), Conard 2003 and Conard – Wertheimer 2010 (for older European traditions), Schwarzberg 2011 (for anthropomorphic vessels) or finally Jarrige 2005 (for Neolithic Balochistan). Cauvin 1994. Mellaart 1967; Gimbutas 1982; Mellaart et al. 1989; Gimbutas 1991; Garfinkel 2003; Hodder 2006; Hodder 2010. For an overview on the Natufian see Bar-Yosef – Valla 1991; Bienert 1995; Rollefson 2008. Peters – Schmidt 2004; Schmidt 2006; Becker et al. 2012. Stordeur – Abbès 2002; Stordeur 2003. Hauptmann 1993; Morsch 2002; Hauptmann 2011. Tubb – Grissom 1995; Schmandt-Besserat 1998; Salje et al. 2004; Schmandt-Besserat 2013.

12

Jörg Becker – Claudia Beuger – Bernd Müller-Neuhof

one of the great challenges that scholars of archaeology, semiotics, psychology and ethnography have been devoting themselves to and must continue to do so in the future.12 As human self-reflection is a major issue of the symbolic meaning of humankind in prehistory, it must be noted that it was not only an important motive behind the expression of anthropomorphic representations, it was also expressed in the way in which societies dealt with death and how societies practised ancestral veneration. Therefore, the material elements of Neolithic burial cult and ancestral veneration, for which we have abundant proof, should also be considered in this context. Among these material elements, the plaster-covered skulls of the developed Early Neolithic (PPNB) which were widespread in the southern Levant (e.g. in Jericho, Tell Aswad, Beisamoun and Kfar Ha’Horesh) and which are regarded as elements of an ancestral cult require a special mention.13 In this regard, the variability or standardisation of burial habits are also important, especially in the case of outstanding findings, such as the ‘death houses’ in Çayönü Tepesi and Dja’de el-Mughara.14 While we can clearly observe a strong continuity of the cultural traditions of the previous periods in the Late Neolithic (c. 8400–7300 calBP), the situation is different in the Early Chalcolithic (c. 7300–6400 calBP), especially in Mesopotamia. Here, a strong correlation of specific characteristics in anthropomorphic representations and physical evidence in human remains can be observed. The characteristic representations of the Ubaid figurines in particular are a subject for discussion.15 One peculiarity of this group is a representation of humans that is fundamentally different to the representation we are accustomed to from the Neolithic figurines. In addition, a re-examination of the corresponding skeletal findings from previous excavations has shown that known iconographical elements (the over-extended ʻlizard’ head) are also reflected in pathological findings and, thus, are indeed real.16 This implies that on the one hand, we must deal extensively with the idea behind the representations, but that on the other hand we must also have a concrete discussion on the self-representation of the human and his body. The narrative function of the late prehistoric iconography of the 6th millennium BP in the Near East is, however, much clearer to us. The social transformation processes, e.g. urbanisation, social stratification and the establishment of social institutions (temples and palaces), which served as the foundations of all succeeding ancient oriental civilisations, also affected the iconography of human representations. Thus, for the first time, everyday activities for human-beings such as fighting, working and being involved in handicrafts, the representation of elites (rulers or priests)17 and the ideological function of iconographical representations (e.g. lion hunt stele from Uruk) are recognisable to us. The fact that we understand the message of these representations better than those of the preceding prehistoric periods is also due to the almost unchanged reception of those themes and motifs, which first appeared in the Uruk period, by the cultures that followed. This was further promoted by the reference to such messages and their meaning in cuneiform texts from the late 3rd millennium BC onwards which contributed significantly to our understanding of these representations.18 These observations in connection with the enormous increase in iconographic representations of the human being and the variety of anthropomorphic representations related to monumental structures (e.g. sculptures, reliefs, plastered skulls) and the material used for the images (e.g. stone, clay, composite materials) demanded a review of the type of human representation in the prehistoric art

12

13

14 15 16 17 18

E.g. the project ‘Our Place: Our Place in the World’ financed by the John Templeton Foundation (Watkins – Schmidt 2012). Generally, e.g. Bienert 1991; Bienert – Müller-Neuhof 2000; Kujit 2000; Goren et al. 2001; Kujit 2008; Bonogofsky 2006; Stordeur 2007 (Tell Aswad); Goring-Morris 2005 (Kfar Ha’Horesh). Cf. e.g. Erim-Özdoğan 2011 (Çayönü); Coqueugniot 1999 (Dja’de el-Mughara). Most recently Daems 2010. Croucher 2010. Cf. Drabsch this volume For example Herles 2006.

Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory: An Introduction

13

of the Near East. Such a re-examination must go beyond the above-mentioned aspects of fertility cult and divine representation. For these reasons, the editors of this volume organised a workshop at the 10th ICAANE in Vienna in 2016 and assembled a number of colleagues who presented papers on different aspects of the subject. In order to present a comprehensive collection of papers, which covered more or less all aspects of this topic, the programme of the workshop is included at the end of this introduction. Time constraints and other commitments for some of the workshop participants were the reason that only a reduced collection of contributions could be gathered for this volume, which may give the impression that some of the general topics are not appropriately discussed. However, the main themes, at least, are addressed by the contributions which according to the workshop programme are divided into three main themes: these being physical anthropology and mortuary practice, self-perception and self-expression of the human, and symbolism and iconography. In comparison to an increasing number of studies on the human body and gender interpretations in European prehistory,19 we have to admit that this field is in its infancy in Near Eastern prehistory and our volume offers only the first foray into the discussion that is required here. A major idea of this workshop was to provide an overview of the corpus of iconographic monuments and their find contexts in a comprehensive manner, with particular attention being paid to the results of recent field research campaigns (B. Chamel/E. Coqueugniot, O. Dietrich et al., Y. Erdal, M. Molist et al.). This corpus was placed in context with anthropological information, e.g. the physical condition of mankind in Near Eastern prehistory (K. Croucher, M. Schultz) and the archaeological findings of burial practices (D. Baird, A. Belfer-Cohen, S. Campbell, B. Finlayson, A. Fletcher, N. Goring-Morris) in order to construct as comprehensive a picture as possible of self-perception and representation of prehistoric humans within their community in South-west Asia. For the workshop, an external view on the topic was provided by N. Conard and M. Zeidi, who are involved in the study of early prehistoric figurines from the Eurasian area. In view of the extensive research carried out for many years in this area, they offered important approaches for interpreting the South-west Asian body of prehistoric anthropomorphic representations. This refers, for example, to the corpulent female figurines, which are deeply rooted in the Palaeolithic. But considering that in Early Neolithic times the sex of the images in many cases is not specific and probably not important to the recipient (B. Chamel/E. Coqueugniot), the images might symbolise aspects other than fertility. Similar to P. J. Ucko’s systematic scheme of anthropomorphic images (cult figures, vehicles of magic, teaching figures, toys; cf. J. Becker, B. Chamel/E. Coqueugniot),20 several scholars were able to present a more differentiated picture of the function of figurines and statues. To achieve this, the treatment and deposition of images are especially important. Not only the clay figurines (J. Becker, B. Chamel/E. Coqueugniot, M. Molist et al.) but also the nearly lifesized stone sculptures from Göbekli Tepe (O. Dietrich et al.) were intentionally broken. For Late Neolithic Mesopotamia especially, with the location of clay figurines in secondary contexts and the lack of special purpose buildings, it is highly likely that rituals were practised within the households without any agents or institutions. The figurines were used as magic vehicles, not as representations of gods and goddesses and therefore generally had limited lives (J. Becker, B. Chamel/E. Coqueugniot). The main questions addressed in this context concern, among other things, the way in which people dealt with their own bodies, the physical self-awareness of people and possible references to social structures. This can be found in ante- and post-mortem body decorations and modifications, in the reproduction of social hierarchies, in costume elements (C. Beuger, B. Drabsch) as well as in possible evidence for gender relations. However, the question as to whether it is possible to derive more detailed information on the symbolic content from the representations is central (O. Nieuwenhuyse). This raises the question if there are tendencies to a canonisation of design principles or the gestures and if we can identify

19 20

For example Robb – Harris 2013; Harris – Hofmann 2014. Ucko 1968.

14

Jörg Becker – Claudia Beuger – Bernd Müller-Neuhof

a gesture, can we understand it (B. Müller-Neuhof)? How are the representations embedded? Can we draw conclusions about magical-religious practices (O. Dietrich et al., J. Becker, P. Biehl)? The fundamental issue that has to be discussed, however, is whether actual (earthly) human-beings or miraculous/heavenly beings (T. Watkins) are represented. On this basis the self-representation of humans has to be examined in relation to the cultural-historical traditions and their important transitional phases, beginning with the first sedentary sites in the Natufian, the development of food-producing economies in the PPN, and finally the surplus-oriented economies in the Late Neolithic and especially in the Chalcolithic. These processes were characterised not only by economic changes but also by significant impacts on human territorial behaviour, on forms of human cooperation and coexistence, and last but not least on the cognitive behaviour of people. In this context, it is of great importance that a shift in the perspectives of archaeological research can be observed over recent decades. Interpretations based on external deterministic explanatory approaches, e.g. climate change and population pressure as causes of social change, now turn to explanatory models, which are based on changes in human consciousness, and which are explored in an interdisciplinary framework, involving, among others, the disciplines of archaeology, ethnology, philosophy and psychology.21 It was the aim of the workshop papers and is consequently also the aim of the contributions in this volume to address at least some of these issues and to illustrate the current state of research in this field, especially from the archaeological perspective.

Physical anthropology and mortuary practice The contribution by M. Schultz and T. H. Schmidt-Schultz which focuses on demographic and health issues in prehistoric societies also has an introductory function. This is of special importance, since funerary customs and in this context ancestor veneration too are correlated with issues such as life span and disease. With regard to diseases in particular, this correlation can be extended to anthropomorphic representations as the function of such figurines might also have been of an apotropaic nature against illness.22 Schultz gives an overview of health and disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historic Near East using paleopathology and bioarchaeology to reconstruct the health status and living conditions of early populations. Health is expressed here by the morbidity and mortality of a population as well as by nutritional and occupational stress. In addition, interactions between various diseases, between diseases and the environment as well as between diseases and the history of a studied population are interesting fields which might be partly explained by the results of palaeopathological investigations. Examples are therefore presented to illustrate such complex interactions or the frequencies of meningeal diseases in infants and children of past populations from different sites in Central Europe and the Near East, and the biosocial background of diseases in upper- and lower-class populations from central Europe, Mesopotamia and Egypt. As an important result, Schultz stresses that the biotope ‘had a greater influence on human health in prehistoric times than human culture’. This clearly demonstrates that prehistoric societies had already developed complex ritual practices against natural rigors. Another section of the volume deals with Neolithic funerary practices; however, in this context, it is not spatially connected with figurines and their treatment. B. Chamel and E. Coqueugniot discuss the variability in human representations and funerary practices in the LPPNA and EPPNB, based on data from the Middle Euphrates site of Dja’de el-Mughara. The funerary practice there is characterised by a high variability in terms of burial places, burial positions and

21

22

Besides Cauvin 1994 (concerning ‘Revolution of the Symbols’), see, for example, Renfrew – Zubrow 1994; Mithen 2004; Watkins 2004; Hodder 2006; Watkins 2008; Hodder 2010; Benz – Bauer 2013; Watkins 2013; Watkins – Sterelny 2015. See Becker this volume; Müller-Neuhof this volume.

Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory: An Introduction

15

presence of single and collective burials as well as of primary and secondary burials. A specific development towards a special location for burials can be observed in the EPPNB phase, where special buildings were designed for a large number of burials. Additionally, LPPNA/EPPNB funerary practices are characterised by closure acts, exemplified by torching the burial buildings (LPPNA phase) or sealing the last burials in burial buildings (EPPNB phase). Finally, Chamel and Coqueugniot compare this highly variable funerary practice with the MPPNB funerary practice which was identified at Tell Halula. There, the funerary practice is characterised by a much higher standardisation and the placement of burials is also different, in that graves are not isolated from the living population: they are located in the entrances of ordinary houses and as such are part of the everyday environment. Spatial connections between burials and figurines, however, have not been observed in the LPPNA/EPPNB phases of Dja’de el-Mughara, which is also the case for the MPPNB in Tell Halula.23 However, the high variability in the manufacture of the figurines, e.g. raw materials and style, reflects – according to the authors – strong parallels with the variability in the burial practice. Moreover, the find context of the deliberately broken figurines, usually in secondary contexts, such as in rubbish or infill, shows further parallels with the LPPNA/EPPNB burial habit of closure or ending described above. The strong relationship that human representations and burials have with the PPNB domestic sphere is discussed by M. Molist, A. Ortiz and A. Gómez-Bach, referring to their findings from the PPNB site of Tell Halula. Human representations were identified in floor paintings as well as in sculptures, made from clay and later (from the LPPNB/PN transitional phase) from stone. In all cases, only women were depicted. Besides the female statuettes, a large number of statuettes representing quadruped animals were also discovered. Some of them seem to be bovine representations. Due to the material (clay), the schematised character and the deliberate fragmentation of the figurines, a relation between these items and votive practices is proposed by the authors.24 However, as in Dja’de el-Mughara, no spatial connection between figurines and burial assemblages at Tell Halula could be identified. Burials were placed under the floor inside the domestic rooms and contained adults (both sexes) as well as children. Similarly, jewellery and grooved stones with incised decoration have been identified as grave goods in almost all burials, without any hint towards a differentiation referring to age or sex. The authors stress that symbolic practices were especially represented in the burial practice, exemplified by the fact that all community members were treated in the same way in interment. Consequently, these mortuary practices reflected the self-expression of the household. This domestic ancestor worship additionally stresses the compatibility of life and death and was also used to determine the ownership of the domestic spaces. Human skulls are also the topic of the contribution by K. Croucher, who refers to the widely exercised custom, particularly in the PPN, of removing the skulls of the deceased, most probably family members, from the burial and reconstructing the faces by means of plastering. This practical reconstruction can be regarded in the thematic context of this volume as a link that connects funerary practice with the production of figurines. However, Croucher addresses the psycho-social backgrounds of such a custom more and interprets the removing and plastering of skulls as an emotive response of the deceased’s family members, in order to retain the bond between the living and the dead. According to the author, this custom can be regarded as a materialisation of the process of coping with grief and bereavement by rituals in daily life.

23 24

Molist et al. this volume. See also Becker this volume.

16

Jörg Becker – Claudia Beuger – Bernd Müller-Neuhof

Self-perception and self-expression of the human-being In C. Beuger’s contribution, the focus is directed exclusively towards anthropomorphic representations. She discusses to what extent nakedness and clothing can be related to the perception of the self in Neolithic societies. By evaluating our (modern) concepts of nakedness and clothing, which are caused by the functional benefits (of clothing) as well as shame and prudery, Beuger concludes, in a longue durée ranging from the Neolithic up to the historical periods of the ancient Near East, that veiling clothes played a minor role until the 6th millennium BP. Moreover, prehistoric clothes had personal values with personal meanings, with the possible exception of specific garments for specific persons and ritual practices, rather than being a protection against the cold or evidence for a notion of shame and prudery. The author points out that the perception of clothes began with the onset of the hierarchical stratification of society, probably as early as in the Ubaid period. This societal change had an impact on the perception of the self and the addition of the concept of shame and prudery meant that new dress codes were required for the upper part of the female body. The elaborate body decorations, however, which are represented on many prehistoric, especially Late Neolithic figurines, refer to an individualistic perception of the self in prehistory, mirroring a general fashion practised in an individual way. Clothing and nakedness are also addressed in the contribution by B. Drabsch which deals with the famous Late Chalcolithic wall painting fragments from Teleilat Ghassul, where the interaction of several individuals in a scene and the possible reasons for the depiction of clothed and naked figurines in this scene are the major themes. Drabsch evaluates a number of different features represented in wall paintings and compares them with ethnographic and also archaeological data. These features comprise the anthropomorphic representations in early Near Eastern art in general and the depiction of processions in particular, the representation of individual extremities under special consideration about whether these were naked or clothed/shod and of different skin colours (tattoos, skin painting), and the evidence for polydactylism. As a further feature, she discusses the ambiguity of the sexuality of naked human representations, as others in the same context were clothed in ornamented robes. Additionally, depicted objects are considered. Using these characteristics, Drabsch constructs a comprehensive image of the scene itself, the role of its protagonists and even considers the possible sensual and emotional environment of such a procession. Special emphasis is placed upon the question of why the naked figures are characterised by an ambiguous sexuality. Possible explanations range from pre-initiation status to ritual ceremonies, in which sexual ambiguity was a key feature and which possibly reflects the ideology of the protagonists, characterised by a relation to gender yet not based on masculine-feminine polarities. The appearance of anthropomorphic representations is not only represented by clothes or nudity but is also represented by the gestures and postures of human representations, especially sculptures. Moreover, features such as clothes and nakedness in such prehistoric anthropomorphic representations transmit specific information to the observer; the function of gestures and postures are the transmission of signals. The diversity and especially the function and meaning of gestures and postures related to them in Neolithic anthropomorphic representations are therefore the topic of the contribution by B. Müller-Neuhof. After establishing a typology of gestures found in the rich assemblages of Neolithic figurative sculptures, an evaluation on the appearance of the types in the respective Neolithic periods (PPNA, PPNB and LN) as well as their attribution to specific sexes and postures is carried out. One result of this evaluation is that the majority of representations in the PPN were found to be male and in the LN were found to be female. Furthermore, PPN anthropomorphic representations are mostly represented in a standing position, while LN representations are mostly seated. This is followed by a discussion about the possible meanings of some of the gestures, by incorporating data from historical, ethological and ethnographic research on human gestures. An important result of this contextualisation of gestures represented in the Neolithic human representations of South-west Asia with these data from other fields is that the Neolithic gestures can be differentiated in somatic and active gestures. The latter are particularly characterised by the

Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory: An Introduction

17

presentation of primary or secondary sexual characteristics. The function of these gestures ranges from worshipping and receiving worship to the demarcation of territories, apotropaic functions, and appeasement functions. Gestures can therefore be regarded as an integral part of the general magic-ritual function of Neolithic human representations in South-west Asia which is discussed in more detail by J. Becker and O. Nieuwenhuyse in their contributions in this volume.

Symbolism and iconography The contribution by L. Dietrich, O. Dietrich and J. Notroff refers indirectly to funerary practices and, in this regard, to the removal of skulls, especially in PPN burials. Moreover, the authors address the custom of intentional decapitation of anthropomorphic representations which is frequently observed at Göbekli Tepe and which combines the themes of funerary practices and human representations. As, according to the authors, all imagery from Göbekli Tepe was part of a complex system of signs and narratives, the intentional destruction, i.e. the decapitation of anthropomorphic sculptures, was strongly related to burial rites. The substantial number of anthropomorphic sculptures discovered at the PPN site Göbekli Tepe shows a clear pattern of intentional decapitation of the heads, which seemed to have been intentionally buried simultaneously with the general backfilling of the enclosures. The parallels with the removal of skulls in PPN and in LN burial rites in particular, especially in relation to the special treatment of the skulls after removal,25 are obvious. Further parallels can be drawn with the custom of intentional decapitation of anthropomorphic statuary in a ritual context which is also observable in later periods such as the MPPNB and LPPNB26 and the LN.27 However, the T-shaped pillars were excluded from decapitation, although the central pillars in the enclosures in particular can be considered to be abstract anthropomorphic representations. A possible explanation for this is that these pillars and the surrounding T-shaped pillars showing zoomorphic representations belonged to another sphere, probably that of the dead and probably representing (divine) ancestors28 rather than naturalistic anthropomorphic and therefore destroyed representations. It is an observation which refers to a hierarchy of anthropomorphic representations to which the burial rites were applied. In his contribution, J. Becker challenges the common perception of the Halaf terracotta figurines as cult objects, which are mostly either female depictions, commonly regarded as depictions of mother goddesses and associated with fertility concepts, or horned quadrupeds, interpreted as bulls and associated with the counterpart of the mother goddess concept, the bull cult. The crude manufacture of these terracotta figurines, which supposedly could have been made by anyone, and the fact that they were mostly found in deliberately destroyed conditions, often in refuse areas, place their cultic function in question. Moreover, and based on earlier studies by Ucko or Voigt,29 Becker suggests a magical function, particularly for the female figurines, which were deliberately broken on magic-ritual occasions, at a household level in order to satisfy a wish or hope, or even to ritually support contractual obligations. The latter is assumed in cases where such broken figurines have been found in the same context as stamp seals and tokens.30 Dual functions cannot be excluded and this refers particularly to the bull figurines, which probably (also) played a role as children’s toys. The apparent lack of ritual buildings in the Halaf culture supports a notion that rituals were commonly practised at the household level. Neverthe-

25 26 27 28 29 30

See Croucher this volume. See Molist et al. this volume; Chamel – Coqueugniot this volume. See Becker this volume. See also Watkins this volume; Drabsch this volume for Teleilat Ghassul. Ucko 1968; Voigt 2000. Akkermans – Schwartz 2003, 140–141.

18

Jörg Becker – Claudia Beuger – Bernd Müller-Neuhof

less, the existence of cult figurines in the Halaf period can also be affirmed sporadically; however, they were made of more durable material (bone and stone). A comparable rarely observed but intriguing phenomenon in the material culture of the Late Neolithic is discussed by O. Nieuwenhuyse, who, in his contribution, focuses on applied decorations on pottery vessels in the Late Neolithic (7th millennium) of Upper Mesopotamia. Some of the applications discovered so far resemble stylised human bodies. However, due to their fragmentary state their stylised appearance; it is not fully clear whether these applications do indeed represent humans (or Mischwesen with reference to Nieuwenhuyse). Therefore, Nieuwenhuyse prefers the more neutral designation ‘humanoid’ and discusses these humanoid applications by applying a multi-sensory perspective and contextualising analyses. An important observation is that humanoid applications have often been discovered on pottery sherds, which originally belonged to larger (storage) vessels in the spatial context of multi-chambered storage buildings, and which are characteristic for a number of LN settlements. The assumed limited lighting conditions in such buildings inspired Nieuwenhuyse to argue that applications on pottery vessels were particularly intended for situations where visibility is restricted and that applications, especially the applied humanoids, can be interpreted as a tactile language, which could be understood by using hands and fingers rather than eyes. According to Nieuwenhuyse, the humanoid images had apotropaic functions, guarding resources in the storage buildings of the LN villages which were essential for the survival and well-being of the population. G. Naumov and P. Biehl discuss how the study of visual representations of the human body from the Neolithic and Chalcolithic in central Anatolia can help us in understanding identity and personhood in the past. Their focus is based on the comparison between human and zoomorphic representations found in the Neolithic Çatalhöyük East Mound and the Chalcolithic Çatalhöyük West Mound, and the role that such figurines as well as representations on pottery and wall paintings played in these communities. Resting upon older traditions of the Çatalhöyük Neolithic period, the Chalcolithic human figurines of the West Mound are more simplified and abstract, whereas no significant changes took place from Neolithic to Chalcolithic times regarding animal representations – mostly cattle. The authors also point out that representations of women on the West Mound figurines are not as explicit as those on the East Mound. They argue that the small quantity of figurines and representations of sex could be contributable to a shift to new media, such as vessels, as indicated by many simplified human representations with sexual markers not only on the West Mound, but also in Chalcolithic Anatolia in general. They conclude that the figurines and material culture expose a society with new principles and an understanding of their environment, which were also manifested in human and animal representations. Finally T. Watkins moves the discussion on anthropomorphic representations and human self-reflection to another level and in his contribution puts special emphasis on the evolution of religion, in particular the strong connection between the character of the organisation of a society and the power attributed to the gods of this society.31 Focusing on the T-shaped pillars from Göbekli Tepe and Nevalı Çori, he argues that these sculptures were representations of powerful, anthropomorphic, supernatural beings, perhaps something like ancestor-gods. His arguments for such an evaluation are their characteristics and their occurrence in appropriate contexts of monumental circular constructions, which resemble archaic, semi-subterranean, domestic ‘houses’ and communal buildings. However, while Watkins characterises the pillars as representations of supernatural beings, he clearly denies their interpretation as supernatural agents. The latter would have represented another ‘level’ of religion which also incorporates the moralising god, a level that is only observed in much more complex societies in which the power of an individual (king)

31

For this he refers to the thesis on the ʻAxialAgeʼ (Bellah 2011; Bellah – Joas 2012) which describes the steps towards monotheism during the 1st millennium BC and when the relationship between humans and gods changed: early gods were not exemplary or moralising.

Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory: An Introduction

19

is strongly related to the power of the god or the gods and vice versa. Yet, at the same time, the pillars represent the beginning of a doctrinal mode of religiosity. Nevertheless, the concept of canonisation of the myths does not contradict the individuality of humans in the prehistoric Near East, as is stressed by several scholars discussing various themes throughout the millennia: these being ritual practices,32 burial practices33 or clothing habits.34 In summary, it is obvious that the anthropomorphic representations were not images of one and the same subject. The discussion on all types of anthropomorphic iconography makes clear that the ‘mother goddess’ or ‘ancestor cult’ interpretations alone are not applicable to the divergent corpus of images. This volume only serves to highlight the beginning of a new perspective on the growing corpus of images which needs to be extended in several directions. The organisers of this workshop and editors of this volume feel confident that research on the iconography and symbolic meaning of the human-being in anthropomorphic representations as well as in mortuary practices is a highly important and current topic, as is attested by new publications on prehistoric figurines such as the recently published handbook edited by T. Insoll.35 However, the focus of future research should not only be directed towards the prehistoric periods but also towards the later periods in order to trace the longue durée of specific characteristics, representations and themes. We think that we have laid a foundation for further discussions and research and this was enabled in particular by the workshop participants and their contributions and especially by the contributors to this volume. Therefore, our sincerest thanks go to these colleagues. Additionally, we would like to thank the organisers of the 10th ICAANE in Vienna who made it possible for us to offer this workshop lasting one and half days. Last but not least we are very grateful for the opportunity to publish the workshop results in a volume of the OREA series and we would therefore like to express our thanks to Barbara Horejs and Ulrike Schuh. We thank our colleague, Emily Schalk (Berlin – Prehistoric Archaeology) for grammatical and stylistic corrections to our contribution. Finally, we would also like to thank the unknown reviewers for their important comments and suggestions.

References Akkermans – Schwartz 2003 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – G. M. Schwartz, The Archaeology of Syria. From Complex Hunter-Gatherers to Early Urban Societies (ca. 16,000–300 BC), Cambridge World Archaeology (Cambridge 2003). Bailey 2005 D. W. Bailey, Prehistoric Figurines. Representation and Corporeality in the Neolithic (London et al. 2005). Bar-Yosef – Valla 1991 O. Bar-Yosef – F. R. Valla, The Natufian Culture in the Levant, International Monographs in Prehistory (Ann Arbor 1991). Becker et al. 2012 N. Becker – O. Dietrich – T. Götzelt – Ç. Köksal-Schmidt – J. Notroff – K. Schmidt, Materialien zur Deutung der zentralen Pfeilerpaare des Göbekli Tepe und weiterer Orte des obermesopotamischen Frühneolithikums, Zeitschrift für Orient-Archäologie 5, 2012, 14–43. Bellah 2011 R. N. Bellah, Religion in Human Evolution. From the Paleolithic to the Axial Age (Cambridge 2011).

32 33 34 35

Becker this volume. Chamel – Coqueugniot this volume. Beuger this volume; Drabsch this volume. Insoll 2017.

20

Jörg Becker – Claudia Beuger – Bernd Müller-Neuhof

Bellah – Joas 2012 R. N. Bellah – H. Joas, The Axial Age and its Consequences (Cambridge 2012). Benz – Bauer 2013 M. Benz – J. Bauer, Symbols of power – symbols of crisis? A psycho-social approach to Early Neolithic symbol systems, Neo-Lithics 2/13, 2013, 11–24. Bienert 1991 H.-D. Bienert, Skull cult in the prehistoric Near East, Journal of Prehistoric Religion 5, 1991, 9–23. Bienert 1995 H.-D. Bienert, The human image in the Natufian and Aceramic Neolithic period of the Middle East, in: W. H. Waldren J. J. A. Ensenyat, R. C. Kennard (eds.), Rituals, Rites and Religion in Prehistory. IIIrd Deya International Conference of Prehistory, Vol. I, BAR International Series 611 (London 1995) 75–103. Bienert – Müller-Neuhof 2000 H.-D. Bienert – B. Müller-Neuhof, Im Schutz der Ahnen? Bestattungssitten im präkeramischen Neolithikum Jordaniens, Damaszener Mitteilungen 12, 2000, 17–29. Bonogofsky 2006 M. Bonogofsky (ed.), Skull Collection, Modification and Decoration, BAR International Series 1539 (Oxford 2006). Broman Morales 1990 V. Broman Morales, Figurines and Other Objects from Sarab and Cayönü. Oriental Institute Communications 25 (Chicago 1990). Carter – Philip 2010 R. A. Carter – G. Philip (eds.), Beyond the Ubaid. Transformation and Integration in the Late Prehistoric Societies of the Middle East. Papers from “The Ubaid Expansion? Cultural Meaning, Identity and the Lead-up to Urbanism”. International Workshop held at Grey College, University of Durham, 20–22 April 2006. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 62 (Chicago 2010). Cauvin 1994 J. Cauvin, Naissance des divinités, naissance de l’agriculture. La révolution de symboles au néolithique (Paris 1994). Conard 2003 N. J. Conard, Palaeolithic ivory sculptures from southwestern Germany and the origins of figurative art, Nature 426, 2003, 830–832. Conard – Wertheimer 2010 N. J. Conard – J. Wertheimer, Die Venus aus dem Eis. Wie vor 40 000 Jahre unsere Kultur entstand (München 2010). Coqueugniot 1999 E. Coqueugniot, Tell Dja’de el-Mughara, in: G. del Olmo-Lete – J.-L. Montero Fenollós (eds.), Archaeology of the Upper Syrian Euphrates. The Tishrin Dam Areas. Proceedings of the International Symposium held at Barcelona, January 28th–30th 1998 (Barcelona 1999) 41–55. Croucher 2010 K. Croucher, Figuring out identity. The body and identity in the Ubaid, in: Carter – Philip 2010, 113–123. Croucher 2013 K. Croucher, Bodily identity. Mortuary practices and bodily treatment in the Upper Mesopotamian Later Neolithic, in: Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2013, 191–202. Daems 2010 A. Daems, A snake in the grass. Reassessing the ever-intriguing ophidian figurines, in: Carter – Philip 2010, 149–161. Erim-Özdoğan 2011 A. Erim-Özdoğan, Çayönü, in: M. Özdoğan – N. Başgelen – P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 1: The Tigris Basin (Istanbul 2011) 185–269. Garfinkel 2003 Y. Garfinkel, Dancing at the Dawn of Agriculture (Austin 2003).

Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory: An Introduction

21

Gimbutas 1982 M. Gimbutas, The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe (Los Angeles 1982). Gimbutas 1991 M. Gimbutas, The Civilization of the Goddess. The World of Old Europe (San Francisco 1991). Goren et al. 2001 Y. Goren – A. N. Goring-Morris – I. Segal, The technology of skull modelling in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB). Regional variability, the relation of technology and iconography and their archaeological implications, Journal of Archaeological Science 28, 2001, 671–690. Goring-Morris 2005 A. N. Goring-Morris, Life, death and the emergence of differential status in the Near Eastern Neolithic. Evidence from Kfar Hahoresh, Lower Galilee, Israel, in: J. Clarke (ed.), Archaeological Perspectives on the Transmission and Transformation of Culture in the Eastern Mediterranean (= Levant Supplementary Series Vol. 2) (Oxford 2005) 89–105. Hansen 2007 S. Hansen, Bilder vom Menschen der Steinzeit. Untersuchungen zur anthropomorphen Plastik der Jungsteinzeit und Kupferzeit in Südosteuropa. Archäologie in Eurasien 20 (Mainz 2007). Harris – Hofmann 2014 S. Harris – K. P. Hofmann, From stones to gendered bodies. Regional differences in the production of the body and gender on the Copper Age statue-menhirs of northern Italy and the Swiss Valais, European Journal of Archaeology 17, 2, 2014, 264–285. Hauptmann 1993 H. Hauptmann, Ein Kultgebäude in Nevalı Çori, in: M. Frangipane – H. Hauptmann – M. Liverani – P. Matthiae – M. Mellink (eds.), Between the Rivers and Over the Mountains. Archaeologica Anatolica et Mesopotamica Alba Palmieri Dedicata (Rome 1993) 37–69. Hauptmann 2011 H. Hauptmann, The Urfa Region, in: M. Özdoğan – N. Başgelen – P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 2: The Euphrates Basin (Istanbul 2011) 85–138. Helck 1971 W. Helck, Betrachtung zur großen Göttin und den ihr verbundenen Gottheiten. Religion und Kultur der Alten Mittelmeerwelt in Parallelforschungen, Bd. 2 (München – Wien – Oldenburg 1971). Herles 2006 M. Herles, Götterdarstellungen Mesopotamiens in der 2. Hälfte des 2. Jahrtausends v. Chr. Das anthropomorphe Bild im Verhältnis zum Symbol, Alter Orient und Altes Testament 329 (Münster 2006). Hodder 2006 I. Hodder, Çatalhöyük: the Leopard’s Tale. Revealing the Mysteries of Turkey’s Ancient ‘Town’ (London 2006). Hodder 2010 I. Hodder (ed.), Religion in the Emergence of Civilization. Çatalhöyük as a Case Study (Cambridge 2010). Insoll 2017 T. Insoll (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Prehistoric Figurines (Oxford 2017). Jarrige 2005 C. Jarrige, Human figurines from the Neolithic levels at Mehrgarh (Balochistan, Pakistan), in: U. Franke-Vogt – H.-J. Weishaar (eds.), South Asian Archaeology 2003 (Aachen 2005) 27–38. Kielt Costello 2013 S. Kielt Costello, Using imagery to interpret Late Neolithic religion, in: Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2013, 117–124. Kujit 2000 I. Kujit, Keeping the peace. Ritual, skull caching, and community integration in the Levantine Neolithic, in: I. Kujit (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communities. Social Organization, Identity, and Differentiation, Fundamental Issues in Archaeology (New York et al. 2000) 137–164.

22

Jörg Becker – Claudia Beuger – Bernd Müller-Neuhof

Kujit 2008 I. Kujit, The regeneration of life. Neolithic structures of symbolic remembering and forgetting, Current Anthropology 49, 2, 2008, 171–197. Mellaart 1967 J. Mellaart, Catal Höyük. Stadt aus der Steinzeit (Bergisch Gladbach 1967). Mellaart et al. 1989 J. Mellaart – U. Hirsch – B. Balpinar, The Goddess from Anatolia, Vol. I–III (Milan 1989). Mithen 2004 S. Mithen, From Ohalo to Çatalhöyük. The development of religiosity during the Early Prehistory of western Asia, ca. 20.000–7.000 BCE, in: H. Whitehouse – L. H. Martin (eds.), Theorizing Religions Past. Archaeology, History and Cognition (Walnut Creek, California 2004) 17–43. Morsch 2002 M. Morsch, Magic figurines? Some remarks about the clay objects of Nevali Cori, in: H. G. K. Gebel – B. D. Hermansen – C. Hoffmann Jensen (eds.), Magic Practices and Ritual in the Near Eastern Neolithic, Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment 8 (Berlin 2002) 145–162. Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2013 O. Nieuwenhuyse – R. Bernbeck – P. M. M. G. Akkermans – J. Rogasch (eds.), Interpreting the Late Neolithic in Upper Mesopotamia, Papers on Archaeology from the Leiden Museum of Antiquities 9 (Turnhout 2013). Orphanidis 1998 L. Orphanidis, Introduction to Neolithic Figurine Art. Southeastern Europe and Eastern Mediterranean, Academy of Athens Research Center for Antiquity Monograph 4 (Athens 1998). Peters – Schmidt 2004 J. Peters – K. Schmidt, Animals in the Symbolic World of Pre-Pottery Neolithic in Göbekli Tepe, South-eastern Turkey. A Preliminary Assessment, Anthropozoologica 39, 1, 2004, 179–218. Renfrew – Zubrow 1994 C. Renfrew – E. B. W. Zubrow, The Ancient Mind. Elements of Cognitive Archaeology (Cambridge 1994). Robb – Harris 2013 J. Robb – O. J. T. Harris (eds.), The Body in History. Europe from the Palaeolithic to the Future (Cambridge 2013). Rollefson 2008 G. O. Rollefson, Charming lives. Human and animal figurines in the Late Epipalaeolithic and Early Neolithic periods in Greater Levant and Eastern Anatolia, in: J.-P. Bocquet-Appel – O. Bar-Yosef (eds.), The Neolithic Demographic Transition and its Consequences (New York 2008) 387–416. Salje et al. 2004 B. Salje – N. Riedl – G. Schauerte, Gesichter des Orients. 10000 Jahre Kunst und Kultur aus Jordanien (Mainz 2004). Schmandt-Besserat 1998 D. Schmandt-Besserat, Ain Ghazal “Monumental Figures”, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 310, 1998, 1–17. Schmandt-Besserat 2013 D. Schmandt-Besserat (ed.), Symbols at ‘Ain Ghazal. ‘Ain Ghazal Excavation Reports 3. Bibliotheca neolithica asiae meridionalis et occidentalis & Yarmouk University, Monograph of the Faculty of Archaeology and Anthropology (Berlin 2013). Schmidt 2006 K. Schmidt, Sie bauten die ersten Tempel. Das rätselhafte Heiligtum der Steinzeitjäger. Die archäologische Entdeckung am Göbekli Tepe (München 2006). Schwarzberg 2011 H. Schwarzberg, Durch menschliche Kunst und Gedanken gemacht. Studien zur anthropomorphen Gefäßkeramik des 7. bis 5. vorchristlichen Jahrtausends, Münchner Archäologische Forschungen 1 (Rahden/Westf. 2011).

Human Iconography and Symbolic Meaning in Near Eastern Prehistory: An Introduction

23

Stordeur 2003 D. Stordeur, De la vallée de l’Euphrate à Chypre ? À la recherche d’indices de relations au Néolithique, in: J. Guilaine – A. Le Brun (eds.), Le Néolithique de Chypre. Actes du colloque international organisé par le départment des antiquités de Chypre et l’École française d’Athenes, Nicosie 17–19 Mai 2001 (Paris 2003) 353–371. Stordeur 2007 D. Stordeur, Les crânes surmodelès de Tell Aswad (PPNB, Syrie). Premier regard sur le ensemble, premières reflexions, Syria 84, 2007, 5–32. Stordeur – Abbès 2002 D. Stordeur – F. Abbès, Du PPNA au PPNB. Mise en lumière d’une phase de transition à Jerf el Ahmar (Syrie), Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 99, 3, 2002, 563–595. Tubb – Grissom 1995 K. W. Tubb – C. A. Grissom, Ayn Ghazal. A comparative study of the 1983 and 1985 statuary caches, in: K. Amr – F. Zayadine – M. Zaghloul (eds.), Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan V (Amman 1995) 437–447. Ucko 1968 P. J. Ucko, Anthropomorphic Figurines of Pre-dynastic Egypt and Neolithic Crete with Comparative Material from the Prehistoric Near East and Mainland Greece. Royal Anthropological Institute, Occasional Papers 24 (London 1968). Verhoeven 2007 M. Verhoeven, Losing one’s head in the Neolithic. On the interpretation of headless figurines, Levant 39, 2007, 175– 183. Voigt 2000 M. M. Voigt, Çatal Höyük in context. Ritual at Early Neolithic sites in central and eastern Turkey, in: I. Kujit (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communities. Social Organization, Identity and Differentiation (New York 2000) 253–293. Watkins 2004 T. Watkins, Building houses, framing concepts, constructing worlds, Paléorient 30, 1, 2004, 5–23. Watkins 2008 T. Watkins, Ordering time and space. Creating a cultural world, in: J. Córdoba – M. Molist – C. Pérez – I. Rubio – S. Martínez (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Congress of the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Madrid 3–8 April 2006 (Madrid 2008) 657–659. Watkins 2013 T. Watkins, Neolithisation needs evolution, as evolution needs Neolithisation, Neo-Lithics 2/13, 2013, 5–10. Watkins – Schmidt 2012 T. Watkins – K. Schmidt, Our place. Our place in the world. Workshop at Urfa initiates a three-year research project on Göbekli Tepe and contemporary settlements in the region, Neo-Lithics 1/12, 2012, 43–46. Watkins – Sterelny 2015 T. Watkins – K. Sterelny, Neolithisation in Southwest Asia in a context of niche construction theory, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 25,3, 2015, 673–691.

24

Jörg Becker – Claudia Beuger – Bernd Müller-Neuhof

Programme of the Workshop: Iconography and Symbolic Meaning of the Human in Near Eastern Prehistory 28.4.2016

Lecturer

Title

8:30

Jörg Becker / Claudia Beuger / Bernd Müller-Neuhof

9:00

Trevor Watkins

When do human representations become superhuman agents?

9:30

Nicolas Conard / Mohsen Zeidi

Continuitiy and discontinuity between Paleolithic and Neolithic imagery

10:00

Lee Clare / Oliver Dietrich / Jens Notroff

Anthropomorphic iconography at Göbekli Tepe

10:30

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

To see or to touch? The sensual context of prehistoric human imagery

11:00

Coffee Break

11:30

Jörg Becker

Introduction

Part I: Symbolism and iconography

Anthropomorphic figurines of the Halaf period Part II: Physical anthropology and mortuary practise

12:00

Michael Schultz

Health and disease in the prehistoric and early historical Near East. A contribution to the reconstruction of ancient living conditions.

12:30

Anna Belfer-Cohen / Nigel Goring-Morris

Epipalaeolithic mortuary customs in Southwest Asia

13:00

Lunch Break Treatment of the dead at Epipalaeoloithic Pınarbaşı

14:00

Douglas Baird

14:30

Bill Finlayson

PPN mortuary patterns, archaeological models, people and society

15:00

Yilmaz Erdal

Post-depositional treatment of dead at Körtik Tepe: symbolic and social implication

15:30

Alexandra Fletcher

Changing faces, from individual to ancestor: a plastered skull from Jericho

16:00

Coffee Break Part III: Self-perception and self-expression of the human being

16:30

Peter Biehl

Forming and transforming the human body in the Near Eastern Neolithic and Chalcolithic

17:00

Bérénice Chamel / Eric Coqueugniot

Human self-perception and self-expression in the Early Neolitihic of north Levant: funerary practices and symbolic meaning of the human representations in Dja’de (Syria)

29.4.2016

Lecturer

Title

9:00

Nigel Goring-Morris / Anna Belfer-Cohen

Skulls, plastered skulls and masks during the Early Neolithic – self-perception and self-expression

9.30

Bernd Müller-Neuhof

Signals from the past: gestures in SW-Asian anthropomorphic iconography – preliminary observations

10:00

Claudia Beuger

Clothing and nudity in prehistoric Near East

10:30

Bernadette Drabsch

Nude, robed and masked processions: considering the figural images in the Teleilat Ghassul wall paintings

11:00

Coffee Break

11:30

Miquel Molist / Anabel Ortiz / Anna Gómez Bach

Symbolic documents in Euphrates Valley in the Middle and Late PPNB. Results of the Tell Halula Project in interpretative context

12:00

Stuart Campbell

Treatment and representation of humans in the later prehistory of northern Mesopotamia. Integrating approaches

12:30

Jörg Becker / Claudia Beuger / Bernd Müller-Neuhof

Final discussion and resumee

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

25

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East: A Contribution to the Reconstruction of Ancient Living Conditions Michael Schultz 1 – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz 2 Abstract: Palaeopathology and bioarchaeology are interdisciplinary scientific disciplines which enable researchers to reconstruct past living conditions and, in particular, ancient health conditions using medical methods and techniques. The goal of this study is to present findings that shed light on some aspects of prehistoric life, such as health which is frequently expressed by the morbidity and mortality of a population as well as nutritional and occupational stress. Additionally, the interactions between various diseases, between diseases and the environment as well as between diseases and the history of a studied population are interesting fields which might be partly explained by the results of palaeopathological investigations. Thus, examples are presented which illustrate the complex interactions of diseases in the medical records of a young infant from a Middle Bronze Age settlement in southern Anatolia (Lidar Höyük, Turkey), the frequencies of meningeal diseases in the infants and children of past populations from Central Europe and the Near East, and the biosocial background of diseases in upper- and lower-class populations from Central Europe (Kleinlangheim, Germany) and Mesopotamia (Nimrud, Iraq). Furthermore, the usage of disease or morbidity profiles (‘disease curves’) is presented; such profiles characterise the morbidity of each population or population group (e.g. Early Bronze Age Jelšovce, Slovakia, and the pre-Columbian Grasshopper Pueblo, Arizona). Because diseases in infancy and childhood are of particular interest for the reconstruction of ancient living conditions, several ancient populations from the Near East in the broadest sense and, for comparison purposes, also from Central Europe have been studied: Early Bronze populations from İkiztepe (Turkey), Franzhausen-I (Austria), Jelšovce-N and -A (Slovakia), Elephantine Island (Egypt) and several settlements in Byzantine Asia Minor (Turkey), such as Arslantepe, Boğazkale, Pergamon and Ephesos. Finally, as a complete population study, results obtained from a palaeopathological investigation on human skeletal remains from Late PPNB Basta (Jordan) are presented here. Keywords: aetiology; bioarchaeology; disease profiles; epidemiology; Near East; palaeopathology

Palaeopathology and bioarchaeology are interdisciplinary scientific disciplines which deal with the reconstruction of the health status and the living conditions of early people. Archaeological skeletal remains, mummies and bog bodies represent bio-historical documents, which report precisely and in detail on ancient everyday life, afflictions and illness also when no contemporary written records are available. Palaeopathology is a relatively new research field, positioned between medicine, physical anthropology and archaeology. It deals with the nature (casuistics), the causes (aetiology) and the frequencies as well as the spread of diseases (epidemiology) in past populations. In the case of a relatively well-represented and well-preserved skeleton, it is possible to reconstruct the biography of the deceased individual (palaeobiography, osteobiography) also after thousands of years, within obvious limits.3 Additionally, the biosocial background of ancient populations can be studied.4 The results of a palaeopathological investigation tell us about the health or rather the disease status of ancient people and characterise different living conditions in various ancient communities shedding light on some aspects of prehistoric life, such as nutritional (e.g. deficiency diseases5) and occupational stress (e.g. enthesopathies6), certain medical interventions (e.g. trephination7) and forensic incidents (e.g. fatal skull trauma8), funerary customs (e.g. drying of the

1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8

Department of Anatomy and Embryology, University Medical School Göttingen, Germany; [email protected]. Department of Anatomy and Embryology, University Medical School Göttingen, Germany; tschmidt-schultz@ web.de. Schultz 2011. Schultz 1982; Larsen 1997; Carli-Thiele – Schultz 2001; Lewis 2009; Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017. Schultz 2001a; Schultz 2003. Gresky et al. 2016. Schultz 1993. Ortner 2003.

26

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

corpse9), taphonomic factors (e.g. diagenetic changes10) and, additionally, help in reconstructing the ancient biotope (e.g. ecology11). In certain cases, the results of a palaeopathological investigation even allow the establishment of the biography of an individual who lived thousands of years ago, with certain limitations.12 The frequencies of certain diseases regarded as morbidity profiles13 characterise the health of a population in a comparative way. As mentioned above, inadequate living conditions cause pathological changes which lead to diseases. Therefore, if we know which diseases afflicted an ancient population at a certain time and at a certain place, we should be able to reconstruct, to some extent, the relevant living conditions.14 Thus, aspects of nutrition, housing and working situations, geographic and climatic conditions, and hygienic and sanitary factors, and particularly diseases and pathological conditions can be evaluated by the study of macerated bones.15 Until the 1980s, skeletal remains of subadults were only of minor interest in physical anthropology and palaeopathology. The skeletons of foetuses and infants were frequently neglected during the course of a palaeopathological investigation. As is generally known, the skeletons of infants and children are characterised by their quick growth which influences not only the healthy, but also the diseased bone tissue. Therefore, in infants and children the morphological product of pathological bone processes is, as a rule, relatively more intensely expressed than in adults. Accordingly, investigations undertaken by a palaeopathologist on the bones of subadults are highly efficient. Infants, children and elderly people represent the weakest groups within a human community mainly because the immune system in the young has not completely developed or has already started to diminish in the elderly.16 Thus, the nature, the occurrence and the frequencies of diseases in these age groups are a reliable indicator of the quality of living conditions. As morbidity influences the dimension of mortality within a population, demographic studies might be helpful in understanding the health situation of an ancient population. This is particularly the case when populations of subadults are studied. The final goal of palaeopathological research is to reconstruct the ‘history of diseases’ which is not identical with the history of medicine which describes as an academic discipline the history of trained professionals (e.g. shamans, medical practitioners, doctors), disease diagnoses and medical treatments from ancient times to the present day. Indeed, relatively little is known about the nature, the causes, the frequency and the spread of diseases in the past populations of the Near East. In fact, there are numerous journal articles that deal only with isolated aspects of the extensive topic of health and disease of the people of the historical Middle East (e.g., dental disease, joint disease), which are mainly case studies and rarely comparative population studies. However, a summarising study, such as was already published for Britain,17 connecting medical cases with ecological, social-anthropological and historical background is still lacking. Unfortunately, the realisation of such a supra-regional study is not only time consuming but also requires a relevant knowledge of the physiology and pathology of the bony tissues and preferably a well-sorted collection of macerated recent and archaeological bones for comparative purposes. This paper should give a general introduction to innovative perspectives in palaeopathology and bioarchaeology and, in particular, try to focus on the health status of populations from the

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Schultz – Kunter 1999. Schultz 1997; Schultz 2001a; Schultz 2012. Schultz 1982. Schultz 2011; Schultz – Walker 2013. Schultz et al. 1998; Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2014; Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017. Schultz 1982; Schultz et al. 2008a; Schultz et al. 2008b; Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017. Schultz 1982; Schultz et al. 2006; Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017. Schultz et al. 1998; Schultz 2001b; Schultz et al. 2008a; Schultz et al. 2008b; Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017. Roberts – Cox 2003.

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

27

Near East as far as the authors have been privileged to study. Unfortunately, thus far, the data basis of papers dealing with interdisciplinary aspects of archaeology and medicine is relatively sparse. Materials Human skeletal remains To illustrate the scope and the potential of palaeopathological investigations, examples from the Near East are presented as follows: from the late PPNB of the Levant (Jordan: Basta), the Bronze Age of Anatolia (Turkey: İkiztepe, Lidar Höyük) and Nubia (Egypt: Elephantine Island) as well as from the Iron Age of Mesopotamia (Iraq: Nimrud) and Byzantine Asia Minor (Turkey: Arslantepe, Boğazkale, Pergamon, Ephesos) and for comparison purposes from Lower Austria (Austria: Franzhausen-I), the Carpathian Basin (Slovakia: Jelšovce-N and Jelšovce-A), the North American Southwest (Arizona: Grasshopper Pueblo) and Central Europe (Germany: Kleinlangheim) (Tab. 1). The relevance of diagenesis The preservation of skeletal remains is a major problem in palaeopathology because the availability of characteristic bony structures determines or limits the interpretability of pathological features. Thus, sometimes only a major part of a skeleton or even a couple of bones are available to be investigated. This explains the different sample sizes during the course of evaluation. Methods and techniques Anthropology Age determination was carried out using the usual criteria.18 Sex determination was undertaken using the usual methods;19 this has not yet been conducted for the subadults. The infants and children were distributed between the relevant age groups: 1) Fetus-Newborn, 2) Infans-Ia (birth to end of the second year), 3) Infans-Ib (beginning of the third to the end of the sixth year) and 4) Infans-II (beginning of the seventh to the end of the fourteenth year). If an individual matched two or more age groups, he/she was distributed proportionally to these groups. Thus, fraction numbers might appear. Palaeopathology For the palaeopathological analysis, macroscopy and low-power microscopy were employed on site.20 If these techniques could not help to establish a reliable diagnosis, selected bones were taken and, after permission had been granted by the local Antiquity Services or the responsible archaeological museums, sent by the director responsible for the excavation to the Anatomy Department of the University Medical School Göttingen. There, additional investigations were conducted using methods such as radiology21, light microscopy including polarisation microscopy22,

18

19 20 21 22

Schmid – Künle 1958; Johnston 1962; Kósa 1978; Stloukal – Hanáková 1978; Ferembach et al. 1980; Szilvássy 1988; Ubelaker 1989; Scheuer – Black 2000; Rösing et al. 2007. Ferembach et al. 1980; Sjøvold 1988; Buikstra et al. 1994. Schultz 1988a; Carli-Thiele – Schultz 2001; Lewis 2009. Herrmann 1988. Schultz 1988b; Schultz 1993; Schultz 2001a; Schultz 2003; Schultz 2012.

28

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

scanning-electron microscopy23 and proteomics24. For the study of the infants and children, six diseases occurring relatively frequently in subadults were selected: diseases which had significant influence on the quality of life and could directly or indirectly cause premature death. Thus, three deficiency diseases were chosen: rickets (chronic vitamin D deficiency), scurvy (chronic vitamin C deficiency) and anaemia. Additionally, three inflammatory/infectious diseases were selected: osteomyelitis (chronic inflammation of bones), otitis media (inflammatory middle ear disease) and meningeal reactions, for instance, bacterial meningitis (inflammatory-haemorrhagic meningeal diseases). Results and discussion Aetiology of diseases – Difficulties in diagnosing morphological features As an example, the morphological features of Cribra orbitalia and of Cribra cranii externa et interna are introduced. Porotic hyperostosis of the orbital roof is called Cribra orbitalia and is not regarded as a disease but rather as the morphological expression of various diseases.25 Therefore, anaemia, scurvy, rickets, and inflammatory conditions, for instance, ostitis or osteomyelitis of the bony orbital roof or an infection inside the orbit originating, for example, from the paranasal sinuses, the nasal cavity or the endocranial cavity or from tumorous lesions, can be the cause. As a rule, all of these can only be detected using microscopic techniques. Thus, from the study of the external appearance of the orbital roof alone, a reliable diagnosis is not possible and the lesions have to be assessed as stress markers.26 The morphological changes seen in porotic hyperostosis of the external skull vault, which is called Cribra cranii externa, are morphologically almost identical to those described for Cribra orbitalia because they are, as a rule, due to the same pathological conditions.27 Cribra cranii interna are also intravitam changes which are characterised by newly-built porotic bone formations. These lesions occur, for instance, in osteomyelitis of the skull vault. However, porotic changes on the endocranial skull lamina can also be diagnosed in inflammatory and haemorrhagic processes of the meninges which means that Cribra cranii interna are frequently caused by nonspecific infectious diseases of the dura mater (e.g. bacterial meningitis, pachymeningitis). Occasionally, Cribra cranii interna can also be observed in specific infectious diseases, such as in tuberculosis and venereal syphilis. Furthermore, survived bleeding, for instance, due to scurvy or sometimes also due to trauma or pathological processes of uncertain origin (e.g. Pachymeningeosis haemorrhagica interna) might also be the reason for the occurrence of Cribra cranii interna. When considering the morphological features of Cribra described briefly here, it is important to keep in mind that various diseases might provoke very similar morphological changes. Thus, it is relatively difficult to establish a reliable diagnosis in cases of porotic hyperostosis in the external and internal surfaces of the skull vault and in the orbital roof.28 Aetiology and interactions of diseases As a case study, the fate of a three- to four-year-old child from the Middle Bronze Age Lidar Höyük, a large settlement on the upper Euphrates in south-eastern Anatolia (Turkey), is presented (Fig. 1). The child suffered from extensive malnutrition (Fig. 2): anaemia, chronic vitamin C

23 24 25 26 27 28

Schultz 1988b. Schmidt-Schultz – Schultz 2004; Schmidt-Schultz – Schultz 2005; Schultz et al. 2007. Schultz 2001a; Schultz 2012. Schultz 2012, 266–269. Schultz 2012. Schultz 2012.

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

29

Fig. 1   Lidar Höyük on the upper Euphrates in south-eastern Anatolia (Turkey) in 1987 (photo: M. Schultz)

Fig. 2   Etiology of diseases in childhood. Case history of a young child from Middle Bronze Age (MBA) Lidar Höyük in south-eastern Anatolia (Turkey). An example of the interactions of diseases in infancy and childhood (graphics: M. Schultz)

30

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

deficiency (scurvy) and chronic vitamin D deficiency (rickets). As a rule, rickets rarely appears in regions with high exposure to UV-light (sunlight) because the effects of ultra-violet rays in the human organism produce vitamin D from components already existing in the body. If chronic rickets nevertheless occurs in regions exposed to high levels of sunlight, other factors besides malnutrition must be taken into consideration (e.g. genetic factors, unusually long-term negative climate trends or being bedridden). The immune system must have been damaged due to its suffering from a chronic vitamin C deficiency. This damage presumably favoured the occurrence of middle ear infection which, in turn, expanded into the mastoid air cells of the temporal bone and then penetrated the nasal cavity and the parnasal sinuses, particularly into the maxillary sinus. Subsequently, the inflammatory process spread via the nasal-lacrimal duct into the orbit. As a severe complication, the process penetrated the cranial cavity and provoked meningeal reactions (e.g. meningitis, subdural empyema, cerebral abscess and perisinuous infection). The presence of chronic scurvy increased the disposition for haemorrhages. The sequel was that the inflammatory meningeal process produced minor blood intrusions in the space between the internal face of the skull vault and the dura mater of the brain (small epidural haematomas). During this process, the volume of the cerebro-spinal liquid increased in the ventricles of the brain and pressed the external brain surface hard against the internal surface of the skull vault. Thus, the digital impressions enlarged significantly (brain pressure symptom). Additionally, the alveolar rims of several tooth sockets of the upper and the lower jaws and the hard palate show vestiges of haemorrhagic affliction due to scurvy. The external surfaces of the postcranial skeleton (e.g. femur and tibia) were also covered by thin porotic layers which are the product of organised haemorrhages.29 Presumably, the child died of generalised sepsis or meningitis30 (Fig. 2). As this example shows, the individual health status is, as a rule, governed by multifactorial processes. Additionally, diseases can influence each other in their occurrence and their intensity. In well-nourished infants and children, the skeleton normally grows quickly. Therefore, vestiges of diseases become manifest relatively quickly and are frequently observed. Frequencies of diseases in the past and what they might tell us today Disease frequencies are relatively reliable indicators of population health. Particularly, when the health situations of various populations need to be compared, disease frequencies point us in the right direction and help us to reconstruct ancient living conditions. However, as a rule, the sample size should be sufficiently large which is sometimes difficult to achieve because the number of individuals within a population is numerically limited due to poor preservation (diagenesis). Thus, in cases in which the number of individuals is low (e.g. lower than 40), frequencies should be handled with caution. In the palaeopathological literature, the term ‘prevalence’ is occasionally used to describe the frequency of a disease in a past population. Indeed, the term ‘prevalence’ which is a clinical term, tells us how many individuals of a group or a population of a defined size suffered from a certain disease at a particular time. In palaeopathology, a population usually exists over a time period lasting several centuries. Thus, authors avoid using the term ‘prevalence’ and instead employ the term ‘frequency’.

29

30

Haematomas cannot ossify. Therefore, haemorrhages on the surface of an archaeological bone can only be detected if the clotted blood components have been broken down and the area of the former haematoma has been organically organised, meaning that it is transformed into connective tissue. Such a connective tissue structure can then ossify through the activity of osteoblasts. Schultz 1999, 73–78.

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

31

Fig. 3   Epidemiology of meningeal reactions (e.g. bacterial meningitis) in prehistoric and historical infant and child populations from Central Europe and Anatolia (n = 746 individuals). Early Neolithic (‘blue columns’: Ait = AiterhofenÖdmühle, Lower Bavaria (Germany), Linear Bandkeramik Culture (LBC), approx. 5500 BC; Wan = Wandersleben, Thuringia (Germany), LBC, approx. 5500 BC), Early Bronze Age (‘pink columns’: Ikiz = İkiztepe, northern Anatolia (Turkey), approx. 2600–2200 BC; Gem = Gemeinlebarn-F, Lower Austria (Austria), 1900–1700 BC; Jel-N = Jelšovce-Nitra Culture, southern Slovakia (Slovakia), approx. 2200–2000 BC; Hain = Hainburg, Lower Austria (Austria), approx. 1900–1700 BC; Jel-A = Jelšovce-Únětice Culture, southern Slovakia (Slovakia), approx. 1900–1700 BC; Franz = Franzhausen-I, Lower Austria (Austria), approx. 2100–1800 BC) and Middle Ages (‘green columns’: Bog = Boğazkale, central Anatolia (Turkey), approx. 600–900 AD; Hart = Harting, Upper Palatinate (Germany), approx. 500–700 AD; Barb = Barbing-Kreuzhof, Upper Palatinate (Germany), approx. 500–700 AD; Strau = Straubing, Lower Bavaria (Germany), approx. 450–775 AD; Perg = Pergamon, north-western Anatolia (Turkey), approx. 1200–1315 AD; Bett = Bettingen, Canton Basel-Stadt (Switzerland), approx. 1200–1450 AD) (graphics: M. Schultz)

Epidemiology of diseases – Example of meningeal reactions The frequencies of meningeal reactions in infants and children of various prehistoric and early historical populations were studied (N = 746). The results of this long-term investigation suggest that meningeal reactions (for example, bacterial meningitis) are apparently relatively new diseases in the development of mankind. It is striking that the frequencies of this disease group increase from the Early Neolithic until the Late Middle Ages (Fig. 3). Thus, at first sight, meningeal diseases are relatively new diseases. However, there might be some doubts because Neanderthal man already sometimes suffered from inflammatory processes of the meninges.31 However, these cases in Neanderthals are rare. A probable reason for the occurrence of meningeal diseases is the quality of the biotope. Populations who lived in isolated small villages which only consisted of a couple of houses such as the Linear Pottery people (e.g. Aiterhofen [Ait] and Wandersleben [Wan]) have an apparently low frequency of about 5% (Fig. 3). Later, in the Early Bronze Age (İkiztepe and populations from the Traisen- and Nitra-Valleys) when people already lived together in larger villages and had contact with more individuals, the

31

Schultz 2006.

32

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

Fig. 4   Disease profile of deficiency diseases in the infants and children from Early Bronze Age Jelšovce (Slovakia), Nitra Culture. LEH = linear enamel hypoplasia (graphics: M. Schultz)

Fig. 5   Disease profile of deficiency diseases in the infants and children from Early Bronze Age Jelšovce (Slovakia), Únětice Culture. LEH = linear enamel hypoplasia (graphics: M. Schultz)

Fig. 6   Disease profile of deficiency diseases in the infants and children from the pre-Columbian Grasshopper Pueblo, Arizona (USA), Late Mogollon – Phase 5. LEH = linear enamel hypoplasia (graphics: M. Schultz)

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

33

populations demonstrate a slightly increased frequency between 9 and 22%. In the Middle Ages, the frequencies dramatically increased: 25–70%. Then, people lived in relatively large communities and the risk of infecting each other grew (Fig. 3). The usefulness of disease profiles With a view to calculating the frequencies of the six diseases mentioned above, disease or morbidity profiles (‘disease curves’) were created32 which characterise the morbidity of each population or population group. A disease profile is a plateau-line in a graph connecting the top of the columns which represent the particular disease frequencies.33 The relation of the particular heights of the columns to each other (= single frequencies) characterises the profile (Figs. 4–6). As the examples demonstrate, the profiles (black lines) are either very similar (Figs. 4 and 5) or completely different (Fig. 6). The two examples from the Early Bronze Age settlement at Jelšovce (Slovakia) (Figs. 4 and 5) show clear differences from the example from pre-Columbian Grasshopper Pueblo (Arizona, USA) (Fig. 6). The skeletal remains of the two Early Bronze Age infant and child populations were excavated in the Nitra Valley at Jelšovce (Slovakia). The subadults of the Nitra Culture date approximately to the period 2200–2000 BC, the subadults from the Únětice Culture date approximately to 1900–1700 BC. The two populations were not related genetically and expressed different material cultures. They lived at the same place; however, there was a time gap between the two populations of at least one hundred years. Interestingly, they have the same disease profile (Figs. 4 and 5). Of course, the disease frequencies are different: the comparison shows that all frequencies calculated for the subadults of the Nitra Culture are lower than in the subadults of the Únětice Culture. The probable reason for the same disease profiles is the same biotope which, apparently, had a greater influence on human health in prehistoric times than human culture.34 For comparison purposes, a pre-Columbian Pueblo population from the North American Southwest is presented (Fig. 6). This example shows a completely different disease profile. On the basis of these disease profiles, the health status of populations can be compared in order to estimate the individual disease stress of each population.35 Biosocial background of diseases – Examples from Germany In the early Middle Ages, in Kleinlangheim, then a small village in Main-Franconia (southern Germany), there was a Merovingian population. From the cemetery which dates back to 475–725 AD, relatively well-preserved skeletons of people of the upper and of the lower classes were excavated.36 The classes were identified by the nature of the burials (e.g. size and depth) and the grave goods, such as weapons (males) and jewellery (females).37 Two groups of diseases were examined: 1) degenerative joint disease (DJD) and 2) diseases in the middle ear region. Out of the total of 230 burials, 72 were suitable to be investigated for DJD (Fig. 7). Overall, the four large joints of the extremities were examined (shoulder, elbow, hip and knee joints of both sides).38 An individual was assessed as diseased if at least one joint was affected.39 Thus, females and males older than 25 years from the upper and the lower classes were examined for the characteristic morphological features of DJD described in detail elsewhere.40 Of the 19 upper-class

32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Schultz et al. 1998; cf. Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2014; Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017. Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017. Schultz et al. 1998. Schultz et al. 1998. Pescheck 1996. Schultz 1996. Schultz 1988a. Schultz 1996. Schultz 1988a.

34

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

Fig. 7   Frequencies of degenerative joint disease in the upper (UC) and the lower class (LC) of the adult Merovingian population from Kleinlangheim (Germany). Ordinate: percentage (graphics: M. Schultz)

Fig. 8   Frequencies of pathological conditions in the middle ear region in the upper (UP) and lower class (LC) of the adult Merovingian population from Kleinlangheim (Germany). indet. = indeterminable. Ordinate: percentage (graphics: M. Schultz)

females, 11 (57.9%) were diseased and eight (42.1%) were non-diseased. Of the twelve upperclass males, six (50%) were diseased and six (50%) were non-diseased. In the lower class, 13 of the 19 females (68.4%) were diseased and six (31.6) were non-diseased, whereas in the males 17 of the 22 (77.3%) were diseased and five (22.7%) were non-diseased.41 Thus, although the result is not really significant, it is easily discernible that upper-class people were not as frequently affected. There is a tendency towards upper-class males being apparently the healthiest group followed by the upper-class females. The lower-class males were most frequently diseased. Not only degenerative joint disease, but also inflammatory processes of the middle ear region and the paranasal sinuses are said to be ‘poor people’s disease’. Therefore, the distribution of

41

Schultz 1996.

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

35

middle ear diseases among the upper- and lower-class people of the population from Kleinlangheim might be interesting. Of the total of 230 burials, 60 were suitable to be examined on morphological changes due to middle ear disease (Fig. 8). Because of the relatively small number of individuals (class determinable individuals n = 48), no separation into females and males was conducted. Of the 30 upper-class individuals, one (3.3%) was diseased and 29 (96.7%) were non-diseased. Of the 18 lower-class individuals, five (27.8%) were diseased and 13 (72.2%) were non-diseased. Twelve individuals who were all (100%) non-diseased could not be attributed to a class.42 Therefore, this result tells us that apparently the biological and the social environment favoured the occurrence of middle ear disease. Palaeopathological investigations on subadult populations led us to conclude that apparently inflammatory middle ear diseases were in many cases fatal in the pre-antibiotic era. To illustrate this point, we now introduce the infants and children from the pre-Columbian Grasshopper Pueblo, a late Mogollon community in the mountains of east-central Arizona (N = 369).43 It is remarkable that otitis media was, at 9.6% (n = 17/178), not very frequent in the Grasshopper subadults. This suggests, at first sight, a relatively good state of health of the Grasshopper infants and children with respect to this life-threatening disease.44 However, if we consider the age of the diseased individuals we see that no child who suffered from middle ear disease was older than four years (Fig. 9).45 Thus, middle ear disease might have been a life-limiting disease in pre-antibiotic times. Biosocial background of diseases – An example from Iraq The skeletal remains of 17 individuals excavated from the Late Assyrian tombs at the Northwest Palace of Nimrud in the 1980s were examined with anthropological and palaeopathological methods.46 Interestingly, the remains of at least four queens were identified. In three of the four

Fig. 9   Mortality of the infants and children from the pre-Columbian Grasshopper Pueblo, Arizona (USA), Late Mogollon – Phase 5 suffering from middle ear disease. There is no child affected by middle ear diseases who was more than four years old (graphics: M. Schultz)

42 43 44 45 46

Schultz 1996. Schultz et al. 2008a; Schultz et al. 2008b. Schultz et al. 2008a. Schultz et al. 2008b. Schultz – Kunter 1999.

36

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

queens, postcranial remains could be studied in addition to the skulls: Queen Jaba, wife of King Tiglatpileser III (744–727 BC), who died at the age of (25) 30–35 (39) years, Queen Atalia, wife of King Sargon II (721–705 BC), who died at the age of 30–35 (39) years and Queen Hama, wife of Shalmaneser IV (783–773 BC), who died at the age of 18–20 years. The fourth individual who is only represented by an incomplete skull vault and whose name was not passed on reached an age of about 30–55 years. It is striking that in the skeletons of these more or less completely preserved three queens who belonged to the highest class in the Assyrian Empire, in two of the queens, slight degenerative changes in the joints of the extremities and the spine were observed: Queen Jaba (elbow, hip, knee joints and spine) and Queen Atalia (shoulder, hip, knee joints and spine). The third, Queen Hama, exhibited no changes of DJD, probably because she died at an advanced juvenile age (18–20 years). Evidence of DJD in extremity joints and the spine are at first sight not usual for a noble class population. However, these seemingly uncharacteristic changes in members of the noble upper-class population can be explained by an untrained locomotor system rather than by excessive physical stress (e.g. remember that in the seraglio of the Ottoman sultans, the harem ladies remained in the palace for their whole lifetime and only had little opportunity for physical or sporting activities when they had plenty of food). Furthermore, in three of the skulls of the four queens we have evidence of so-called ‘poor people’s disease’: in all three cases in which sinuses are present, morphological vestiges of chronic inflammation of the paranasal sinuses were found. Simple colds could have been the reason.47 This assumption suggests inadequate housing conditions, for instance, damp and cold rooms which might be the case in an old-established Assyrian palace, and/or an insufficient immune system. The latter is not unlikely because three of the four queens (Jaba, Atalia and the unnamed adult queen) suffered from inflammatory meningeal disease (meningitis: at the time of death still active in the unnamed adult queen but recovered from in Queen Jaba and Queen Atalia). Transversal linear enamel hypoplasias (LEH) are linear lines in the enamel of the teeth which represent lines of arrested growth which means that in infancy and childhood, during the period when the teeth are growing, growth will stop in favour of the recovery of the organism from deficiency or infection. Later, when the deficiency is eliminated or the infection is healed, the physiological growth of the enamel starts again. On the basis of the position of the lines in the enamel, the approximate age at which the line occurred or at what age the noxa48 had influenced the organism can be estimated. In Queen Atalia, three lines were diagnosed for the 3rd, 4th and 5th year of her life. In Queen Hama, lines were verified for the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th year of her life. As the occurrence of deficiency diseases is not very probable in royal families, the lines had been provoked by infectious diseases which affected the two queens in childhood. Often, LEH are regarded as characteristic of members of the lower class. Therefore, if LEH are found in upper-class individuals, some researchers speak of a paradoxical situation since people of the upper class have, as a rule, better resources such as better food, better housing conditions and better medical and probably also better psychological care and, therefore, had a better chance to survive an infection.49 What do diseases of young infants and children tell us? As already mentioned above, the nature and the frequencies of diseases of infants and children are a sensitive measure for the quality of living conditions in ancient times. Therefore, the study of bones of subadults is highly efficient. Particularly, with the application of a selected spectrum of

47 48 49

Schultz – Kunter 1999. Pathogenic cause. Schultz – Kunter 1999.

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

37

medical methods and techniques in palaeopathological research, reliable diagnoses are also possible in infant and child skeletons which, as a rule, are difficult to examine. Selected infant-child populations from various geographical regions are presented here consecutively to illustrate the validity of such investigations. İkiztepe, northern Anatolia (Turkey), Early Bronze Age The relatively large number of infant and child skeletons (N = 144) excavated at İkiztepe which is today a small village in northern Anatolia (Turkey) and dates to the Early Bronze Age III (approximately 2600–2200 BC) enables us to characterise the health status of this population (Fig. 10). The ancient settlement was situated in the area of the delta of the biggest river in central Anatolia, the Kızılırmak (ancient name: Halys). Therefore, from ancient times till even today, the region has small lagoons and wetlands. Altogether, the disease frequencies in comparison with other prehistoric populations are astonishingly low.50 Chronic vitamin-D deficiency (rickets) is found in 5 of 129 individuals (3.9%). This is a relatively high frequency because İkiztepe is situated geographically in a region which has a high solar irradiation. Therefore, there is an assumption that these five children stayed inside the house (bedridden), probably, for a prolonged period of time because they were ill and could not go outside in the sunshine. The frequencies of chronic vitamin-C deficiency (scurvy) (n = 17/123, 13.8%) and anaemia (n = 6/129, 4.7%) are relatively low and proof of favourable living conditions, particularly with regard to nutrition. However, in antiquity and even today, the close surroundings of İkiztepe, which were a partly swampy biotope, were and still are the home of the Anopheles mosquito which likes to breed in such an environment. Therefore, malaria was and still remains common. Children who suffer from malaria develop chronic anaemia. Thus, the occurrence of anaemia at İkiztepe might be due to this wet biotope. Infection risk was also relatively low (Fig. 10). Vestiges of inflammatory processes in the bone structure (osteomyelitis: n = 6/129, 4.7% and of meningeal reactions [e.g., meningitis]: n = 11/117, 9.4%) were rarely observed. Only the frequency of middle ear disease shows a relatively high value (otitis media: n = 10/46, 21.7%). We can only speculate about possible causes. In summary, we can say that the infant/child population from İkiztepe was relatively healthy which shows favourable living conditions not only for the subadults but also for the whole population. This is also confirmed by the archaeological records. Early Bronze Age İkiztepe was a wealthy settlement which encouraged trading along the coasts of the Black Sea and inner Anatolia. Franzhausen-I, Lower Austria (Austria), Early Bronze Age The Early Bronze Age settlement of Franzhausen-I is situated in the Traisen Valley, Lower Austria (Austria), and dates to approximately 2300/2200–1600 BC (Unterwölbling Culture and Věteřov Culture). A large number of infant and child skeletons (N = 224) could be excavated; however, because the burials were situated in the river bed of the Traisen River, the superficial preservation is rather poor due to postmortem erosion. This infant/child population also demonstrates low disease frequencies (Fig. 11). No cases of rickets (n = 0/110, 0.0%) or anaemia (n = 0/110, 0.0%) were observed. Chronic scurvy occurred with a low frequency (n = 7/110, 6.0%). Thus, the situation of basic food supply was apparently good.51 Most infectious diseases were present in low frequencies (Fig. 11: osteomyelitis: n = 3/97, 3.1%; otitis media: n = 5/46, 10.9%). Only the frequency of meningeal reactions (e.g. meningitis) was relatively high (n = 22/99, 22.2%). In summary, the population from Franzhausen-I was a relatively healthy community. The results of the archaeological research described this population as one that was higher than average wealthy.

50 51

Schultz 1990. Schultz 1993.

38

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

Fig. 10   Disease frequencies observed in the skulls of the infants and children from Early Bronze Age İkiztepe (Turkey). Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

Fig. 11   Disease frequencies observed in the skulls of the infants and children from Early Bronze Age Franzhausen-I (Austria). Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

Jelšovce, Carpathian Basin (Slovakia), Early Bronze Age The Early Bronze Age settlement of Jelšovce is situated in the Carpathian Basin, in the Nitra Valley, southern Slovakia (Slovakia). The large cemetery is divided into three cultural traditions, only two of which are discussed here: the Nitra Culture which dates to approximately 2200–2000 BC and the Únětice Culture which dates to approximately 1900–1700 BC. The third cultural tradition, the Mad’arovce Culture, is not presented here. Both populations had become very wealthy through bronze processing and trading of bronze goods. It is important to know that the people of the Nitra Culture were biologically not related to the people of the Únětice Culture. Between the settlement phases of both cultures, there was a hiatus of at least 100 years.

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

39

Fig. 12   Disease frequencies observed in the skulls of the infants and children from Early Bronze Age (Nitra Culture) Jelšovce-N, (Slovakia). Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

Jelšovce-N In general, the disease frequencies in the population of the Nitra Culture (N = 55) are low (Fig.12).52 There is little evidence of deficiency diseases: rickets (n = 1/47, 2.1%), scurvy (n = 6/47, 12.8%) and anaemia (n = 8/47, 17.0%). There is almost no evidence of vestiges of infectious diseases: osteomyelitis (n = 0/43, 0.0%), otitis media (n = 0/43, 0.0%), and meningeal reactions, for instance, meningitis (n = 5/43, 11.6%). Jelšovce-A The disease frequencies in the Únětice Culture (N = 45) are relatively low, however clearly higher than in the population of the Nitra Culture (Fig. 13). In particular, the frequency of anaemia is surprisingly high (n = 12/31, 38.7%). Scurvy (n = 9/42, 21.4%) also shows a high frequency, whereas the frequency of rickets (n = 3/42, 7.1%) is relatively low. The high frequency of anaemia might be explained by the seasonal flooding of the Nitra River which produced a rather wet environment which favoured the occurrence of malaria and helminthiasis. It is well-known that both parasitic diseases provoke anaemia in subadults.53 The frequencies of infectious diseases are a little bit lower, although considerably higher than in the population of the Nitra Culture: otitis media (n = 4/25, 16.0%) and meningeal reactions, for example meningitis (n = 6/29, 20.7%). Osteomyelitis was the only disease where no diseased individual (n = 0/29, 0.0%) could be diagnosed. In summary, the frequency of all the diseases studied in the population of the Nitra Culture is lower than in the population of the Únětice Culture. However, the disease profiles (see above) are almost identical in both populations (Figs. 4 and 5). This tells us that living conditions for both populations were apparently similar. This means that the biotope probably played a crucial role in the quality of their living conditions. The higher frequencies in all the diseases examined in the Únětice Culture might be explained by the assumption that the conditions of the biotope and, in particular, its resources were exhausted after the first centuries, when mainly the people of the Nitra Culture lived

52 53

Schultz et al. 1998; Schultz 2001b. Angel 1966; Schultz 1990; Reinhard 1992.

40

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

Fig. 13   Disease frequencies observed in the skulls of the infants and children from Early Bronze Age (Únětice Culture) Jelšovce-A, (Slovakia). Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

there before leaving. Thus, this change resulted in higher disease frequencies. Finally, both populations from Jelšovce had favourable living conditions, although, in the Únětice Culture somewhat worse than observed in the Early Bronze Age populations from İkiztepe and Franzhausen-I. Elephantine Island, Nubia (Egypt), Middle Kingdom/Second Intermediate Period The health situation of infants and children from Elephantine Island during the Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period (approximately 1900–1600 BC) was examined (N = 52). The burials of this population have been excavated in the residential area of the island inside the inhabited houses. The infants/children studied during this investigation had been members of the upper-middle and the lower-upper classes.54 Anaemia was found in a high frequency (n = 7/20, 35.0%) (Fig. 14). Characteristic vestiges of chronic scurvy were not observed in a very high frequency (n = 4/24, 16.7%) and no cases of rickets could be diagnosed (n = 0/24, 0.0%). The food situation appeared to have been satisfactory. As an example of infectious diseases, the frequency of otitis media was studied which occurred in a relatively high frequency (n = 5/18, 27.3%). Vestiges of meningeal reactions, probably due to meningitis, were diagnosed in a not very high frequency (n = 3/18, 16.7%). Osteomyelitis could not be observed (n = 0/24, 0.0%). These results predominantly represent a relatively healthy community. In summary, if we exclude the high frequency of anaemia, all other diseases present frequencies which fit into the pattern of a relatively wealthy and healthy population. As we know, Elephantine Island was an important trading post and for a long time the residence of an Egyptian governor. This would explain why the people of Elephantine Island probably had favourable living conditions. However, the frequency of anaemia (35.0%) is out of the ordinary. Probably the cause of this high frequency is not due to malnutrition (e.g. iron deficiency anaemia) but rather to helminthiasis or even malaria which are both presumably associated with the Nile biotope.

54

Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 1993.

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

41

Fig. 14   Disease frequencies observed in the skulls of the infants and children from the Egyptian population from Elephantine Island dating from the Middle Kingdom and the 2nd Intermediate Period. Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

Medieval populations from Asia Minor55 Arslantepe, south-eastern Anatolia (Turkey), Early Byzantine period These Early Byzantine skeletal remains (N = 97) from Arslantepe date back to 600–800 AD and are in an excellent condition. During the Early Byzantine period, Arslantepe was an important place on the Euphrates where trading routes crossed. This settlement therefore probably prospered from this economic position. The disease frequencies are low (Fig. 15) and similar to the frequencies observed in the population of Jelšovce-N (Fig. 12). Thus, rickets is found in one of 48 individuals (2.1%). Possibly this case represents a chronically ill, bedridden child who lacked exposure to UV-light (sunlight). The frequencies of chronic scurvy (n = 6/56, 10.7%) and anaemia (n = 7/56, 12.5%) are relatively low and indicate favourable living conditions, particularly with regard to nutrition. Infection risk was very low: there is no evidence of osteomyelitis (n = 0/56, 0.0%) and otitis media (n = 0/48, 0.0%). However, vestiges of meningeal reactions (e.g. meningitis) were found, though to a relatively low degree (n = 7/60, 11.7%). We can say that the infant/child population from Arslantepe was relatively healthy and enjoyed favourable living conditions which are also confirmed by the archaeological record. Boğazkale, central Anatolia (Turkey), Early Byzantine period The infant/child population from Boğazkale (N = 77) also lived during the Early Byzantine period (600–900 AD), a time in which the Byzantine Empire was still strong, and had less favourable living conditions than the subadults from Arslantepe. The well-preserved skeletons of this rural community were excavated from rock-cists which were situated near a small village in the rough highland of central Anatolia. The population included farmers and sheep and goat breeders and, therefore, has to be regarded as a poor community.

55

Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017.

42

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

Fig. 15   Disease frequencies observed in the skulls of the infants and children from Early Byzantine Arslantepe (Turkey). Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

Fig. 16   Disease frequencies observed in the skulls of the infants and children from Early Byzantine Boğazkale (Turkey). Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

Fig. 17   Disease frequencies observed in the skulls of the infants and children from Late Byzantine Pergamon (Turkey). Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

43

As expected by the quality of the biotope and the living conditions in such an arduous environment, the health situation was not the best (Fig. 16). No case of rickets was diagnosed (n = 0/64, 0.0%). Scurvy was represented to a considerable extent (n = 18/64, 28.1%). The same was observed for anaemia (n = 17/64, 26.6%). Osteomyelitis occurred at a low frequency (n = 3/59, 5.1%) and otitis media was not diagnosed (n = 0/64, 0.0%). However, vestiges of meningeal reactions were frequently observed (n = 16/64, 25.0%). In summary, the health status clearly reflects the quality of the biotope and the living conditions in such a difficult environment. Pergamon, north-western Anatolia (Turkey), Late Byzantine and Early Turkish period The infant/child population from the Late Byzantine period (approximately 1200–1315 AD) and the Early Turkish period (approximately 1315–1350 AD) of Pergamon provides interesting insights into the living conditions at that time. The preservation of the skeletons was good or fair (N = 64) and the skeletons belonged to a relatively poor urban community. The subadults from the Late Byzantine population (n = 49) lived during a span of about 100 years up to the conquest of the city at around 1315 AD. Due to political and economic difficulties, they were exposed to enormous physical and psychological stress which is reflected in their health status (Fig. 17). Although, there no cases of rickets were diagnosable (n = 0/29, 0.0%), all other diseases studied show relatively high frequencies, in parts similar to the high values seen in the poor rural population from Boğazkale (Fig. 16) which are unusual for an urban population: scurvy (n = 8/29, 27.6%) and anaemia (n = 8/31, 25.8%). However, the frequencies of osteomyelitis (n = 4/28, 14.3%) and meningeal reactions (e.g. meningitis) (n = 19/31, 61.3%) are significantly higher than at Boğazkale (Fig. 16). Otitis media which was not diagnosable at Boğazkale yields a high frequency (n = 4/14, 28.6). The health situation was quite different for the small numbers of the surviving Christian population (n = 15) who lived as slaves after the conquest of the city by the Turkish tribes (Fig. 18). No rickets (n = 0/12, 0.0%), osteomyelitis (n = 0/12, 0.0%), or otitis media (n = 0/2, 0.0%) were diagnosed. The frequencies of scurvy (n = 2/12, 16.7%) and vestiges of meningeal reactions (e.g. meningitis) (n = 2/12, 16.7%) were relatively low, whereas anaemia was presented at a higher frequency (n = 3/14, 21.4%). In summary, due to the political situation (war, siege of the city) and the dependent economy, the health situation was very bad in the Late Byzantine period. However, after the conquest of the city, the Turks apparently treated their slaves in a humane way. Ephesos, south-western Anatolia (Turkey), Late Byzantine period Ephesos, situated close to the modern city of Selçuk, lies in south-western Anatolia. From this site, two burial areas, St Mary’s Church and the Byzantine Palace, dating to the Late Byzantine period, (1100–1310 AD) were examined (N = 95). These human remains were recovered from the area of St Mary’s Church and a small burial area in the former Byzantine Palace. The political and health situations at Ephesos (Fig. 19) on the threshold of the downfall of the Byzantine Empire were probably similar to those at Pergamon. The highest frequencies are seen in the vestiges of meningeal reactions (e.g. meningitis) (n = 20/39, 51.3%), scurvy (n = 18/53, 34%), anaemia (n = 12/53, 22.6%) and otitis media (n = 8/38, 21.1%). Rickets (n = 0/47, 0.0%) and osteomyelitis (n = 0/49, 0.0%) were not observed. St Mary’s Church A relatively large group of subadult individuals were recovered (N = 55) from the cemetery of St Mary’s Church,. This population shows a higher disease frequency than the total population, with the exception of otitis media. Scurvy (n = 15/34, 44.1%) and, particularly, the vestiges of meningeal reactions (e.g. meningitis) (n = 15/26, 57.7%) are present at considerably higher frequencies (Fig. 20). The frequency of otitis media (n = 2/25, 8.0%) is strikingly low for Byzantine

44

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

Fig. 18   Disease frequencies observed in the skulls of the infants and children from Early Turkish period Pergamon (Turkey). Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

Fig. 19   Disease frequencies observed in the skulls of the infants and children from Late Byzantine Ephesos (Turkey). Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

Fig. 20   Disease frequencies observed in the skulls of the infants and children from Late Byzantine Ephesos (Turkey) – St Mary’s Church. Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

45

Fig. 21   Disease frequencies observed in the skulls of the infants and children from Late Byzantine Ephesos (Turkey) – Byzantine Palace. Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

populations of that time. Rickets (n = 0/28, 0.0%) and osteomyelitis (n = 0/30, 0.0%) were not diagnosed. Byzantine Palace The human skeletal remains of infants and children allow a certain tendency for the health situation of this relatively small group to be observed (N = 40). Similar to the group from St Mary’s Church, no cases of rickets (n = 0/19, 0.0%) or osteomyelitis (n = 0/19, 0.0%) were found (Fig. 21). Although the frequency of meningeal reactions (e.g. meningitis) (n = 5/13, 38.5%) is high, the pattern of the other frequencies is quite different from that seen at St Mary’s Church. Whereas the frequency of otitis media is unduly high (n = 6/13, 46.2%), the frequencies of scurvy (n = 3/19, 15.8%) and anaemia (n = 3/19, 15.8%) are relatively low. Also in the population from the Byzantine Palace, no rickets (n = 0/19, 0.0%) or osteomyelitis (n = 0/19, 0.0%) were diagnosed. In summary, the disease frequencies in the two cemeteries at Ephesos show a completely different pattern. The reasons for this difference have still not been found. However, the two populations might have belonged to different social communities which would explain the disease pattern. Morbidity and mortality Particularly in the Anatolian infant and child populations, the morbidity correlates with the mortality which means that the degree of the mortality rates of the subadults is reflected in the level of the morbidity.56 Population study – the example from late PPNB Basta (southern Jordan) The skeletal remains from the Late PPNB settlement of Basta consist of 56 almost complete skeletons which were examined by macroscopic, radiological, endoscopic (Fig. 22), light and scanning-electron microscopic (Fig. 23), and biochemical techniques (protein research; Fig. 24).57 The demography in the Basta population demonstrated a normal age distribution as observed

56 57

See more in Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017. Schultz et al. 2006.

46

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

Fig. 22   Basta, burial 35, probably female, 22–25 years old. Endoscopic view of right maxillary sinus. The porous, plate-like bone apposition indicates a long-term chronic inflammatory process (Sinusitis maxillaris) (photo: M. Schultz)

Fig. 24   Basta, burial 37, male, 30–39 (45) years old. One-dimensional gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE). Lane 1 – left femur, lane 2 – tooth 27. kD – molecular weight (kilodalton) (photo: T. Schmidt-Schultz)

Fig. 23   Basta, burial 37, male, 30–39 (45) years old. Well-preserved compact bone tissue of the left femur. Microstructure of the area of the internal circumferential lamellae. Undecalcified thin ground section (50μm) viewed through the microscope in polarised light using a hilfsobject, red 1st order (quartz) as compensator. Magnification 100× (photo: M. Schultz)

Fig. 25   Basta, burial 37, male, 30–39 (45) years old. Perimortem cut marks on the mandible (arrows) (photo: M. Schultz)

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

47

Fig. 26   Basta, burial 39/3, male, 40–59 years old. Very well- Fig. 27   Basta, burial 37, male, 30–39 (45) years old. healed incomplete compression impression fracture in the Macroscopic view of left frontal sinus. Vestiges of a right parietal bone (photo: M. Schultz) chronic partly-healed inflammatory process (Sinusitis frontalis). Healing suggested by the bumpy surface of the wall of the sinus (photo: M. Schultz)

Fig. 28   Disease frequencies observed in the skeletal remains from Basta (Jordan) Osteomyl. = osteomyelitis. Mening. R. = meningeal reactions (graphics: M. Schultz)

Fig. 29   Basta, mature male. Degenerative joint disease in the right knee joint (distal end of femur). The thickened layer on the surface of the medial condyle (degree IV) is the result of osteoarthritis (photo: M. Schultz)

48

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

in other prehistoric populations. Cut marks were observed which suggest a particular mortuary practice (Fig. 25). In the skulls, no intentional ante-mortem deformation was observed. There is a relatively high frequency of healed skull trauma (n = 5/29, 17.2%; (Fig. 26). In one or possibly two cases, there is evidence of ante-mortem surgical intervention representing, to date, one of the oldest-known skull operations world-wide. Unspecific stress indicators such as Cribra orbitalia, transverse linear enamel hypoplasia, Harris’s lines and periosteal reactions were diagnosed. Vestiges of deficiency diseases such as scurvy (n = 2/24, 8.3%) and anaemia (n = 6/40, 15%) and of inflammatory processes such as meningeal reactions (n = 14/30, 46.7%; Fig. 28) were diagnosed. Single cases of sinusitis frontalis (Fig. 27) and maxillaris (Fig. 22), were also observed. No rickets (n = 0/30, 0.0%), osteomyelitis (n = 0/12, 0.0%) or otitis media (n = 0/21, 0.0%) were diagnosed. The frequency of severe ‘osteoarthritis’ (degree IV–VI) was relatively low, but slight degenerative changes (degree II–III) were common (Fig. 29). Because of poor oral hygiene, the Basta population suffered from inflammatory diseases of the periodontium. Dental caries was rare. In summary, the frequencies of diseases were relatively low in comparison with other prehistoric populations.58

Closing remarks Up to now, the basis of our knowledge about the health of past populations from the Near East obtained by interdisciplinary research using medical methods and techniques has been rather narrow. Comparable data dealing with the aetiology and the epidemiology of the most important diseases which have left their vestiges on the skeleton are still not available. Future interdisciplinary cooperation will hopefully close this gap. The results of interdisciplinary palaeopathological research can help in the reconstruction of the health status and living conditions of early peoples. The study of infant and child skeletons in particular provides new answers to aetiological and epidemiological problems, thus shedding light on some aspects of prehistoric life. Furthermore, it should not be forgotten that social factors might also cause diseases. As expected and shown in the example of Pergamon, the results revealed poor to very poor living conditions for the infants and children who lived at the time of the decline of the Byzantine Empire (c. 13th/14th century AD), whereas the subadults who lived at the time when the Byzantine Empire was still powerful (c. 7th–10th century AD) showed, as a rule, evidence of better living conditions. Subadults who lived after the conquest had apparently better living conditions, however, the mortality rate was high in the older children. This might be associated with child labour. Thus, as expected, morbidity influences mortality. As the example of Pergamon has further shown, historical and political causes, for instance, the downfall of the Byzantine Empire, provoked far-reaching changes which were responsible for the origin of deficiency diseases and the outbreak of epidemics. Diseases which had a significant influence on the quality of life could directly or indirectly provoke premature death. A special role in the health of ancient populations is played by anaemia because this disease has manifold causes for its origin. Anaemia can be provoked by iron deficiency or lack of essential amino acids, such as tryptophan, and in subadults also by malaria. However, anaemia might also occur as a consequence of parasitic diseases or of genetically caused factors, for instance thalassemia.

58

Schultz et al. 2006.

49

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East



Population

Country

1) Basta*59 southern Jordan northern Turkey İkiztepe60 Elephantine Island61 southern Egypt south-eastern Turkey Lidar Höyük62 northern Iraq Nimrud*63 south-eastern Turkey Arslantepe64 central Turkey Boğazkale65 north-western Turkey Pergamon66 south-western Turkey Ephesos67

Culture/Dating

Numbers of Individuals

Late Pre-Pottery Neolithic B c. 6000–4000 BC

56

Early Bronze Age III c. 2600–2200 BC

144

Middle Kingdom/ 2nd Intermediate Period c. 1900–1600 BC

52

Middle Bronze Age c. 1700–1500 BC

1

Iron Age (Neo-Assyria) c. 750–620 BC

17

Early Byzantine Period c. 600–800 AD

97

Early Byzantine Period c. 600–900 AD

77

Late Byzantine/Early Turkish Period Greek population before conquest c. 1200–1315 AD Greek population after conquest c. 1315–1350 AD

15

Middle–Late Byzantine Period c. 1100–1310 AD

95

2) Early Neolithic: Aiterhofen-Ödmühle68 Lower Bavaria Linear Bandkeramik Culture c. 5500 BC Thuringia Early Neolithic: Wandersleben69 Linear Bandkeramik Culture c. 5500 BC Lower Austria Early Bronze Age: Franzhausen-I70 Unterwölbling Culture c. 2100–1800 BC

49

21

37

224

Tab. 1   Infant and child populations from 1) the Near East and comparable 2) European and 3) American populations studied (n = 1907). * Total population (adults and subadult), ** all subadults

59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70

Gebel – Muheisen 1997; Schultz et al. 2006. Bilgi 1984; Schultz 1984; Schultz 1990. Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 1993. Schultz 1999; Schultz 2011. Damerji 1999; Schultz – Kunter 1999. Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017. Neve 1996; Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017. Radt 1989; Radt 1990; Rheidt 1991; Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 1995; Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017. Karwiese 1989; Pülz 2015; Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017. Nieszery 1995; Carli-Thiele 1996. Bach 1986; Bach – Bach 1989; Carli-Thiele 1996. Neugebauer 1987; Neugebauer 1991; Neugebauer 1994, Schultz – Teschler-Nicola 1989; Schultz 1993; Schultz 2001b.

50

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

Population

Country

Culture/Dating

Numbers of Individuals

Gemeinlebarn-F71 Lower Austria Early Bronze Age: Věteřov Culture/Böheimkirchner Culture: c. 1900–1700 BC southern Slovakia Early Bronze Age: Jelšovce72 Nitra Culture c. 2200–2000 BC Early Bronze Age: Unetice Culture c. 1900–1700 BC Lower Austria EBA: Wieselburg Culture Hainburg-Teichtal73 c. 1900–1700 BC Straubing**74 southern Germany Early Middle Ages: Merovingian Period c. 450–775 AD Kleinlangheim*75 southern Germany Early Middle Ages: Merovingian Period c. 475–725 AD Barbing-Kreuzhof76 southern Germany Early Middle Ages: Merovingian Period c. 500–700 AD Harting77 southern Germany Early Middle Ages: Merovingian Period c. 500–700 AD Switzerland High/Late Middle Ages Bettingen78 c. 1200–1450 AD 3) Pre-Columbian: Grasshopper Pueblo Arizona (USA)79 Late Mogollon-Phase 5 c. 1300–1360/90 AD

10

55

45

43

198

230

22

22

30

369

Tab. 1 continued   Infant and child populations from 1) the Near East and comparable 2) European and 3) American populations studied (n = 1907). * Total population (adults and subadult), ** all subadults

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank many colleagues for their help, information and support, particularly Hans Georg K. Gebel, Free University at Berlin (Germany), Önder Bilgi, University of Istanbul (Turkey), Cornelius von Pilgrim, Swiss Institute for Egyptian Architectural and Archaeological Research in Cairo (former director of the excavations of the German Archaeological Institute at Elephantine Island), Harald Hauptmann, former director of the German Archaeological Institute at Istanbul and director of the German excavations at Lidar Höyük (Turkey), Muayad Said Basim Damerji, former director of the Supreme Council of Iraqi Antiquities at Baghdad (Iraq), Donny George†, former director of the Iraqi National Museum at Baghdad (Iraq), Michael Müller-Karpe, Romano-Germanic

71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79

Neugebauer 1987; Neugebauer 1991; Neugebauer 1994; Schultz 1993; Schultz 2001b. Schultz et al. 1998; Bátora 2000; Bátora – Schultz 2001; Schultz 20001b. Neugebauer 1987; Neugebauer 1991; Neugebauer 1994; Schultz 1989; Schultz 1993; Schultz 2001b. Geisler 1984; Kreutz 1997. Pescheck 1996; Schultz 1996. Geisler 1984; Detken 1991. Geisler 1984; Gresky 2006. Templin 1993. Reid – Whittlesey 1999; Schultz et al. 2008a; Schultz et al. 2008b.

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

51

Central Museum at Mainz (Germany), Norbert Nieszery, Stralsund (Germany), Herbert Bach†, former director of the Institute of Human Genetics of the University of Jena (Germany), Maria Teschler-Nicola, former director of the Department of Anthropology of the Vienna Museum of Natural History at Vienna (Austria), Johannes-Wolfgang Neugebauer†, University of Vienna (Austria), Christian Pescheck†, former director of the State Office of Archaeological and Historical Monuments at Würzburg (Germany), Hans Geisler, Straubing (Germany), Bruno Kaufmann, Basel (Switzerland), Lane Beck, Museum of the University of Arizona at Tucson (USA), Wolfgang Radt, former director of the German excavations at Pergamon, German Archaeological Institute (DAI) at Istanbul (Turkey), Klaus Rheidt, chair and head of the Department of Research in Architecture at the Brandenburg University of Cottbus (Germany), Peter Neve†, former director of the German excavations at Boğazkale, German Archaeological Institute (DAI) at Istanbul, field office Ankara (Turkey), Marcella Frangipane, director of the Italian excavations at Arslantepe, Italian Archaeological Mission of Oriental Anatolia of the University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’ (Italy), Sabine Ladstätter, director of the Austrian excavations at Ephesos, Austrian Archaeological Institute (ÖAI) at Vienna (Austria), and Andreas Pülz, director of the recent Austrian excavations of the Byzantine Palace at Ephesos, Austrian Academy of Science (ÖAW) and the Austrian Archaeological Institute (ÖAI) at Vienna (Austria). The authors thank Berna Alpagut, formerly head of the Anthropological Laboratory, University of Ankara (Turkey), for support during the examination of skeletal remains in 1987. For the preparation of the thin-ground sections, the authors thank Michael Brandt and for the preparation of samples for scanning-electron microscopy Ingrid Hettwer-Steeger, both of the Department of Anatomy, University Medical School Göttingen (Germany). For the reading of the English text, the authors thank Cyrilla Maelicke, Göttingen (Germany).

References Angel 1966 J. L. Angel, Porotic hyperostosis, anemias, malarias, and marshes in the prehistoric eastern Mediterranean, Science 153, 1966, 760–763. Bach 1986 A. Bach, Einige Befunde an den Skeletten aus den Körpergräbern des linearbandkeramischen Gräberfeldes Wandersleben, Kr. Gotha, Anthropologie 24, 1986, 111–114. Bach – Bach 1989 H. Bach – A. Bach, Paläanthropologie im Mittelelbe-Saale-Werra-Gebiet. Beiträge zur Rekonstruktion der biologischen Situation ur- und frühgeschichtlicher Bevölkerungen, Weimarer Monographien zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte 23 (Weimar 1989). Bátora 2000 J. Bátora, Das Gräberfeld von Jelšovce, Slowakei. Ein Beitrag zur Frühbronzezeit im nordwestlichen Karpatenbecken, Prähistorische Anthropologie in Südosteuropa 16 (Kiel 2000). Bátora – Schultz 2001 J. Bátora – M. Schultz, Zum Gesundheitszustand der frühbronzezeitlichen Population des Gräberfeldes von Jelšovce, Südwestslowakei / The health of the Early Bronze Age population from the cemetery at Jelšovce, Southwest Slovakia, in: Lippert et al. 2001, 307–315. Bilgi 1984 Ö. Bilgi, Metal objects from İkiztepe, Turkey, Beiträge der Kommission für Allgemeine und Vergleichende Archäologie 6, 1984, 31–97. Buikstra et al. 1994 J. E. Buikstra – D. H. Ubelaker – J. Haas (eds.), Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains, Proceedings of a seminar at the Field Museum of Natural History, Arkansas Archeological Survey Research Series 44 (Fayetteville 1994). Carli-Thiele 1996 P. Carli-Thiele, Spuren von Mangelerkrankungen an steinzeitlichen Kinderskeleten / Vestiges of deficiency diseases in Stone Age child skeletons, in: M. Schultz (ed.), Advances in Paleopathology and Osteoarchaeology I (Göttingen 1996) 13–267. Carli-Thiele – Schultz 2001 P. Carli-Thiele – M. Schultz, Wechselwirkungen zwischen Mangel- und Infektionskrankheiten des Kindesalters bei neolithischen Populationen. Reciprocal interactions between deficiency and infectious diseases of infancy in Neolithic populations, in: Lippert et al. 2001, 273–285.

52

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

Damerji 1999 M. S. B. Damerji, Gräber assyrischer Königinnen aus Nimrud, Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 45/1998 (Mainz 1999) 3–69. Detken 1991 S. Detken, Krankhafte Veränderungen an den menschlichen Skeleten aus dem frühmittelalterlichen Reihengräberfeld von Barbing-Kreuzhof (MD Diss., Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Göttingen 1991). Ferembach et al. 1980 D. Ferembach – I. Schwidetzky – M. Stloukal, Recommendations for age and sex diagnosis of skeletons, Journal of Human Evolution 9, 1980, 517–549. Gebel - Muheisen 1997 H. G. Gebel – M. Muheisen, Basta, in: E. M. Meyers (ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East (Oxford 1997) 279–280. Geisler 1984 H. Geisler, Studien zur Archäologie frühmittelalterlicher Siedlungen in Altbayern (PhD Diss., Ludwig Maximilians Universität München, Munich 1984). Gresky 2006 J. Gresky, Ätiologie und Epidemiologie der Erkrankungen des Craniums bei der Population des bajuwarischen Gräberfeldes von Harting (Oberpfalz). Ein Beitrag zur Rekonstruktion des Gesundheitsstatus frühmittelalterlicher Populationen (MD Diss., Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Göttingen 2006). Gresky et al. 2016 J. Gresky – M. Wagner – T. H. Schmidt-Schultz – L. Schwarz – X. Wu – A. Aisha – P. E. Tarasov – M. Schultz, ‘You must keep going‘. Musculoskeletal system stress indicators of prehistoric mobile pastoralists in Western China, Quaternary International 405, 2016, 186–199. Herrmann 1988 B. Herrmann, Röntgenologische Methoden, in: Knussmann 1988, 684–698. Johnston 1962 F. E. Johnston, Growth of the long bones of infants and young children at Indian Knoll, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 20, 1962, 249–254. Karwiese 1989 S. Karwiese, Die Marienkirche in Ephesos. Erster vorläufiger Grabungsbericht 1984–1986 (Wien 1989). Knussmann 1988 R. Knussmann (ed.) Anthropologie: Handbuch der vergleichenden Biologie des Menschen, Vol. I, 1. Wesen und Methoden der Anthropologie (Stuttgart, New York 1988). Kósa, 1978 F. Kósa, Identifikation der Feten durch Skelettuntersuchungen, in: H. Hunger – D. Leopold (eds.), Identifikation (Leipzig 1978) 211–241. Kreutz 1997 K. Kreutz, Ätiologie und Epidemiologie von Erkrankungen des Kindesalters bei der bajuwarischen Population von Straubing (Niederbayern), Beiträge zur Paläopathologie I & II (Göttingen 1997). Larsen 1997 C. S. Larsen, Bioarchaeology. Interpreting behavior from the human skeleton (Cambridge, New York 1997). Lewis 2009 M. E. Lewis, The bioarchaeology of children. Perspectives from biological and forensic anthropology, Studies in Biological and Evolutionary Anthropology 50 (Cambridge 2009). Lippert et al. 2001 A. Lippert – M. Schultz – S. Shennan – M. Teschler-Nicola (eds.), Mensch und Umwelt während des Neolithikums und der Frühbronzezeit in Mitteleuropa (Rahden 2001).

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

53

Neugebauer 1987 J.-W. Neugebauer, Die Bronzezeit im Osten Österreichs (St. Pölten, Wien 1987). Neugebauer 1991 J.-W. Neugebauer, Die Nekropole F von Gemeinlebarn, Niederösterreich, Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 49 (Mainz 1991). Neugebauer 1994 J.-W. Neugebauer, Bronzezeit in Ostösterreich (St. Pölten, Wien 1994). Neve 1996 P. Neve, Ḫattuša Stadt der Götter und Tempel. Neue Ausgrabungen in der Hauptstadt der Hethiter, Zaberns Bildbände zur Archäologie (Mainz 1996). Nieszery 1995 N. Nieszery, Linearbandkeramische Gräberfelder in Bayern, Internationale Archäologie 16 (Espelkamp 1995). Ortner 2003 D. J. Ortner, Identification of pathological conditions in human skeletal remains (San Diego 2003). Pescheck 1996 C. Pescheck, Das fränkische Reihengräberfeld von Kleinlangheim, Lkr. Kitzingen/ Nordbayern, Germanische Denkmäler der Völkerwanderungszeit, Serie A, XVII (Mainz 1996). Pülz 2015 A. Pülz, ‘Byzantinischer Palast’ (= Bischofspalast) von Ephesos. Online (last accessed 10 Oct. 2018). Radt 1989 W. Radt, Pergamon. Vorbericht über die Kampagne 1988, Archäologischer Anzeiger 1989, 387–412. Radt 1990 W. Radt, Pergamon. Vorbericht über die Kampagne 1989, Archäologischer Anzeiger 1990, 397–424. Reid – Whittlesey 1999 J. Reid – S. Whittlesey, Grasshopper Pueblo. A Story of Archaeology and Ancient Life (Tucson 1999). Reinhard 1992 K. J. Reinhard, Patterns of diet, parasitism and anemia in prehistoric West North America, in: P. Stuart-Macadam – S. Kent (eds.) Diet, demography, and disease. Changing perspectives on anemia (New York 1992) 219–258. Rheidt 1991 K. Rheidt, Die Stadtgrabung, Teil 2. Die byzantinische Wohnstadt, Altertümer von Pergamon XV, 2 (Berlin, New York 1991). Roberts – Cox 2003 C. Roberts – M. Cox, Health & disease in Britain from prehistory to the present day (Phoenix Mill 2003). Rösing et al. 2007 F. W. Rösing – M. Graw – B. Marré – S. Ritz-Timme – M. A. Rothschild – K. Rötzscher – A. Schmeling – I. Schröder – G. Geserick, Recommendations for the forensic diagnosis of sex and age from skeletons, Homo 58, 2007, 75–89. Scheuer – Black 2000 L. Scheuer – S. Black, Developmental juvenile osteology (San Diego 2000). Schmid – Künle 1958 F. Schmid – A. Künle, Das Längenwachstum der langen Röhrenknochen in Bezug auf Körperlänge und Lebensalter, Fortschritte Röntgenstrahlen 89, 1958, 350–356. Schmidt-Schultz – Schultz 2004 T. H. Schmidt-Schultz – M. Schultz, Bone protects proteins over thousands of years. Extraction, analysis, and interpretation of extracellular matrix proteins in archaeological skeletal remains, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 123, 2004, 30–39.

54

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

Schmidt-Schultz – Schultz 2005 T. H. Schmidt-Schultz – M. Schultz, Intact growth factors are conserved in the extracellular matrix of ancient human bone and teeth. A storehouse for the study of human evolution in health and disease, Biological Chemistry 386, 2005, 767–776. Schultz 1982 M. Schultz, Umwelt und Krankheit des vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Menschen, in: H. Wendt – N. Loacker (eds.), Kindlers Enzyklopädie. Der Mensch, Vol. 2 (München 1982) 259–312. Schultz 1984 M. Schultz, The diseases in a series of children’s skeletons from İkiztepe, Turkey, in: V. Capecci – E. Rabino Massa (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th European Meeting of the Paleopathology Association (Siena 1984) 321–325. Schultz 1988a M. Schultz, Paläopathologische Diagnostik, in: Knussmann 1988, 480–496. Schultz 1988b M. Schultz, Methoden der Licht- und Elektronenmikroskopie, in: Knussmann 1988, 698–730. Schultz 1989 M. Schultz, Erkrankungen des Kindesalters bei der frühbronzezeitlichen Population von Hainburg/Niederösterreich, Mitteilung der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 118/119, 1989, 369–380. Schultz 1990 M. Schultz, Erkrankungen des Kindesalters bei der frühbronzezeitlichen Population vom İkiztepe (Türkei), in: F. M. Andraschko – W.-R. Teegen (eds.) Gedenkschrift für Jürgen Driehaus (Mainz 1990) 83–90. Schultz 1993 M. Schultz, Spuren unspezifischer Entzündungen an prähistorischen und historischen Schädeln. Ein Beitrag zur Paläopathologie. Vestiges of non-specific inflammations of the skull in prehistoric and historic populations. A contribution to palaeopathology, Anthropologische Beiträge 4A/B (Aesch BL 1993). Schultz 1996 M. Schultz, Ergebnisse der paläopathologischen Untersuchung an den menschlichen Skeleten aus dem merowingischen Reihengräberfeld von Kleinlangheim, in: C. Pescheck (ed.), Das fränkische Reihengräberfeld von Kleinlangheim, Lkr. Kitzingen/Nordbayern, Germanische Denkmäler der Völkerwanderungszeit, Serie A, XVII (Mainz 1996) 177–213. Schultz 1997 M. Schultz, Microscopic investigation of excavated skeletal remains. A contribution to paleopathology and forensic medicine, in: W. D. Haglund – M. H. Sorg (eds.), Forensic Taphonomy. The Postmortem Fate of Human Remains (Boca Raton, New York, London, Tokyo 1997) 201–222. Schultz 1999 M. Schultz, Der Mensch der Bronzezeit, in: Kunst- und Ausstellungshallen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (eds.), Götter und Helden der Bronzezeit. Europa im Zeichen des Odysseus (Bonn 1999) 73–78. Schultz 2001a M. Schultz, Paleohistopathology of bone. A new approach to the study of ancient diseases, Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 44, 2001, 106–147. Schultz 2001b M. Schultz, Krankheit und Tod im Kindesalter bei bronzezeitlichen Populationen. Disease and death in infancy in Bronze Age populations, in: Lippert et al. 2001, 287–305. Schultz 2003 M. Schultz, Light microscopic analysis in skeletal paleopathology, in: D. J. Ortner (ed.) Identification of pathological conditions in human skeletal remains (San Diego 2003) 73–108. Schultz 2006 M. Schultz, Results of the anatomical-paleopathological investigations on the Neanderthal skeleton from the Kleine Feldhofer Grotte (1856) including the new discoveries from 1997/2000, in: R. Schmitz (ed), Neanderthal 1856–2006, Rheinische Ausgrabungen (Mainz 2006) 277–318.

Health and Disease in the Prehistoric and Early Historical Near East

55

Schultz 2011 M. Schultz, Paläobiographik, in: G. Jüttemann (ed.), Biographische Diagnostik (Berlin, Bremen 2011) 222–236. Schultz 2012 M. Schultz, Light microscopic analysis of macerated pathologically changed bone, in: C. Crowder – S. Stout (eds.), Bone histology. An anthropological perspective (New York, London, Tokyo, Boca Raton 2012) 253–295. Schultz – Kunter 1999 M. Schultz – M. Kunter, Erste Ergebnisse der anthropologischen und paläopathologischen Untersuchungen an den menschlichen Skeletfunden aus den neuassyrischen Königinnengräbern von Nimrud, Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 45, Jahrgang 1998 (Mainz 1999) 85–128. Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 1993 M. Schultz – T. H. Schmidt-Schultz, Erste Ergebnisse der osteologischen Untersuchung an den menschlichen Skelettfunden der 16.–20. Kampagne, in: W. Kaiser – M. Bommas – H. Jaritz – A. Krekeler – C. von Pilgrim – M. Schultz – T. H. Schmidt-Schultz – M. Ziermann (eds.), Stadt und Tempel von Elephantine 19./20. Grabungsbericht (Mainz 1993) 182–187. Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 1995 M. Schultz – T. H. Schmidt-Schultz, Krankheiten des Kindesalters in der mittelalterlichen Population von Pergamon, Istanbuler Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 44, 1995, 181–201. Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2014 M. Schultz – T. H. Schmidt-Schultz, The role of deficiency diseases in infancy and childhood of Bronze Age populations, in: L. Milano (ed.), Paleonutrition and food practices in the Ancient Near East towards a multidisciplinary approach, History of the Ancient Near East/Monographs XIV (Padova 2014) 25–42. Schultz – Schmidt-Schultz 2017 M. Schultz – T. H. Schmidt-Schultz, Health and disease of infants and children in Byzantine Anatolia between AD 600 and 1350, in: J. R. Brandt – E. Hagelberg – G. Bjørnstad – S. Ahrens (eds.), Life & Death in Asia Minor in Hellenistic, Roman & Byzantine Times (Oxford, Philadelphia 2017) 286–305. Schultz – Teschler-Nicola 1989 M. Schultz – M. Teschler-Nicola, Osteologische Untersuchungen an bronzezeitlichen Kinderskeletten aus Franzhausen, Niederösterreich, Verhandlungen der Anatomischen Gesellschaft 82, 1989, 407–409. Schultz – Walker 2013 M. Schultz – R. Walker, Report on the mummy of Djau, Govenor of Upper Egyptian Provinces 8 and 12 (6th Dynasty), in: N. Kanawati (ed.), Deir el-Gebrawi, III. The Southern Cliff. The Tombs of Djau/Shemai and Djau (Oxford 2013) 64–78. Schultz et al. 1998 M. Schultz – T. H. Schmidt-Schultz – K. Kreutz, Ergebnisse der paläopathologischen Untersuchung an den frühbronzezeitlichen Kinderskeletten von Jelšovce (Slowakische Republik), in: B. Hänsel (ed.), Mensch und Umwelt in der Bronzezeit Europas – Man and Environment in Bronze Age Europe (Kiel 1998) 77–90. Schultz et al. 2006 M. Schultz – T. H. Schmidt-Schultz – J. Gresky – K. Kreutz – M. Berner, Morbidity and mortality in the Late PPNB populations from Basta and Ba’ja (Jordan) (Oxford 2006). Schultz et al. 2007 M. Schultz – H. Parzinger – D. V. Posdnjakov – T. A. Chikisheva – T. H. Schmidt-Schultz, Oldest known case of metastasizing prostate carcinoma diagnosed in the skeleton of a 2,700-year-old Scythian king from Arzhan (Siberia, Russia), International Journal of Cancer 121, 2007, 2591–2595. Schultz et al. 2008a M. Schultz – U. Timme – R. Hilgers – T. H. Schmidt-Schultz, Preliminary results of the bioarchaeological and sociobiological investigation on the infants and children from Grasshopper Pueblo, Arizona, in: A. L. W. Stodder (ed.), Reanalysis and Reinterpretation in Southwestern Bioarchaeology, Anthropological Research Papers 59 (Tucson 2008) 127–140. Schultz et al. 2008b M. Schultz – U. Timme – R. Hilgers – T. H. Schmidt-Schultz, Die Krankheiten der Kinder des Grasshopper Pueblo (Arizona). Ergebnisse paläopathologisch-bioarchäologischer Untersuchungen, in: J. Piek – T. Terberger (eds.),

56

Michael Schultz – Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz

Traumatologische und pathologische Veränderungen an prähistorischen und historischen Skelettresten. Diagnose, Ursachen und Kontext (Rahden 2008) 137–360. Sjøvold 1988 T. Sjøvold, Geschlechtsdiagnose am Skelett, in: Knussmann 1988, 444–480. Stloukal – Hanáková 1978 M. Stloukal – H. Hanáková, Die Länge der Längsknochen altslawischer Bevölkerungen. Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Wachstumsfragen, Homo 29, 1978, 53–69. Szilvássy 1988 J. Szilvássy, Altersdiagnose am Skelett, in: Knussmann 1988, 421–443. Templin 1993 O. Templin, Die Kinderskelette von Bettingen im Kanton Basel-Stadt (Schweiz). Eine paläopathologische Untersuchung (MD Diss., Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Göttingen 1993). Ubelaker 1989 D. H. Ubelaker, Human skeletal remains: Excavation, analysis, interpretation, Manuals on Archaeology 2 (Washington 1989).

Human Self-perception and Self-expression during the 9th Millennium calBC

57

Human Self-perception and Self-expression during the 9th Millennium calBC: Funerary Practices and Symbolic Meaning of the Human Representations at Dja’de el-Mughara (Syria) Bérénice Chamel 1 – Eric Coqueugniot 2 Abstract: Located on the left bank of the Euphrates River, approx. 100km north-east of Aleppo and 30km south-west of ‘Ain el Arab/Kobane, the Neolithic tell of Dja’de el-Mughara is the only site in the northern Levant that covers the entire 9th millennium (Late PPNA to the end of the Early PPNB), a crucial phase for the process of Neolithisation. Six to nine metres thick, the archaeological levels are particularly rich in indications of the techniques, the social organisation and the human self-perception. With a total of 116 individuals, spread over 34 funerary deposits, Dja’de el-Mughara has the largest Late PPNA and Early PPNB collection of human remains. Funerary practices are various in type and in location, although the greatest number of human remains is situated in the DJ III ‘House of the Dead’ with 80 individuals. A very strong link was noticed between burial and the architecture, but no significant association was recorded between the funerary practices and the age at death or the sex. Human representations are limited to figurines (in clay, limestone, chalk and bone). The female ones are diverse and do not seem related to the unique principle of fertility (only one represents a clearly pregnant woman). Others seem to be masculine and one has scarification marks. Some resemblance exists between the treatment of the bodies and the treatment of the human representations. Keywords: Pre-Pottery Neolithic; Syria; funerary practice; human representation; Dja’de el-Mughara; symbolism

Self-perception and self-expression of prehistoric humans are expressed through burial practices, and the representations they made of themselves. Traditionally, it is considered that the Early Neolithic anthropomorphic figurines and representations have an important symbolic meaning related to fertility or to deities.3 The question of figurines, and more generally figurations, is central to many reflections on the driving force of Neolithisation and on the symbolic thought of ‘Prehistoric Man’. In his major book, Jacques Cauvin4 emphasises the role of the woman/bull couple, opposing a principle of female fertility and male virility. According to him, economic and social change, marked by the passage of a hunter-gatherer’s way of life to an economy of production, was preceded by a psycho-cultural change, a mental revolution seen especially through ‘the woman and the bull’ pairing. Therefore, animal and human figurines are a class of artefacts which focused the thoughts of many researchers. The site of Dja’de el-Mughara yielded an important collection of human remains from the Neolithic phases as well as several human representations in the form of figurines. In this paper we tried to relate these two types of material to gain a better understanding of the self-perception and self-expression of the Neolithic inhabitants of Dja’de el-Mughara.

Presentation of Dja’de el-Mughara The tell of Dja’de el-Mughara is located on the left bank of the Euphrates River, upstream of the bridge of Qara Qosak, north-east of Aleppo (Fig. 1). The tell is located at the interface of two environments: the flood plain of the Euphrates and the steppic hinterland of the Jezireh. This site belongs to the salvage excavations programme linked to the construction of the Tishreen Dam and it was excavated from 1991 to 2010, under the supervision of Eric Coqueugniot (CNRS, France).5

1 2 3 4 5

CNRS, UMR 5133 Archéorient, Lyon, France; [email protected]. CNRS, UMR 5133 Archéorient, Lyon, France; [email protected]. Hamilton 1996; Lesure 2002. Cauvin 2000. Coqueugniot 2000.

58

Bérénice Chamel – Eric Coqueugniot

Fig. 1   Localisation of the site of Dja’de el-Mughara in Syria (CAD: Archéorient)

Dja’de el-Mughara presents a very long sequence with seven to nine metres of stratigraphy, which covers most of the 9th millennium BC. On the basis of the lithic industry, the Pre-Pottery Neolithic sequence has been divided into three main phases: DJ I (9310–8830 calBC), DJ II (8800–8500 calBC) and DJ III (8540–8290 calBC). However, this whole Neolithic sequence is a continuum as the limits between the three phases are blurred. Furthermore, the evolutions are not simultaneous for the architecture, the lithic industries and various social features such as funerary practices.6 The earliest phase of occupation, DJ I, is related to the Late PPNA. The architecture alternates between rectangular buildings, with large stone walls and paved floors, and circular buildings. However, the most important discovery for this early phase is a large sub-circular building, definitely for collective use, with very well preserved geometric paintings on the inside surface of the walls, named the ‘House of Paintings’. As regards portable art, this phase yielded grooved stones, figurines and two large engraved flagstones, characteristic of this period.7 The DJ II phase is an initial phase of Early PPNB, which is at this moment the only occurrence of this period in the Near East. The architecture is composed of large rectangular buildings with several rooms, but some particular features are present such as a burnt house and a high concen-

6 7

Coqueugniot 2016. Coqueugniot 2000.

Human Self-perception and Self-expression during the 9th Millennium calBC

59

tration of animal bones in exterior spaces. This concentration of bones was left in situ and was not mixed in with areas for rubbish or pits as is usual. According to the archaeozoologist8 the composition of the fauna is also unusual, mainly big game (equids and aurochs), and the remains have not been trampled and quickly covered with a gritty sediment. It seems that this area gathered the remains of a special collective event, a feasting. The portable art for the second phase is mainly represented by figurines made from the first phalanx of equids9. The phase DJ III corresponds to the second part of the Early PPNB. It yielded small rectangular buildings, divided into small rooms, with large exterior spaces between them. One particular building exists which has been named the ‘Maison des Morts’ (‘House of the Dead’) because 80 individuals were buried beneath its floors. The portable art for this period is more important and varied: grooved stones, figurines from equids phalanx and, lastly, anthropomorphic figurines were found on the site, but none in a funerary context.10 After phase DJ III, the site was abandoned during the Middle–Late PPNB period. The last two phases did not belong to the Pre-Pottery Neolithic and the site was re-occupied in the early 7th millennium BC for the DJ IV phase and in the mid-3rd millennium BC for the DJ V phase. For both these phases, the settlement was very small and is limited to a few houses and pits for DJ IV and to Early Bronze Age graves for the last phase, DJ V.11 With regard to the Neolithisation context, the site of Dja’de el-Mughara occupies an important place, at the interface between two economic models: the hunter-gatherer economy of predation and the farmer-breeder economy of production. Its very long continuous sequence therefore allows longitudinal studies to be produced.

The funerary practices The funerary practices at Dja’de el-Mughara are various. During the three Pre-Pottery Neolithic phases, 116 individuals were buried inside or outside the buildings, as primary or secondary deposits.12 Phase DJ I (Late PPNA) The DJ I phase yielded only five individuals: three mature adults, one young adult and one immature individual who died between the age of 10 to 15 years old. It was not possible to determine the sex for these individuals, not even for the skeleton with coxal bones, due to extreme fragmentation. Skeleton 661 was found on the floor of the communal ‘House of Paintings’ in a hyperflexed position. Unfortunately, the bones were badly crushed by the collapse of the building which seems to have been intentional, as a decision of closing the structure.13 The second type of deposit for this phase is secondary: four individuals were represented only by their skull or jaw. These skull deposits, which are common for this period,14 seem to share a strong link with the architecture. For instance, deposit 627 was discovered on the floor of a house and placed on its base in the corner of a room, with its gaze turned toward the centre of the room, with a possible staging (Fig. 2.1). With regard to the other skull deposits, one is in a pit, and one was discovered under a pebble bed, wedged with pebbles and small stones.15

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

L. Gourichon, personal communication. Coqueugniot 2000. Coqueugniot 2000. Coqueugniot et al. 1998. Chamel 2014. Chamel 2014. Kurth – Röhrer-Ertl 1981; Contenson 1992; Stordeur 1997; Stordeur 2000; Chamel 2014. Chamel 2014.

60

Bérénice Chamel – Eric Coqueugniot

Fig. 2   Funerary deposits for DJ I and DJ II. 1. Burial 627 in DJ I; 2. Burial 483 in DJ II; 3. Immature skullcaps and human bones in an exterior space with a human representation of a pregnant woman, DJ II (photo: E. Coqueugniot, CAD: B. Chamel in Chamel 2014)

Phase DJ II (beginning of early PPNB) The phase DJ II yielded a more important number of individuals: 26, distributed between 8 immature individuals and 18 adults. Only one of these can be sexed, a man from a single primary deposit, the skeleton 413. Funerary gestures are really varied for this phase and we noticed the first appearance of plural deposits in the site. Indeed, 17 individuals came from deposits with more than one individual, some of them being collective burials with re-opening, and some of them multiple burials, with a one-time event deposit of the dead. For example, grave 350 is a multiple deposition of 7 individuals, with a one-time deposit, while burial 283 is a collective deposit with 5 individuals, buried at several different times. It is interesting to note that this burial is outside of the house, while the other plural burials for this phase are often inside.

61

Human Self-perception and Self-expression during the 9th Millennium calBC

The other skeletons of DJ II came from single and primary deposits, often in a flexed position, on the right or on the left side. With regard to the composition of the population, all ages at death are represented here, from 1 years old to mature adults. For the 483 deposit, an immature individual who was between 1 and 2 years old at death, his/her position in the house, against a wall, makes the hypothesis of a foundational deposit possible (Fig. 2.2). Lastly, some scattered human bones were discovered: two mandibles on the ground and three pieces of skullcaps from two immature individuals on the floor of an open space. Other bones scattered not far away come from two individuals, one adult and one immature; they have been found with a figurine of a woman, probably pregnant, but we do not know if this association is intentional (Fig. 2.3).16 Phase DJ III (end of early PPNB) and the ‘House of the Dead’ The last phase of the Neolithic, DJ III, is the one with the most important number of human remains: up to 85 individuals. There are still primary and secondary deposits, multiple and collective burials, and scattered human remains, but the difference is that most of the dead (94%) were buried in relation to a particular building this time, the ‘House of the Dead’. Amongst the 85 individuals, 33 are adults and 52 are immature individuals.17 The ‘House of the Dead’ is an ensemble of seven rectangular buildings, rebuilt during a 250- to 300-year span at the same place, with only small modifications of the plan. All of the structures yielded human remains, on the inside (Minimum Number of Individuals = 51), usually in small cells, or outside the building, against the exterior walls (MNI = 13). Sixteen other individuals are believed to be associated with the buildings, but there is no certainty. The ‘funerary occupation’ of this unusual building can be divided into 3 phases (Tab. 1). The question is whether this building was in use only for the dead or whether daily activities were also carried out inside during its utilisation as a burial place. In fact, only the last state of the house (Structure 27–28) yielded some archaeological material, while the sixth other stages were free of artefacts.

Phase

Number of structure

3

St. 27–28

Burials inside ‘House of the Dead’

Burials against ‘House of the Dead’

Associated burials?

Sp. 108 Isolated mandible St. 150

Sp. 183 Isolated mandible

Sp. 179

2 St. 155

Sp. 181 Sp. 180

St. 209 St. 222

Sp. 240 Sp. 180 inferior

Sp. 304

1 St. 282 St. 294

Sp. 297

Tab. 1   Structures and funerary deposits in relation to the ‘House of the Dead’ in DJ III

16 17

Chamel 2014. Chamel 2014.

62

Bérénice Chamel – Eric Coqueugniot

Fig. 3   Funerary deposits in the ‘House of the Dead’ (DJ III). 1. Final sub-phase of the 180 deposit; 2. The 181 deposit; 3. Traces of mats and ochre in the 179 deposit; 4. Final sub-phase of the 108 deposit (photos: E. Coqueugniot, CAD: B. Chamel in Chamel 2014)

Phase 1 of the ‘House of the Dead’ includes the first four architectural layers (Structures 294, 282, 222 and 209 – Tab. 1). One collective burial, the 180 inferior, contains 14 individuals, including 8 adults and 6 immature individuals, among which is a perinatal individual. The basal layer of human remains is composed of parts of skeletons, with some connections preserved, probably disturbed primary burials, while the final layer has obvious primary burials, without any disturbances. The burial, which may have been in use during at least three architectural layers, remains in the same place during this time, indicating that there has to be some knowledge about the place

Human Self-perception and Self-expression during the 9th Millennium calBC

63

allocated to the deceased. Outside the building but press against the wall is a primary deposit of an adult, burial 240. Phase 2 encompasses two architectural layers. One of them, structure 155, yielded two collective burials, 180 and 181, and an isolated mandible found at the corner of two walls. Due to its position, this bone can be considered as a foundational deposit. Associated with this same building, a collective burial (179) is pressed against the external face of the northern wall. Burial 180 is located on top of the collective burial 180 inferior, belonging to phase 1, and includes 13 individuals with 6 adults and 7 immature individuals, among which is a perinatal individual. This collective grave can be divided into several sub-phases which contain both primary and secondary deposits, including a large set of skulls for the last sub-phase, with a clear choice of arrangement against the western wall, together with a bundle of long bones (Fig. 3.1). At the end of the last sub-phase, a pebble bed is created in order to close the grave. In phase 2 and for the first time in the ‘House of the Dead’, a funerary deposit occurs in the southern cell of the house and is clearly identified as a secondary deposit. Burial 181, with the remains of 5 individuals, consisted of long bones, especially from the lower limbs, arranged like a bundle, which were probably in a bag (Fig. 3.2).18 The exterior burial associated with the structure 155, named 179, is an ensemble of several deposits, both primary and secondary. It contains 12 individuals, including 3 adults and 9 immature individuals, among which are three perinatal individuals. Traces of mats (Fig. 3.3) with a layer of ochre were discovered between the different layers, and a human figurine is associated with the last layer of the grave. Phase 3 of the inhumations in the ‘House of the Dead’ concerns the last architectural layer, structure 27–28. It contains burial 108 (Fig. 3.4), which brings together 2 adults and 12 immature individuals, among which are 2 perinatal individuals, in the eastern corner of the northern cell. Two sub-phases are clearly visible for this burial, with some sediment between the two. After the last inhumation, the burial was then sealed by a pebble bed.19 Regarding whether potential selection criteria may have restricted access to the tomb to only a part of the community is very difficult to state. The question can be addressed on two different levels, the level of the whole ‘House of the Dead’, and the level of the burials which are inside. It must be noted that, depending on the state of preservation of the human remains, it was often impossible to estimate the age at death and to determine the sex. Nevertheless, the latest burial (108) includes a high proportion of immature individuals that is 87% of the remains. In this case, a selection according to age cannot be excluded.

The human representations At Dja’de el-Mughara, remains which have survived are rare, limited to some figurines (we didn’t find any engraving and painting with human representation), and usually found in secondary position. Anthropomorphic figurines made in different styles and materials (clay, animal bones, different stone, etc.) were found throughout the entire archaeological sequence. Some are clearly female, other are not gendered. Some are nude, others wear clothing (Figs. 4.7; 5.1, 3). We observe also a rare case of a representation of a phallus. Throughout the sequence, female figurines are not standardised. For example, in phase DJ II, one figurine evokes a pregnant woman (Figs. 2.3; 5.2), but it is the only one found which could clearly evoke fertility. Another very thin and elongated one is certainly not a fertility symbol (Fig. 4.1).

18 19

Chamel 2014. Chamel 2014.

64

Bérénice Chamel – Eric Coqueugniot

Fig. 4   Photographs of some human representations. 1. Elongated female figurine (DJ II); 2. Schematic figurine on equid phalanx (DJ III); 3. Gypsum figurine, definitely male (DJ I); 4. Gypsum female figurine (DJ I); 5. Schematic chalk figurine (DJ I); 6. Inferior part of a chalk figurine with intentional saw marks (DJ III); 7. Chalk figurine with clothes (DJ III); 8. Small figurine in red stone from DJ III (photos: E. Coqueugniot)

Human Self-perception and Self-expression during the 9th Millennium calBC

65

If figurines are not necessarily female ones, then it is clear that early female figurines are not always symbols of fertility. We now know that bucrania of aurochs are not always bulls (in Dja’de el-Mughara as in Çatalhöyük some are bucrania of cows!).20 The discoveries from Dja’de el-Mughara suggest that the idea of a ‘revolution of symbols’ based on the duality between ‘the woman and the bull’ and between female fertility and male virility is at least to be debated.21 Even when we do have a pregnant woman, is it as a symbol of fertility or for educational purposes including sex education for girls as has been observed in some ethnological situations? Or is it to be used as some kind of magic support during childbirth protection rites? Many schematic figurines created from the first phalanx of equids (more than 40 items, mainly from DJ III, Fig. 4.2)22 have been found. This use of the natural shape of the phalanx of equids to make figurines is not restricted to Dja’de el-Mughara; it has also been acknowledged at Mureybet23 and in the Chalcolithic in many other regions.24 A special figurine in gypsum found in the filling of the ‘House of Paintings’ (phase DJ I, Fig. 4.3) is definitely a male one. Its style evokes another small figurine found in Göbekli25 and the great male statue of Yeni Mahalle,26 suggesting the existence of an ‘anthropomorphic canon’ in the area of the Golden Triangle.27 Another figurine (a female one) in gypsum (Fig. 4.4) as well as a very stylised figurine in chalk (Fig. 4.5) were found in the ‘House of Paintings’. The breaking of figurines is common. This fragmentation appears to be intentional as suggested by figurines with traces of prior sawing and by the fact that it does not occur in zones of weakness (Figs. 4.6–8; 5.1). The intentional fragmentation of figurines is a classic phenomenon during the PPN, for example at ‘Ain Ghazal.28 Fragmentation can be linked with magical practices, as it is known in later Mesopotamia by texts.29 For the stone figurines, different materials have been chosen (chalk, gypsum, metamorphic rocks) and the colour could be a criterion for the selection of materials of different origins. In conclusion, with regard to the figurines, we should note that: • Whatever the period, many figurines are abstract and schematic and so gender is often not clearly specified. Even when they are not schematic, anthropomorphic figurines are not always female, and some asexual figurines could be male ones. If the precise determination (gender) is ambiguous, that is not due to an inability to make a faithful representation, but rather it seems to be intentional, with there being no desire to clarify the gender. • In addition, the swift throwing away of the figurines among the waste suggests that they had no inherent value, that the act of manufacturing them was important and that they were for short-term use.

Discussion After this presentation of human representations and funerary practices, we would like to describe the eventual convergences and differences between these two aspects. During the Pre-Pottery Neolithic sequence, we are able to observe great variability in the funerary practices: from DJ I to DJ III, all types of inhumation were represented, both primary and

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Twiss – Russel 2009; Coqueugniot 2014. Coqueugniot 2014. Christidou et al. 2009. Gourichon pers. comm. Bıçakçı 2001; Olsen 2008. Schmidt 2000. Hauptmann 2003. Kozlowski – Aurenche 2005. Schmandt-Besserat 2013. Postgate 1994.

66

Bérénice Chamel – Eric Coqueugniot

Fig. 5   Drawing of three figurines from DJ II and DJ III. 1. Figurine in chalk with clothes – cf. Fig. 4.7; 2. Clay figurine, painted in red, of a pregnant woman – cf. Fig. 2.3; 3. Clay figurine with mark of clothes and possible scarification marks (drawings: R. Douaud)

Human Self-perception and Self-expression during the 9th Millennium calBC

67

secondary. The minimal number of individuals in a grave can be very variable too, from 1 to 16 individuals. The variability can also be observed in the human representations as well as in the choice of materials (clay, animal bones and stone) and in the style of the representations (nude or with clothes, sitting or standing, etc.). In both cases, there are no clues of a standardisation in human representations or in the treatment of bodies, contrary to the Middle PPNB site of Tell Halula where standardisation is seen for funerary practices.30 In the funerary practices, we do not observe selection according to age at death or sex for the individuals buried in the site, and there is also no obvious selection using these criteria in the ‘House of the Dead’ in the DJ III phase. With regard to the figurines, although we have some that are obviously female, others are not gendered and can be hypothesised as male representations. In Dja’de el-Mughara, only one figurine seems to be linked to a fertility symbol, the ‘pregnant woman’. The last hypothesis we would like to highlight concerns the obvious intention to move on, which can be clearly seen both in funerary practices and in human representations. With regard to funerary practices, there is an irrevocable closure of the graves after they have been used with a sealing of a pebble bed for DJ III or by setting fire to a building after the last inhumation as in burial 661 in DJ I. For the 108 burial, the pebble bed definitely sealed the grave and the funerary occupation of this particular building. On the other hand, in Tell Halula (Middle PPNB), the bodies were buried in the entrance of the houses and their emplacements are clearly visible during daily use of the house for everyday activities.31 This desire for a ‘closure’ or for an ‘ending’ can also be seen in the human representations. Indeed, regardless of the material from which they were made, figurines are often broken or sawn; the cuts are not due to natural causes, rather there is a desire to deliberately destroy the representation, perhaps to mark the end of its use. Another argument for this hypothesis is that figurines were always found in secondary context, on the soil, on rubbish or in concentrations of animal bones as if their work was done. But it is interesting to note that there were absolutely no figurines found in a funerary context. Acknowledgements: We would like to thank the organisers of the ‘Iconography and Symbolic Meaning of the Human in Near Eastern Prehistory’ Workshop during the 10th ICAANE in Vienna, Bernd Müller-Neuhof, Jörg Becker and Claudia Beuger for inviting us to talk about symbolism in Dja’de el-Mughara. Our acknowledgments also go to the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs for funding the Dja’de el-Mughara mission, to the Archéorient Laboratory for providing us with the opportunity to participate in this workshop, and to Vincent Regis for helping with the English editing.

References Bıçakçı 2001 E. Bıçakçı, Tepecik-Çiftlik Höyüğü (Niğde) Kazısı Işığında Orta Anadolu Tarihöncesi Kültürleri ile İlgili Yeni bir Değerlendirme, Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Dergisi IV, 2001, 25–41. Cauvin 2000 J. Cauvin, The Birth of the Gods and the Origins of Agriculture, translated by Trevor Watkins, with updated postscript (Cambridge 2000). Chamel 2014 B. Chamel, Bioanthropologie et pratiques funéraires des populations néolithiques du Proche-Orient. L’impact de la Néolithisation. Etude de sept sites syriens 9820–6000 cal. BC (PhD Diss., University of Lyon 2, Lyon 2014). Christidou et al. 2009 R. Christidou – E. Coqueugniot – L. Gourichon, Neolithic figurines manufactured from phalanges of equids from Dja’de el Mughara, Syria, Journal of Field Archaeology 34, 3, 2009, 319–335.

30 31

Guerrero et al. 2009. Guerrero et al. 2009.

68

Bérénice Chamel – Eric Coqueugniot

Contenson 1992 H. de Contenson, Les coutumes funéraires dans le néolithique syrien, Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 89, 1992, 184–191. Coqueugniot 2000 E. Coqueugniot, Dja’de (Syrie), un village à la veille de la domestication (seconde moitié du 9ème millénaire av. J.-C.), in: J. Guilaine (ed.), Les Premiers Paysans du Monde. Naissance des Agricultures (Paris 2000) 63–79. Coqueugniot 2014 E. Coqueugniot, Dja’de (Syrie) et les représentations symboliques au IXe millénaire cal. BC, in: C. Manen – T. Perrin – J. Guilaine (eds.), La Transition Néolithique en Méditerranée (Arles 2014) 87–104. Coqueugniot 2016 E. Coqueugniot, Dja’de el-Mughara (Aleppo), in: Y. Kanjou – A. Tsuneki (eds.), A History of Syria in One Hundred Sites (Oxford 2016) 51–53. Coqueugniot et al. 1998 E. Coqueugniot – A. S. Jamieson – J. L. Montero Fenollós – J. Anfruns, Une tombe du Bronze ancien à Dja’de el Mughara (Moyen Euphrate, Syrie), Cahiers de l’Euphrate 8, 1998, 85–114. Guerrero et al. 2009 E. Guerrero – M. Molist – I. Kuijt – J. Anfruns, Seated memory. New insights into Near Eastern Neolithic mortuary variability from Tell Halula, Syria, Current Anthropology 50, 3, 2009, 379–391. Hamilton 1996 N. Hamilton, Can we interpret figurines? The personal is political, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 6, 2, 1996, 282–285. Hauptmann 2003 H. Hauptmann, Eine frühneolithische Kultfigur aus Urfa, in: H. Hauptmann – N. Başgelen (eds.), Köyden Kente. Yakındoğu´da İlk Yerleşimler. Ufuk Esin’e Armağan / From Village to Cities. Early Villages in the Near East. Studies presented to Ufuk Esin, Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları. Armağan kitaplar dizisi 4 (Istanbul 2003) 623–636. Kozlowski – Aurenche 2005 S. K. Koslowski – O. Aurenche, Territories, Boundaries and Cultures in the Neolithic Near East (Oxford, Lyon 2005). Kurth – Röhrer-Ertl 1981 G. Kurth – O. Röhrer-Ertl, On the anthropology of the Mesolithic to Chalcolithic human remains from the Tell esSultan in Jericho, Jordan, in: K. Kenyon (ed.), Excavations at Jericho 3/1 (Jerusalem 1981) 409–499. Lesure 2002 R. G. Lesure, The goddess difracted. Thinking about the figurines of early villages, Current Anthropology 43, 4, 2002, 587–610. Olsen 2008 S. Olsen, This old thing? Archaeology 61, 1, 2008, 46–47. Postegate 1994 J. N. Postgate, Text and figure in ancient Mesopotamia: match and mismatch, in: C. Renfrew – E. B. Zubrow (eds.), The ancient mind. Elements of cognitive archaeology (Cambridge 1994) 176-184. Schmandt-Besserat 2013 D. Schmandt-Besserat (ed.), Symbols at ‘Ain Ghazal, ‘Ain Ghazal Excavations Reports 3, Bibliotheca neolithica Asiae meridionalis et occidentalis, Yarmuk University, Monograph of the Faculty of Archaeology and Anthropology (Berlin 2013). Schmidt 2000 K. Schmidt, Zuerst kam der Tempel, dann die Stadt. Vorläufiger Bericht zu den Grabungen am Göbekli Tepe und am Gürcütepe 1995–1999, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 50, 2000, 5–41. Stordeur 1997 D. Stordeur, Jerf el Ahmar et l’horizon PPNA en Haute Mésopotamie. Xe–IXe millénaire avant J.-C., Subartu 4, 1, 1997, 13–29.

Human Self-perception and Self-expression during the 9th Millennium calBC

69

Stordeur 2000 D. Stordeur, Jerf el Ahmar et l’émergence du Néolithique au Proche-Orient, in: J. Guilaine (ed.), Premiers Paysans dans le Monde. Naissances des agricultures (Paris 2000), 33–60. Twiss – Russel 2009 K. C. Twiss – N. Russel, Taking the bull by the horns. Ideology, masculinity, and cattle horns at Çatalhöyük (Turkey), Paléorient 35, 2, 2009, 19–32.

70

Bérénice Chamel – Eric Coqueugniot

Symbolic Artefacts in the Syrian Euphrates Valley in the Middle and Late PPNB

71

Symbolic Artefacts in the Syrian Euphrates Valley in the Middle and Late PPNB: Contributions of the Tell Halula Project in an Interpretative Context Miquel Molist 1 – Anabel Ortiz 2 – Anna Gómez-Bach 3 Abstract: This paper focuses on archaeological objects recovered from Tell Halula, a site located in the Middle Euphrates Valley (Syria). The well-known stratigraphy dating from the Middle to Late PPNB allows for the identification of some symbolic artefacts related to household and other domestic areas. Some of these objects were already present within the preceding Natufian culture, with continuity throughout the entire Neolithisation process that occurred in the Middle East and the Eastern Mediterranean. The increase in quantity, quality, and diversity of these artefacts during this period shows the complex relationship between shape, technology and the social meaning of material culture. To proceed with this objective, we will try to establish the relationship between different symbolic artefacts including floor and wall paintings, burials and related artefacts made from clay, copper and stone. A contextualisation of these objects is sought with the aim of determining their significance, meaning and use. Finally, in a broad sense, we would like to discuss the symbolic world of the Middle Euphrates region during the 8th millennium BC. Keywords: Neolithic; Middle East; Tell Halula; Euphrates Valley; paintings; small finds

In recent years, there has been a renewed interest in the Neolithic societies of the Middle East, and research on symbolic aspects of their societies has progressed. The origin of this interest is multi-faceted, with focus provided by structuralist, processualist and historic materialist theoretical groups4 as well as the subsequent debate generated in seminars and specific meetings focused on the discussion of these proposals.5 Nevertheless, other less theoretical reasons for this renewed interest include new archaeological data, the abundance of theoretical approaches and the quality of the newly excavated finds revealed by recent archaeological fieldwork. Proof of this fact are the PPNA sites in south-western Turkey such as Göbekli, Nevalı Çori, Çayönü, etc.,6 as well as the sites in northern Syria, primarily in the Euphrates Valley, such as Tell ‘Abr 3, Jerf el-Ahmar, and Dja’de el-Mughara to name a few.7 Although this renewed interest has been quite significant for the ancient PPNA and PPNB horizons, new material culture from the later periods is not as prevalent, nor as extensively studied. Therefore, how should such an absence of artefacts be interpreted? The purpose of this brief paper is to present the recovered material culture from Tell Halula (Middle and Late PPNB) and to debate the interpretations which have been proposed for these symbolic representations and artefacts. Therefore, this paper focuses upon particular symbolic objects recovered from Tell Halula, a site located in the Middle Euphrates Valley, from a specific time period spanning the Middle and Late PPNB sequence. In this sense, it should be noted that many of these traditions were already present in previous periods, some of them appearing already within the Natufian culture and continuing throughout the process of Neolithisation that occurred throughout the Middle East. In pursuing this objective, the possible relationship between symbolic items such as paintings, burials and related artefacts that are elaborated with different materials, with a great time investment, will be evaluated. Therefore, these objects will be examined within their context in order to gain new knowledge that will help to disentangle their significance, meaning and use. Finally,

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Autonomous University of Barcelona, Department of Prehistory, Spain; [email protected]. Autonomous University of Barcelona, Department of Prehistory, Spain; [email protected]. Autonomous University of Barcelona, Department of Prehistory, Spain; [email protected]. Cauvin 1994; Hodder 2010; Testart 2010; Watkins 2010. E.g. Gebel et al. 2002; Coqueugniot – Aurenche 2011. Schmidt 2007; Erim-Özdoğan 2011; Hauptman 2011; Özdoğan et al. 2011. Stordeur 2003; Yartah 2005; Christidou et al. 2009; Yartah 2013; Coqueugniot 2014; Stordeur 2015.

72

Miquel Molist – Anabel Ortiz – Anna Gómez-Bach

Fig. 1   General view from Tell Halula (Middle Euphrates, Syria) (SAPPO/UAB)

more broadly, we intend to discuss the implications for understanding the symbolic world of the Middle Euphrates region during the 8th millennium BC. Within this analysis of different types of objects, paintings on floors and walls will be of particular interest. Nevertheless, other symbolic artefacts (figurines, tokens and grooved stones) associated with funerary contexts as well as human and animal figurines that were recovered in domestic contexts will also be discussed.

Tell Halula: the archaeological site in context Tell Halula is a large site, located 150km east of Aleppo, covering an area of 8ha and presenting more than 11m of stratigraphic sequence. It is near other well-known sites such as Tell Mureybet, Dj’ade, Jerf el-Ahmar and Tell Abu Hureyra, upon which our knowledge of the transition from hunter-gatherer societies to farming communities in the northern Levant is currently based. An area of about 4200m² has been excavated thus far and has allowed for the documentation of a nearly continuous occupation of over 2500 years, with a complex stratigraphic sequence covering a time-span from 7800 to 5700 calBC. This sequence was divided into a total of 37 phases of occupation (PO), each one defined by a group of several levels and features which represent an episode of human habitation. Continuously occupied from 7800 to 5200 calBC, the main archaeological cultures identified extend from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) to the Pottery Neolithic (PN) and the transition to the Chalcolithic period8 (Fig 1). In the PPNB, the settlement pattern consisted of a series of rectangular houses, each with a total area of approximately 30 to 50m². Part of this research was centred upon the identification of

8

Molist 1996a; Molist 1996b; Molist 2013.

Symbolic Artefacts in the Syrian Euphrates Valley in the Middle and Late PPNB

73

domestic activities in these houses using both synchronic and diachronic spatial analyses, characterising their histories of occupation and their social, spatial, and temporal dynamics. The aspects/ variables of this analysis that will be examined are the following: variation in domestic structures and storage spaces, variability in burial practices, production and specialisation and, finally, consumption patterns. A complete synchronic spatial relation between the houses was established during the 2011 archaeological fieldwork season.9 With regard to the domestic buildings, it was not possible to determine significant differences throughout the archaeological sequence. During the MPPNB occupations, the inhabited area was focused around dwelling units that all presented the same structural layout. To date, a total of 16 different houses have been documented. A sequence of rebuilding was determined that resulted in a succession of houses built upon the same architectural layout. All of the buildings display renovations and repairs, attesting to their continued use over time, with an estimated longevity of 30 to 40 years for each structure. All of these houses were made of mud brick and are rectangular and identical in organisation with three, four or five rooms. The central rooms, which were about 20–25m² in size, were normally carefully finished, with the floor and walls plastered. These rooms contain the domestic facilities connected with food preparation, namely hearths and ovens. The hearths were usually built on a semi-circular or rectangular plan, while the ovens had a flat cover, were built on a stone foundation and were also plastered with lime. From this central room, corridors led to the rooms located on the northern side. These were usually finished less carefully and were used for complementary functions, including storage. Storage facilities placed inside the houses indicate that these social units possessed relative autonomy in the series of activities that comprised the production process. Some of them are also placed in the porch area, close to the main room with different structures such as grill plans, small basins or pits.

Symbolic objects Painting elements: motifs and techniques In architectural phases 9 to 12, the floors and walls in several houses were also painted with geometric or human motifs. Many rooms had walls painted with red and black designs upon a white background. Since the first discovery of these paintings in 1997, four other domestic units have provided additional evidence of this practice. Two houses with pictorial decorations on the floor of the central room have also been excavated. The plaster floor was usually coloured black or red by soot and ochre pigments, which made the paint a greyish-white colour. Such an activity would have involved an important technical investment. The first set of paintings was discovered in the F/E C house (sector 4E/F, Floor 4EFE13 from the 11th occupation phase). They were located in the southern area of the main room in an organised manner near to the posthole and hearth and covered a surface of 1.2m². These paintings stand out thanks to an intense red colour applied onto the grey background of the chalky floor. The analyses performed on pigment samples (XRD and SEM-XRF) detected that haematite had been used to obtain the red colouration.10 The pictorial analysis revealed the existence of 23 schematic human figures displayed around a squared central shape with internal parallel lines. Two types of human figures were distinguished. The first one is a frontal human figure where the lower body presents wide hips and open triangular legs with a pointed base. The upper body is narrower at the core with opened arms that end in a set of small straight lines that could be interpreted

9 10

Molist et al. 2013; Molist et al. 2014. Navarro 1998.

74

Miquel Molist – Anabel Ortiz – Anna Gómez-Bach

Fig. 2   Frontal human figure, type one (F/E C house; floor 4EFE13, 11th occupation phase) (SAPPO/UAB)

Fig. 3   Lateral human figure, type two (F/E C house; floor 4EFE13, 11th occupation phase) (SAPPO/UAB)

Symbolic Artefacts in the Syrian Euphrates Valley in the Middle and Late PPNB

75

as a hand. A simple round stain on all figures is assumed to represent the head. A total of seven representations of this type are located in the south-western portion of the composition. They appear either in pairs or alone and, when paired, the upper limbs appear joined (Fig. 2). The presented elements could be interpreted as related to fecundity such as the representations are female in nature. The second type of human figure is more specific. With reference to all the characteristics observed in several figures, they could be described as schematic human representations where the lower body is depicted by a triangular shape that highlights the upper body. While in the lower limbs a pair of small perpendicular lines could represent the feet, in the upper body perpendicular lines could depict the arms. The core of the body is depicted as a wide uniform line ending in a circular shape which could be the head. It is possible that other traces of perpendicular lines in the core of the body could symbolise breasts. For this reason, some of these figures have been interpreted as stylised representations of females in a lateral position, thus depicting additional traits of fecundity. These figures are presented in groups of two or three and, in a single case, four. They are always joined at the hips, probably indicating a chained disposition. All of the figures are depicted on the same scale and none stands out due to its dimensions. They measure around 14 × 21cm and the central square presents the same proportions (Fig 3). As stated previously, these figures are found in the northern, southern and eastern areas around a central motif, which is a rectangle completely filled with six parallel lines. In the north-western part of the scene, more poorly preserved lines suggest the presence of complementary elements which were too poorly preserved to be identified with confidence (Fig 4). This central element in the scene is difficult to interpret, but as indicated, its shape could match some of the domestic structures at the site that have been labelled ‘grill plans’. Such structures have been documented at several sites and present close similarities to those found at Çayönü11 and others found in Dja’de el-Mughara.12

Fig. 4   Complete panel painting (F/E C house; floor 4EFE13, 11th occupation phase) (SAPPO/UAB)

11 12

Erim-Özdoğan 2011. Coqueugniot 2014.

76

Miquel Molist – Anabel Ortiz – Anna Gómez-Bach

Fig. 5   Drawing of geometric paintings (in Phase 9, HF house; wall 4HE35, 11th occupation phase) (SAPPO/UAB)

Wall paintings with geometric motifs have also been discovered in Phase 9. Moreover, in the HF house (square 4H, wall 4HE35), these frescos were painted on the inner face of the southern wall, which gives access to the main room. The paintings were partially preserved and a series of figures were detected both close to the ground and up to a height of approximately 40cm (the maximum height preserved). The paintings were separated into two zones, one to the west, close to a corner of the room, and the other to the east, near to the other corner (south-west) of the room (Fig. 5). With regard to the painting located on the eastern wall, traces of paint on a 1.20 × 0.4m surface were detected. The preservation state was fragile and, therefore, the restoration took place in situ. The geometric motif consists of six parallel lines (perhaps in the form of a single spike) and is painted in two colours, red and black. Adjacent to these lines in the eastern area, ten red stains were identified. Poor preservation did not allow for a clear pictographic attribution to be made; however, they may have formed some sort of geometric motif. The paintings located on the western side of the wall covered a width of 1.4m and a height of 40cm. Once again, poor preservation forced restoration to be performed in situ. The preserved evidence indicates the existence of red and black figures in a similar distribution to those on the eastern panel; geometric lines in the eastern part of this composition create a motif with black and red lines. The exact shape of the motif could not be entirely determined due to its poor preservation. Nevertheless, additional coloured stains on a western wall clearly define a set of small rectangles presented in a regular pattern that resembles a chess board. To the west of the spiked lines, a pictorial set composed of three friezes formed by small triangles could be detected. The triangles varied in number but were always united through their vertices. In summary, such painted remains are rather unique due to their location and their preserved motifs. As described, these paintings were located on the lower parts of the walls which allowed the researchers to better understand the partial painting traces found in other domestic units. Furthermore, the motifs are thematically geometric with an interesting bichrome contrast. The archaeometric analysis carried out allowed for a determination of the techniques of painting as well as the materials used in the production of the reddish colour.13 In fact, the reddish layer consists of a complex aggregate of red earth, calcite and particles of dolomite and quartz. On the other hand, it was observed that lime plaster was used for a substratum of the painting, which, according to the analysis, would consist of two plaster layers, the upper one with a whitish hue and a differentiated texture to that of the lower plaster layer. This interesting observation allows us to propose the hypothesis of the execution of the paintings in two working stages: first, an application of a liquid solution of lime, white in colour, which constitutes the lower layer; and second, the addition of reddish painted geometric motifs upon this layer. The same observations have been documented in further detail on paintings at Dja’de el-Mughara.14 The painted scenes recovered at Tell Halula represent interesting symbolic elements that allow for additional comments to be made. Due to the precarious state of preservation, it is difficult to

13 14

Pérez – Sanz 2008. Coqueugniot 2014.

Symbolic Artefacts in the Syrian Euphrates Valley in the Middle and Late PPNB

77

hypothesise regarding the possible motifs that were depicted on these images about whether they are textile patterns, field paths or fences of animal pens. However, it is possible to state that many painting motifs are present in a large number of domestic structures and that the technical quality of execution is very high, continuing an earlier technological tradition documented in the same geographical area and cultural tradition (EPPNB). The variations of the motifs and their possible interpretations will be discussed below. Burial elements: grave goods and other objects The layout of burial spaces in the PPNB at Tell Halula followed a highly standardised pattern and was closely linked to the domestic context. All 120 graves are from the 7th to 14th phases of occupation and were discovered in the entrance area to the main room of the house. The current data indicate an equal treatment of the dead in all houses and homogenous mortuary practices and rituals. Burials at Tell Halula consist primarily of individual inhumations in subfloor pits just beyond the entrance of the main room of the houses. In almost all cases, the burials were placed near the entrance to the main room. Although some pits with rectangular or oval plans were excavated, these burials are generally characterised by a circular pit in the floor with straight walls and a concave or flat base. As in the burials at Dja’de el-Mughara, a strong link between the deceased and the architecture was determined which could indicate a link between the burials and particular members of the household. Despite the uniformity in the layout of burials at Tell Halula, the Euphrates Valley presents a highly diverse context in terms of the use of symbols and social organisation between different sites and chronological phases. The excavation of the burial pits unearthed sacks, textiles and, to a lesser extent, vegetable mats and some basketry which still preserved some of its organic matter. It is possible that such materials were used for clothing or to wrap the bodies. Moreover, the sacks and textiles were generally found next to the body or on the walls of the pits. In summary, it should be noted that 77.7% of the burials presented seated and flexed bodies with the legs contracted tightly upwards and the arms folded around the chest. The other burials were either in a foetal position (12.9%), a supine position (1.2%) or in a flexed position (8.2%) which are the only exceptions to the predominant sitting position. Nevertheless, such variation could also be explained by taphonomic processes in an early state of body decomposition.15 Grave goods such as stone and bone tools, ornaments, tokens, clay cones, balls, textile impressed objects and figurines have been observed in 59% of the burials. Preliminary analyses have shown that, with varying frequencies, individuals of both genders and all ages were buried wearing adornments and/or had objects placed in their graves. Furthermore, the burials of infants younger than four years of age held the greatest number of personal ornaments. These constitute the larger category of grave goods, with more than 500 beads and pendants made from shell, stone, copper or bone. Raw materials such as gypsum, ochres and bitumen were also found in the burials. Their presence, primarily associated with the covering of tombs, has been interpreted as a hygienic practice related to the well-being and cleanliness of the household. With few exceptions, no post-depositional treatment of the burials has been determined. Furthermore, body treatment activities almost similar to mummification have been suggested,16 which demonstrate aspects of both life and death within a household and which use the ancestor’s identity to establish ownership over the domestic space. Tokens made of clay or fired clay in basic geometric shapes (triangles, cones and rectangles) have been found in significant concentrations but also commonly in groups of four. These items usually appear related to burials with women and children.

15 16

Guerrero et al. 2009; Ortiz et al. 2013. Ortiz 2014.

78

Miquel Molist – Anabel Ortiz – Anna Gómez-Bach

Two kinds of metallic minerals were used in artefact production in Tell Halula: galena and copper (the latter being the most abundant). Both metallic minerals usually appear within grave goods but can also be found in layers of debris inside houses. In occupational Phase 11, copper objects have been found in two burials: one belonging to a child (8–10 months old), and the other belonging to a likely female adolescent (ten years old) from a different household. In the levels of the subsequent 12th phase of occupation, two other houses with burials contained copper objects. These burials included those of a perinatal, four children aged between one and four and two young women aged twenty and twenty-five. These metal objects were found exclusively in the burials inside specific houses and related to specific occupation phases. Burials with metal objects appear to belong to the 11th to the 13th phases of occupation and are not attested in any of the earlier phases from which a significant number of burials have already been excavated. Their exclusive presence within three houses might also suggest a concentration of these objects in several households, among which House JB stands out. Copper objects such as beads and pendants were primarily associated with children’s burials. In the subsequent 13th phase of occupation, only the burial of the thirty-year-old male in a single house has been found to contain a metal object, in this instance a copper pendant, which was part of a larger ornament.17 Others symbolic elements: figurines and grooved stones The final group of artefacts, documented in the MPPNB and LPPNB phases that could have a symbolic meaning are small finds such as figurines, grooved stones with incised decorations and the intentional deposits of animal remains. Thirty-eight figurines have been recovered which are predominantly zoomorphic, although four of them can be interpreted as anthropomorphic.18 The figurines are moulded from clay in a very schematic style. The zoomorphic figurines are quadrupeds; however, due to the lack of essential morphological characteristics such as horns or tails, it is difficult to identify them clearly as bovines, caprines or ovines. However, some horned quadrupeds can be interpreted as bulls. Other figurines appear to be related to votive practices because of the shape and material used. Such an assumption is supported by the deliberate fragmentation of these figurines although these have not been studied in detail. Nevertheless, the fact that the solid clay figurines have their heads missing shows that they previously could have been used for other purposes or had been intentionally broken. An anthropomorphic figurine from a non-stratified context dating to the tranFig. 6   Anthropomorphic figure sculptured in calcareous stone (SAPPO/UAB) sition phase from the PPNB to the PN was

17 18

Molist et al. 2009; Molist 2013. Molist 1996b; Ayobi 2013.

Symbolic Artefacts in the Syrian Euphrates Valley in the Middle and Late PPNB

79

sculpted in calcareous stone and, despite its state of preservation, it is still possible to identify the upper part of a seated human figure (Fig 6). In addition, a set of five grooved stones with incised decorations and good preservation is another category of small finds that we may add to these symbolic elements. It should be emphasised that one of these objects is part of the furnishings of a grave, while the other four were located in domestic contexts.19 Lastly, deposits of animal remains, namely bovine bucrania, that were deposited in the sockets of domestic structures can also be discussed within this category of symbolic elements.20

General discussion: a view based on Tell Halula The archaeological evidence that was excavated at Tell Halula related to the symbolic worlds allows us to emphasise a number of hypotheses related to the domestic sphere and the formation and consolidation of households. The diachronic view permitted by the excavations at Tell Halula is also significant as it pertains to aspects of regional continuity in the Euphrates Valley and in relation to economic, cultural and social transformations of the Neolithic village. As indicated at the beginning of this paper, the symbolic elements excavated from Tell Halula and presented here can be considered representative for the PPNB period (Middle and Late) and this is especially supported by comparable data from Tell Abu Hureyra and Bouqras. The evaluation of these elements in relation to the archaeological record of the earlier chronological periods indicates a significant variation in comparison with the material from Jerf el-Ahmar, Tell ‘Abr 3 or Dja’de el-Mughara particularly in terms of styles and motifs and especially in the representation of animals. Schematisation and the disappearance of figurines representing wild animals and their substitution with cattle and domestic animals are the most remarkable pieces of evidence of variation.21 However, there are also elements that show the continuity of the symbolic representations between the 9th and 8th millennia. At the current stage of our work we would emphasise two of these elements: First, the continuity of the representation of females and bovines and second, the painted and/or incised geometric motifs present in a few houses. We are not able in this work to provide a detailed analysis of the binomial representation of females and bovines due to the complexity of the subject and substantial studies that have already engaged with the issue22. For example, later examples are found in Halaf pottery, these being geometric designs with two or three colours but also with the association between bucrania and dots. It is important to note that representations with these motifs are well documented virtually throughout the whole of the Neolithic period as well as in the LPPNB and clearly continue into the Pottery Neolithic.23 The other element that we would like to emphasise is the strong continuity of the geometric motifs. The direct comparison of painting techniques as well as painted motifs used on the decorated panels found at Dja’de el-Mughara and Tell Halula is clearly suggestive and indicative, in our view, of a technological, cultural and, to some degree, symbolic continuity. A phenomenon that takes place through the IX and VIII millennia cal BC in the region of the Euphrates Valley.

19 20 21 22 23

Molist 2013. Molist 1996b; Saña 1999. Helmer et al. 2004; Stordeur 2010; Yartah 2013; Coqueugniot 2014. Campbell 2010. Verhoeven 2002; Gómez-Bach 2011.

80

Miquel Molist – Anabel Ortiz – Anna Gómez-Bach

Final remarks With the aim of approaching objects that could have symbolic meaning at Tell Halula, some concluding remarks can be made. First, we would like to emphasise the importance of human representation at Tell Halula and its strong relation with the domestic sphere as these representations appear within household contexts. Human pictorial representations with female gender attributes are present in floor paintings as well as in burial practices. Furthermore, anthropomorphic attributes can be assigned to certain clay and stone objects. Second, burial practices are among the most ritualised processes seen at Tell Halula. Death is an intergroup phenomenon and Neolithic societies invested time and care in the burial of their members. Mortuary practices also reflect social customs and beliefs as well as the self-expression of the households. Tell Halula’s particularity must be related to a northern Mesopotamian variability in funerary practice. At Tell Halula, burials show elaborate symbolic practices associated with the body and the bodies are preserved primarily in flexed positions and mainly settled and bundled. All the members of the Tell Halula community were treated using the same funerary ritual, unified and codified within a highly domestic context. Valuable sets of grave goods were related to newborns, children and women. Uniformity in this context can be related to ‘intentional’ standardisation in material culture for a symbolic purpose such as child protection or accentuating the female role in the maintenance of a community. Significant investment in domestic ritualised activities can also be identified at this site. In this way then, Tell Halula becomes paradigmatic of domestic symbolism. Although specific buildings or other sacred spaces have been identified, votive pits, burial practices and small finds were recovered from almost all domestic units implying widespread domestic symbolism. The symbolic figurines and other artefacts associated with the burials as well as the human and animal figurines within the domestic context are common in sites within the Middle Euphrates including Tell Abu Hureyra and Bouqras, although at these other sites they appear with significant differences in technical and stylistic construction. It should be noted that all these symbolic objects can be related to artificial memory skills (counting, learning, etc.) and that, therefore, the domestic sphere also became one of the best contexts in which to acquire these skills. Finally, we would like to conclude with the view that the relationship between technology and specific objects, such as fired clay and metal elements that can serve as a liaison between technological expertise and symbolism, will be further developed in future research. It seems clear that ʻinnovationʼ or ʻtechnological innovationʼ could have had a strong link with the symbolic sphere in ancient societies. The identification of this process in a well-stratified site such as Tell Halula becomes essential in order to understand the symbolic changes in the domestic sphere. Acknowledgements: This work was developed within the framework of several research projects funded by the Autonomous University of Barcelona and the Agaur/Dursi-Generalitat de Catalunya entitled: GRAMPO, 2017SGR1302 and headed by Miquel Molist. Moreover, this research is part of the main project HAR2016-78416-P. Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad /Agencia Estatal de Investigación/ FEDER. “Procesos de transferencia e interacción social en el neolítico del Próximo Oriente: Estudio de los ámbitos del Valle del Éufrates y Altiplanos del Zagros”. Our deepest gratitude goes to the Directorate-General of Antiquities and Museums (Syrian Government) who provided the best conditions possible to develop our archaeological research at Tell Halula and we especially thank all our European and Syrian colleagues, archaeologists and inhabitants of Syria in these sad times. Thanks to our colleagues Claudia Beuger, Jörg Becker and Bernd Müller-Neuhof for organising this interesting thematic session.

References Ayobi 2013 R. Ayobi, Objets en terre du Néolithique précéramique au Proche Orient. Terre crue ou cuite? (PhD Diss., University of Lyon 2, Lyon 2013).

Symbolic Artefacts in the Syrian Euphrates Valley in the Middle and Late PPNB

81

Campbell 2010 S. Campbell, Understanding symbols: putting meaning into the painted pottery of prehistoric northern Mesopotamia, in: D. Bolger – L. Elder, (eds), The Development of Pre-state Communities in the Ancient Near East: Studies in Honour of Edgar Peltenburg (Oxford 2010) 147–155. Cauvin 1994 J. Cauvin, Naissance des divinités, naissance de l’agriculture. La révolution des symboles au néolithique (Paris 1994). Christidou et al. 2009 R. Christidou – E. Coqueugniot – L. Gourichon, Neolithic figurines manufactured from phalanges of equids from Dja’de el-Mughara, Syria, Journal of Field Archaeology 34, 2009, 319–335. Coqueugniot 2014 E. Coqueugniot, Dja’de (Syrie) et les représentations symboliques au IXe millénaire cal. BC, in: C. Manen – Th. Perrin – J. Guilaine (eds.), La transition néolithique en Méditerranée (Paris 2014) 91–108. Coqueugniot – Aurenche 2011 E. Coqueugniot – O. Aurenche (eds.), Neolithisations: nouvelles données, nouvelles interpretations. À propos du modèle théorique de Jacques Cauvin, Paléorient 37, 1, 2011, 9–204. Erim-Özdoğan 2011 A. Erim-Özdoğan, Çayönü, in: Özdoğan et al. 2011, 185–269. Gebel et al. 2002 H. Gebel – D. Hermansen – C. Hoffmann Jensen (eds.), Magic Practices and Ritual in the Near Eastern Neolithic. Proceedings of a Workshop held at the 2nd International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient near East (ICAANE) Copenhagen University, May 2000, Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence and Environment 8 (Berlin 2002). Gómez-Bach 2011 A. Gómez-Bach, Caracterización del producto cerámico en las comunidades neolíticas de mediados del VI milenio cal BC: el valle del Eufrates y el valle del Khabur en el Halaf Final (PhD Diss., Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona 2011). Guerrero et al. 2009 E. Guerrero – M. Molist – I. Kuitj – J. Anfruns, Seated memory. New insights into Near Eastern Neolithic mortuary variability from Tell Halula, Syria, Current Anthropology 50, 3, 2009, 365–382. Hauptman 2011 H. Hauptman, The Urfa Region, in: Özdoğan et al. 2011, 85–138. Helmer et al. 2004 D. Helmer – L. Gourichon – D. Stordeur, À l’aube de la domestication animale. Imaginaire et symbolisme animal dans les premières sociétés néolithiques du nord du Proche-Orient, Anthropozoologica 39, 1, 2004, 143–163. Hodder 2010 I. Hodder, Religion in the Emergence of Civilization: Çatalhöyük as a Case of Study (Cambridge 2010). Molist 1996a M. Molist (ed.), Tell Halula (Siria). Un yacimiento neolítico del valle medio del Éufrates. Campañas de 1991 y 1992. Ediciones del Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia (Madrid 1996). Molist 1996b M. Molist, El neolítico del IX y VII milenio BP en el Levante Norte: Aportaciones del yacimiento de Tell Halula (Valle del Eufrates, Siria), in: M. A. Querol – T. Chapa (eds.), Homenaje al Profesor Manuel Fernández Miranda (Madrid 1996) 63–74. Molist 2013 M. Molist (ed.), Tell Halula. Un poblado de los primeros agricultores en el valle del Éufrates, Siria (Madrid 2013). Molist et al. 2009 M. Molist – I. Montero – S. Rovira, New metallurgic findings from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic. Tell Halula (Euphrates Valley, Syria), Paléorient 35, 2, 2009, 33–48.

82

Miquel Molist – Anabel Ortiz – Anna Gómez-Bach

Molist et al. 2013 M. Molist – M. Bofill – A. Ortiz – B. Taha, Grooved stones and other macrolithic objects with incised decoration from PPNB at Tell Halula (Syria, Middle Euphrates Valley), in: F. Borrell – J. J. Ibañez – M. Molist (eds.), Stone Tools in Transition. From Hunter-Gatherers to Farming Societies in the Near East (Barcelona 2013) 421–434. Molist et al. 2014 M. Molist – A. Gómez-Bach – M. Bofill – W. Cruells – J. M. Faura – C. Marchiori – J. Martín, Maisons et constructions d’habitation dans le néolithique. Une approche à l’évolution des unités d’habitat domestiques à partir des documents de Tell Halula (Vallée de l’Euphrate, Syrie), in: J. L. Montero (ed.), Redonner vie aux Mésopotamiens. Mélanges offerts à Jean-Claude Margueron à l’occasion de son 80e anniversaire (Coruña 2014) 107–126. Navarro 1998 J. Navarro, Análisis de muestras de un pavimento decorado procedente del yacimiento arqueológico de Tell Halula (Siria), Informe Instituto del Patrimonio Cultural de España (unpublished report Madrid 1998). Ortiz 2014 A. Ortiz, Estudio arqueo-antropológicos de las sepulturas del PPNB medio y recinte del yacimiento de Tell Halula (Valle Medio del Éufrates, Syria). Aportaciones a la comprensión de las dinámicas socio-económicas y culturales de las primeras comunidades campesinas del Próximo Oriente (PhD Diss., Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona 2014). Ortiz et al. 2013 A. Ortiz – P. Chambon – M. Molist, “Funerary bundles” in the PPNB at the archaeological site of Tell Halula (middle Euphrates valley, Syria). Analysis of the taphonomic dynamics of seated bodies, Journal of Archaeological Science 40, 2013, 4150–4165. Özdoğan et al. 2011 M. Özdoğan – N. Başgelen – P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 1: The Tigris Basin (Istanbul 2011). Pérez – Sanz 2008 P. P. Pérez – E. Sanz, Caracterización de las materiales constitutivos y la técnica de ejecución en unas pinturas murales del yacimiento de Tell Halula, Informe Instituto del Patrimonio Cultural de España (unpublished report Madrid 2008). Saña 1999 M. Saña, Arqueología de la domesticación animal. La gestión de los recursos animales en Tell Halula (valle del Éufrates, Siria) del 8.800 al 7.000 BP. Treballs d’arqueologia del Pròxim Orient 1 (Barcelona 1999). Schmidt 2007 K. Schmidt, Sie bauten die ersten Tempel (Munich 2007). Stordeur 2003 D. Stordeur, Symboles et imaginaire des premières cultures néolithiques du proche orient (Haute et moyenne vallée de l’Euphrate), in: J. Guilaine (ed.), Arts et symboles du néolithique à la protohistoire (Paris 2003) 15–36. Stordeur 2010 D. Stordeur, Domestication of plants and animals, domestication of symbols?, in: D. Bolguer – L. C. Maguire (eds.), The Development of the Pre-State Communities in the Near East. Studies in Honour of Edgar Peltenburg (Oxford 2010) 123–130. Stordeur 2015 D. Stordeur, Le village de Jerf el Ahmar (Syrie, 9500–8700 av. J.-C.). L’architecture, miroir d’une société néolithique complexe (Paris 2015). Testart 2010 A. Testart, La Déesse et le Grain. Trois essais sur les religions néolithiques (Paris 2010). Verhoeven 2002 M. Verhoeven, Transformations of society. The changing role of ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant, Syria and south-east Anatolia, Paléorient 28, 1, 2002, 5–13. Watkins 2010 T. Watkins, New light on Neolithic revolution in south-west Asia, Antiquity 85, 2010, 621–634.

Symbolic Artefacts in the Syrian Euphrates Valley in the Middle and Late PPNB

83

Yartah 2005 T. Yartah, Tell ‘Abr 3, un village du Néolithique Précéramique (PPNA) sur le Moyen Euphrate. Première approche, Paléorient 30, 2, 2005, 141–158. Yartah 2013 T. Yartah, Vie quotidienne, vie communautaire et symbolique à Tell ‘Abr 3 – Syrie du Nord. Données nouvelles et nouvelles réflexions sur l’horizon PPNA au nord du Levant 10000–9000 BP (PhD Diss., University of Lyon, Lyon 2013).

84

Miquel Molist – Anabel Ortiz – Anna Gómez-Bach

Plastered Skulls: Evidence of Grief and Mourning?

85

Plastered Skulls: Evidence of Grief and Mourning? Karina Croucher 1 Abstract: This paper discusses plastered skulls from the Neolithic of South-west Asia (the Near East). Rather than traditional interpretations relating to status, hierarchy, or seeing treatment of the skulls as a means for social cohesion, new suggestions are made about their role in relationships between the living and the dead. Drawing on contemporary theories of grief and mourning, this paper explores themes of loss and bereavement as a motivation behind the selection of skulls for special treatment. Keywords: crania; continuing bonds; plastered skulls; emotion; grief; bereavement

While relatively rare, to date there have been around 90 plastered skulls2 recovered from the Levant, Northern Mesopotamia and South-east Anatolia. Most of these date to the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN3, c. 9500–6500 cal BC) of the Levant and Northern Mesopotamia, although later examples have been found from the Pottery Neolithic (PN, c. 6500–52004 cal BC) in Anatolia.5 Plastered skulls were first recovered during Kathleen Kenyon’s excavations of Jericho in the 1950s,6 with at least 12 plastered skulls recovered from the site,7 with many more since excavated from the Levantine PPNB. Examples to date include the following: ‘Ain Ghazal in Northern Jordan, where at least 8 plastered skulls have been found, usually without mandibles, and often in association with buildings or courtyards;8 Beisamoun in the Hula Basin, with two recovered from beneath a house;9 six plastered skulls have been recovered from Kfar Ha’Horesh,10 of which two are well-published;11 among the best-preserved are the examples from Tell Aswad in south-west Syria, where nine plastered skulls have been recovered from two caches in the mortuary area of the site;12 27 plastered skulls have been reported from Tell Ramad in south-west Syria, found from three caches;13 among the most recent finds are those from Yiftahel in Lower Galilee, with three badly-preserved plastered skulls recovered.14 Plastered skulls have also been recovered from two Pottery Neolithic sites in Anatolia: one is from Çatalhöyük, where the skull was recovered cradled in the arms of a burial;15 the others are from Köşk Höyük, where at least 19 have been excavated.16 This paper will summarise previous research on the plastered skulls, before exploring new avenues for research based on concepts of grief and mourning.

1 2

3

4

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

School of Archaeological and Forensic Sciences, University of Bradford, UK; [email protected]. Often, it is the crania, without the mandible, rather than the skull which is plastered; these are included here under the label ‘plastered skulls’. The period is further subdivided into the PPNA, PPNB (Early, Middle and Late) and Final PPNB/PPNC/Early Pottery Neolithic. This period includes further subdivisions, such as Hassuna and Halaf, and is sometimes referred to as the Chalcolithic rather than the Later or Pottery Neolithic. Phases are based on Kuijt – Goring-Morris 2002; Akkermans – Schwartz 2003 and used in Croucher 2012. Kenyon 1953; Kenyon 1957. Kurth – Röhrer-Ertl 1981. Rollefson 2000; Bonogofsky 2001; Bonogofsky 2006a. Ferembach – Lechevallier 1973. Bonogofsky 2006a. Goring-Morris 2005; Bonogofsky 2006a. Stordeur et al. 2006; Stordeur – Khawam 2007. Ferembach 1969; de Contenson 1971; Bienert 1991; Garfinkel 1994; de Contenson et al. 2000. Slon et al. 2014. Hodder 2004; Hodder 2006. Bonogofsky 2006b; Özbek 2009.

86

Karina Croucher

Fig 1   Burial showing post-cranial remains following retrieval of cranium. Note that the mandible remains in place (source: G. Rollefson)

Plastered skulls Plastered skulls were created by the application of mud, lime and gypsum plasters (or combinations of these) onto the crania of the deceased.17 This would follow the primary burial of the deceased, often beneath the floor of houses. The head is usually the first part of the body to skeletonise,18 and so after a potentially short period of time,19 the skull, or more frequently, the cranium, without the mandible, would be retrieved, leaving the remainder of the post-cranial skeleton in situ, as can be seen in the example from ‘Ain Ghazal (Fig. 1). There were several differing methods for subsequent treatment of the crania and skulls. Some would be moulded to include the mandible, or have a mandible modelled on, to create a more realistic

Fig. 2   Plastered skull from Jericho (source: Kenyon Jericho Archive held at UCL) 17

18 19

Goren – Segal 1995; Goren et al. 2001; Clarke 2012. The skulls were also packed with soil or plaster, as evidenced in D113 in the British Museum, Fletcher et al. 2014. Knight 1991; Clark et al. 1997, 159; Janaway et al. 2009. Research into decomposition rates in broadly comparable climates suggests that skeletonisation is likely to take place in the region of months rather than years (Rodriguez 1997, see Croucher 2018, 111).

Plastered Skulls: Evidence of Grief and Mourning?

87

Fig. 3   Plastered skulls from Tell Aswad (source: D. Stordeur)

appearance, such as in the examples from Jericho (Fig. 2) and Tell Aswad (Fig. 3). Others retained a shortened appearance, as seen at Kfar Ha’Horesh (Fig. 4). Many were painted, often with red and brown pigments, and some had the addition of eyes recreated from shells, such as at Jericho, or flint, such as at Yiftahel, whereas others were recreated with eyes closed or semi-closed, such as at Tell Aswad and Beisamoun. The skulls were first interpreted by Kenyon20 as evidence for the veneration of elder, male ancestors. This interpretation remained prevalent until recent research by Bonogofsky confirmed that the skulls often belonged to younger, frequently female individuals,21 Fig. 4   Plastered skull from Kfar Ha’Horesh although the aging and sexing of skulls is not (source: N. Goring-Morris) unproblematic.22 The skulls have inspired various discussions on ancestor cults23 and are frequently used in discussions over status and hierarchy; due to their rare nature, they are usually discussed in terms of evidence of social hierarchy and those

20 21 22 23

Kenyon 1953; Kenyon 1957. Bonogofsky 2004. See Fletcher et al. 2014, 97. Wright 1988; Bienert 1991; Cauvin 2000 [1994].

88

Karina Croucher

Fig. 5   Plastered skull from Jericho (source: Kenyon Jericho Archive held at UCL)

of elite status (often defined by ritual means, in absence of evidence of material wealth)24 or argued to play a role in social cohesion, through communal burial events.25 Benz argues that through time there was an increasing focus on individuals rather than communities in the use and treatment of skulls.26 Age may have also played a role in the selection of skulls, particularly in earlier contexts where crania, plastered and unplastered, appear to have been selected for treatment.27 Research is beginning to look at the individual life histories of the plastered skulls, such as through CT scanning of one of the Jericho skulls in the British Museum28 which revealed evidence of cranial modification.29 Many plastered skulls display such evidence of cranial modification, with varying degrees of visibility. In the case of the British Museum skull, modification is difficult to detect with the naked eye.30 However, other examples from Jericho are more prominent, as can be seen in Fig. 5.31 Cranial modification is a process of altering the shape of the cranial

24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

E.g. Rollefson 2000. Kuijt 2000; Kuijt 2008. Benz 2010. Benz 2012. The role of age is also a topic of research in progress by Karina Croucher. Excavation number D113, British Museum Accession Number BM 127414, Fletcher et al. 2014, tab. 1. Fletcher et al. 2008; Fletcher et al. 2014. Fletcher et al. 2008; Fletcher et al. 2014. Although Strouhal (1973) also suggests post-depositional factors may have played a role in changing the shape of the skull post-mortem, a further factor supporting the need for CT scanning to confirm the practice (Fletcher et al. 2014, 98).

Plastered Skulls: Evidence of Grief and Mourning?

89

vault. It is achieved through binding of the head during infancy, from birth until the age of around 2 years old, after which time the shape becomes permanent. Such treatment can be seen at many sites from the period and region.32 The modification was the result of choice by an adult (rather than self-selected).33 It is tempting to see a direct relationship between cranial modification and the selection of skulls for plastering.34 However, this proposition is inconclusive while the proportions of modified to unmodified skulls are unknown, particularly if cranial modification is difficult to detect visually.35 In contrast to most interpretations of the practice, cranial modification could have been a feature of infant-care practices, rather than necessarily relating to a deliberate selection of particular individuals. However, further research is required to ascertain the full extent of cranial modification, including from complete, interred bodies from these same past communities. It is evident, however, that special treatment such as the plastering and separate internment of skulls was not a routine practice for all the deceased in 8th–6th millennium Levantine communities; there must have been some selection criteria guiding the decision over which of the deceased were treated in this way. While concepts of status and hierarchy may have played a role, other factors may have influenced this choice of funerary practice. Selection criteria possibilities include circumstance of death, personal qualities or abilities possessed by the deceased, or relationships between the living and the dead. As with cranial modification, this choice would have been made by the community, rather than relying on self-selection. It is possible that this choice also related to emotive attempts to keep the dead close to the living, as the next section will explore.

Evidence of display There was not one unified process of dealing with the skulls; rather, different skulls received varying treatment in their post-mortem use-lives. Plastered skulls were usually recovered having been reburied in caches from a variety of contexts, frequently associated with buildings interpreted as household structures, either within them, buried beneath their floors, or under associated courtyard areas. As discussed above, decoration and painting varied. Evidence suggests that skulls were handled prior to their deposition; these were not kept in a pristine condition but show signs of wear and tear, repair and reuse. One skull from Tell Aswad has a broken and repaired nose.36 At least one of the plastered skulls from Kfar Ha’Horesh had been in a state of deterioration when it was buried.37 Further plaster faces recovered from ‘Ain Ghazal were once attached to skulls.38 This indicates a complex process of plastering and unplastering, supported by cut marks on one of the skulls which appear to have resulted from the removal of plaster faces,39 representing different phases of use and reuse, or perhaps changing of the physical appearance of the skull. For the PN skulls, the plastered skull from Çatalhöyük has evidence of re-plastering as well as many episodes of painting.40 There is some evidence that plastered skulls appear to have been modelled to facilitate display or performance. Examples from Tell Aswad41 and ‘Ain Ghazal had modelled bases to facilitate

32

33 34

35 36 37 38 39

40 41

Molleson – Campbell 1995; Arensburg – Hershkovitz 1988; Croucher 2006; Daems – Croucher 2007; Lorentz 2008. Croucher 2006. It has been argued that skulls were selected for their shape, potentially enhanced through cranial modification, e.g. Arensburg – Hershkovitz 1988; Meiklejohn et al. 1992, 95. Fletcher et al. 2014, 100. Stordeur – Khawam 2007. Goring-Morris 2005, 95. Griffin et al. 1998. Previously, these cut marks were thought to have resulted from removal of muscle and soft tissue in the initial preparation of the skull for plastering but are likely to have been from plaster removal, Bonogofsky 2001. Hodder 2006, 23. Stordeur et al. 2006; Stordeur – Khawam 2007.

90

Karina Croucher

upright viewing,42 as do examples from Jericho43. One of the skulls from ‘Ain Ghazal was recovered from a room where it had fallen from a place of display.44 Some examples from Köşk Höyük were excavated from locations of display on a bench and had black stones placed for eyes.45 The evidence supports the suggestion that the skulls were used in daily life; they were displayed, handled and repaired as part of their use-lives, before being reburied or falling out of use or discarded. Such evidence of the use of skulls post-mortem could relate to different interpretations. While status, hierarchy or ancestor worship probably were factors in the plastered skull phenomenon, these do not preclude other human motivations and considerations when confronting the death of a loved one. The next section considers modern theories of grief and loss which are then discussed in relation to plastered skulls, suggesting a role played in bereavement.

Theories of grief and bereavement In recent decades, research into bereavement has changed from Freudian-inspired motivations for the bereaved to ‘move on’, to detach from the deceased and form new attachments.46 KüblerRoss’s47 perspective of the stages of grief are well-known, and it has been the case that if bereavement is not seen to move through these stages, then the grieving process is considered to be ‘complicated’ or ‘chronic’.48 However, more recently, it has been recognised that personal experiences of grief do not necessarily conform to these models and that rather than ‘getting over’ their attachments to the deceased, the dead are perceived to inhabit new roles in the lives of the bereaved. Grief is recognised as oscillating between loss and acceptance in the ‘Dual Process of Grieving’ model,49 and there is a recognition of ‘Continued Bonds’50 between the living and the dead rather than a need to forget or move on, and a reallocation of the place of the dead.51 Such concepts of the relocation of the deceased rather than an end to relationships with the dead are commonly seen in ethnographic case studies, where the dead continue to play a role in the lives of, and often have influence over, the living. Among the Toraja of Indonesia the dead remain part of the household, with their preserved bodies perceived of described as sleeping until they are removed from the house,52 and from then on they are revisited, redressed, danced with and talked to in ceremonies taking place every 5–7 years; a similar practice is observed by the Merina of Madagascar.53 As far back as the early historic periods in Mesopotamia and Anatolia, the dead were perceived as having an influence on the living, needing to be remembered in kispu ceremonies,54 and the physical remains of the deceased were also retained and redeposited in tombs or within architecture.55 Throughout various periods of time and in numerous locations, the dead are still perceived as having a role to play for the living. It is not uncommon for physical remains to be retained as connections with the dead. In Victorian England, hair of the deceased was weaved into mourning jewellery and ornaments and it was common to have

42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

Griffin et al. 1998. Strouhal 1973; Fletcher et al. 2014. Rollefson 2000, 171. Öztan 2011, 36. E.g. Bowlby 1980; Parkes 1996; Stroebe 2002; inspired by Freud 1917 and Lindemann 1944. Kübler-Ross 1969. Prigerson et al. 1995; Stroebe et al. 2012; Nam 2015. Stroebe – Schut 1999. Klass et al. 1996; Field et al. 2005. Walter 1996. Barley 1995, 54–55. Bloch 1971, 138. Finkelstein 1966. E.g. at Titriş Höyük: Laneri 2007, 252, 255–256; Tell Banat: Porter 2002, 16; suggested for Ur: Croucher 2015; and see Bradbury 2011.

Plastered Skulls: Evidence of Grief and Mourning?

91

portrait photographs taken of the dead.56 Today, many mourners keep ashes in urns within the household or even have cremation ashes made into jewellery, ornaments or used in tattoo ink, keeping the dead physically close.57 Whilst clearly such practices are not universal, it seems that they are frequent occurrences, where the dead are kept physically close to the living, having a role to play, with varying amounts of perceived agency. Notably, the dead are not required to look identical to their living bodies for the association and continued bond to be effective; in the example of the use of cremation ashes, the dead are far removed from the physical appearance they retained during life.

Continued bonds, grief and plastered skulls While practices among contemporary societies, the recent or distant pasts, and ethnographic case studies cannot be viewed as directly equivalent, there are potential parallels in the desire to keep the dead close for longer, manifested in different ways. The same may be true of plastered skulls. Beyond social status, their treatment may also be evidence of a response to grief and loss, and motivation to keep the dead physically close to the living. Status may have also played a role; the plastering of skulls utilised new technology which may have had restricted use and access. But solely ascribing the plastered skulls to status indicators or to veneration of ancestors provides interpretations which may be missing evidence of emotive responses to death linked to desires to retain a bond between the living and the dead by physically retaining, recreating and displaying the heads of deceased loved ones within the household. It is feasible that, perhaps facilitated by social status, the plastering of skulls was an emotive response and an attempt to retain physical continuing bonds with the dead. It may be the case that the skulls went on to obtain ancestor status through time,58 but it may be that the skulls underwent a more personal process first, as a reaction to loss.

Conclusion It is evident that the plastering of skulls did not represent one unified practice; it was carried out in different ways and styles, the contexts of finds vary, and there is a caution in attributing the later PN skulls to the same tradition. However, it is also restrictive to dismiss the idea of emotion59 and the role of bereavement in motivating the treatment of the dead. This paper has suggested that emotion and response to loss should be considered as factors influencing the practice of plastered skulls. Applying contemporary practices of response to grief and loss provides a different perspective to relationships between the living and the dead, suggesting that motivations for the plastering of skulls may also be a simple and understandable desire to keep the dead close for longer. Acknowledgements: Thanks are owed to the generosity of scholars in other areas of research including end of life care and death studies, particularly Christina Faull, Laura Green, Tony Walter and Catherine Walshe, as well as to the ‘Continuing Bonds’ project team, and to Rob Janaway and Andrew Wilson for their discussion on forensic aspects of deposition. I am indebted to Gary Rollefson, Nigel Goring-Morris, Danielle Stordeur and the Kenyon Jericho Archive at UCL for their images of plastered skulls. Thank you also to Alexander Fletcher for discussion on the British Museum plastered skull and Ellen Belcher and the volume editors for their comments on this paper. Any errors or oversights remain my own.

56 57 58 59

Lutz 2011, 135. Heessels et al. 2012. As argued by Kuijt 2008; Croucher 2017; Croucher 2018. Tarlow 2000; Harris – Sørensen 2010.

92

Karina Croucher

References Akkermans – Schwartz 2003 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – G. M. Schwartz, The Archaeology of Syria. From Ccomplex Hunter-Gatherers to Early Urban Societies (ca. 16,000– 300 BC) (Cambridge 2003). Arensburg – Hershkovitz 1988 B. Arensburg – I. Hershkovitz, Cranial deformation and trephination in the Middle East, Bulletin et Mémoires de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris 3, 1988, 139–150. Barley 1995 N. Barley, Dancing on the Grave. Encounters with Death (London 1995). Benz 2010 M. Benz, Beyond death. The construction of social identities at the transition from foraging to farming, in: M. Benz (ed.), The Principle of Sharing. Segregation and Construction of Social Identities at the Transition from Foraging to Farming, Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment 14 (Berlin 2010) 249–276. Benz 2012 M. Benz, ʻLittle poor babiesʼ. Creation of history through death at the transition from foraging to farming, in: T. L. Kienlin – A. Zimmermann (eds.), Beyond Elites. Alternatives to Hierarchical Systems in Modelling Social Formations, Universitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen Archäologie 215 (Bonn 2012) 169–182. Bienert 1991 H. D. Bienert, Skull cult in the prehistoric Near East, Journal of Prehistoric Religion 5, 1991, 9–23. Bloch 1971 M. Bloch, Placing the Dead. Tombs, Ancestral Villages and Kinship Organization in Madagascar (London 1971). Bonogofsky 2001 M. Bonogofsky, Cranial modeling and Neolithic bone modification at ‘Ain Ghazal. New interpretations, Paléorient 27, 2, 2001, 141–146. Bonogofsky 2004 M. Bonogofsky, Including women and children. Neolithic modeled skulls from Jordan, Israel, Syria and Turkey, Near Eastern Archaeology 67, 2, 2004, 118–119. Bonogofsky 2006a M. Bonogofsky, Cultural and ritual evidence in the archaeological record. Modeled skulls from the Ancient Near East, in: M. Georgiadis – C. Gallou (eds.), Archaeology of Cult and Death (Budapest 2006) 45–70. Bonogofsky 2006b M. Bonogofsky, Complexity in context. Plain, painted and modeled skulls from the Neolithic Middle East, in: M. Bonogofsky (ed.), Skull Collection. Modification and Decoration (Oxford 2006) 15–28. Bowlby 1980 J. Bowlby, Attachment and loss; Vol. 3, Loss. Sadness and depression (London 1980). Bradbury 2011 J. Bradbury, Landscapes of Burial? The Homs Basalt. Syria in the 4th–3rd Millennia BC Durham University, Durham 2011). Cauvin 2000 [1994] J. Cauvin, The Birth of the Gods and the Origins of Agriculture (translation by Trevor Watkins, Cambridge, UK; New York 2000 [1994]). Clark et al. 1997 M. A. Clark – M. B. Worrell – J. E. Pless, Postmortem changes in soft tissues, in: W. D. Haglund – M. H. Sorg (eds.), Forensic Taphonomy. The Postmortem Fate of Human Remains (Boca Raton, Florida 1997) 151–164. Clarke 2012 J. Clarke, Decorating the Neolithic. An evaluation of the use of plaster in the enhancement of daily life in the Middle Pre-Pottery Neolithic B of the Southern Levant, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 22, 2, 2012, 177–186.

Plastered Skulls: Evidence of Grief and Mourning?

93

Croucher 2006 K. Croucher, Getting ahead. Exploring meanings of skulls in the Neolithic Near East, in: M. Bonogofsky (ed.), Skull Collection, Modification and Decoration (Oxford 2006) 29–44. Croucher 2012 K. Croucher, Death and Dying in the Neolithic Near East (Oxford 2012). Croucher 2015 K. Croucher, Life and death in the Late Prehistoric to Early Historic Mesopotamia, in: C. Renfrew – M. J. Boyd – I. Morley (eds.), Death Rituals, Social Order and the Archaeology of Immortality in the Ancient World. “Death Shall Have No Dominion” (Cambridge 2015) 223–236. Croucher 2017 K. Croucher, Living with the dead, past and present. A reinterpretation of Southwest Asia’s Neolithic mortuary practices in light of contemporary theories of bereavement, in: J. Bradbury – C. Scarre (eds.), Engaging with the Dead. Exploring Changing Human Beliefs about Death, Mortality and the Human Body, Studies in Funerary Archaeology 13 (Oxford 2017) 201–209. Croucher 2018 K. Croucher, Keeping the dead close. Grief and bereavement in the treatment of skulls from the Neolithic Middle East, Mortality 23, 2, 2018, 103–120. doi: 10.1080/13576275.2017.1319347. Daems – Croucher 2007 A. Daems – K. Croucher, Cranial modification in ancient Iran, Iranica Antiqua 42, 2007, 1–21. de Contenson 1971 H. de Contenson, Tell Ramad. A Village Site of Syria of the 7th and 6th Millennia B.C., Archaeology 4, 1971, 278–285. de Contenson et al. 2000 H. de Contenson – M.-C. Cauvin – L. Courtois – P. Ducos – M. Dupeyron – Q. van Zeist, Ramad. Site Néolitique en Damascène (Syrie) aux VIIIe et VIIe Millénaires Avant l’Ère Chrétienne (Beirut 2000). Ferembach 1969 D. Ferembach, Etude anthropologique des ossements humains neolithiques de Tell-Ramad (Syrie), Annales Archeologiques Arabes Syriennes 19, 1969, 49–70. Ferembach – Lechevallier 1973 D. Ferembach – M. Lechevallier, Découverte de deux crânes surmodelés dans une habitation du VIIème millénaire à Beisamon, Israël, Paléorient 1, 1973, 223–230. Field et al. 2005 N. P. Field – B. Gao – L. Paderna, Continuing bonds in bereavement. An attachment theory based perspective, Death Studies 29, 4, 2005, 277–299. Finkelstein 1966 J. J. Finkelstein, The Genealogy of the Hammurapi Dynasty, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 20, 3/4, 1966, 95–118. Fletcher et al. 2008 A. Fletcher – J. Pearson – J. Ambers, The manipulation of social and physical identity in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 18, 3, 2008, 309–325. Fletcher et al. 2014 A. Fletcher – J. Pearson – T. Molleson – R. Abel – J. Ambers – C. Wiles, Beneath the surface. Imaging techniques and the Jericho skull, in: A. Fletcher – D. Antoine – J. D. Hill (eds.), Regarding the Dead. Human Remains in the British Museum (London 2014) 93–104. Freud 1917 S. Freud, Mourning and Melancholia, The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud 14 (London 1917) 243–258. Garfinkel 1994 Y. Garfinkel, Ritual burial of cultic objects, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 4, 1994, 159–188.

94

Karina Croucher

Goren – Segal 1995 Y. Goren – I. Segal, On early myths and formative technologies. A study of Pre-Pottery Neolithic B sculptures and modelled skulls from Jericho, Israel Journal of Chemistry 35, 1995, 155–165. Goren et al. 2001 Y. Goren – N. Gorring-Morris – I. Segal, The technology of skull modelling in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB). Regional variability, the relation of technology and iconography and their archaeological implications, Journal of Archaeological Science 28, 7, 2001, 671–690. Goring-Morris 2005 A. N. Goring-Morris, Life, death and the emergence of differential status in the Near Eastern Neolithic. Evidence from Kfar HaHoresh, Lower Galilee, Israel, in: J. Clarke (ed.), Archaeological Perspectives on the Transmission and Transformation of Culture in the Eastern Mediterranean (Oxford 2005) 89–105. Griffin et al. 1998 P. S. Griffin – C. A. Grissom – G. O. Rollefson, Three late eighth millennium plastered faces from Ain Ghazal, Jordan, Paléorient 24, 59–70. Harris – Sørensen 2010 O. J. T. Harris – T. F. Sørensen, Rethinking emotion and material culture, Archaeological Dialogues 17, 2, 2010, 145–163. Heessels et al. 2012 M. Heessels – F. Poots – E. Venbrux, In touch with the deceased. Animate objects and human ashes, Material Religion 8, 4, 2012, 466–489. Hodder 2004 I. Hodder, A season of great finds and new faces at Çatalhöyük, Anatolian Archaeology 10, 2004, 8–10. Hodder 2006 I. Hodder, The Leopard’s Tale. Revealing the mysteries of Turkey’s ancient ‘town’ (New York 2006). Janaway et al. 2009 R. C. Janaway – S. L. Percival – A. S. Wilson, Decomposition of human remains, in: S. L. Percival (ed.), Microbiology and Aging (New York 2009) 313–334. Kenyon 1953 K. M. Kenyon, Neolithic portrait-skulls from Jericho, Antiquity 106, 1953, 105–107. Kenyon 1957 K. Kenyon, Digging Up Jericho (London 1957). Klass et al. 1996 D. Klass – P. R. Silverman – S. L. Nickman, Continuing Bonds. New Understandings of Grief (London 1996). Knight 1991 B. Knight, Forensic Pathology (New York 1991). Kübler-Ross 1969 E. Kübler-Ross, On Death and Dying (London 1969). Kuijt 2000 I. Kuijt, Keeping the peace. Ritual, skull caching, and community integration in the Levantine Neolithic, in: I. Kuijt (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communities. Social Organisation, Identity, and Differentiation (New York 2000) 137–162. Kuijt 2008 I. Kuijt, The Regeneration of Life. Neolithic Structures of Symbolic Remembering and Forgetting, Current Anthropology 49, 2, 2008, 171–197. Kuijt – Goring-Morris 2002 Kuijt – N. Goring-Morris, Foraging, Farming, and Social Complexity in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic of the Southern Levant. A Review and Synthesis, Journal of World Prehistory 16, 4, 2002, 361–440.

Plastered Skulls: Evidence of Grief and Mourning?

95

Kurth – Röhrer-Ertl 1981 G. Kurth – O. Röhrer-Ertl, On the Anthropology of the Mesolithic to Chalcolithic Human Remains from the Tell esSultan in Jericho, Jordan, in: T. A. Holland (ed.), Excavations at Jericho 3, 1 (London 1981) 407–499. Laneri 2007 N. Laneri, Burial practices at Titriş Höyük, Turkey. An interpretation, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 66, 4, 2007, 241–266. Lindemann 1944 E. Lindemann, Symptomatology and management of acute grief, American Journal of Psychiatry 101, 1944, 141–148. Lorentz 2008 K. Lorentz, From life course to longue durée. Headshaping as gendered capital?, in: D. Bolger (ed.), Gender Through Time in the Ancient Near East (New York, Plymouth UK 2008) 281–312. Lutz 2011 D. Lutz, The dead still among us. Victorian secular relics, hair jewelry, and death culture, Victorian Literature and Culture 39, 1, 2011, 127–142. Meiklejohn et al. 1992 C. Meiklejohn – A. Agelarakis – P. A. Akkermans – P. E. L. Smith – R. Solecki, Artificial cranial deformation in the Proto-Neolithic and Neolithic Near East and its possible origin. Evidence from four sites, Paléorient 18, 2, 1992, 83–97. Molleson – Campbell 1995 T. Molleson – S. Campbell, Deformed skulls at Tell Arpachiyah. The social context, in: S. Campbell – A. Green (eds.), Archaeology of Death in the Ancient Near East (Oxford 1995) 45–55. Nam 2015 I. Nam, Trajectories of complicated grief, The European Journal of Psychiatry 29, 2015, 173–182. Özbek 2009 M. Özbek, Remodeled human skulls in Köşk Höyük (Neolithic age, Anatolia). A new appraisal in view of recent discoveries, Journal of Archaeological Science 36, 2, 2009, 379–386. Öztan 2011 A. Öztan, Köşk Höyük. A Neolithic Settlement in Niğde-Bor Plateau, in: M. Özdoğan – N. Başgelen – P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 3: Central Turkey (Istanbul 2011) 31–70. Parkes 1996 C. M. Parkes, Bereavement. Studies of Grief in Adult Life (London 1996). Porter 2002 A. Porter, The dynamics of death. Ancestors, pastoralism, and the origins of a third-millennium city in Syria, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 325, 2002, 1–36. Prigerson et al. 1995 H. G. Prigerson – P. K. Maciejewski – C. F. Reynolds III – A. J. Bierhals – J. T. Newsom – A. Fasiczka – E. Frank – J. Doman – M. Miller, Inventory of complicated grief. A scale to measure maladaptive symptoms of loss, Psychiatric Research 59, 1, 1995, 65–79. Rodriguez 1997 W. C. Rodriguez, Decomposition of buried and submerged bodies, in: W. D. Haglund – M. H. Sorg (eds.), Forensic Taphonomy. The postmortem fate of human remains (Boca Raton, Florida 1997) 459–467. Rollefson 2000 G. O. Rollefson, Ritual and social structure at Neolithic ‘Ain Ghazal, in: I. Kuijt (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communities. Social Organisation, Identity, and Differentiation (New York 2000) 165–190. Slon et al. 2014 V. Slon – R. Sarig – I. Hershkovitz – H. Khalaily – I. Milevski, The plastered skulls from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B site of Yiftahel (Israel). A computed tomography-based analysis, PLoS ONE 9, 2, 2014, e89242.

96

Karina Croucher

Stordeur – Khawam 2007 D. Stordeur – R. Khawam, Les Crânes surmodelés de Tell Aswad (PPNB, Syrie). Premier regard sur l’ensemble, premières réflexions, Syria 84, 2007, 5–32. Stordeur et al. 2006 D. Stordeur – B. Jammous – R. Khawam – É. Morero, L’aire funéraire de Tell Aswad (PPNB), Syria 83, 2006, 39–62. Stroebe 2002 M. S. Stroebe, Paving the way. From early attachment theory to contemporary bereavement research, Mortality 7, 2, 2002, 127–138. Stroebe – Schut 1999 M. Stroebe – M. Schut, The dual process model of coping with bereavement. Rationale and description, Death Studies 23, 3, 1999, 197–224. Stroebe et al. 2012 M. S. Stroebe – G. Abakoumkin – W. Stroebe – H. Schut, Continuing bonds in adjustment to bereavement. Impact of abrupt versus gradual separation, Personal Relationships 19, 2, 2012, 255–266. Strouhal 1973 E. Strouhal, Five plastered skulls from Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Jericho. Anthropological study, Paléorient 1, 1973, 231–247. Tarlow 2000 S. Tarlow, Emotion in archaeology, Current Anthropology 41, 5, 2000, 713–746. Walter 1996 T. Walter, A new model of grief. Bereavement and biography, Mortality 1, 1, 1996, 7–25. Wright 1988 G. Wright, The severed head in earliest Neolithic times, Journal of Prehistoric Religion 2, 1988, 51–56.

Clothing and Nudity in the Prehistoric Near East

97

Clothing and Nudity in the Prehistoric Near East Claudia Beuger 1 Abstract: The modern addiction to illustrating prehistoric men dressed and veiling the main sexual characteristics by gender specific clothing contradicts the iconographical record, which mainly shows naked persons. In addition, although technological knowledge about textile production was well established no later than the Late Neolithic, we cannot identify a significant change with regard to the degree of nudity within the iconography. Even burials provide scant information on garments and larger pieces of textile were only used for wrapping the bodies of the deceased. Nevertheless, from prehistoric art we know of examples of loin cloths, short skirts or long robes as early as the PPNA. However, it is striking that clothing was never intended to cover the body completely. In most cases, even during the era of the 8.2ka BC cooling event, the upper part of the depicted body is uncovered. Likewise, we can refer to ethnographic sources for surviving strategies of cultures living in similar cool conditions without elaborate clothing, or even naked. Some elements of early clothing, which are unisex until the end of the 4th millennium BC, are still observed in later Mesopotamian art from the 3rd millennium onwards. Here we find them gender-related in close association with ritual contexts or mythological figures. Even if we accept that the persons shown in the prehistoric record probably belonged to a mythological world, we can assume that the representation of the adornment was inspired by the everyday environment of the artist. Based on the high variation in style, clothing such as adornments, and body decoration or body modifications in the prehistoric Near East should be understood as an expression of the individual self. Keywords: clothing; dress; garment; nudity; body decoration; body modification; shame; prudery

Iconographical records in the prehistoric Near East offer numerous depictions of naked humans; additionally, evidence of prehistoric clothing is very limited. Nevertheless, modern scientists have a clear desire to hide all sexual characteristics particularly in visual reconstructions of daily life in Near Eastern prehistory. The depicted persons are generally dressed in longer or shorter shirts, skirts or loincloths.2 Furthermore, such illustrations of the garments often mirror our own definitions of gender styles: men show bare torsos and the women’s chests are covered.3 It is not my intention to deny that prehistoric people had the ability to design clothes but to ask if any necessity to be dressed can be observed and how we can appraise the iconographic examples of clothes in contrast to the overwhelming number of representations of nudity. In view of our topic of self-perception, I will also refer to the question of whether the shame and prudery of prehistoric people can be defined on the basis of archaeological and iconographical records.

Archaeological records Body decoration was already highly developed in the late Epipalaeolithic4 and during the following periods a wide variety of jewellery, piercing elements,5 body painting or tattoos6 and per-

1

2

3

4 5 6

Seminar for Oriental Archaeology and Art History, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Germany; claudia. [email protected]. E.g. at Göbekli Tepe illustrated by Fernando Babtista in Mann 2011 or Mureybet III, building XLVII, in Akkermans – Schwartz 2003, 51, fig. 3.4. See for example Hodder 2014, 236, fig. 8.8 and especially the icons of humans for the architectural reconstructions in that volume (e.g. 149, fig. 5.26). Cf. Belfer-Cohen 1988, 302. E.g. labrets: burial in burial, Deh Luran plain, SW Iran (Early Chalcolithic), Croucher 2010, 117, fig. 8.2. E.g. terracotta figurines from Tell Halaf (Schmidt 1943, Taf. CV,8) or Becker this volume, figs. 2–3. It is generally not possible to decide which kind of ornament was used.

98

Claudia Beuger

haps scarifications7 and other permanent modifications8 appeared. Without a doubt it is accepted that people in the early Holocene in the Near East had the general ability to dress and decorate themselves with leather or cloth. The finds from the Early Neolithic site Nahal Hemar especially illustrate that textile technology was already quite elaborate there.9 The presence of textiles is not questioned, but it remains problematic to find evidence for real garments such as larger wrapped sheets or even larger sewn pieces. Burials, which generally reproduce everyday life by means of grave goods,10 can be expected to offer some evidence of the use of garments, but there is hardly any evidence so far. The main finds which give an insight into the adornments are collections of beads from bracelets or necklaces, headdresses, belts, small decorated bags and some items which were interpreted as cosmetic tools.11 Even the extremely wealthy burials from the Late Chalcolithic (levels XI–VIII) at Tepe Gawra revealed no indications of clothing.12 Remnants of shrouds were found at several sites, Çatalhöyük13 for example, which were probably used to envelope the deceased or for the lining of the grave14. These might be regarded as evidence of even larger pieces of cloth in Late Neolithic times. Yet, in contrast, it is also noteworthy that textiles, which might have had some value (see below), were used as shrouds but that the dead body itself stayed naked. This is still a common habit in the Islamic world, where people in daily life are definitively not undressed or uncovered. Muslim corpses are left completely undecorated in order to stress that everyone is equal in the face of death.15 Yet, the prehistoric understanding of death must clearly have deviated from this practice since several buried bodies still show some kind of ornamentation.

Iconographical records Iconographical records are much more rewarding with regard to the subject of clothing. However, it should be noted that the images in question are in the minority in comparison to the vast number of representations of completely naked persons – male and female or sexless – sometimes, but not always, showing body decorations.16 Moreover, we have to be aware of the fact that such images may not represent normal, terrestrial people, but supernatural beings.17 However, in my opinion the supernatural world, as in later Mesopotamia, was a mirror image of the everyday world. Therefore, we can assume that the illustrated adornments were, in fact, worn in that way by real human beings.

7

8

9 10 11

12

13 14 15 16 17

E.g. terracotta figurines decorated with pellets or incisions: male from Dja’de el-Mughara, PPNB (Chamel – Coqueugniot this volume, fig. 5.3); male (?) from Tell Bouqras (late PPNB) (Akkermans et al. 1983, pl. 40b); female from Tell Halaf, Halaf period (Schmidt 1943, Taf. CV.8), and Songor A, Samarra period (Fujii 1981, fig. 39.1). E.g. skull deformation: Daems – Croucher 2008 (at Ganj Dareh, Iran, as early as the 9th millennium BC). In comparison to a sherd painting from Tall-e Bakun (cf. Daems – Croucher 2008, fig. 4) it might be possible to assume that even the T-shaped pillars in Göbekli Tepe and other sites likewise depict an artificially elongated skull (interpretation of T-shaped pillars as representations of humans cf. Hauptmann 1993, 53; Hauptmann 2000, 261). Summarised by Barber 1993. Alfaro-Giner 2012, 50 stressed that these early textiles were not large pieces. Croucher 2012. As an exception see two Chalcolithic graves from Eridu: Safar et al. 1981, Ubaid cemetery burials: 120, 123, nos. 68, 114; the positions of beads may indicate the seams of a skirt and trousers. Tobler 1950, 88: beads in tombs were often found near wrists, waists, arms or necks indicating adornment. An elaborately decorated belt is mentioned for tomb G36–34, stratum IX (and probably the wealthy tomb 102), but no other garments are mentioned. Vasić et al. 2014, 219 do not mention any evidence for dresses within the graves of the site. A larger piece of textile was used to stuff a skull in a burial in Çatalhöyük ‘shrine’ VI,1 (Mellaart 1967, 222 pl. 94). Sörries 2015, 25. E.g. Morsch 2002, 148; Croucher 2010, 115. Watkins does not expect gods/godesses in Neolithic times but venerated ancestors (Watkins this volume). Becker interprets the figurines as ‘magic vehicles’ (Becker this volume). For further discussion see Hansen 2007, 329–331, 357–358; Müller-Neuhof this volume.

Clothing and Nudity in the Prehistoric Near East

99

Generally speaking, we find short skirts or loincloths or a kind of sash as predominant examples of clothes. The short skirt is not gender-related and can be found throughout the millennia;18 the apron with an open back can be regarded as a variant.19 The wall paintings at Çatalhöyük show a loincloth in combination with a sash made out of a leopard pelt or an imitation of such,20 which is also known from earlier PPNB-contexts in Nevalı Çori, but was found there without an apron.21 The sash or belt forms the most tangible group of adornment within the iconographical records; although these are not really veiling garments, several of the decorated figurines, male and female, show some designs at the height of the waist which might be interpreted as such.22 It is obvious that the belt or sash was not necessarily used for tying clothes.23 Following the line of the legs in many images leads to the observation that the pubic area was left visible. The design is variable and we cannot identify any differentiation regarding the sex.24 Only a sash with a tail seems to have a special character and can be seen as a male attribute. The phallus is not necessarily indicated, but the contexts and the silhouette of the body make this supposition appear realistic.25 Several images with long skirts are known from the Late Neolithic onwards.26 In some cases the long skirts seem to be made of a very fine transparent textile, since the vulva is still visible.27 The transparency of the textiles is also of some interest as it probably mirrors a concept of representation that was described by Helga Vogel on the basis of depictions of the male leader (EN or Lugal)28 in the Uruk period. Hence, the net-like dress is one of the insignia of an official person and it must be shown within the image to identify that person. At the same time it was important for the artist to bring out or highlight other aspects of the depicted person: the visible muscles demonstrate powerful potency and the transparency of the dress may also point to an erotic aspect, implying sexual virility.29

18

19

20

21 22

23

24

25

26

27 28 29

Some examples of female representations: figurines from Gritille, Late PPNA (Voigt 1985, 17, fig. 13a, b) and Gilgal I, PPNA (Noy 1989, 13; with a grass skirt?), painted sherd (round dance) from Domuztepe, Halaf period (Carter 2012, 116, fig. 14), figurine with ‘leopard top’ from Çatalhöyük, level III shrine A II 1 (Mellaart 1967, 218, 261, pls. 86–87; Hodder 2006, 207, fig. 91); male representations: sherd with relief decoration (hunting scene) Köşk Höyük, 6th millennium BC (Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007, 347, no. 319); Warka vase, Late Chalcolithic (Schmandt-Besserat 1993, 204, fig. 4). Cf. figurine from Dja’de el-Mughara, PPNB (Chamel – Coqueugniot this volume, fig. 5.1); statue from Tell Cheikh Hassan, EPPNB (Müller-Neuhof 2006, 32–33 figs. 1–2); figurines from Köşk Höyük, 6th millennium BC (Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007, 328, nos. 249–250). Shrine AIII 1, eastern wall (Mellaart 1967, 188, pl. XIII); recent interpretation of the leopard at Çatalhöyük: Hodder 2006, 87, 260–261. Morsch 2002, pls. 3.3, 4, 6; Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007, 293, no. 114. Figurines: Tell el Oueili, Ubaid 1 (Breniquet 1996, 160 pl. IV.8, VI); Yarim Tepe III, Halaf period (Merpert – Munchaev 1993, 202, Fig. 9.38.2); Ur, Ubaid period (Woolley 1956, pl. 22); Tepe Gawra level XVII (Tobler 1950, pl. LXXIc). If we accept the interpretation of the cubic torso of the T-shaped pillars at Göbekli Tepe III, enclosure D (belt with fox pelt), as an abstraction of a long robe (see below) this might be an exception. According to Morsch only male figurines from Nevalı Çori are illustrated with a belt: Morsch 2002, 148, 151; also Becker et al. 2012, 21. Çatalhöyük wall painting in shrine AIII,1 (Mellaart 1967, 166, pl. 61); vessel decoration Halaf period from Tell Arpachiyah (Hijara 1980, 148, fig. 10:342a), painted vessel from Tell Halaf (Schmidt 1943, pl. LX,4); painted vessel from Tepe Gawra, early Ubaid period (Tobler 1950, LXXVa–b). It is not clear whether even the rock paintings from the Latmos area in western Turkey should be added here. Peschlow-Bindokat prefers to interpret the bee-shaped figures as women, but the ithyphallic depiction of some of the images contradicts her idea. However, she also interprets the swelling as a sash with a tail, not of pelt but of textile (Peschlow-Bindokat 2003, 43). Figurines: Tell Songor A, Samarra period (Fujii 1981, fig. 39, 5–6); Uruk (Jordan 1932, T21:23); Ur, Ubaid period?, with fringe selvedge (Woolley 1956, 175, pl. 23 U.12764); Tell Arpachiyah, Halaf period (Mallowan – Cruikshank Rose 1935 fig. 45,1); Jarmo, Neolithic (Morales 1983 fig. 161.4); Choga Mish Archaic Susiana 2–3 (Alizadeh 2008, 367, fig. 79E, M); Choga Mish, Early Susiana (Alizadeh 2008, 365 fig. 78A, F–H); Eridu, Ubaid period (Safar et al. 1981, fig. 116, 7–8); seal impression: Susa, Susa A/LC2 (Hole 2010, 236, fig. 15.8f–l). Choga Mish, Ubaid 0/1 (Alizadeh 2008, 365, fig. 78A). According to Gibson 2010, 87 now accepted as a king and not leader of the temple state. Vogel 2009, 153.

100

Claudia Beuger

As early as the early 7th millennium BC, spindle whorls as indicators of new spinning technologies and probably the use of animal fibres can be observed at several sites in Syria and Mesopotamia.30 In the late 7th millennium levels at Tell Sabi Abyad a significant number of very small spindle whorls indicate the manufacturing of very fine rope and subsequent fine cloth.31 This technological process culminated in the Late Uruk and Early Dynastic sheep exploitation, textile industries and trade.32 Despite this developing textile industry, we learn from early textual records from the 3rd millennium that the fine linen cloth was still of higher value, since the production of linen requires more water and is more time consuming.33 Linen cloth was reserved for the high officials especially within cultic circles.34 Accordingly, it should be assumed that the long skirts of the Neolithic figurines reflect this fine linen quality, which was indeed transparent. Further discussions may address the question of whether this transparent clothes can be compared with the Netzrock, which is also known from depictions of women in the Uruk period (Frau im Netzgewand).35 Clothing for the upper part of the body is much more rarely illustrated: indeed, the paintings on several female figurines resemble patterned clothes on the upper part of the body. But at the same time the sexual characteristics are clearly in the foreground.36 Therefore, I would prefer to interpret most of them as body paintings, tattoos or other kinds of adornment.37 The female figurine from Çatalhöyük (shrine A II 1) with its short skirt and strapless top with leopard design is to date without comparison.38 However, the incised drawings on some Early Neolithic (PPNA/ PPNB) stone vessels from Körtik Tepe clearly show a kind of long shirt which covers the entire body (down to the knees?).39 Bernd Müller-Neuhof interprets the incised lines on the EPPNB statue from Tell Cheikh Hassan as an indication of a shirt.40 Although his interpretation cannot be excluded, I would prefer to identify the lines on the waist of that statue as a belt, perhaps in connection with an apron similar to the one from the later Köşk Höyük,41 especially with regard to the line indicating the legs on the back. The triangle under the neck of the statue from Tell Cheikh Hassan can be seen as a necklace or collar, also known from the T-shaped pillars, the Urfa statue and later figurines.42 In any case, we cannot exclude that the cubic shape of the T-shaped pillars

30 31

32

33 34

35 36

37

38 39 40 41 42

Barber 1993, 51, fn. 8. Rooijakkers 2012, 94 (I thank Olivier Nieuwenhuijse for this reference). According to H. Sudo, larger spindle whorls from earlier periods were used for flax (linen); only the smaller ones indicate the spinning of wool and finer textiles (Sudo 2010, 174). He uses this information as a basis for illustrating technological development from the Early to Late Ubaid period at Tell Kosak Shamali. He observed a group of spindle whorls weighing more than 25g from Early Ubaid contexts and a second group including pieces weighing less than 25g from Late Ubaid contexts. But it must be considered that the total number of 25 examples is probably not a tangible basis for such an analysis. Moreover, the 64 spindle whorls and 193 pierced disks from the earlier Tell Sabi Abyad Operation I (Late Neolithic), which were analysed by C. T. Rooijakkers, already have maximum amounts at 8g and 14–16g (Rooijakkers 2012, 97–98). J. Adovasio believes that since at least the appearance of the richly decorated Halaf painted wares, textiles and basketry had influenced craftworks (Adovasio 1975, 228). According to H. Sudo, during the 4th millennium the exploitation of sheep shifted more to wool exploitation (Sudo 2010, 170). Czichon 2006, 184. Vogel 2009, 216. For an example of the fine quality, see the Egyptian linen shirt of the late 4th millennium BC (Stevenson – Dee 2016). Vogel 2009, 95. For example Choga Mami, Samarra period (Oates 1969, pls. XXVIIIc–d, XXIXc–d); Songor A, Samarra period (Fujii 1981, fig. 39.4). An exception is probably a sherd painting from Tell Zeidan (Ubaid period, Stein 2011, 136, figs. 19–20). It probably is, in fact, a kind of textile pattern. Admittedly, the design on the upper part of the body resembles the design of a bird depicted on a sherd from the same site. Mellaart 1967, 218, 261, pls. 86–87; Hodder 2006, 207, fig. 91. Benz – Bauer 2015, 3, figs. 2–3. Müller-Neuhof 2006, 32–33, figs.1–2. 6th millennium BC, see Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007, 328, nos. 249–250. Cf. human with leopard (?) from Çatalhöyük level VI in Hodder 2006, 158, no. 20; female figurine with painting from Tell Halaf, Halaf period (Schmidt 1943, pl. CV).

Clothing and Nudity in the Prehistoric Near East

101

might indicate a type of long robe, especially in the case of the central pillars of enclosure D.43 This might also explain why genitalia were as a rule invisible on the pillars. The clothing on this pair of pillars is quite elaborate: the V-shaped necklace or collar rests on a stole or cape. The lower ends of the stole end above the characteristic hands.44 Similarly, the painted patterns of some later figurines seem to indicate a long robe fastened by a belt.45 Finally, the crossed bands between the breast and/or the back of the torso should be mentioned. While they are not a veiling garment, they are still – like the sash/belts – one of the more tangible clothing components and are also present throughout the millennia. They seem to be a special adornment for women.46 The more naturalistic younger iconography47 gives us an impression of what the garment could have looked like and that it does not necessarily indicate a wrapped blouse.48 The discussion on the problem of how to portray daily life in prehistory is not restricted to Near Eastern archaeology. An experimental approach to sewing prehistoric clothes, for example, was inspired by European Neolithic Linienband-Keramik figurines. The students around Jens Lüning interpreted the painted decorative pattern on the figurine from Zschernitz (Germany, c. 5200 BC) as long trousers, albeit the front side of this fragment clearly shows the male genitalia.49 The same figurine must have inspired the braver reconstruction of a completely naked farmer with body painting by Karol Schauer (Landesdenkmalamt Sachsen-Anhalt, Halle/Saale).50 It should also be mentioned that ethnographical sources describe tattoos used to imitate clothes and such tattoos protecting the person in the same way as clothes would have done.51 On the one hand, this idea emphasises that clothes do indeed have a protective function, but, on the other hand, that clothes may also have a spiritual function.

Shame and prudery At this point the question of how shame and prudery were defined in Near Eastern prehistory arises, and again later records in early Mesopotamian literature provide some insight. Of course, such a method is not without risk, since any analogy might be guided simply by chance. However, we sometimes happen to find a glimpse of a very deeply rooted memory of the Sumerians, as illustrated in the poem about the sheep and the grain: ‘The people of those days did not know about eating bread. They did not know about wearing clothes; they went about with naked limbs in the land. Like sheep they ate grass with their mouths and drank water from the ditches.’52 This source lets us assume that in the 3rd millennium BC at the latest people wore clothes and that nakedness was a matter for early uncivilised ancestors before the gods gave them grain, sheep

43

44

45 46

47

48

49 50 51 52

See Dietrich et al. this volume, fig. 1. Becker et al. 2012, 21 (referring to Köksal-Schmidt – Schmidt 2010) interpret the fox pelt together with the belt as a loincloth. They define the central pillars as male. K. Schmidt describes this kind of dress on the pillars of Nevalı Çori (Schmidt 2006, 73–74). Here, the stole also ends above the hands. Schmidt interprets the ‘V’, together with the two stripes of the stole, as a band wrapped around the neck. Choga Mish, Ubaid 0/1 (Alizadeh 2008, 365, fig. 78F–H); Susa, Ubaid 4 (Spycket 1992, pl. 2.6.8). For example Tell Arpachiyah, Halaf period (Mallowan – Cruikshank Rose 1935, fig. 45.2); Tell el Oueili, Ubaid 1 (Breniquet 1996, 157 pl. I.4, VI); male exception: Dja’de el-Mughara, PPNB (Chamel – Coqueugniot this volume, fig. 5.1). See the very finely and detailed worked examples from Susa (late 3rd and mid-2nd millennium, Spycket 1992, pls. 25–26, 122–123). For the later periods we probably can refer to the bridal garment, which is mentioned by Bahrani 2001, 87, known from cuneiform texts. Lüning 2006, 53, 61. Other figurines (e.g. from Nerkewitz) clearly allow the reconstruction of trousers. Published in Braun 2010. Schultz 2005, 14. The debate between Grain and Sheep, Sumerian, Ur III period (Black et al. 2006, 226).

102

Claudia Beuger

and clothes. The picture of the naked, wild-living ancestors was used in Ancient Mesopotamia to highlight the blessings of civilisation. Nevertheless, despite this self-perception of the Sumerians, nakedness was always present in their daily lives.53 From the Late Uruk period onwards, we know that cloth and wool were distributed to workers as part of their rations, so we can assume that wearing clothes was a possibility.54 When referring to iconographical records, men wear short skirts with a bare upper part as in earlier times, but for the women things have changed much more obviously: the breast is now covered.55 At the same time, nakedness, in contrast to a clothed condition, is clearly visible within the iconographical and textual records: here, nakedness appears as a punitive measure against enemies or delinquents and as a sign of poverty. And we can find nakedness within the context of some daily work, although there is some controversy on the question of whether this nakedness was only functional or also a means of social classification.56 Furthermore, we are aware of nakedness in ritual contexts, evidenced in the figure of a worshipper or priest and finally we shall add some contexts from the supernatural world: for example the naked male hero57 or the female nude, who is generally interpreted as an actor in magical practices referring to erotic contexts and fertility or in other contexts as a symbol of Inanna/Ishtar58. In sum, nakedness was obviously present in Mesopotamian art and, according to the textual evidence, presumably present as a social category in daily life in Ancient Mesopotamia. According to Zainab Bahrani, nakedness was not relevant in terms of prudishness and the Mesopotamians were not ashamed of the naked body.59 Asher-Greve and Sweeney also stress that the depictions of the naked body are not evidence of a ‘lack of a sense of shame, but rather [of] conscious choices determined by concepts about the body.’60 The results of a worldwide empirical study conducted by the ethnographer Hans Peter Duerr show that the sense of shame especially with regard to the genitalia is universal and part of human nature.61 Still, this does not imply that prudery or shame requires being dressed. Naked girls from the Solomon Islands, for example, would feel ashamed if the thin rope around their hips was removed.62 Even communities who do not wear clothes have certain taboos with regard to their genitalia: thus, it is a universally accepted rule that looking directly at the genitalia is not allowed.63 The functional benefit of clothes Above all, we will ask whether clothes in Near Eastern prehistory from the Early Holocene onwards were necessary as protection against heat, cold, sunburn or scratches. To answer this ques-

53

54

55

56 57 58

59

60 61 62 63

Summarising studies on this subject in Ancient Mesopotamia cf. Waetzoldt 1980–1983; Bahrani 1993; Bahrani 2001; Asher-Greve – Sweeney 2006. Asher-Greve – Sweeney 2006, 135. We should also note that according to Waetzoldt 1980–1983, 24 ordinary citizens had only one piece of cloth per annum. As the earliest evidence of this gender differentiation from the Uruk period, see, for example, the first register of the well-known Warka vase (Schmandt-Besserat 1993, 204, fig. 4); comments on ‘pig-tailed’ representations of clothed women e.g. Asher-Greve – Sweeney 2006, 135; Vogel 2009, 41. Asher-Greve – Sweeney 2006, 133–134. Asher-Greve – Sweeney 2006, 144–147: male nude gods are generally represented in active fighting scenes. Asher-Greve – Sweeney 2006, 144, 159–160: The interpretation of an erotic aspect is based on the inscription by King Aššur-bēl-kala of Assyria (1073–1056 BCE) on the stone statue of a nude woman found at Nineveh. Nude female figurines and plaques were found primarily in non-elite residential houses and areas and belong to the sphere of household magic. Asher-Greve – Sweeney 2006, 130 referring to Bahrani 1993, 12, 17. Other scholars argue that attitudes towards nakedness have changed from less to more restrictive (Reade 2002, 555 from Early Dynastic period; Seidl 1998, 68 from 2nd millennium). Asher-Greve – Sweeney 2006, 131. Steinert 2012, 469, 473, 505 referring to Duerr 1988. Eibl-Eibesfeldt 1997, 342–343, fig. 4.50. Duerr 1988, 135.

Clothing and Nudity in the Prehistoric Near East

103

tion, I will take into account that the upper part of the bodies in most images is bare, as are the legs. Of course, the winter would have required some kind of solution for protecting the body against the cold, but this can be achieved quite simply, as can be observed in ethnographic examples such as the aboriginal people in Tierra del Fuego (Cape Horn)64 living more or less naked with temperature changes between -1 to 15°C or the first Australians sleeping naked on the ground despite temperatures near freezing65. The issue of protection against the cold should not be overestimated. Surely, climatic events such as the cold phase of the 8.2 ka event might have had some influence on the clothes-wearing habit, as was most recently indicated by the research group of Tell Sabi Abyad,66 but for most part of the Early Holocene climatic conditions in the Middle East were much more comfortable than in Palaeolithic times, when humans started to wear clothes as a protection against the cold and other strategies such as migration has to be taken into account as well.67 Consequently, developments in clothes-wearing habits can likewise highlight a general development caused by a growing experience in and knowledge about textile technologies and don’t necessarily reflect a need to produce warming textiles.68 Finally, clothes which cover most parts of the body are not always a benefit: their production is time consuming and needs some specialisation within the group. In addition, clothing has to be kept clean and needs mending. Clothes can make you sweat or can chafe the skin. And we can add the body louse, the genetic indicator for the first clothing of humankind,69 as a further troublemaker.

Perception of the self Until the late 4th millennium we have no reliable evidence in the Near East that the majority of people covered their primary sex characteristics or the rest of their body. Loincloths, short skirts and long skirts or robes are known since the PPNA; likewise we can refer to some rare examples of shirts. However, the scarcity of such evidence within iconographical records and burials lead me to assume that veiling clothes played a minor role in daily life. This assumption is confirmed by the fact that in contrast to earlier millennia, the iconography frequently shows clothed and covered persons, in particular women, from the late 4th/early 3rd millennium onwards.70 Notwithstanding, even in Bronze and Iron Age art, nudity is still known but then refers to specific situations (enemies, soldiers, workmen) or certain myths (Inanna/Ishtar, naked hero). Prehistoric clothes may have functioned as body decoration and not (primarily) as protective cover, and they were not necessarily a status symbol.71 Instead clothes were of personal value,

64 65 66

67 68

69

70

71

Gusinde 1931. On genetic adaption to the cold in combination with fire, see Scholander et al. 1958. Akkermans et al. 2010 report that the number of spindle whorls increases during the 7th millennium BC, probably initialised by the 8.2 ka event. However, the archaeozoological finds do not highlight a clear connection with secondary products from the exploitation of sheep at that time (Akkermans et al. 2015). For the 8.2 ka event see Clare 2016, 35: c. 2–3°C less, peaking around 6225 BC. For clothes made from leather and fur see the discussions on early Ice Age humans, for example: Gilligan 2007. Evidence for migration cf. for example concluding remarks by Clare 2016. According to Gilligan 2018, 120, 124 textile has a better moisture management than leather: “… the problem of moisture in the postglacial world favored a great innovation, a fundamental change in material: from animal skins to woven fabrics.” Kittler et al. 2003 (72 ka ± 42 ka); Toups et al. 2011 (83 ka and possibly as early as 170 ka, Middle Pleistocene). Both studies refer to the genetic codes of the head and clothing lice, which diverged when clothing was in regular use. Ironically it is argued that the loss of fur helped the early humans to resist morbific parasites (Rantala 2007). Summarising studies on this subject in Ancient Mesopotamia cf. Waetzoldt 1980–1983; Bahrani 1993; Bahrani 2001; Asher-Greve – Sweeney 2006. Even the sash with a tail, for example, was worn by several members of a larger group, as we can see in the ‘hunting scene’ with the large bull in Çatalhöyük level V (Hodder 2006, 94, fig. 38, pl. 15) or in the depiction on a sherd from Tell Halaf (Halaf period, polychrome: Schmidt 1943, Taf. LX, 2).

104

Claudia Beuger

with a personal meaning. This might explain the high variation in the images.72 But we shall not entirely exclude garments for special persons or ritual practices.73 The long robe/skirt, especially, is a candidate for this purpose, since it is less practical in daily working contexts. Besides, when such a garment was made of textile, it must have been an unusual item due to the high workload required to produce it. Only by looking at Mesopotamian art in the 3rd millennium and later can we identify the belt/ sash,74 the long skirt for women with covered upper part75 and a crossed band decoration for the female breast76 as a special garment or adornment and gender-specific clothing. The belt, in particular, and the crossed band adornment define elements of prehistoric clothing as very early forerunners of the later canonised corpus which generally shows supernatural creatures. Such canonised elements of clothing had a specific meaning and not a profane function. The sash, for example, could have been used in later periods to emphasise a long tradition, as a reference to the fashion of the (mythological) past.77 It is only since the Late Uruk period that we definitively know that clothes were luxury goods and that garments functioned as prestige goods or status symbols – for human beings as well as the gods.78 They were part of the ‘domestication of the humans’79 by the process of urbanisation. Our general knowledge about the beginnings of the hierarchical stratification of society may lead us to the assumption that the roots of this perception of clothes were already established as early as in the late Ubaid period.80 Parallel to this trend the perception of the self might have changed slowly, and the concept of shame and prudery required new dress codes especially with regard to the upper part of the female body, resulting in the clearly covered breast and the long skirt for women in Uruk iconography. Based on the fact that men still show a bare upper part in Uruk iconography, I think that socio-cultural concepts rather than deterministic aspects (the 8.2 ka event81) were responsible for this trend. Referring to the figurines, Deams already stressed that we can observe homogeneity of styles from the Neolithic in Mesopotamia and Iran, so we should not assume that real individuals are behind the images.82 In contrast, the elaborate body decorations of the figurines and other images, in most cases, do not allow the definition of a canon; hence the decorative components and elements of adornment were indeed a very individualistic perception of the self in prehistory. However,

72 73

74

75

76

77

78 79 80

81

82

Note a similar conclusion for the adornments at Çatalhöyük by Vasić et al. 2014, 218. Special meanings of garments in ritual contexts are well documented within the cuneiform record, for example Waetzold 1980–1983. Bahrani 1993, 15 refers to a long tradition of belts or loincloths for (naked) heroes. According to her the belt/loincloth is probably evidence of wrestling or mock combats. As the earliest evidence of this gender differentiation from the Uruk period, see, for example, the first register of the well-known Warka vase (Schmandt-Besserat 1993, 204, fig. 4); comments on ‘pig-tailed’ representations of clothed women e.g. Asher-Greve – Sweeney 2006, 135; Vogel 2009, 41. See the very finely and detailed worked examples from Susa (late 3rd and mid-2nd millennium, Spycket 1992, pls. 25–26, 122–123). Cf. the representation of the mythological priest Adapa in the Neo-Assyrian relief (Ninurta temple, Kalḫu, BM 124573) with the depiction of a kaunakes (Soleil 1987) as a reference to 3rd millennium dresses. The myth has its roots in the 3rd millennium, and the mythological context of Adapa is placed in the era before the flood (Wiggermann, 1993–1997, 224). Vogel 2009, 90–91. Algaze 2001, 212. On elites in the Ubaid period cf. Carter – Philip 2010b, 12–13; on social stratification in the Late Neolithic cf. Becker, this volume. Another indicator for defining elites is probably cranial modification, which can be detected in increasing numbers in Ubaid period contexts (Lorentz 2010, 141–142). Akkermans et al. 2010 report that the number of spindle whorls increases during the 7th millennium BC, probably initialised by the 8.2 ka event. However, the archaeozoological finds do not highlight a clear connection with secondary products from the exploitation of sheep at that time (Akkermans et al. 2015). For the 8.2 ka event see Clare 2016, 35: c. 2–3°C less, peaking around 6225 BC. Daems 2010, 156.

Clothing and Nudity in the Prehistoric Near East

105

this does not necessarily imply that the images represent individual beings but rather a general fashion, which was practised in an individual way.83 Asher-Greve and Sweeney84 warned that the number of naked figurines could be a misleading basis for understanding shame and prudery in the past. But neither a functional nor a societal explanation model for clothing are resistant enough to disprove the existence of mainly naked, unveiled living communities until the late 4th millennium BC. The winter probably required some warming clothes, but this season is not relevant when regarding the issue of shame and prudery in general. The perception of the self among prehistoric people in the Near East was characterised by individuality, expressed by body decorations and a wide variety of modifications, and the naked body was their projection screen. Acknowledgements: For this paper, the data set collected by the Project ‘Our Place: Our Place in the World’, financed by the John Templeton Foundation, was of great help. I am grateful for the opportunity to use this database. Finally, I would like to thank Julia Böttcher and the team of OREA for the linguistic review of the text.

References Adovasio 1975 J. Adovasio, The textile and basketry impressions from Jarmo, Paléorient 3, 1, 1975, 223–230. Akkermans – Schwartz 2003 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – G. M. Schwartz, The Archaeology of Syria. From Complex Hunter-Gatherers to Early Urban Societies (c.16,000–300 BC) (Cambridge 2003). Akkermans et al. 1983 P. A. Akkermans – J. A. K. Boerma – A. T. Clason – S. G. Hill – E. Lohof – C. Meiklejohn – M. Le Mière – G. M. F. Molgat – J. J. Roodenberg – W. Waterbolk-van Rooyen – W. Van Zeist, Bouqras revisited. Preliminary report on a project in eastern Syria, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 49, 1983, 335–372. Akkermans et al. 2010 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – J. van der Plicht – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse – A. Russell – A. Kaneda – H. Buitenhuis, Weathering climate change in the Near East:. Dating and Neolithic adaptations 8200 years ago, Antiquity Project Gallery Issue 325, September 2010. Online (last accessed 10 Oct. 2018). Akkermans et al. 2015 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – J. van der Plicht – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse – A. Russell – A. Kaneda, Cultural transformation and the 8.2 ka event in Upper Mesopotamia, in: S. Kerner – R. J. Dann – P. Bangsgaard (eds.), Climate and Ancient Societies (Kopenhagen, 2015) 97–112. Alfaro-Giner 2012 C. Alfaro-Giner, Textiles from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic Site of Tell Halula (Euphrates Valley, Syria), Paléorient 38, 1, 2012, 41–54. Algaze 2001 G. Algaze, Initial social complexity in southwestern Asia. The Mesopotamian advantage, Current Anthropology 42, 2, 2001, 199–233. Alizadeh 2008 A. Alizadeh, Chogha Mish, Volume II. The Development of a Prehistoric Regional Center in Lowland Susiana, Southwestern Iran. Final Report on the Last Six Seasons of Excavations, 1972–1978, Oriental Institute Publications 130 (Chicago 2008).

83

84

Hansen 2007, 351, 368 stresses the individuality of each figurine in south-eastern Europe and argues that individuality was not expressed in the faces, but in the body decoration. He refers to ethnographical evidence in New Guinea for verifying his interpretation (Hansen 2007, 329–331, 357–358). Asher-Greve – Sweeney 2006, 131.

106

Claudia Beuger

Asher-Greve – Sweeney 2006 J. Asher-Greve – D. Sweeney, On nakedness, nudity, and gender in Egyptian and Mesopotamian Art, in: S. Schroer (ed.), Images and Gender: Contributions to the Hermeneutics of Reading Ancient Art, Orbis Bibilicus et Orientalis 220 (Fribourg, Göttingen 2006) 125–176. Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007 Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe (ed.), Vor 12000 Jahren in Anatolien. Die ältesten Monumente der Menschheit (Stuttgart 2007). Bahrani 1993 Z. Bahrani, The iconography of the nude in Mesopotamia, Notes in the History of Arts, Source. Notes in the History of Art 12, 2, 1993, 12–19. Bahrani 2001 Z. Bahrani, Women of Babylon. Gender and Representation (London, New York 2001). Barber 1993 E. J. W. Barber, Prehistoric Textiles. The Development of Cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages with Special Reference to the Aegean (Princeton 1993). Becker et al. 2012 N. Becker – O. Dietrich – T. Göetzelt – Ç. Köksal-Schmidt – J. Notroff – K. Schmidt, Materialien zur Deutung der zentralen Pfeilerpaare des Göbekli Tepe und weiterer Orte des obermesopotamischen Frühneolithikums, Zeitschrift für Orient-Archäologie 5, 2012, 14–43. Belfer-Cohen 1988 A. Belfer-Cohen, The Natufian graveyard in Hayonim Cave, Paléorient 14, 2, 1988, 297–308. Benz – Bauer 2015 M. Benz – J. Bauer, On Scorpions, Birds, and Snakes. Evidence for Shamanism in Northern Mesopotamia during the Early Holocene, Journal of Ritual Studies 29, 2, 2015, 1–23. Black et al. 2006 J. A. Black – G. Cunningham – E. Robson – G. Zólyomi, The Literature of Ancient Sumer (Oxford 2006). Braun 2010 D. M. Braun, Asian Invaders Showed Europeans how to Farm, Graveyard Study Finds, National Geographic Society, November 9, 2010 (last accessed 10 Oct. 2018). Breniquet 1996 C. Breniquet, Les petits objects découverts à Tell el Oueili en 1987 et 1989, in: J.-L. Huot, Queili, Travaux de 1987 et 1989 (Paris 1996) 151–162. Carter 2012 E. Carter, On human and animal sacrifice in the Late Neolithic at Domuztepe, in: A. Porter – G. Schwartz (eds.), Sacred Killing. The Archaeology of Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East (Winona Lake 2012) 97–124. Carter – Philip 2010a R. A. Carter – G. Philip (eds.), Beyond the Ubaid. Transformation and Integration in the Late Prehistoric Societies of the Middle East, Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 63 (Chicago 2010). Carter – Philip 2010b R. A. Carter – G. Philip, Deconstructing the Ubaid, in: Carter – Philip 2010a, 1–22. Clare 2016 L. Clare, Culture Change and Continuity in the Eastern Mediterranean during Rapid Climate Change, Kölner Studien zur Prähistorischen Archäologie 7 (Rahden/Westf. 2016). Croucher 2010 K. Croucher, Figuring out identity. The body and identity in the Ubaid, in: Carter – Philip 2010a, 113–123. Croucher 2012 K. Croucher, Death and Dying in the Neolithic Near East (Oxford 2012).

Clothing and Nudity in the Prehistoric Near East

107

Czichon 2006 R. Czichon, Neue Überlegungen zu den Beterstatuetten, Altorientalische Forschungen 33, 2006, 179–188. Daems 2010 A. Deams, A snake in the grass. Reassessing the ever-intriguing ophidian figurines, in: Carter – Philip 2010a, 149–161. Daems – Croucher 2008 A. Daems – K. Croucher, Prehistory of Iran. Artificial cranial modifications, Encyclopædia Iranica, online edition, 2008. Online (last accessed 10 Oct 2018). Duerr 1988 H. P. Duerr, Der Mythos vom Zivilisationsprozeß, 1. Nacktheit und Scham (Frankfurt am Main 1988). Eibl-Eibesfeldt 1997 I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, Die Biologie des menschlichen Verhaltens, Grundriss der Humanethologie 3rd edition (Munich 1997). Frangipane et al. 1993 M. Frangipane – H. Hauptmann – M. Liverani – P. Matthiae – M. Mellink (eds.), Between the Rivers and over the Mountains, Archaeologica Anatolica et Mesopotamica Alba Palmieri dedicata (Rome 1993). Fujii 1981 H. Fujii, Preliminary report of excavations at Gubba and Songor, Hamrim Report 6 (Baghdad, Tokyo 1981). Gibson 2010 McG. Gibson, The dead hand of Deimel, in: Carter – Philip 2010a, 85–92. Gilligan 2007 I. Gilligan, Neanderthal extinction and modern human behaviour. The role of climate change and clothing, World Archaeology 39, 2007, 499–514. doi: 10.1080/00438240701680492. Gilligan 2018 I. Gilligan, Climate, Clothing, and Agriculture in Prehistory. Linking Evidence, Causes, and Effects (Cambridge 2018). Gusinde 1931 M. Gusinde, Die Selk’nam. Vom Leben und Denken eines Jägervolkes auf der großen Feuerlandinsel, Die Feuerlandindianer. Ergebnisse meiner vier Forschungsreisen in den Jahre 1918 bis 1924, unternommen im Auftrage des Ministerio de Instruccion Publica de Chile. Band 1 (Mödling 1931). Hansen 2007 S. Hansen, Bilder vom Menschen der Steinzeit. Untersuchungen zur anthropomorphen Plastik der Jungsteinzeit und Kupferzeit in Südosteuropa, Archäologie in Eurasien 20 (Mainz am Rhein 2007). Hauptmann 1993 H. Hauptmann, Ein Kultgebäude in Nevalı Çori, in: Frangipane et al., 1993, 37–69. Hauptmann 2000 H. Hauptmann, Ein frühneolithisches Kultbild aus Kommagene. Die Könige von Kommagene und ihr Herrscherkult, in: J. Wagner (ed.), Gottkönige am Euphrat. Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in Kommagene (Mainz am Rhein 2000), 5–9. Hijara 1980 I. Hijara, Arpachiyah 1976, Iraq 42, 1980, 131–154. Hodder 2006 I. Hodder, Çatalhöyük. The Leopard’s tale. Revealing the mysteries of Turkey’s ancient ‘town’ (London 2006/2011). Hodder 2014 I. Hodder (ed.), Çatalhöyük Excavations. The 2000–2008 Seasons, Çatalhöyük Project 7 (London 2014). Hole 2010 F. Hole, A monumental failure. The collapse of Susa, in: Carter – Philip 2010a, 227–243.

108

Claudia Beuger

Jordan 1932 J. Jordan, Dritter vorläufiger Bericht über die von der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka unternommenen Ausgrabungen, Abhandlungen der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, Jahrgang 1932/2 (Berlin 1932). Kittler et al. 2003 R. Kittler – M. Kayser – M. Stoneking, Molecular evolution of Pediculus humanus and the origin of clothing, Current Biology 13, 16, 2003, 1414–1417. doi: 10.1016/S0960-9822(03)00507-4. Köksal-Schmidt – Schmidt 2010 Ç. Köksal-Schmidt – K. Schmidt, “Peştamallı ve kemerli” / “With belt and loincloth”. The pair of gigantic pillar-statues in Enclosure D at Göbekli Tepe, Aktüel Arkeoloji 17, 2010, 26–29. Lorentz 2010 K. O. Lorentz, Ubaid headshaping: Negotiations of identity through physical appearance?, in: Carter – Philip 2010a, 125–148. Lüning 2006 J. Lüning, Haare, Hüte, Hosenanzüge. Trachten der Bandkeramik und ihre Rolle im Ahnenkult, in: E. Keefer (ed.), Lebendige Vergangenheit. Vom archäologischen Experiment zur Zeitreise, Archäologie in Deutschland Sonderheft 2006 (Stuttgart 2006) 52–64. Mallowan – Cruikshank Rose 1935 M. E. L. Mallowan – J. Cruikshank Rose, Excavations at Tell Arpachiyah 1933, Iraq 2 (Oxford 1935). Mann 2011 C. C. Mann, Die Geburt der Zivilisation, National Geographic 6/2011, 2011, 38–63. Mellaart 1967 J. Mellaart, Çatal Höyük. Stadt aus der Steinzeit (Bergisch Gladbach 1967). Merpert – Munchaev 1993 N. Y. Merpert – R. M. Munchaev, Yarim Tepe III. The Halaf levels, in: N. Yoffee – J. J. Clark (eds.), Early Stages in the Evolution of Mesopotamian Civilization. Soviet Excavations in Northern Iraq (Tucson 1993) 163–205. Morales 1983 V. B. Morales, Jarmo figurines and other clay objects, in: L. S. Braidwood – R. J. Braidwood – B. Howe – C. A. Reed – P. J. Watson (eds.), Prehistoric Archeology Along the Zagros Flanks, Oriental Institute Publications 105 (Chicago 1983) 369–423. Morsch 2002 M. G. F. Morsch, Magic figurines? Some remarks about the clay objects of Nevalı Çori, in: H. G. K. Gebel – B. Dahl Hermansen – C. Hoffmann Jensen (eds.), Magic Practices and Ritual in the Near Eastern Neolithic, Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment 8 (Berlin 2002) 145–162. Müller-Neuhof 2006 B. Müller-Neuhof, An EPPNB human sculpture from Tell Sheikh Hassan, Neo-Lithics 2/06, 2006, 32–38. Noy 1989 T. Noy, Gilgal I: A Pre-Pottery Neolithic site, Israel. The 1985–1987 seasons, Paléorient 15, 1, 1989, 11–18. Oates 1969 J. Oates, Choga Mami 1967–68. A preliminary report, Iraq 31, 115–152. Peschlow-Bindokat 2003 A. Peschlow-Bindokat, Frühe Menschenbilder. Die prähistorischen Felsmalereien des Latmos-Gebirges (Westtürkei) (Mainz 2003). Rantala 2007 M. J. Rantala, Evolution of nakedness in Homo sapiens, Journal of Zoology 273, 2007, 1–7. Reade 2002 J. Reade, Sexism and homotheism in ancient Iraq, in: S. Parpola – R. M. Whiting (eds.), Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East. Proceedings of the XLVIIe Rencontre Assyrologique Internationale, Helsinki (Helsinki 2002) 551–568.

Clothing and Nudity in the Prehistoric Near East

109

Rooijakkers 2012 C. T. Rooijakkers, Spinning animal fibres at Late Neolithic Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria? Paléorient 38, 1–2, 2012, 93–109. Safar et al. 1981 F. Safar – M. A. Mustafa – S. Lloyd, Eridu (Baghdad 1981). Schmandt-Besserat 1993 D. Schmandt-Besserat, Images of Enship, in: Frangipane et al. 1993, 201–219. Schmidt 1943 H. Schmidt, Die vorgeschichtlichen Funde vom Tell Halaf, in: M. Freiherr von Oppenheim, Tell Halaf I. Die Prähistorischen Funde (Berlin 1943) 23–120. Schmidt 2006 K. Schmidt, Sie bauten die ersten Tempel. Das rätselhafte Heiligtum der Steinzeitjäger. Die archäologische Entdeckung am Göbekli Tepe (München 2006). Scholander et al. 1958 P. F. Scholander – H. T. Hammel – J. S. Hart – D. H. LeMessurier – J. Steen, Cold adaptation in Australian Aborigines, Journal of Applied Physiology 13, 2, 1958, 211–218. Schultz 2005 A. Schultz, Tatau in der Südsee. Die Tatauierkunst der Polynesier, in: C. Diemel (Hrsg.), Haut und Hülle. Vom Schmücken und Kleiden. Begleitheft zur Sonderausstellung des Museums für Völkerkunde Dresden im Japanischen Palais Dresden (26.10.2005–23.7.2006) (Dresden 2005) 13–16. Seidl 1998 U. Seidl, Nacktheit. B. In der Bildkunst, Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie 9, 1998, 66–68. Soleil 1987 B. Soleil, Statuettes féminines à tunique de kaunakes. Deux fragments des Musées Royaux d’Art et d’Histoire de Bruxelles (0.239, 0.243), Akkadica 54, 1987, 11–28. Sörries 2015 R. Sörries, Von Mekka bis Berlin. Archäologie und Kulturgeschichte des islamischen Friedhofs (Wiesbaden 2015). Spycket 1992 A. Spycket, Les figurines de Suse. Les figurines humaines: IVe–IIe millenaires av. J.-C., Ville royale de Suse 6 (Paris 1992). Stein 2011 G. J. Stein, Tell Zeidan, in: The Oriental Institute 2010–2011 Annual Report (Chicago 2011) 122–139. Online (last accessed 10 Oct 2018). Steinert 2012 U. Steinert, Aspekte des Menschseins im Alten Mesopotamien. Eine Studie zu Person und Identität im 2. und 1. Jt. v. Chr., Cuneiform Monographs 44 (Leiden, Boston 2012). Stevenson – Dee 2016 A. Stevenson – M. W. Dee, Confirmation of the world’s oldest woven garment. The Tarkhan Dress, Antiquity, Project Gallery article 349, February 2016 (http://antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/stevenson349). Sudo 2010 H. Sudo, The Development of Wool Exploitation in Ubaid Period Settlements of North Mesopotamia, in: Carter – Philip 2010a, 169–179. Tobler 1950 A. J. Tobler, Excavations at Tepe Gawra. Volume II. Levels IX–XX (Philadelphia 1950). Toups et al. 2011 M. A. Toups – A. Kitchen – J. E. Light – D. L. Reed, Origin of clothing lice indicates early clothing use by anatomically modern humans in Africa, Molecular Biology and Evolution 28, 1, 2011, 29–32. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msq234.

110

Claudia Beuger

Vasić et al. 2014 M. Vasić – R. Bains – N. Russell (with contributions by D. Bar-Yosef – L. Meskell – C. Nakamura), Dress. A preliminary study of bodily ornamentation at Çatalhöyük, in: I. Hodder (ed.), Integrating Çatalhöyük. Themes from the 2000–2008 Seasons, Çatalhöyük Project 10 (London 2014) 197–220. Vogel 2009 H. Vogel, Wie man Macht macht. Eine macht- und genderkritische Untersuchung der frühesten Repräsentationen von Staatlichkeit (PhD Diss. Freie Universität Berlin 2009). Online (last accessed 10 Oct 2018). Voigt 1985 M. M. Voigt, Village on the Euphrates. Excavations at Neolithic Gritille in Turkey, Expedition 27, 1, 1985, 10–24. Waetzoldt 1980–1983 H. Waetzoldt, Kleidung. A. Philologisch, Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie 6, 1980– 1983, 18–31. Wiggermann 1993–1997 F. A. M. Wiggermann, Mischwesen. A. Philologisch, Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie 8, Berlin 1993–1997, 222–246. Woolley 1956 L. Wooley, Ur Excavations IV. The Early Periods (Philadelphia 1956).

Nude, Robed and Masked Processions

111

Nude, Robed and Masked Processions: Considering the Figural Images in the Teleilat Ghassul Wall Paintings, Jordan Bernadette Drabsch 1 Abstract: The wall paintings from the Chalcolithic (c. 4700–3600 BC) site of Teleilat Ghassul in the south Jordan Valley are rich with symbolism and human iconography. The figural images depicted in the complex ‘procession’ scenes are vital elements in our understanding of this enigmatic preliterate culture. This paper will consider the anthropomorphic figures and their associated motifs in two ways. Discussion will establish key attributes of the figures, such as elaborate clothing (or lack of clothing), the masks, associated implements, bodily decoration and posture, thus viewing the human bodies as inscriptive. Scene compositions will then be considered, exploring aspects alluding to social stratification and ritual practice. Secondly, the human representations will be viewed from a more phenomenological viewpoint, considering the experience of individuals depicted in the scenes (and those viewing them), while exploring the role clothing and nudity played in shaping public and private identities. Keywords: nudity; clothing; Chalcolithic; human iconography; Teleilat Ghassul; wall paintings; inscriptive human bodies

The wall paintings that are the focus of this study were created at Teleilat Ghassul, located in the south Jordan Valley, during the Chalcolithic period (Fig. 1). The people who resided in the southern Levant during this time produced many unique objects that were rich in symbology and ritual iconography – exemplified by their elaborate polychrome wall paintings. The images depicted in complex scenes are vital elements in our understanding of this enigmatic preliterate culture and

Fig. 1   Map of Jordan showing location of Teleilat Ghassul (graphics: B. Drabsch) 1

University of Newcastle, Australia; [email protected].

112

Bernadette Drabsch

the individuals who moulded it. Through close observation of the figural representations it has been possible to gain insights into the Ghassulian society that have been difficult to determine in any other way. The partially preserved murals provide a fascinating glimpse into the lives of the men, women and children who lived along the Dead Sea plains 6000 years ago.

Methodology and outline Previous studies of the Ghassulian wall paintings have either been overly imaginative reconstructions2 or purely functional descriptions of the scenes.3 This exploration will take a different, multi-faceted approach, exercising a more comprehensive methodology for reading the figurative images. Most would now agree that the first step in any study of ancient artworks should be the establishment of a firm contextual framework, recently achieved in my doctoral thesis.4 Here my primary concern is with the representation of the body. In the first section of this paper I will break down the complex scenes and identify the key attributes associated with the human figurative images and some of the motifs connected with them. Whilst acknowledging that many features of the Ghassulian frescos are unique, they were not created in a cultural vacuum, therefore a brief overview of comparative data will also be provided to assist in understanding the motifs. The composition of the scenes will then be briefly analysed. In the final phase of the discussion, the focus will shift from the figural representations to the experience of the individuals depicted. The scenes will be considered from a more phenomenological viewpoint, considering the distinctive characters while exploring the role clothing, nudity, masks and ritual played in shaping their identities.

Presenting the wall paintings Of the most coherent wall paintings from Teleilat Ghassul, the first five were uncovered during the 1929–1938 and 1959–60 seasons by Pontifical Biblical Institute excavators and the final two were discovered by teams from the University of Sydney in 1977 and 1995. The fragmentary paintings vary in style and content, while the iconography of the scenes seems closely connected with the ritualistic practices evident in many other aspects of Chalcolithic society, such as the Sanctuary complexes and cultic artefacts. A selection of four wall paintings have been chosen for this study. • ‘The Notables’ frieze shows the lower portion of a much larger fresco depicting seated and standing figures situated along a distinct yellow ground-line facing a star and smaller figure (Fig. 2). • ‘The Bird and Spook Masks’ are an unusual assortment of fragments which may have been part of the same mural, despite obvious stylistic differences (Fig. 3). • ‘The Star of Ghassul’ shows the remaining portion of an extremely elaborate fresco which had a large eight-rayed star as its focal point surrounded by masked figures and other symbolic motifs (Fig. 4). • Hennessy’s ‘Processional’ fresco is the most compositionally sophisticated scene. The large painting, measuring approximately 4 metres in length, records a group of near life-sized figures moving towards a building viewed from a raised perspective (Fig. 5).

2 3

4

Mallon et al. 1934; Vincent 1935; North 1961; Elliott 1977; Cameron 1981. Hennessy 1982, 56; Stager 1992; Gilead 2002, 117; Schmandt-Besserat 2007, 54; Bourke 2008, 140; Seaton 2008, 126. Drabsch 2015.

Nude, Robed and Masked Processions

113

Fig. 2   ‘The Notables’ frieze (from Mallon et al. 1934, pl. 66, used with kind permission of The Pontifical Biblical Institute, Jerusalem)

Fig. 3   ‘The Bird and Spook Masks’ (composition developed by B. Drabsch after Mallon et al. 1934, pl. 57 and pl. 67, used with kind permission of The Pontifical Biblical Institute, Jerusalem)

Fig. 4   ‘The Star of Ghassul’ (composition developed by B. Drabsch after Mallon et al. 1934, frontispiece used with kind permission of The Pontifical Biblical Institute, Jerusalem)

114

Bernadette Drabsch

Fig. 5   Hennessy’s ‘Processional’ (composition developed by B. Drabsch from photographs courtesy of S. J. Bourke)

Section 1: Identifying key attributes of figural images Although the original ‘meaning’ of the painted scenes remains open to conjecture, most appear to portray masked figures involved in cultic activities. Whilst it is possible that the artists intended the figures to represent deities or mythical entities, there are few clear symbolic markers to suggest that the events were taking place in a supernatural realm. Therefore, I propose that the anthropomorphic characters might reflect the actual inhabitants of Teleilat Ghassul, with the 6000-yearold visual narratives recording their involvement in ritual practices, providing a ‘snapshot’ into events in prehistory that might otherwise have remained unknown. The images are complex and when they are viewed as complete scenes they are difficult to understand; however when the frescos are broken down into individual elements, they can be analysed in a more productive way. Following this method, several key attributes have been identified and will be discussed in this study. These include the following: • Anthropomorphic representations • Feet – bare and shod • Hands and arms – bare and covered

Nude, Robed and Masked Processions

115

• Clothing – elaborate robes and tassels • Nude bodies – body decoration and skin colour • Cephalic emanations – masks with prominent eyes and horns • Status markers and musical instruments Anthropomorphic representations There are 25 partial representations of human figures in the frescos. In some, just the feet remain whilst others reveal the upper parts of the bodies only. While none of the frescos show a complete body, we are able to ascertain what one might have looked like through piecing together the surviving fragments (Fig. 6). Anthropomorphic representations: comparative data Human figures partaking in ritual processions and banquets played a significant role in the corpus of ancient Near Eastern art. Most of the examples come from Syria or Mesopotamia from a slightly later date, usually between 3000–2000 BC, such as the famous Warka vase that depicts nude participants involved in a procession related to Inanna and the banquet scene illustrated on the Standard of Ur. Many of the key iconographical elements found in these later examples reflect those seen in the earlier Ghassulian frescos such as processions involving nude and robed participants, some standing and some sitting with their feet on footstools and some drinking from cornet-shaped cups, suggesting that these shared motifs related to a long-lasting ideology in this area. Feet – bare and shod Feet and shoe images are an important component of the Ghassulian frescos, yet, despite the fact that they possibly represent some of the earliest images of footwear, they have rarely been discussed. The question of why some of the people were shod and some barefoot reflects the larger inquiry into dress and nakedness; however, the links between the two are certainly not clear. Most feet were represented in simple profile, with a triangular shape and a skin colour that relates to the individual. There are only two pairs of shoes that can be clearly identified in the frescos which were worn by the seated individuals in the ‘Notables’ frieze. The shoes worn by the first seated figure are the best preserved and appear to be laced with some sort of white cord to a point just above the ankles (Fig. 7). Although one would expect the robed individuals of the ‘Processional’ fresco to also be shod, this does not appear to be the case, as evidenced by the individual who wears a knee-length robe but appears to have bare feet. It is therefore possible that the depiction of bare feet might not be representative of a lower status but is reminiscent of a deliberate decision to participate in the procession unshod, perhaps in connection with the sacredness of the event, indicating a sense of humility or receptiveness. It is certainly plausible that sandals held a symbolic meaning as well as a practical function and the decision to wear them, or not, possibly held a meaning that has largely been lost to us. Feet – bare and shod: comparative data We know from recent excavations near Jericho that sandals similar to those illustrated in the frescos were worn by an elderly person who lived in the region during the Late Chalcolithic. The well-preserved shoes were found in association with a man whom excavators believe might have been a warrior, chief or ritual leader from this time.5 They were made of leather and had two straps

5

Schick 1998.

116

Bernadette Drabsch

Fig. 6   Figural representations from the Teleilat Ghassul frescoes (graphics: B. Drabsch)

Nude, Robed and Masked Processions

117

Fig. 7   Representations of shoes and feet from the Teleilat Ghassul frescos (graphics: B. Drabsch)

that ran along the upper portion of the foot. In contrast to these simple slip-on sandals, the footwear shown in the Ghassulian fresco appears more comparable with the ‘gladiator’ type of sandal which laces firmly onto the foot and lower leg. The elaborate footwear and the placement of the couple’s feet on footstools suggest that the seated couple held a high status and were possibly participating in a banquet or ritual event. Hands and forearms There are three hands evident in the remaining portions of the ‘Processional’ fresco. The leader of the group, who is larger in size than the other participants, has an outstretched arm robed in red, black and white. The large orangey-red forearm, which is emphasized in yellow, has a strong six-fingered hand, which appears to be grasping an object of some kind. The second person in the procession has a hand and forearm that is depicted in a completely different style. This individual has a long-fingered hand illustrated in black that is grasping a large hookshaped object. The elongated hand is joined to a black forearm, which is decorated with red and white stripes, which were possibly intended to represent body painting, tattooing or jewellery. The figure following this individual also features black hands and white bands on his wrist. The fact that he is depicted with black hands is quite intriguing, as the rest of his nude body is presented in red, implying that he was perhaps wearing black gloves or mittens that were possibly part of his ritual costume (Fig. 8). Similar to these characters are the individuals presented in the ‘Star’ fresco. The dominant figure has an outstretched hand with elongated fingers tipped in black and a red forearm also depicted with black and white stripes. The outstretched hand with long fingers is positioned over the head of the smaller masked figure in a manner that is reminiscent of the bestowing of a blessing or approval (Fig. 9). Hands and forearms: comparative data Although the portrayal of the large leader’s hand with six fingers might have been purely accidental, there is also the possibility that the hand was purposely portrayed as polydactyl. There have been other incidences of human figures portrayed with six fingers or six toes in the southern Levant such as the plaster statues from Neolithic Jericho and ‘Ain Ghazal and the harp player

118

Bernadette Drabsch

Fig. 8   Representations of hands and forearms from the ‘Processional’ fresco (graphics: B. Drabsch)

engraved into the pavement during the EBA at Megiddo.6 The later Biblical texts also provide interesting accounts of polydactylism and gigantism within this region.7 Therefore, the occurrence of extra digits on a tall individual appears less coincidental and worthy of note. Banning has observed that ‘In some modern cultures, the genetic anomaly that results in extra digits is taken as a means for identifying witches or especially gifted individuals, and this could account for their prominence in PPNB art’.8 There certainly appears to be a long history, in both literature and artworks from many different cultures, that connects polydactylism with special powers and eligibility for rulership, and a resurgence of the belief that polydactylism was connected with divine and supernatural powers also

6 7 8

Fig. 9   Representations of hands and forearms from ‘The Star of Ghassul’ fresco (graphics: B. Drabsch)

Garstang – Garstang 1948, 66; Schmandt-Besserat 1998, 8; Adams et al. 2014, 32–43. 2 Samuel 21, 15–22. Banning 1998, 226.

Nude, Robed and Masked Processions

119

Fig. 10   Robed figures from ‘The Star of Ghassul’ and the ‘Processional’ frescos (graphics: B. Drabsch)

occurred in the Middle Ages. During that time many artists added extra digits to their artworks to enhance their symbolism.9 Whether the leading figure of the Ghassulian fresco was chosen due to unusual physical features will remain unknown; however, it is certainly worthy of note. Clothing – ornate robes A surprising feature of the wall paintings is the evidence of colourful robes. The pictorial record of these finely crafted garments provides an unparalleled glimpse back in time and challenges our concept of the type of clothing worn 6000 years ago. The best-preserved illustrations of robes are chiefly made up of red, white and black and appear to be knee-length or longer with decorative tassels hanging from the shoulders (Fig. 10). In addition, there is a badly damaged portion of the ‘Star’ fresco that is yellow with intricate black designs which could also be part of another unique robe. Clothing – ornate robes: comparative data The robes were possibly fashioned out of wool or linen, and excavations have revealed that both materials were available.10 Fortunately the dry climate of the caves in the nearby Judaean Desert has proven beneficial for the preservation of organic substances, with samples of finely woven linen and woollen textiles uncovered with the burials near Jericho and Nahal Mishmar and connected to the stone mask found in the Nahal Hemar Cave.11 These textiles indicate that sophisticated weaving techniques and dyes were successfully used during the Chalcolithic period with the samples found in these caves supplying the earliest preserved evidence of spinning, large loom weaving and dyeing. In addition to the time-consuming and labour-intensive preparation of flax plants, it is notoriously difficult to dye linen because the fibres’ hardness keeps the dye from penetrating thoroughly.12 However, the extremely fine linen wrapping sheet found with the Cave of the Warrior burial indicates that dyes were successfully used during the Chalcolithic period and the samples found there supply the earliest preserved evidence of dyeing.

9 10 11 12

See Raphael’s Pope Sixtus in the Sistine Madonna (Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Dresden). Meadows 2005, tab. 7.2. Bar Adon 1980; Schick 1988; Schick 1998; Langgut et al. 2016. Schick 1998, 20.

120

Bernadette Drabsch

Fig. 11   Nude figures from ‘The Notables’ and the ‘Processional’ frescos (graphics: B. Drabsch)

It is possible that Teleilat Ghassul was an important flax-growing and processing centre as the site had a ready water supply, indicated by the reed beds, a large population and the availability of washing soda and other minerals to be used as mordants in the dyeing process. A significant number of loom weights, spindle whorls, awls and other finely made bone objects which might have been used for tassel making have been found in the excavations at Teleilat Ghassul and the visual evidence of fine dyed textiles illustrated on the frescos all make the argument for this connection reasonably strong.13 There is little doubt that the elaborate outfits depicted in the frescos would have been costly and highly visible status markers, identifying their wearers as important and prestigious individuals. The addition of tassels, which imply excess wealth due to their purely decorative function, would have also added to their splendour and suggests that there might have been a connection between elaborately tasselled garments and ritual practitioners in this area from a very early age. Nude bodies of ambiguous sexuality and varying skin colour In sharp contrast to the well-dressed individuals are the members of the ritual who appear to be nude. These figures seem to be wearing masks and are holding various attachments but no clothing is evident. The skin of the nude participants is typically depicted in an orange tone; however, the small unclothed figure facing the group in the ‘Notables’ frieze and the robed figure holding the hook-shaped object in the ‘Processional’ were both painted in a dark-brown shade (Fig. 11). This raises the question of whether there were people with darker skin tones living in the southern Levant at that time or whether the different shade symbolised something else entirely. It was certainly within the capacity of the original artists to depict pubic triangles, breasts or male genitalia on the unrobed participants, yet their absence leads to the conclusion that the nude figures were deliberately portrayed with ambiguous sexuality. Why the artists chose to do so remains elusive due to the lack of texts; however, I would like to briefly present two hypotheses based on ethnographic accounts and comparative data. • The first theory explores the possibility that the nude figures were depicted without sex or gender markers because they were children who had not yet been initiated into society and were not viewed as sexual adults. • The second theory is that the nude figures were depicted without sex or gender markers because they were part of a ritual ceremony where sexual ambiguity was a key feature, suggesting the participants’ ideology relating to gender was not based on masculine-feminine polarities.

13

A collection of textile-making implements from Teleilat Ghassul is displayed at the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Jerusalem.

Nude, Robed and Masked Processions

121

Nude bodies of ambiguous sexuality and varying skin colour: comparative data Hypothesis 1: in many societies, rites of passage play an important role in marking the progression of children into adulthood. The sequential steps often take the form of initiation ceremonies that help to construct the individual’s social position and sexual identity. The child is often considered as incomplete within that society until the compulsory rituals have been visibly fulfilled.14 Tim Yates challenges our western concept of gender using ethnological accounts to examine the ways different cultures construct sexual identity.15 Of particular interest for this study is his account of the Sambia tribe from the highlands of Papua New Guinea. All children born into that tribe are considered bi-sexual at birth and full sexual identity, as either male or female members of society, is only possible through complex initiation rites. Yates notes the following: ‘Far from full presence from birth, therefore, the true male sexual and anatomical identity can develop only through a process of draining off the femaleness of the body (the blood) and acquiring the maleness of the body (semen). All this is achieved through initiation rites … Therefore sexual identity is not guaranteed from birth as we believe in our culture; it has to be supplemented, completed by the removal of latent and threatening female elements of the body, and the acquisition of that substance – semen – upon which anatomical and symbolic masculinity depends … Sexual identity is not guaranteed – it is only possible through initiation through which it depends.’16 Yates concluded that ‘sexuality is constructed in different ways in different times and places – it is therefore, a contextual approach’.17 Accordingly, if we interpret the nude figures of the Ghassulian frescos with this model in mind, we can appreciate the possible variations of gender identity from a viewpoint that is not confined to Western concepts of binary, male/female limitations but explores a diversity of options. Therefore, if the Ghassulian artists intended the ambiguous nude figures of varying height to represent children who were not yet considered by their culture to be fully male nor female due to the fact that they had not yet completed the necessary steps in initiation, then this image provides us with a fascinating insight into an aspect of preliterate culture that would have been impossible to attain in any other way. Hypothesis 2: using the same non-binary approach as established in the previous discussion, I would also like to consider the fact that the figures of ambiguous sexuality may have belonged to a category of people who were deliberately represented as asexual or of ambiguous sexuality due to their involvement in an ideology that was not based on male/female polarities. Numerous gender studies have followed on from Yates’ exploratory work with the authors encouraging their readers to view representations of gender in a more fluid fashion.18 In her paper, Asher-Greve offered interesting insights into gender ambiguity, providing examples of numerous figures in the visual arts who were depicted with ambiguous or no sexual markers.19 As a case study she presents the statue of Ur-Nanše, the leading singer from Mari who was most likely a eunuch, who wears a masculine skirt and has a masculine name but also features an effeminate face, bulging breasts and has long hair – all socio-cultural signifiers of femininity at that time.20 Similarly, she discusses the figural representations depicted on the elaborately decorated vase from Uruk, noting that the group of naked men are ‘sexed by genitals and gendered by baldness, meaning that their bodies are inscribed with two gender signifiers: anatomical – the male genitals; and socio-cultural – baldness’. In contrast to these clearly marked males in the human sphere are the two small figures of ambiguous gender placed in the divine sphere behind Inanna. These figures wear skirts associated with males but have long hair which was a socio-cultural signifier associated with females. As a

14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Hunt 2010. Yates 1993, 48. Yates 1993, 50. Yates 1993, 60. Ochshorn 1996; Ramet 1996; Asher-Greve 1997; Pluciennik 2002; Hunt 2010; Skoglund 2013. Asher-Greve 1997. Asher-Greve 1997, 438.

122

Bernadette Drabsch

result of her exploration into the gendered body, Asher-Greve concluded that asexuality or sexual ambiguity was possibly associated with people participating in ritual actions or performing as musicians and suggested that a nude person was believed to be more receptive to divine influence. Ochshorn also explored the link between sexual ambiguity and ancient ritual activities, focusing on the texts and images relating to the powerful goddess Inanna.21 She notes that some of the rituals engaged in by Inanna’s cult personnel involved women dressing as men and men dressing as women and extracts from the original texts would appear to confirm that fluidity of gender was part of the ideology surrounding Inanna.22 The gender role reversals and transformative power of Inanna were also made explicit in the lamentation ‘That City which has been pillaged’, where she proclaims: ‘I turn a man into a woman. I turn a woman into a man. I am the one who causes the man to adorn himself as a woman. I am the one who causes the woman to adorn herself as a man. […] I turn white into black. I turn black into white.’23 Ochshorn concludes that the hymns and the rituals associated with Inanna emphasise her all-encompassing power ‘over heaven and earth, love and war, life and death, and what is basic to all human cultures, gender and gender roles’.24 Similar transformative rituals have taken place in many different cultures throughout history and the unification of opposites and the act of transformation, such as setting aside one’s birth gender to become a neutral entity, have been a feature of many ancient rituals, some of which have been passed down to today’s society.25 Perhaps the most famous of these is Paul’s baptismal speech in the New Testament Book of Galatians where he declares: ‘There is neither Jew nor Greek […] slave nor free […] male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus’.26 This notion of transformation and unification for initiates of an all-powerful deity appears to have been a key feature of many early religions. It is therefore plausible that the nude figures in the Ghassulian frescos were produced with intentional ambiguity and depicted without sexual markers to signify to their viewers that they had set aside their previous identities and were now acolytes of a deity who was associated with strong transformative powers. Cephalic emanations (masks, hair and horns) Another key feature of the ritual activities depicted in the Ghassulian frescos is the prominent use of masks. The masks vary in style but most are depicted with two exaggerated eyes presented frontally that provide the impression of a direct stare. The large and dilated pupils, and the placement of red cone-shaped objects (which possibly represented the horn-shaped cornets found in significant quantities in ritual contexts at the site) near the mouth and nose area of these masked figures might indicate that a substance was imbibed from these vessels to achieve an altered state of consciousness (Fig. 12). The construction material of the masks is unknown, but indentations around the edges and the white stripes might suggest that a white cord was wrapped around a black or red, possibly furred, head-covering. The addition of small ears, horns and long noses or beards on some of the masks

21 22 23 24 25 26

Ochshorn 1996. Ochshorn 1996, 61. Ochshorn 1996, 62. Ochshorn 1996, 63. Ramet 1996; Back Danielsson 2002; Pluciennik 2002. Galatians 3, 28.

Nude, Robed and Masked Processions

123

Fig. 12   Masks and cephalic emanations from ‘The Star of Ghassul’, ‘The Bird’ and the ‘Processional’ frescos (graphics: B. Drabsch)

adds to their animal-like appearance. Some of the headpieces also had wavy black lines emerging from them that give the appearance of long plaits. Cephalic emanations (masks, hair and horns): comparative data Masking is often associated with ritualistic activities, performances and rites of passage such as initiation or other ceremonies marking change and they have a long history in this region, with the well-preserved masks from the Nahal Hemar Cave and Horvat Duma providing stunning examples of an ongoing tradition.27 With no textual evidence it is difficult to determine the original significance of the masks illustrated in the frescos, but many of their key features such as the elongated heads, small horns, long plaits and exaggerated eyes are also represented on artefacts from surrounding regions suggesting that these elements were perhaps part of a shared ideology.28 Status markers and musical instruments In addition to the robes and masks, the figures’ identities were also communicated through objects that they were associated with (Fig. 13). The most prominent items are seen in the ‘Processional’ fresco with the outstretched arm of the leading figure grasping an object that is difficult to determine. The shape suggests that it might have been a sceptre, flail or sistrum and it is likely that the item was associated with the high rank of this individual, whose status was also demonstrated by the leading position in the procession and the enlarged dimensions of the commanding profile. The figure behind this individual holds a large curved object painted in red that extends over the shoulder and behind the masked head. Although a clear identification is impossible, it is

27 28

Schick 1988; Back-Danielsson 2002, 181; Edson 2005, 5. Amiran 1972; de Miroschedji 2011; McCreery 2011; Drabsch 2015.

124

Bernadette Drabsch

Fig. 13   Status markers and instruments from the ‘Processional’ fresco (graphics: B. Drabsch)

possible that this object was a musical instrument of some kind, such as a large bow harp. The followers in the first group also have unusual items associated with them such as the red and black, multi-pronged, fork-like devices which might also have been instruments such as lyres. The figures in the second group have accessories attached to the neck area and falling to both sides of the body consisting of black vertical prongs crossed with white hatching. Once again, the purpose of these items remains a mystery, although they might have been part of their costumes intended to make noises while they walked in the procession. Status markers and musical instruments: comparative data The ancient texts and iconography of the Near East make it clear that music often accompanied festivities and ritual performances. Paz and colleagues have recently proposed that the multipronged devices found on the EBA cylinder seal impressions from the southern Levant represent lyres being played by priestesses belonging to the cult of Inanna.29 As there are significant iconographical similarities between the figures on the seal impressions and those depicted in the frescos, there is a strong possibility that the members of the Ghassulian procession might also have been carrying similar musical instruments as part of a comparable cultic ritual. Likewise, one of the EBA pavement engravings from Megiddo depicts a belted nude figure of ambiguous sexuality, having both male and female gender markers (both penis and breasts), holding a harp in his/her six-fingered hands.30 Scene composition: social composition There has been considerable debate about the social and political structure of the Ghassulian society.31 Evidence of increasing specialisation, public temple complexes, the storage of community

29 30 31

Paz et al. 2013. Loud 1948, pl. 273.5–6. Bourke 2002; Joffe 2003; Levy 2003; Rowan – Ilan 2007; Bourke 2008, Seaton 2008; Rowan – Golden 2009.

Nude, Robed and Masked Processions

125

Fig. 14   Scene complexity and social complexity. Illustration of the ‘Processional’ fresco (graphics: B. Drabsch)

surplus and elaborate ritual activities all suggest that the community had a form of hierarchy and social control not governed by brute force. The archaeological records have shown very little evidence suggestive of wealthy elites or sharp inequality, so it is perhaps more likely that the authority and influence of the leaders came from an ideological and spiritual power, rather than amassed material wealth or coercion. Stein has proposed a similar model of social complexity for the contemporary Ubaid society of southern Mesopotamia, with Bourke already suggesting parallels with Ghassul.32 It is possible that this concept of subtle rulership by ritual practitioners and religious leaders was based on cognate ideologies across the Ghassulian and Ubaid cultures. The stratified group shown in the ‘Processional’ fresco supports this theory, with the scene most likely reflecting the structure of society of that time, with the ritual leaders and acolytes playing a prominent role in the Ghassulian culture. The complex ritually-laden scenes suggest that this was a time of increasing social stratification, regulated and legitimated by complex public rituals. It is clear that these artworks represent a highly developed form of visual communication created at a tipping point in late prehistory as each of the characters has unique features and is syntactically positioned in order to tell a particular story (Fig. 14). The pictorial narratives could be ‘read’ by their viewers because of the order, orientation, size and garb of each individual. All of the indicators of a storyline are evident, presented visually rather than textually. The important murals make it clear that preliterate message systems and their associated cultures were not primitive and unstructured, as some have claimed.33

Section 2: The experiencing body Although it would be easy to finish the study at this point, archaeology has moved on from viewing the body as purely inscriptive and has widened its concerns to focus on the embodied person.34 With this approach in mind, it is interesting to view the figures in the masked processions as individuals who participated in an elaborate ritual event that actively shaped both their public and

32 33 34

Stein 1994, 43; Bourke 2002, 22. Schmandt-Besserat 2007, 102. Joyce 2005, 142.

126

Bernadette Drabsch

Fig. 15   Reconstruction of the ‘Processional’ scene (graphics: B. Drabsch)

private identity. Once the costumes had been donned, these individuals became transformed and were experiencing ritual as active members. They would most likely have experienced a sense of pride, nervousness and excitement, in addition to many other emotions, as they anticipated the coming of the events and then participated in them. As Morris and Peatfield recently highlighted, archaeologists should be thinking about ancient human representations from a more phenomenological viewpoint, considering them as feeling bodies who used all of their senses – sight, smell, hearing, touch and taste.35 It is likely that the sensory experience of the individuals performing in the Ghassulian masked processions must have been intense. There is every chance that the substantial masks might have felt both suffocating and transformative: the tactile qualities of the heavy robes probably provided an unusual sensation against the skin; the vibrant colours of the elaborate costumes would have been eye-catching in an environment that normally consisted of more muted tones; the use of body painting or tattooing would have inscribed and altered the appearance of the skin; and the sounds of the musical instruments and costume attachments, the burning of incense and the consumption of alcoholic beverages or other stimulants would have all contributed to a highly sensual and transformative experience (Fig. 15). The fact that some of the participants were presented naked with no gender markers suggests that they were either children taking part in an initiation ceremony, with some eagerly awaiting and some perhaps dreading the fact that they were about to become full adult members of their society, or perhaps the nude figures were acolytes – ideologically transformed by the power of the deity they were worshipping. It is possible that they were no longer considered by their community as male or female but were now viewed as special members of the community who had ded-

35

Morris – Peatfield 2002.

Nude, Robed and Masked Processions

127

icated themselves to being followers of their powerful transformative god. These people might have made a conscious decision as adults to follow their chosen path, such as nuns and monks in later eras, or had been dedicated to the chief deity as children, such as Samuel in the Biblical accounts.36 Whatever might have been the case, the Ghassulian frescos are vital clues to our understanding of the nude, robed and masked individuals who lived along the Dead Sea plains 6000 years ago. There is little doubt that the costumed performances would have promoted trust and affiliation among the members and helped foster group cohesion. The complex murals honoured and encapsulated these important ceremonial events in permanent form, creating a unique habitus that was both outcome and stimulus. The depiction of these occasions on the walls of their communal meeting areas would have acted to emphasise a sense of place and a sense of belonging, binding the viewers together through shared memories in pigment.

References Adams et al. 2014 M. Adams – I. Finkelstein – D. Ussishkin, The Great Temple of Early Bronze 1 Megiddo, American Journal of Archaeology 118, 2, 2014, 1–21. Amiran 1972 R. Amiran, Reflections on the identification of the deity of the Early Bronze II and Early Bronze III temples at Ai, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 208, 1972, 9–13. Asher-Greve 1997 J. Asher-Greve, The essential body. Mesopotamian conceptions of the gendered body, Gender and History 9, 1997, 432–461. Back-Danielsson 2002 I. M. Back-Danielsson, (Un)masking gender. Gold foil (dis)embodiments in late Iron Age Scandinavia, in: Hamilakis et al. 2002, 179–199. Banning 1998 E. Banning, The Neolithic Period. Triumphs of architecture, agriculture and art, Near Eastern Archaeology 61, 1998, 188–237. Bar-Adon 1980, P. Bar-Adon, The Cave of the Treasure. The finds from the Caves in Naḥal Mishmar (Jerusalem 1980). Bourke 2002 S. J. Bourke, Origins of social complexity in the Southern Levant. New evidence from Teleilat Ghassul, Jordan, Palestine Exploration Quarterly 134, 2002, 2–27. Bourke 2008 S. J. Bourke, The Chalcolithic period, in: R. Adams (ed.), Jordan. An Archaeological Reader (London 2008) 109–146. Cameron 1981 D. Cameron, The Ghassulian Wall Paintings (London 1981). de Miroschedji 2011 P. de Miroschedji, At the origins of Canaanite cult and religion: the Early Bronze Age fertility ritual in Palestine, Eretz-Israel 30, 2011, 74–103. Drabsch 2015 B. Drabsch, The Mysterious Wall Paintings of Teleilat Ghassul, Jordan. In Context (Oxford 2015).

36

1st Samuel 1, 21–28.

128

Bernadette Drabsch

Edson 2005 G. Edson, Masks and Masking. Faces of Tradition and Belief Worldwide (Jefferson 2005). Elliott 1977 C. Elliott, The religious beliefs of the Ghassulians, Palestine Exploration Fund 109, 1977, 3–25. Garstang – Garstang 1948 J. Garstang – J. B. E. Garstang, The Story of Jericho (London 1948). Gilead 2002 I. Gilead, Religio-magic behaviour in the Chalcolithic period in Palestine, in: S. Ahituv – E. D. Oren (eds.), Aharon Kempinski Memorial Volume, Studies in Archaeology and Related Disciplines 15 (Beer-Sheva 2002) 103–128. Hamilakis et al. 2002 Y. Hamilakis – M. Pluciennik – S. Tarlow (eds.), Thinking Through the Body. Archaeologies of Corporeality (New York 2002). Hennessy 1982 J. B. Hennessy, Teleilat Ghassul and its place in the archaeology of Jordan, in A. Hadidi (ed), Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan 1 (Amman 1982) 55–58. Hunt 2010 S. Hunt, Indigenous Religions (Farnham 2010). Joffe 2003 A. Joffe, Slouching toward Beersheva. Chalcolithic mortuary practices in local and regional context, in: B. Alpert-Nakhai (ed.), The Near East in the Southwest. Essays in Honour of William G. Dever (Boston 2003) 45–67. Joyce 2005 R. A. Joyce, Archaeology of the Body, Annual Review of Anthropology 34, 2005, 139–158. Langgut et al. 2016 D. Langgut – N. Yahalom-Mack – S. Lev-Yadun – E. Kremer – M. Ulman – U. Davidovich, The earliest Near Eastern wooden spinning implements, Antiquity 90, 2016, 973–990. Levy 2003 T. E. Levy, The Chalcolithic of the southern Levant, in: S. Richard (ed.), Near Eastern Archaeology. A Reader (Winona Lake 2003). Loud 1948 G. Loud, Megiddo II. Seasons of 1935–39 (Chicago 1948). Mallon et al. 1934 A. Mallon – R. Koeppel – R. Neuville, Teleilat Ghassul Vol. 1 (Rome 1934). McCreery 2011 D. McCreery, Agriculture and religion at Bab edh-Dhra’ and Numeira during the Early Bronze Age, in: M. Chesson – W. Aufrecht – I. Kuijt (eds.), Daily Life, Materiality and Complexity in the Early Urban Communities of the Southern Levant (Winona Lake 2011). Meadows 2005 J. Meadows, Early Farmers and their Environment. Archaeobotanical Research at Neolithic and Chalcolithic Sites in Jordan (PhD Diss., La Trobe University, Melbourne 2005). Morris – Peatfield 2002 C. Morris – A. Peatfield, Feeling through the body. Gesture in Cretan Bronze Age religion, in: Hamilakis et al. 2002, 105–120. North 1961 R. North, Ghassul 1960 Excavation Report (Rome 1961). Ochshorn 1996 J. Ochshorn, Sumer. Gender, gender roles, gender role reversals, in: Ramet 1996, 52–65.

Nude, Robed and Masked Processions

129

Paz et al. 2013 Y. Paz – I. Milevski – N. Getzov, Sound-track of the ‘sacred marriage’? A newly discovered cultic scene depicted on a 3rd millennium BC cylinder seal impression from Bet Ha-Emeq, Israel, Ugarit-Forschungen 44, 2013, 243–260. Pluciennik 2002 M. Pluciennik, Bodies in/as material culture, in: Hamilakis et al. 2002, 173–177. Ramet 1996 S. Ramet, Gender Reversals and Gender Cultures. Anthropological and Historical Perspectives (London 1996). Rowan – Golden 2009 Y. Rowan – J. Golden, The Chalcolithic period of the Southern Levant. A synthetic review, Journal of World Prehistory 22, 2009, 1–92. Rowan – Ilan 2007 Y. Rowan – D. Ilan, The meaning of ritual diversity in the Chalcolithic of the Southern Levant, in: D. Barrowclough – C. Malon (eds.), Cult in Context. Reconsidering Ritual in Archaeology (Oxford 2007) 249–256. Schick 1988 T. Schick, Nahal Hemar Cave. Cordage, basketry and fabrics, Atiqot. 18, 1988, 21–43. Schick 1998 T. Schick, The Cave of the Warrior. A Fourth Millennium Burial in the Judean Desert, Vol. 5. (Jerusalem 1998). Schmandt-Besserat 1998 D. Schmandt-Besserat, ‘Ain Ghazal ‘monumental’ figures, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 310, 1998, 1–17. Schmandt-Besserat 2007 D. Schmandt-Besserat, When Writing met Art. From Symbol to Story (Austin 2007). Seaton 2008 P. Seaton, Chalcolithic Cult and Risk Management at Teleilat Ghassul. The Area E Sanctuary (Oxford 2008). Skoglund 2013 P. Skoglund, Images of shoes and feet. Rock-art motifs and the concepts of dress and nakedness, Norwegian Archaeological Review 46, 2013, 159–174. Stager 1992 L. Stager, The periodization of Palestine from Neolithic through Early Bronze Age times, in: R. Ehrich, Chronologies in Old World Archaeology (Chicago 1992) 22–60. Stein 1994 G. Stein, Economy, ritual and power in ‘Ubaid Mesopotamia, in: G. Stein – M. S. Rothman (eds.), Chiefdoms and Early States in the Near East. The Organisational Dynamics of Complexity (Madison 1994) 34–46. Vincent 1935 L. Vincent, Les Fouilles de Teleilat Ghassul, Revue Biblique 44, 1935, 69–105. Yates 1993 T. Yates, Frameworks for an archaeology of the body, in: C. Tilley (ed.), Interpretive Archaeology (Oxford 1993) 31–72.

130

Bernadette Drabsch

Signals from the Past

131

Signals from the Past: Gestures in South-west Asian Anthropomorphic Iconography – Preliminary Observations Bernd Müller-Neuhof 1 Abstract: The increasing number of newly discovered Neolithic anthropomorphic representations in South-west Asia in recent years facilitates comparative iconographical studies. An interesting observation of these comparative iconographical studies is the restricted stylistic variability of the anthropomorphic representations in the South-west Asian Neolithic. This restriction is furthermore characterised by a confined set of gestures, displayed by these figurines. The aim of this contribution is to present a preliminary characterisation of these gestures and, subsequently, to hypothesise some theories concerning their meaning and significance. Keywords: anthropomorphic figurines; gestures; South-west Asia; Neolithic

Neolithic anthropomorphic representations are components of a Neolithic semiotic repertoire, whose codification happened between 12,000 and 7,000 years ago. However, these transmitted codified messages were not addressed to the modern observer.2 The consequence is that the function and symbolic meaning of prehistoric figurines, and especially Neolithic figurines, have been the subjects of debates for more than one hundred years which were and are, in most cases, influenced by political and social perspectives and trends. This is especially true for the Neolithic figurines from South-east Europe and South-west Asia and especially female representations, which have been in the focus of discussions for a long time. The functions ascribed to these figurines range from depictions of mother goddesses,3 which were mostly understood as evidence for matriarchal societies,4 via their role as stimuli to review sexual identities,5 to initiation figurines6 and to amulets providing fertility, in which case female fertility and crop fertility were metaphorically linked.7 However, these interpretations are not satisfactory, as they are the results of biased and mostly ideologically connoted approaches, which were affected by theological perspectives (especially the Old Testament), feminist perspectives and also wishful thinking. A possible strategy to get away from such interpretations will be presented here and is characterised by the application of a semiotic approach that focuses on the analysis of the depicted gestures. This can only be realised when human ethological and cultural anthropological (ethnological) research methods and results are consulted. This includes the consideration of several other factors, such as the sizes and postures of the representations as well as the material they were made of and the places where they were found and probably originally kept. This contribution focuses on gestures, represented by Neolithic figurines that have hitherto been an underestimated feature of the research on Neolithic anthropomorphic representations from South-west Asia. The aim is to present a preliminary characterisation of gestures shown in South-west Asian Neolithic anthropomorphic representations and, subsequently, to hypothesise some theories concerning their meaning and significance, which may finally give hints as to their original function. Following a brief introduction, which focuses on the general definition of the term gesture and in this connection the terms posture and appearance, the gestures in South-west Asian Neolithic anthropomorphic representations will be compiled and sorted according to time

1 2

3 4 5 6 7

Deutsches Archäologisches Institut – Orientabteilung, Germany; [email protected]. See Morenz 2009, 117; referring to the problem of using hermeneutics in archaeology in order to decode 12,000 years old messages. See Winter 1983, 132–133 and for a critical view see Ucko 1970, 417–419. Gimbutas 1982. Bailey 2005, 180. Voigt 2007, 168; referring to the Late Neolithic figurines from Hacılar and Çatalhöyük. Haaland – Haaland 1996, 299.

132

Bernd Müller-Neuhof

periods and how the different gestures relate to the different sexes. This provides the basis for a hypothetical interpretation of the possible meanings and significance of gestures, with particular reference to ethnological and human ethological observations and theories. Definition: gesture, posture and appearance It is important to consider the definition of the term gesture because of its different connotations, which are more complicated when the linguistic background of scholars studying gestures is taken into account. The English term ‘gesture’ is derived from the Latin ‘gestus’ (= bodily action [gestures] of an actor or a speaker) and is a collective term for all sorts of visible bodily actions in a non-verbal or non-vocal communication, which also includes the expression of emotions. Contrary to the utilisation of the word ‘gesture’ in English or geste in French, the German language differentiates between Geste (pl. Gesten) and Gebärde (pl. Gebärden). Because a definitional clarification is important for the following discussion of the possible meanings of gestures in Neolithic representations, a short excursus describing the differences between Geste and Gebärde is necessary. While Gebärde is the expression of an emotion, Geste is considered to be a sign that has a fixed, quasi-lexical significance, which the sender assumes is known to the addressee.8 In contrast to Gebärde, a Geste has a fixed meaning that cannot be interpreted in a different manner.9 A Gebärde can, however, be ‘converted’ into a Geste within a culturally specific environment. This is the case, for example, for gestures associated with mourning.10 Mourning gestures are Gebärden that belong to the gestures of a psychological state (so-called Zustandsgebärde),11 which differ from gestures of affect (Momentangebärde), such as those of fright or of surprise.12 It must be mentioned at this point that the necessity to distinguish between the semiotic meaning and the expression of emotions, which are usually both described by the English term ‘gesture’, has already been recognised by American anthropologists and psychologists studying non-verbal communication. One attempt to introduce a new term to describe one of the two different meanings of the term ‘gesture’ was carried out by the anthropologist and specialist in non-verbal communication David Efron, who introduced the term ‘emblem’ in the 1940s to refer to the semiotic meaning of gesture (Geste).13 However, while this term was adopted and is still used by anthropologists and psychologists studying non-verbal communication, it did not find its way into the English terminology used by archaeologists and cultural anthropologists, who still use the term ‘gesture’ when describing semiotic meanings of bodily actions. In the following discussion, the term ‘gesture’ is used only in its semiotic meaning. It is possible to make a typological differentiation of such gestures, which range from lexical gestures, via deictic gestures, iconic gestures, metaphoric gestures, to rhythmical gestures.14 Lexical gestures are gestures that function as lexemes and which are learned, such as gestures of offence. Deictic gestures are mostly used in conversations and in speeches and include, for example, the direction of a finger on an abstract, non-existing object. Iconic gestures are also used in speeches and direct conversations. These gestures are reproducing reality as an icon, such as the depiction of the outline of an object with the fingers/hands. Metaphoric gestures are representations of metaphors, such as, for example, hands showing the distribution of good ideas on one side and bad ideas on the other. Lastly, the function of rhythmical gestures is to emphasise statements which is, for instance, done by raising the index finger. The dialogic connections in which gestures

8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Cf. Mrass 2005, 161. Mrass 2005, 138. Cf. Mrass 2005, 131. Cf. Neumann 1965, 2, 106. Cf. Neumann 1965, 2, 97. Efron 1941; cf. Ekman – Friesen 1969, 63. Cf. Neumann 1965, 5.

Signals from the Past

133

are placed, and which usually only enable the thematic interpretation of the depicted scene,15 can only be transferred to images showing scenes consisting of one or several persons, or one person and several objects that are interacting with each other. Here the specification of a single gesture has to consider the context of the image and not only the formal description of the display of the gesture.16 However, this approach cannot be applied to the Neolithic statuaries because they usually represent single individuals, whose original arrangement or position relating to other possible statues, murals, room design, etc. is unknown to us. We therefore have to assume that these statues were in a dialogic connection with addressees that cannot always be identified and characterised, but who were familiar with the codes of these gestures. In consequence, it can be hypothesised that humans and/or even supernatural beings were the addressees of these gestures. According to the typology of gestures, it can be stated that because of the static character of the Neolithic anthropomorphic representations, and especially of the statues where movements are not expressed, only lexical gestures are presented. The contemporaneous human and/or supernatural addressees of these statues were able to decode these lexical gestures and therefore recognised the signal that was transmitted to them by the gestures. Of high importance in this context is the posture. While gestures have a semantic value, postures seem to be semantically neutral.17 However, postures give information on the inner attitude in the broadest sense,18 and it is, therefore, necessary to also consider the posture of the anthropomorphic representations in order to make a conclusive interpretation of a gesture. A third and also very important factor to consider in the interpretation of gestures is appearance. The term appearance can comprise several characteristics, such as sex (male/female), age group (child/adult) and social affiliation (subordinate/ruler/god). These characteristics can be expressed in the size- and age-related anatomic characteristics of figurines;19 the representation of primary and secondary sexual characteristics (pubic area, phallus and female breasts) and artificial sex characteristics (clothing, hairstyles, etc.); and the display of attributes that refer to the social position of an anthropomorphic representation (e.g. insignias of rulers and gods). Such a differentiation is needed due to the fact that certain gestures are restricted to a specific sex-, ageand/or social group and its meaning can only be interpreted when this affiliation, which is represented by the appearance, is considered. When it comes to the Neolithic figurines of South-west Asia, however, appearances refer mainly to the depicted sexual affiliation of a figurine. With a few Late Neolithic exceptions, children are not represented in the repertoire of anthropomorphic representations.20

Gestures in Neolithic anthropomorphic representations in South-west Asia The majority of human anthropomorphic representations in the South-west Asian Neolithic are figurines and statues, which occur in both Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN) and Late Neolithic (LN) contexts. Two-dimensional depictions, however, are rare and occur mainly in the LN. Examples of such two-dimensional depictions are found on painted pottery vessels from the Halaf period, e.g. from Fıstıklı Höyük,21 and on pottery with relief decorations showing humans, which have been found at LN Köşk Höyük.22 Further two-dimensional anthropomorphic representations are found

15 16 17 18 19

20 21 22

Cf. Neumann 1965, 5. Cf. Neumann 1965, 5. Firth 1970, 189. Neumann 1965, 2. Anthropomorphic representations of children can, in most cases, only be identified by differences in body lengths when anthropomorphic representations of adults originate from the same context or are depicted on the same image. See the mother with child figurines from Hacılar (Mellaart 1970, figs. 218–220). Cf. Bernbeck – Pollock 2003, 43, fig. 22. Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007, 347–349.

134

Bernd Müller-Neuhof

in petroglyphs, such as the LPPNB/LN rock carvings at Dhuweila in north-east Jordan23 and the LN rock paintings in the Latmos mountains in western Turkey.24 Additionally, two-dimensional images have been depicted in murals, such as the famous wall paintings at LN Çatalhöyük.25 However, the majority of these depictions show scenes either consisting of several individuals interacting with each other, such as in dancing scenes,26 or individuals interacting with other elements, such as animals in hunting scenes from Çatalhöyük,27 or architecture.28 The gestures of the depicted human individuals in these scenes are often expressions of emotions, such as affect (Gebärden), which do not have a lexical significance. Such expressions are visible in, for example, hunting scenes but also in dancing scenes.29 In other scenes, the gestures of the anthropomorphic representations have a clear lexical significance. These gestures (Gesten), however, are not addressed to the observer but to other persons or even objects that are components of the depicted scene.30 This is especially the case when the human individual is depicted in side view. Contrary to the en face representations of human individuals where the gesture is directed towards the observer outside of the scene, the two-dimensional representations, whose gestures are addressed to another element or individual within the same scene, have narrative functions31 in which the observer is not involved. However, such figurative narrations may enable us to identify possible addressees and possible meanings of specific gestures that have similarities to gestures in threedimensional anthropomorphic representations. The majority of the published Neolithic anthropomorphic representations displaying gestures have been analysed for this study, which incorporates 88 representations, covering the chronological range from the PPNA to the LN (c. 10,000–5,000 BCE) in the Levant, Syria, Anatolia and Iraq.32 The majority of these representations (85) are three-dimensional. Only three representations are two-dimensional, namely two LN seal impressions and one PPNB engraving on a slab. These are, however, clearly communicating with the observer(s). Paintings of Neolithic human representations depicted in murals, on rock faces or pottery have not been included in this study due to the fact that these depictions are in almost all cases embedded in scenes and the displayed gestures seemed not to be directed towards the observer. The following analysis starts with a typology of gestures which correlates the depicted gestures with the posture and the represented sex. The second step is a chronological classification of these gestures into the three Neolithic periods, PPNA, PPNB and LN. It has to be emphasised that anthropomorphic representations are infrequently represented in these three periods. Almost 90%

23 24 25 26 27 28 29

30

31

32

Betts 1998, figs. 7.1, 7.2. Peschlow-Bindokat 2003. Mellaart 1967. Cf. Garfinkel 2003. Mellaart 1967, fig. 48. Cf. Bernbeck – Pollock 2003, 43, fig. 22. Campbell 2006, 17 and Garfinkel 2003. However, dancing scenes as depicted on LN pottery vessels may represent possible states of trance (Garfinkel 2003, 88), whose gestures have no lexical significance, and/or are expressive acts of worship towards a deity or transcendent being (Garfinkel 2003, 85). In this case the expressed gestures belong to gestures expressing a psychological state (Zustandsgebärde). In many cases these scenes are not complete and the addressees of the gesture of the depicted human individual are missing. This is especially the case in scenes depicted on pottery or in murals, due to the fragile nature of these media (Bildträger). A famous example of such scenes is the representation of introduction scenes on Ancient Near Eastern cylinder seals. PPNA representations are from Mureybet (Syria). The PPNB representations are from ‘Ain Ghazal (Jordan), Tell Aswad (Syria), Gaziantep (Turkey), Tell Cheikh Hassan (Syria), Tell Fakhariyah (Syria), Göbekli Tepe (Turkey), el-Hammeh (Jordan), Kilisik (Turkey), Nevalı Çori (Turkey), Şanlıurfa (Turkey). Late Neolithic representations from Tell Arpachiyah (Iraq), Byblos (Lebanon), Çatalhöyük (Turkey), Choga Mami (Iraq), Eridu (Iraq), Tepe Gawra (Iraq), Hacılar (Turkey), Tell Halaf (Syria), Höyüçek (Turkey), Köşk Höyük (Turkey), Kuruçay (Turkey), Munḫata (Israel), Sabi Abyad (Syria), Sha’ar Hagolan (Israel), Tell es-Sawwan (Iraq), Tell Songor (Iraq), Uluçak (Turkey) and Yarim Tepe (Iraq).

Signals from the Past

135

of all known and published anthropomorphic representations from Neolithic sites in South-west Asia showing gestures have been included in this study. From the 88 anthropomorphic representations included here, three to five (four to six) date to the PPNA,33 19 to 20 to the PPNB, and 63 to the LN. Definition of gestures in South-west Asian Neolithic representations A total of 17 different types of gestures, including one sub-type, were identified; these are presented and defined in Table 1. Some of these gesture types are distinguished from others by their combination with different postures. Seven of the gesture types can be attributed to male figurines, partly together with representation of the genitals, partly without. Ten gesture types are attributed to female figurines. These are in all cases characterised by the depiction of secondary female sex characteristics (breasts) and in three cases with the additional display of the pubic area.

Type 1

2

3

33

Appearance

Definition Standing man with stretched arms and hands clinging to the outer sides of the thighs. Standing man with the upper arms more or less clinging to the outer sides of the upper body, bent elbows, and the forearms resting in front of the upper abdomen where the hands are probably grasping each other. Standing man with upper arms more or less clinging to the outer sides of the upper body, bent elbows with the left forearm at a c. 90° angle and resting horizontally on the abdomen and the right forearm at a 45°, or less, angle and its hand resting on the left breast.

4

(Symbolic?) phallus presentation: standing man with bent elbows and hands resting in front of the body, close to the (not depicted) primary male sexual characteristics.

5

Standing man with depicted primary male sexual characteristics (ithyphallic representation), with upper arms more or less clinging to the outer sides of the upper body, bent elbows and forearms resting in front of the upper abdomen where the hands are probably grasping each other.

6

Phallus presentation: standing man with bent elbows and hands resting in front of the body, close to the depicted primary male sexual characteristics.

7

Sitting man (?) with upper arms clinging to the outer sides of the upper body and lower arms and hands resting on the thighs.

8

Standing woman with depicted secondary female sexual characteristics (breasts) and stretched arms with hands clinging to the outer sides of the thighs.

9

Standing woman with depicted secondary female sexual characteristics (breasts), upper arms more or less clinging to the outer sides of the upper body, bent elbows and forearms resting in front of the abdomen where the hands are probably grasping each other.

10

Standing woman with depicted secondary female sexual characteristics (breasts), upper arms more or less clinging to the outer sides of the upper body and bent elbows with the left forearm resting on the upper abdomen and the right forearm on the lower abdomen.

Three of these representations definitely date to the PPNA, while the stratigraphic find spot of a fourth statue, a head and a torso from Göbekli Tepe (cf. Clare et al. 2015, fig. 3), is at the moment unclear and might also date to the PPNB (pers. comm. Oliver Dietrich, 10 November 2016). A hitherto unpublished T-shaped pillar from ‘Anlage F’ at Göbekli Tepe has the same stratigraphic and, therefore, chronological problems as the latter (pers. comm. Jens Notroff, 30 November 2016).

136

Bernd Müller-Neuhof

11

Breast presentation: standing woman presenting her breasts with both hands.

11a

Breast presentation: woman presenting her breasts with both hands, legs are missing. (Lower parts of the body are broken off and it cannot be determined whether these are standing, sitting or kneeling persons.)

12

Breast presentation: kneeling or sitting woman presenting her breasts.

13

Breast presentation: standing woman with depicted primary female sexual characteristic (pubic area) presenting her breasts with both hands.

14

Pubic area/breasts presentation: sitting woman with spread legs presenting her pubic area, and presenting her breasts with both hands.

15

Pubic area presentation: sitting woman with depicted secondary female sexual characteristics (breasts), with spread legs presenting her pubic area, bent elbows and hands probably grasping each other in front of the abdomen.

16

Kneeling or sitting woman with depicted secondary female sexual characteristics (breasts), bent elbows and hands probably grasping each other in front of the abdomen or the breasts.

17

Sitting woman with depicted secondary female sexual characteristics (breasts), with closed legs, upper arms clinging to the outer sides of the upper body and lower arms and hands resting on the thighs.

Tab. 1   Typology and definition of gestures in anthropomorphic representations in the Neolithic in South-west Asia

Catalogue of gestures in South-west Asian Neolithic representations In Table 2, the archaeological references for the 17 gesture types are listed and internally differentiated according to the time period (PPNA, PPNB or LN) for which these gestures have been identified in the published anthropomorphic representations. As already mentioned above, not all known Neolithic anthropomorphic representations from South-west Asia have been included in this study and this compilation cannot, therefore, be used for a statistical analysis of the chronologically differentiated distribution of gestures, though certain trends become visible.34 Type

34

PPNA

PPNB

1

Tell Fakheriya (Müller-Neuhof 2007, figs. 1–2); Göbekli Tepe (Dietrich et al. 2014, 15, fig.11); ‘Ain Ghazal (Schmandt-Besserat 1998a, fig. 4)*

2

Gaziantep (Çelik 2005, 28– 29, figs. 1–3); Tell Cheikh Hassan (Müller-Neuhof 2006, 33–34, figs. 1–2); Göbekli Tepe (Schmidt 2000, 33, fig. 14b; Schmidt 2010, 249, fig. 20)

LN

Choga Mami (Hansen 2007, pl. 39.3)

Due to the limited space available and the given limit for illustrations in this contribution, the archaeological evidence for the gestures could not be reproduced here as illustrations. Therefore, only the published sources of the illustrations, where the depictions can be consulted, have been quoted.

137

Signals from the Past

3

4

Göbekli Tepe (Clare et al. 2015, fig. 3) Göbekli Tepe, pillar 18 (Schmidt 2006, 172, fig. 80), pillar 31 (Schmidt 2010, 244–245, fig. 7), unpubl. T-pillar (pers. commun. J. Notroff)

Nevalı Çori (Hauptmann 1993, 56, fig. 16; Schmidt 2010, 244, fig. 5); ‘Ain Ghazal (Schmandt-Besserat 1998a, fig. 3)*

Göbekli Tepe, unpubl. T-pillar from ‘Anlage F’ (pers. commun. J. Notroff) Eridu (Basmachi 1975/76, fig. 16; Hansen 2007, pl. 48.1); Munḫata (Garfinkel 1993, 124–125, fig. 11.1)

5

6

Şanlıurfa (Hauptmann 2003, 631–632, figs. 1–2)

Kilisik (Hauptmann 2000, figs. 8–9)

Byblos (Garfinkel 1993, fig. 10.1)

7

Çatalhöyük (Mellaart 1963, 83, 90, figs. 20, 25, pls. 21c, 22a–b)

8

Hacılar  II (Mellaart 1970, fig. 240.1); Hacılar  VI (Mellaart 1961, 49, fig. 5); Kuruçay (Duru 1994a, pl. 185.1)

9

Çatalhöyük (Mellaart 1963, 83, fig. 19); Sha’ar Hagolan (Garfinkel et al. 2002, 198, fig. 13.14); Tell es-Sawwan (Hansen 2007, pl. 39.7); Tell Songor (Kamada – Ohtsu 1995, 304, fig. 31.T.6)

‘Ain Ghazal (PPNC) (Schmandt-Besserat 1998b, 109–112)

10

Tell es-Sawwan 2007, pl. 39.5)

11

Çatalhöyük (Hamilton 1996, fig. 12.1, no. 532); Hacılar (Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007, 363, no. 382); Hacılar (Mellaart 1961, 53, fig. 11); Hacılar II (Mellaart 1970, fig. 242); Hacılar IV (Mellaart 1961, 49, 50, fig. 6, 8; 1961, pl. 9a); Höyüçek (Duru 1995, pl. 42.1); Kuruçay (Hansen 2007, pl. 76.13); Sabi Abyad (Akkermans 1989, fig. 8.3; Akkermans – Verhoeven 1995, 23, fig. 13); Uluçak (Abay 2003, 20, figs. 6–7); Yarim Tepe (Merpert et al. 1981, 26, figs. 10–11)

11a

Mureybet (Cauvin 1979, 35, figs. 15.3, 16–17)

Aswad (Stordeur 2003, 13, fig. 6.1); Tell Fakhariyah (Müller-Neuhof 2007, figs. 1–2); el-Hammeh (Makarewicz – Austin 2006, 21, fig. 4); ‘Ain Ghazal (SchmandtBesserat 1998a, fig. 1)

(Hansen

Çatalhöyük (Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007, 324, no. 238); Tell Songor (Kamada – Ohtsu 1995, 304, fig. 31.T.3); Yarim Tepe (Munchaev et al. 1984, 43, fig. 21.1)

138

Bernd Müller-Neuhof

Çatalhöyük (Mellaart 1963, 93, fig. 30; pl. 23c, d); Hacılar (Mellaart 1961, 56, fig. 19; 1970, fig. 243; pl. 178b); Hacılar  VI (Mellaart 1961, 56, fig. 23); Höyüçek (Duru 1994b, pl. 24; 1995, pl. 52.1); Kuruçay (Hansen 2007, pl 76.13); Munḫata (Garfinkel 1993, 124, fig. 9.2); Arpachiyah (Mallowan – Cruikshank Rose 1935, 81, figs. 45.6, 45.7, 45.10, 45.12); Tell Halaf (Oppenheim 1943, pl. 55.1.2, 55.4, 55.6, 55.12); Tell Songor (Kamada – Ohtsu 1995, 304, fig. 31.T.1); Tepe Gawra (Tobler 1950, pl. 81a, 153.1, pl. 81b, 153.3); Yarim Tepe (Munchaev et al. 1984, 43, fig. 21.2); Köşk Höyük (Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007, 327, no. 247)

12

13

14

‘Ain Ghazal (SchmandtBesserat 1998a, fig. 2)

Göbekli Tepe (Schmidt 1999, 21, C18, pl. 10.3)

Hacılar  VI (Mellaart 1961, 56, fig. 20); Hacılar (Mellaart 1970, pl. 179d); Tell es-Sawwan (von Wickede 1990, 83, pl. 53)

15

Tell es-Sawwan 2007, pl. 40.3)

(Hansen

16

Tell es-Sawwan (Breniquet 1992, 23, fig. J.1); Köşk Höyük (Silistreli 1989, pl. 5.1); Çatalhöyük (Edgü 1983, 54 A48)

17

Çatalhöyük (Mellaart 1963, 93, fig. 28; pl. 23a); Choga Mami (Hansen 2007, pl. 39.4); Sha’ar Hagolan (Garfinkel 1993, fig. 9.1) Tab. 2   Catalogue of gestures in anthropomorphic representations in the Neolithic in South-west Asia

*

Even though D. Schmandt-Besserat avoids a sexual classification for this statue, it is highly possible that it is a male anthropomorphic representation. Arguments for such a classification include the missing female sexual characteristics (breasts), which are depicted on two other statues from ‘Ain Ghazal (Schmandt-Besserat 1998a, figs. 1–2), and the specific gesture, which seems, according to other PPNB comparisons, to be a male-related gesture.

Evaluation of the Neolithic gestures in South-west Asia Gestures and appearances: distribution of sexes The Neolithic anthropomorphic representations in South-west Asia can generally be differentiated by their depicted sex. Looking at the chronological distribution of the sexes in the figurative art of the three Neolithic periods, differences become apparent. This relates in particular

139

Signals from the Past

to the repertoires dating to the PPN and the LN. While only four to six anthropomorphic representations date to the PPNA, 13 to 14 male figurines and five or six female figurines date to the PPNB, and 53 female figurines and nine male figurines date to the LN.35 The sex of one LN figurine is unclear. In all Neolithic periods female representations can clearly be identified by the depiction of their secondary sexual characteristics, the female breasts. Male representations are identified based on their blocky shape and/or their primary sexual characteristic, the phallus. The repertoire of Neolithic gestures can be divided between gestures (actively) presenting primary and/or secondary sexual characteristics, and gestures not presenting them. Within the repertoire, breasts can generally be regarded as distinctive features for female figurines provided these secondary sexual characteristics are not actively presented by gestures. Consequently, male figurines are generally depicted without a phallus as long as the active presentation of the phallus (phallus presentation) was not intended.36 The gesture types without clear indications for the presentation of primary or secondary sexual characteristics are summarised in Table 3. ♂

♀

♂

♂

♀

PPNB

LN

PPNB/LN

LN

PPNC/LN

Type 1

Type 8

Type 2

Type 5

Type 9

♂

♀

LN Type 7

Type 17

Tab. 3   Comparison of gestures in South-west Asian Neolithic anthropomorphic representations

Figurines displaying gestures related to the presentation of primary and/or secondary sexual characteristics (phallus-, pubic area- and/or breast-presentation) are summarised in Table 4. It becomes obvious that the diversity of such gestures in female representations is higher than in male representations. With regard to the male representations, gesture type 4 does not show the phallus itself. However, the gesture of the forearms and hands directed towards the anatomical area where the male primary sexual characteristics are located, hints towards such a phallus presentation without showing the phallus itself.37 ♂

♂

♀

♀

♀

♀

♀

PPNA–B

PPNB/LN

PPNA – LN

PPNB

LN

PPNB(?)/LN

LN

Type 4

Type 6

Type 11

Type 13

Type 12

Type 14

Type 15

Tab. 4   Comparison of gestures in South-west Asian Neolithic anthropomorphic representations, presenting primary and/or secondary sexual characteristics according to their sexual affiliation

35 36

37

With reference to the over-representation of female figurines in the LN, see Hamilton 1996, 225–226. Type 5, a standing man with a depicted phallus, which is not presented by a hand-gesture, might be an exception and is possibly confined to the few known LN representations. This is especially important for the interpretation of the T-shaped pillars at Göbekli Tepe as male representations and supports the interpretation by the excavators, who also state that these representations are male representations (see Becker et al. 2012, 21).

140

Bernd Müller-Neuhof

PPNA(B)

LN

LN

Type 3

Type 10

Type 16

Tab. 5   Sex-related gestures in South-west Asian Neolithic anthropomorphic representations

The catalogue of gestures in Neolithic anthropomorphic representations also contains one male and two female gestures that show no relationship to each other (see Tab. 5). These are the male gesture type 3 and the two female gestures type 10 and type 16. In addition to the sex, other characteristics of appearances depicted in Neolithic anthropomorphic representations are clothes. Neolithic figurines generally have little evidence of clothing in their depictions. It can be assumed that some of the figurines are wearing clothes made of felt and textiles, which have not been preserved.38 However, the depiction of specific garments, such as a loincloth,39 and other clothes show that a number of these figurines probably did not wear additional clothes. Due to the fact that we have no information about clothing in the Neolithic with regard to social status, this element of the appearance in Neolithic figurative art will not help us in interpreting specific gestures. Gestures and postures As gestures have to be viewed in relation to postures, it is interesting to note that a chronological and, to a lesser extent, a sex-related distinction of postures can be observed. While the anthropomorphic representations dating to the PPN are all depicted as standing figurines, with the exception of one PPN slab engraving from Göbekli Tepe,40 the postures of the LN figurines are more diverse. Here we observe standing, sitting, kneeling and even figurines that are lying down.41 The following tables 6a and 6b focus on the male–female distribution of gestures in connection with postures. As is shown in Table 6a, several of the depicted gestures that are related to specific postures go back to the PPN. ♀

♂

♂

♀

♂

♂

♀

♀

♀

LN

PPNB/LN

LN

PPN(C)/ LN

PPNB/LN

PPNB

PPNB

PPNA/LN

LN

Type 8

Type 2

Type 5

Type 9

Type 6

Type 4

Type 13

Type 11

Type 10

Tab. 6a   Distribution of PPN to LN gestures in male and female figurines in standing positions

38 39 40 41

See the contribution on clothing by Claudia Beuger this volume. Cf. the female figurine from PPNB Tell Fakheriya (Müller-Neuhof 2007, 39). Schmidt 1999, 21, C18, pl. 10.3. Figurines that are lying down are represented in this study by one example from LN Hacılar (Mellaart 1961, 56, fig. 19).

141

Signals from the Past

♂

♀

♀

♀

♀

LN

LN

LN

LN

LN

Type 7

Type 12

Type 14

Type 15

Type 16

Tab. 6b   Distribution of PPN to LN gestures in male and female figurines in sitting or kneeling positions

Interpretation For the interpretation of Neolithic gestures and defining of possible meanings for the gestures and, therefore, the entire corpus of anthropomorphic representations, it is necessary to look at other scientific fields of research which deal with the documentation and exploration of comparable gestures. In addition to the archaeological and historical sources, a wide range of analogies may be found in human ethology and ethnology, as well as in psychology, theology and religious studies. To the knowledge of the author, it is not (yet) possible to find explanations for all gestures that have hitherto been observed in Neolithic South-west Asian anthropomorphic representations. Therefore, only the gestures with analogies in other periods and cultures are considered in the following interpretation. These have been grouped according to their appearance and themes into the five groups (see Table 7), namely ‘somatic positions I’, ‘somatic positions II’, ‘phallus presentation’, ‘breast presentation’ and ‘pubic area presentation’. While the somatic positions can be seen in male and female figurines, the remaining three types are clearly associated with either male or female figurines. Acknowledging the fact that the interpretations of these gestures derive from different periods and cultures from all over the world and from different scientific disciplines, their application in this study is only aimed towards a hypothetic interpretation of the gestures and the possible functions of the South-west Asian Neolithic anthropomorphic representations. These interpretations have to be regarded not only as hypothetical but also as preliminary, due to the fact that further ethnographic, ethologic, historical, etc. sources not considered here might offer additional descriptions of such gestures, and possibly even additional or alternative interpretations for these gestures. As such, the following interpretations are meant to open the field for further discussions and studies on the issue of gestures in the study of Neolithic anthropomorphic representations and their possible contribution to the functional analyses of these representations. Type:

2

5

9

16

Somatic positions I* Psychology

Retention pose, self-control, self-confidence (Strehle 1954, 129).

Archaeology / History

Prayer gesture and self-restriction: Mesopotamia (Langdon 1919, 534; Keel – Schroer 2004, 29). Veneration gesture: Mesopotamia (Czichon 1992, 107). Pregnancy wish: Mesopotamia (Keel – Schroer 2004, 28) (for Types 9 and 16).

Type:

3

Somatic position II

Archaeology / History

Inaction of latent authority: Iron Age Europe, see statues from Glauberg and Hirschlanden (Aldhouse-Green 2004, 22). Tension, trepidation or fear: Iron Age Europe, see Hirschlanden figure (Armit – Grant 2007, 415). Representation of dead warriors or nobles: Iron Age Europe, see Hallstatt burials of male warriors (Armit – Grant 2008, 419–420). Expression of grief: Etruria, Etruscan female gesture; however with left hand to the chest (Armit – Grant 2007, 418).

142

Bernd Müller-Neuhof

Type:

6

4

Phallus presentation

Ethnology / Ethology

Type:

Apotropaic (defence against demons and illness): e.g. in Borneo (Kalimantan) (Eibl-Eibesfeldt – Sütterlin 1992, 272), Bali (Eibl-Eibesfeldt – Sütterlin 1992, 136–140), Maori in New Zealand (Eibl-Eibesfeldt – Sütterlin 1992, 148), Punjab, Montenegro, Kosovo (Duerr 1993, 169). Territory marking/display behaviour (primate behaviour) (Fehling 1974, 8–9). Phallic threat: Eipo (Eibl-Eibesfeldt et al. 1989, 112). Guardian figurines: Kwakiutl (Vancouver Island) (Eibl-Eibesfeldt – Sütterlin 1992, 130). Ancestor figurines: Easter Island, New Guinea, Melanesia, etc. (Eibl-Eibesfeldt – Sütterlin 1992). 11

11a

12

13

Breast presentation

Ethnology / Ethology

Appeasement: South-east Asia (Eibl-Eibesfeldt – Sütterlin 1992, 257), Eipo (New Guinea) (Eibl-Eibesfeldt et al. 1989, 112). Apotropaic: (defence against demons and illness) e.g. in New Zealand (Maori) depiction of hybrid creatures presenting breasts in houses; Borneo (Kalimantan) on door posts in Bali, New Guinea, Nigeria (Luba, Yombe, Yoruba), Zaire (amulets with such representations) (Eibl-Eibesfeldt – Sütterlin 1992, 242–277).

Archaeology/ History

Appeasement: Celtic women from Segovia against Caesar’s troops (Duerr 1993, 38 [quot. Caesar Bellum Gallicum VII, 47.5–7]). Cheering: supporting their own troops (on the way to the Falklands): Britain 1981 (Duerr 1993, 40–41). Insulting enemies: Mohave (Arizona) (Duerr 1993, 45). Apotropaic: facades of medieval churches in France, England, Germany, Ireland (‘Sigla na gcíoch’) (Duerr 1993, 42, 121). Aggression: 20th century Europe, USA, Philippines (Duerr 1993, 48–52). Fertility: Qadesh representations (Kamlah 1993, 112). Plea (for breast milk) (Böhm 1990, 137). Nourishing (Keel – Uehlinger 1998, 122; Schmandt-Besserat 1998b). Sexual-erotic self-presentation (in context of temple prostitution) (Kyrieleis 1988, 48; Duerr 1993, 72–75).

Type:

14

15

Pubic area presentation

Ethnology / Ethology

Apotropaic: (guardian spirit) on, e.g., Trobriand Islands (boat bows); New-Guinea: Sepik and Asmat) (door lintels, stelae, gates, shields, etc.); New-Zealand: Maori; Pre-Columbian Peru and Ecuador; Cameroon; Palau (on gables of community houses) (Eibl-Eibesfeldt – Sütterlin 1992, 223–229). Mockery: Africa !Ko (Eibl-Eibesfeldt – Sütterlin 1992, 240).

Archaeology / History

Apotropaic: (evil averting) Greeks, Persians, Lykians, Baubos in Ancient Egypt (Eibl-Eibesfeldt – Sütterlin 1992, 193); Ireland (facades of medieval churches ‘Sigla na gcíoch’) (Duerr 1993, 121). Mockery (see Eibl-Eibesfeldt – Sütterlin 1992 [quot. Herodot]) (see above Caes. Bell. Gall.). Receptivity, invitation to sexual intercourse (Keel – Schroer 2004). Allure: Ishtar sexually stimulating the sea snake Chedammu in order to lure him ashore (Duerr 1993, 493 [quot. Winter 1983, 289]). Appeasement: Enkidu and the temple prostitute (Duerr 1993, 123). Fertility cult, sexual receptivity, birth position (Orrelle 2014, 87–88).

Religious studies / Theology

Receptivity, invitation to sexual intercourse (Keel – Schroer 2004).

Tab. 7   Interpretation of gestures * Gestures characterised by arms and hands located close to the body and especially the thorax and/or abdomen are described as ‘somatic positions’ by Aldhouse-Green 2004, 21.

Signals from the Past

143

The first group of gestures (somatic position I) contains types 2, 5, 9 and 16. All are characterised by bent arms and hands attached to each other (folded?) in front of the abdomen. These gestures can be found both in male and female figurines. In psychology, these gestures are seen as expressions of retention, self-control, or self-confidence.42 The appearance of such gestures in so-called worshipper figurines from the Early Dynastic II and later periods in Mesopotamia, and the similarity with modern praying gestures might hint towards such a meaning.43 However, the worshipper and prayer interpretation is a very unidirectional, hypothetical interpretation because it focuses solely on an active function of the figurine showing such gestures (e.g. praying, worshipping). The above-mentioned psychological explanations are also worth considering because, in addition to the aforementioned active function, they offer multidirectional interpretations, including a passive function of these anthropomorphic representations, such as being the recipients of worship. The latter would, consequently, imply that these figurines represented, for example, supernatural beings and/or venerated ancestors. The second group (somatic position II) consists of only one gesture, which is encountered only once during the Neolithic in South-west Asia (Göbekli Tepe). Usually a single case would not be considered in this section because the material base is too small. However, it is worth mentioning that the reason for its inclusion is the similarity between this gesture and gestures found on European anthropomorphic statues and figurines dating to the Iron Age.44 There, this gesture is connoted with the representation of authority and high-ranking persons (warriors or nobles) in the context of death. To draw such an analogy is difficult and only meant to present one possible explanation. For a better understanding and a more in-depth interpretation of this gesture, further examples are needed as well as information about their original arrangement. Phallus presentations (ithyphallic presentation) make up the third group of gestures. This is a very common male gesture, which can be observed in different regions, cultures and periods all over the world. It is a gesture that has a strong, sometimes even aggressive, defence connotation, ranging from demarcation of territory (e.g. in community buildings) where the addressees are other humans, to demarcation of territory with an apotropaic function aimed at supernatural beings (e.g. demons, illness). An important observation of this gesture in the South-west Asian Neolithic anthropomorphic representations is that in some cases it was depicted with the phallus and in other cases without. The latter is, for example, the case with the T-shaped pillars from Göbekli Tepe and Nevalı Çori. These pillars are very much reduced anthropomorphic representations, whose major aim in terms of their presentation was the transmission of a specific signal by this gesture. As the T-shaped pillars were presumably decoded as anthropomorphic representations by the Neolithic observers, probably showing supernatural beings with anthropomorphic characteristics,45 the signal transmitted by the gesture was also clearly decoded as the demarcation of territory and/or apotropaic. The depiction of the phallus itself was not necessary as the position of the arms and hands, directed towards the area where the phallus anatomically is located, was sufficient to transmit this signal.46 This again underlines that arms and hands are the most important body parts to perform gestures, and especially such lexical gestures. The fourth group of gestures is characterised by the presentation of the breasts, a very common female gesture that can be observed in South-west Asian anthropomorphic representations from the PPNA to the Achaemenid period in Babylonia47 and which was observed in a range of different cultures, regions and periods all over the world. Its meaning ranges from aggression and insult

42 43 44 45 46

47

Strehle 1954. Cf. Müller-Neuhof 2007, 37. Armit – Grant 2007. See the contribution of Trevor Watkins this volume. Interestingly, on both of the T-shaped pillars in structure D (P 16 and 31), the area where the primary male sexual characteristics are located is shrouded by a loincloth. While the phallus is shrouded, the gesture simultaneously emphasises the existence of it and its semiotic function. Müller-Neuhof 2007, 41.

144

Bernd Müller-Neuhof

via apotropaic to sexual-erotic and appeasement functions. By reviewing these different interpretations, it becomes clear that the sexual-erotic interpretation seems to be a modern construct, for which no evidence could be found in historical periods (e.g. in written sources) or in ethnographical records. Additionally, it is unlikely that the wish for fertility was expressed with these gestures in the Neolithic anthropomorphic representations. In my opinion, a lack of fertility was not a problem in the Neolithic.48 It seems that population control measurements had been applied, rather than measures to increase fertility and the birth rate.49 More importantly, however, was the problem of complicated pregnancies, with lethal consequences for mothers and foetuses, and a high infant mortality rate, especially of neonates.50 Therefore, the apotropaic and appeasement function of such a gesture seems to be a more reasonable explanation. This apotropaic function was directed towards illness and demons that could jeopardise the health and life of mothers and newborns, and therefore the entire community. The appeasement function was meant to mitigate the mighty supernatural forces and ensure a healthy and successful pregnancy. The fifth group of gestures contains pubic area presentations. Again, this is a female gesture that finds its parallels in different cultures, regions and periods. The range of possible interpretations for this gesture resembles the range of interpretations for the breast presentation gesture; from mockery and apotropaic functions, to sexual-erotic functions, such as alluring, sexual receptivity and invitation to sexual intercourse, and finally birth positions. Due to the fact that just two of these gestures are known from the Neolithic periods, it is difficult to decide on a plausible interpretation. Again, I would tend to argue against the sexual-erotic interpretations since this is entirely based on textual sources,51 which do not describe the gesture and position itself. Instead, an apotropaic function but in a more aggressive manner than the breast presentation and perhaps even a territory demarcation function, as such serving as a female counterpart to the male phallus presentation gesture, might be assumed.

Conclusion This short and very preliminary study of the meaning of gestures in the South-west Asian Neolithic anthropomorphic representations already shows that Neolithic figurative art is characterised by specific sets of gestures that frequently appear in the archaeological record and which partly show a longue durée from the Neolithic to much later periods of South-west Asian cultural history. Additionally, it became clear that the manner in which gestures were depicted followed a clear intention that consequently gives an insight into the possible functions of the different anthropomorphic representations. The numerous multi-disciplinary interpretations for the various gestures from different periods, cultures and regions all over the world can be condensed into interpretations referring to territory demarcation functions, apotropaic functions against evil, illness and malevolent supernatural beings, or even appeasing functions probably also directed towards such supernatural beings. Especially the interpretation referring to an apotropaic function of several of these gestures corresponds well with the apotropaic significance of the semiotic repertoire, which is commonly displayed on artefacts such as small stone tablets and shaft straighteners with incised symbols from PPN sites such as Tell Qaramel and Göbekli Tepe.52 An important issue in the discussion of the meaning of Neolithic gestures in anthropomorphic representations, which has to be emphasised again, is the posture of the representations. It is important to note that the predominance of standing postures among the PPN figurines was

48 49 50 51 52

Regarding the high reproduction rate see Bar-Yosef 2001, 18; Henry 2002, 17. See Angel 1972, 98; Hayden 1972. See Miller 2002, 231–232. See Keel – Schroer 2004. See Morenz 2009, 119–120.

Signals from the Past

145

replaced by a predominance of seated postures in the LN. The female figurines in particular that were depicted in a seated posture have been regarded as being within the context of human and agricultural fertility and interpreted as being in birthing positions.53 An alternative, interesting interpretation for the increase in seated postures in LN anthropomorphic art has been presented by Miller, who does not associate this position with fertility and birth but rather with sedentism and, in this context, land ownership.54 With reference to the Yarmoukian figurines – which according to Miller were stationary and fixed, and seated in the home of the family in its village – she argues that the seated positions should be interpreted as positions of power and authority, drawing an analogy to the depiction of high ranking figures (gods, kings, officials) in later Mesopotamian and Egyptian art.55 This is a very convincing point, which again refers to the function of Neolithic anthropomorphic representations. From the LPPNA onwards at the latest, the emergence of a strict territoriality becomes visible, e.g. by investment in infrastructure, which was essential for the survival of the now sedentary way of living.56 In addition, a formation of large groups that were not closely related to each other can be observed, which could, consequently, cause internal and external conflicts.57 This emerging strict territorial behaviour implied a strict territorial demarcation and, in some cases, also defence. Such a territorial claim was not only addressed to other human beings but probably also to supernatural beings,58 which could have tried to invade this territory and endanger the society, whose survivability depended on an intact territory. The intention of this contribution has not been to present a thoroughly developed model that explains the various gestures and therefore also the functions of the Neolithic anthropomorphic representations. Rather, it is intended to spark interest in a hitherto almost neglected topic in the research on Neolithic figurines. In my opinion, the future analyses of gestures in connection with postures and appearances will provide us with new information on the intended semiotic character of these figurines, and therefore also their function. However, this can only be realised when we look for further multi-disciplinary explanations for specific gestures, more detailed information about the find context and probable original places of the installation of these figurines. Additionally, the discovery of more anthropomorphic representations dating to the South-west Asian Neolithic, showing gestures, would be a large contribution to future research. Acknowledgements: My thanks go to the team of the Göbekli Tepe Project for providing me with information on recent discoveries at the site concerning anthropomorphic representations, to Jens Notroff for his critiques on a preliminary version of the text and to Cecilie Lelek Tvetmarken for taking up the burden of proofreading.

References Abay 2003 E. Abay, The Neolithic figurines from Ulucak Höyük. Reconsideration of the figurine issue by contextual evidence, Neo-Lithics 2/03, 2003, 16–22. Akkermans 1989 P. M. M. G. Akkermans, The other small finds of Tell Sabi Abyad, in: P. M. M. G. Akkermans (ed.), Excavations at Tell Sabi Abyad. Prehistoric Investigations in the Balikh Valley, Northern Syria (Oxford 1989) 285–294. Akkermans – Verhoeven 1995 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – M. Verhoeven, An image of complexity. The burnt village at Late Neolithic Sabi Abyad, Syria, American Journal of Archaeology 99, 2005, 5–32.

53 54 55 56 57 58

See Miller 2002, 228 with further references. Miller 2002, 228. Miller 2002, 229. Müller-Neuhof forthcoming Müller-Neuhof forthcoming. Watkins this volume.

146

Bernd Müller-Neuhof

Aldhouse-Green 2004 M. Aldhouse-Green, An Archaeology of Images. Iconology and Cosmology in Iron Age and Roman Europe (London – New York 2004). Angel 1972 J. L. Angel, Ecology and population in the Eastern Mediterranean, World Archaeology 4, 1972, 88–105. Armit – Grant 2007 I. Armit – P. Grant, Gesture politics and the art of ambiguity. The Iron Age statue from Hirschlanden, Antiquity 82, 2007, 409–422. Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007 Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe (ed.), Vor 12.000 Jahren in Anatolien. Die ältesten Monumente der Menschheit (Stuttgart 2007). Bailey 2005 D. W. Bailey, Prehistoric Figurines (London – New York 2005). Bar-Yosef 2001 O. Bar-Yosef, From sedentary foragers to village hierarchies. The emergence of social institutions, in: W. G. Runciman (ed.), The Origins of Human Social Institutions (Oxford – New York 2001) 1–38. Basmachi 1975/76 F. Basmachi, Treasures of the Iraq Museum (Baghdad 1975/76). Becker et al. 2012 N. Becker – O. Dietrich – T. Götzelt – Ç. Köksal-Schmidt – J. Notroff – K. Schmidt, Materialien zur Deutung der zentralen Pfeilerpaare des Göbekli Tepe und weiterer Orte des obermesopotamischen Frühneolithikums, Zeitschrift für Orientarchäologie 5, 2012, 14–43. Bernbeck – Pollock 2003 R. Bernbeck – S. Pollock, The biography of an early Halaf village. Fıstıklı Höyük 1999–2000, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 53, 2003, 9–77. Betts 1998 A. Betts, 7. Dhuweila: rock carvings, in: A. V. G. Betts (ed.), The Harra and the Hamad, Vol. 1 (Sheffield 1998) 143–158. Böhm 1990 S. Böhm, Die “Nackte Göttin”. Zur Ikonographie und Deutung unbekleideter weiblicher Figuren in der frühgriechischen Kunst (Mainz 1990). Breniquet 1992 C. Breniquet, Rapport sur deux campagnes des fouilles à Tell es-Sawwan, 1988–1989, Mesopotamia 27, 1992, 5–30. Campbell 2006 S. Campbell, Domuztepe 2006, Anatolian Archaeology 12, 2006, 17–18. Cauvin 1979 J. Cauvin, Les fouilles de Mureybet (1971–1974) et leur signification pour les origines de la sédentarisation au ProcheOrient, Annual of the American School of Oriental Research 44, 1979, 19–48. Çelik 2005 B. Çelik, A new statue of the early Pre-Pottery Neolithic period from Gaziantep, Southeastern Turkey, Neo-Lithics 1/05, 2005, 28–29. Clare et al. 2015 L. Clare – O. Dietrich – J. Notroff, Göbekli Tepe. Die Arbeiten der Jahre 2014–2015. E-Forschungsberichte des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 2015, Faszikel 3, 2015, 149–151. Czichon 1992 R. M. Czichon, Die Gestaltungsprinzipien der neuassyrischen Flachbildkunst und ihre Entwicklung vom 9. zum 7. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Münchner Vorderasiatische Studien XIII (Munich 1992).

Signals from the Past

147

Dietrich et al. 2014 O. Dietrich – Ç. Köksal-Schmidt – C. Kürkçüoglu – J. Notroff – K. Schmidt, Göbekli Tepe. Preliminary report on the 2012 and 2013 excavation season, Neo-Lithics 1/14, 2014, 11–17. Duerr 1993 H. P. Duerr, Der Mythos vom Zivilisationsprozess. Band 3: Obszönität und Gewalt (Frankfurt 1993). Duru 1994a R. Duru, Kuruçay Höyük I. 1979–1988 kazılarının sonuçları neolitik ve erken kalkolitik çağ yerleşmeleri (Ankara 1994). Duru 1994b R. Duru, Höyücek kazıları 1990 / Höyücek excavations 1990, Belleten 58, 1994, 725–750. Duru 1995 R. Duru, Höyücek kazıları 1991/1992 / Höyücek excavations 1991/1992, Belleten 59, 1995, 447–490. Edgü 1983 F. Edgü (ed.), The Anatolian Civilisations. XVIIIth European Art Exhibition Istanbul 22 May – 30 October 1983 (Istanbul 1983). Efron 1941 D. Efron, Gesture and Environment. A Tentative Study of Some of the Spatio-temporal and Linguistic Aspects of the Gestural Behavior of Eastern Jews and Southern Italians in New York City, Living Under Similar as Well as Different Environmental Conditions (New York 1941). Eibl-Eibesfeldt – Sütterlin 1992 I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt – C. Sütterlin, Im Banne der Angst. Zur Natur- und Kunstgeschichte menschlicher Abwehrsymbolik (Munich 1992). Eibl-Eibesfeldt et al. 1989 I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt – W. Schiefenhövel – V. Heeschen, Kommunikation bei den Eipo. Eine humanethologische Bestandsaufnahme, Mensch, Kultur und Umwelt im zentralen Bergland von West-Neuguinea 19 (Berlin 1989). Ekman – Friesen 1969 P. Ekman – W. V. Friesen, The repertoire of nonverbal behavior. Categories, origins, usage, and coding, Semiotica 1, 1969, 49–98. Fehling 1974 D. Fehling, Ethologische Überlegungen auf dem Gebiet der Altertumskunde, Zetemata 61 (Munich 1974). Firth 1970 R. Firth, Postures and gestures of respect, in: J. Pouillon – P. Maranda (eds.), Echanges et Communications. Mélanges offerts à Claude Lévi-Strauss à l’occasion de son 60ème anniversaire, Studies in General Anthropology 1 (The Hague 1970). Garfinkel 1993 Y. Garfinkel, The Yarmukian culture in Israel, Paléorient 19, 1993, 115–134. Garfinkel 2003 Y. Garfinkel, Dancing at the Dawn of Agriculture (Austin 2003). Garfinkel et al. 2002 Y. Garfinkel – N. Kora – M. A. Miller, Art from Sh’ar Hagolan. Visions of a Neolithic village in the Levant, in: Y. Garfinkel – M. A. Miller (eds.), Sha’ar Hagolan 1. Neolithic Art in Context (Oxford 2002) 188–208. Gimbutas 1982 M. Gimbutas, The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe, 6500–3500 BC. Myths and Cult Images (London 1982). Haaland – Haaland 1996 G. Haaland – R. Haaland, Levels of meaning in symbolic objects, Cambridge Archaeology Journal 6, 1996, 293–300.

148

Bernd Müller-Neuhof

Hamilton 1996 N. Hamilton, Figurines, clay balls, small finds and burials, in: I. Hodder (ed.), On the Surface. Çatalhöyük 1993–95 (Cambridge – London 1996) 215–263. Hansen 2007 S. Hansen, Bilder vom Menschen der Steinzeit (Mainz 2007). Hauptmann 1993 H. Hauptmann, Ein Kultgebäude aus Nevalı Çori, in: M. Frangipane – H. Hauptmann – P. Matthiae – M. Mellink (eds.), Between the Rivers and over the Mountains. Archaeologica Anatolica et Mesopotamica Alba Palmieri Dedicata (Rom 1993) 37–69. Hauptmann 2000 H. Hauptmann, Ein frühneolithisches Kultbild aus Kommagene, in: J. Wagner (ed.), Gottkönige am Euphrat – Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in Kommagene (Mainz 2000) 5–9. Hauptmann 2003 H. Hauptmann, Eine frühneolithische Kultfigur aus Urfa, in: M. Özdoğan – H. Hauptmann – N. Başgelen (eds.), Köyden Kente / From Village to Cities. Studies presented to Ufuk Esin (Istanbul 2003) 623–636. Hayden 1972 B. Hayden, Population control among hunter-gatherers, World Archaeology 4, 1972, 205–221. Henry 2002 D. O. Henry, Models of agricultural origins and proxy measures of prehistoric demographics, in: R. T. J. Cappers – S. Bottema (eds.), The Dawn of Farming in the Near East (Berlin 2002) 15–25. Kamada – Ohtsu 1995 H. Kamada – T. Ohtsu, Fourth report on the excavations at Tell Songor A, Al-Rafidan 16, 1995, 275–366. Kamlah 1993 J. Kamlah, Tell-el-Fuhhar (Zarqu?) und die pflanzenhaltende Göttin in Palästina. Ergebnisse des Zerqon-Surveys 1989, Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästinavereins 109, 1993, 102–127. Keel – Schroer 2004 O. Keel – S. Schroer, Eva – Mutter alles Lebendigen. Frauen- und Göttinnenbilder aus dem Alten Orient (Freiburg 2004). Keel – Uehlinger 1998 O. Keel – C. Uehlinger, Göttinnen, Götter und Gottessymbole. Neue Erkenntnisse zur Religionsgeschichte Kanaans und Israels aufgrund bislang unerschlossener ikonographischer Quellen (Freiburg 1998). Kyrieleis 1988 H. Kyrieleis, Ein altorientalischer Pferdeschmuck aus dem Heraion von Samos, Athenische Mitteilungen 103, 1988, 37–61. Langdon 1919 S. Langdon, Gesture in Sumerian and Babylonian prayer, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 51, 1919, 531–556. Makarewicz – Austin 2006 C. Makarewicz – A. E. Austin, Late PPNB occupation at el-Hemmeh: results from the third excavation season 2006, Neo-Lithics 2/06, 2006, 19–23. Mallowan – Cruikshank Rose 1935 M. E. L. Mallowan – J. Cruikshank Rose, Excavations at Tell Arpachiyah 1933, Iraq 2, 1935, 1–178. Mellaart 1961 J. Mellaart, Excavations at Hacılar. Fourth preliminary report, 1960, Anatolian Studies 11, 1961, 39–75. Mellaart 1963 J. Mellaart, Excavations at Çatal Höyük, 1962. Second preliminary report, Anatolian Studies 13, 1963, 43–103.

Signals from the Past

149

Mellaart 1967 J. Mellaart, Çatal Höyük. A Neolithic Town in Anatolia (London 1967). Mellaart 1970 J. Mellaart, Excavations at Hacılar (Edinburgh 1970). Merpert et al. 1981 N. I. Merpert – R. M. Munchaev – N. O. Bader, Investigations of the Soviet expedition in Northern Iraq 1976, Sumer 37, 1981, 22–54. Miller 2002 M. A. Miller, The function of anthropomorphic figurines. A preliminary analysis, in: Y. Garfinkel – M. A. Miller (eds.), Sha’ar Hagolan 1. Neolithic Art in Context (Oxford 2002) 221–233. Morenz 2009 L. Morenz, 12.000 Jahre alte Texte? Zeichen zur kulturellen Bewältigung von Furcht, Zeitschrift für Semiotik 31, 2009, 115–132. Mrass 2005 M. Mrass, Gesten und Gebärden. Begriffsbestimmung und -verwendung in Hinblick auf kunsthistorische Untersuchungen (Regensburg 2005). Müller-Neuhof 2006 B. Müller-Neuhof, A EPPNB human sculpture from Tell Sheikh Hassan, Neo-Lithics 2/06, 2006, 32–38. Müller-Neuhof 2007 B. Müller-Neuhof, Anthropomorphic statuettes from Tell Fakhariyah: arguments for their possible PPNB origin, NeoLithics 1/07, 2007, 37–43. Müller-Neuhof forthcoming B. Müller-Neuhof, Conflict as a constituent of the Neolithisation (in SW-Asia), in: S. Hansen – F. Klimscha – J. Renn (eds.), Prehistoric Networks in the Longue Durée. Palaeolithic Innovations enabling the Neolithic Revolution (forthcoming). Munchaev et al. 1984 R. M. Munchaev – N. I. Merpert – N. O. Bader, Archaeological studies in the Sinjar Valley 1980, Sumer 43, 1984, 32–62. Neumann 1965 G. Neumann, Gesten und Gebärden in der griechischen Kunst (Berlin 1965). Oppenheim 1943 M. Freiherr von Oppenheim, Tell Halaf. Erster Band: Die prähistorischen Funde. Bearbeitet von Hubert Schmidt (Berlin 1943). Orrelle 2014 E. Orrelle, Material Images of Humans from the Natufian to Pottery Neolithic Periods in the Levant, BAR International Series 2595 (Oxford 2014). Peschlow-Bindokat 2003 A. Peschlow-Bindokat, Frühe Menschenbilder. Die prähistorischen Felsmalereien des Latmos Gebirges (Westtürkei) (Mainz 2003). Schmandt-Besserat 1998a D. Schmandt-Besserat, ‘Ain Ghazal „monumental“ figures, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 310, 1998, 1–17. Schmandt-Besserat 1998b D. Schmandt-Besserat, A stone metaphor of creation, Near Eastern Archaeology 61, 1998, 109–117. Schmidt 1999 K. Schmidt, Frühe Tier- und Menschenbilder vom Göbeklitepe – Kampagnen 1995–98. Ein kommentierter Katalog der Großplastik und der Reliefs, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 49, 1999, 5–21.

150

Bernd Müller-Neuhof

Schmidt 2000 K. Schmidt, „Zuerst kam der Tempel, dann die Stadt“. Vorläufiger Bericht zu den Grabungen am Göbekli Tepe und am Gürcütepe 1995–1999, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 50, 2000, 5–41. Schmidt 2006 K. Schmidt, Sie bauten die ersten Tempel. Das rätselhafte Heiligtum der Steinzeitjäger (Munich 2006). Schmidt 2010 K. Schmidt, Göbekli Tepe – The stone age sanctuaries. New results of ongoing excavations with a special focus on sculptures and high reliefs, Documenta Praehistorica 37, 2010, 239–256. Silistreli 1989 U. Silistreli, Köşk Höyük figürin ve heykelcikleri, Belleten 53, 1989, 497–504. Stordeur 2003 D. Stordeur, Tell Aswad. Résultats préliminaires des campagnes 2001 et 2002. Neo-Lithics 1/03, 2003, 7–15. Strehle 1954 H. Strehle, Mienen, Gesten und Gebärden. Analyse des Gebarens (Munich – Basel 1954). Tobler 1950 A. J. Tobler, Excavations at Tepe Gawra. Volume II. Levels IX–XX (Philadelphia 1950). Ucko 1970 P. J. Ucko, Anthropomorphic Figurines of Predynastic Egypt and Neolithic Crete with Comparative Material from the Prehistoric Near East and Mainland Greece, Anthropological Institute Occasional Papers 24 (London 1970). Voigt 2007 M. M. Voigt, The splendour of women. Late Neolithic images from Central Anatolia, in: C. Renfrew – C. I. Morley (eds.), Image and Imagination. A Global Prehistory of Figurative Representation (Cambridge 2007) 151–169. Von Wickede 1990 A. von Wickede, Prähistorische Stempelglyptik in Vorderasien (Munich 1990). Winter 1983 U. Winter, Frau und Göttin (Fribourg 1983).

Anthropomorphic Imagery at Göbekli Tepe

151

Anthropomorphic Imagery at Göbekli Tepe Oliver Dietrich 1 – Laura Dietrich 2 – Jens Notroff 3 Abstract: The present contribution reviews the corpus of anthropomorphic imagery from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic site of Göbekli Tepe in south-eastern Turkey. The intentional fragmentation and selective deposition of fragments, especially heads, are highlighted as social practices connected to this find group. Keywords: sculpture; anthropomorphic; Göbekli Tepe; Pre-Pottery Neolithic; T-shaped pillars

In 1965, during an excursion from Friedrich Karl Dörner’s excavations at Arsameia, an enigmatic, approximately 80cm-high statue was acquired from a farmer.4 It has a long head which towers over a highly abstract, curved body. If the arms and hands which were holding the head of another figure on the narrow front side of the sculpture had not been clearly depicted, its anthropomorphic character would have been hard to guess. At the time of discovery, the statue remained a mystery and perhaps would have been disregarded altogether as some kind of oddity had not Harald Hauptmann’s excavations at Nevalı Çori (1983–1991) and Klaus Schmidt’s work at Göbekli Tepe (1995–2014) proven that this ‘Kilisik-statue’ was, in fact, a prime example of one of the ways in which early Neolithic people represented the human body. The anecdote shows the enormous influx of knowledge our understanding of early Neolithic imagery has undergone in the last few decades.5 We currently possess a fairly large and still growing corpus of three-dimensional human and animal images from that period that mostly awaits thorough study. The site that has produced the most extensive record of imagery so far is Göbekli Tepe. Its late excavator, Klaus Schmidt, has published a general review of the site which includes many comments on the imagery6 as well as several papers on the sculptures7. He also initiated a catalogue8. This current contribution sets out to give an overview of the anthropomorphic sculpture of Göbekli Tepe and its current interpretation which has been roughly outlined in a previous German language contribution.9

Göbekli Tepe Göbekli Tepe is situated about 15km north-east of Şanlıurfa on the highest point of the Germuş mountain range. With a height of 15m, the mound measures 300m in diameter. The site is best known for its monumental circular buildings, formed of often richly decorated T-shaped limestone pillars interconnected by walls with bench-like structures along the inner mantles. The pillars in the circular walls stand up to 4m high and are always arranged around two even bigger central pillars. Five monumental buildings have been excavated in the lower lying areas of the tell so far (Buildings A–D in the southeastern depression, Building H in the northwestern depression), several more have been detected by georadar.10 During excavations,

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

German Archaeological Institute, Orient Department, Germany; [email protected]. German Archaeological Institute, Orient Department, Germany; [email protected]. German Archaeological Institute, Orient Department, Germany; [email protected]. Hauptmann 2000. For a summary: Hansen 2007; Hansen 2014. Schmidt 2006. Hauptmann – Schmidt 2007; Schmidt 2008a; Schmidt 2009; Schmidt 2010. Schmidt 1998a; Schmidt 1999. Becker et al. 2012. Cf. Schmidt 2008b; Schmidt 2006 for an overview.

152

Oliver Dietrich – Laura Dietrich – Jens Notroff

Fig. 1   The main excavation area at Göbekli Tepe, Building D and one of its central pillars (photos: N. Becker, E. Kücük; 3D-scan of P 18 by HS Karlsruhe, © DAI)

these buildings had been summarised as an older layer (III) of site occupation and dated to the PPNA (Fig. 1).11

11

Dietrich et al. 2013 with bibliography.

Anthropomorphic Imagery at Göbekli Tepe

153

A younger layer is superimposed on this monumental architecture in some parts of the mound, but mainly concentrates in the higher-lying areas of the tell. 12 This layer (Layer II) was dated to the early and middle PPNB during excavations and is characterised by smaller rectangular buildings of about 3 × 4m (Fig. 2). Some of them may be understood as smaller versions of the older monumental buildings as they share a common element – the T-shaped pillars. However, their number and height are considerably reduced: often only two small central pillars of up to 2m are present. There are also rooms which are without any pillars. Layer I is the topsoil. The clearly multi-phased monumental buildings were very long-lived and possibly reached the younger PPNB and thus Layer II-times.13 This corresponds well with the fact that, at least in the area in the south-eastern depression where excavations have concentrated so far, the older buildings were spared deliberately from younger construction activities. The area occupied by the monumental buildings was encircled by a terrace wall. The younger buildings show long and complicated biographies themselves, including the extensive use of spolia.14

Intentionally buried buildings: the limits and possibilities of inference The monumental buildings known to date were at least partially intentionally backfilled.15 The refilling/burial of special purpose buildings has been observed in several sites and seems to have been an integral part of the biography of some of these buildings.16 At Göbekli Tepe, the filling consists of limestone rubble supposedly from the quarry areas on the adjacent plateaus, large quantities of animal bones, flint debitage as well as artefacts and tools. The backfilling is a limiting factor for our understanding of the function of the monumental buildings, as very few in situ deposits connected to their time of use remain. Backfilling, however, was a structured process that included the deposition of artefacts and sculptures, often next to the pillars. One must also consider the buildings themselves, their layout and the richly decorated pillars as starting points.

Human imagery at Göbekli Tepe There are several categories of human imagery at Göbekli Tepe.17 The most prominent of these are the pillars. The T-shape is clearly an abstract depiction of the human body seen from the side. Evidence for this interpretation are the low relief depictions of arms, hands and items of clothing on some of the central pillars. There is a clear hierarchy of pillars inside the monumental buildings. The central pillars are up to 5.5m high. The surrounding pillars are smaller but more richly decorated with animal reliefs. They always ‘look’ towards the central pair, and the benches further amplify the impression of a gathering of some sort. All pillars share this abstract T-form. This abstraction is not due to limited artistic skills; it is a deliberate choice that has a meaning, as is demonstrated by the other important group of anthropomorphic depictions: naturalistic sculptures. A total of 149 sculptures have been found to date at Göbekli Tepe. Of these, 86 depict animals, 38 humans, four anthropomorphic masks,18 three phalli, nine are human-animal composite sculptures and a further nine are indeterminable.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Schmidt 2006; Kurapkat 2015, 18–22. Pöllath et al. 2018, 31–32, with bibliography. Kurapkat 2015, 19, 29–47. Pöllath et al. 2018, 31–32. Özdoğan – Özdoğan 1998. Schmidt 2010. Dietrich et al. 2018.

Fig. 2   Layer II features on Göbekli Tepe’s south-eastern hilltop with findspot of sculpture A66 (photos: K. Schmidt, D. Johannes; drawings/plans project team, © DAI)

154 Oliver Dietrich – Laura Dietrich – Jens Notroff

Anthropomorphic Imagery at Göbekli Tepe

155

Fig. 3   Limestone heads from Göbekli Tepe: 1. A05; 2. A32; 3. A33; 4. A41; 5. A44; 6. A47; 7. A50; 8. A69; 9. A84; 10. A87; 11. A93; 12. A96; 13. A98; 14. D11. For A75 and A76 see Fig. 4 (photos: N. Becker, D. Johannes, K. Schmidt, © DAI)

Intentional fragmentation and the importance of heads Most anthropomorphic sculpture is fragmented. Of the 38 human-shaped depictions, only seven can be securely regarded as complete, fitting fragments were found in only one case (List 1, A97). The fragments preserved in the highest numbers are heads (Fig. 3) rather than (often larger) torsos. Some of them may have belonged to large sculptures in the shape of the ‘Urfa Man’: the oldest life-sized human stone sculpture currently known discovered during construction work at Urfa-Yeni Mahalle.19 The large number of broken off heads and the regulated fractures speak in favour of intentional fragmentation. Fragmentation of sculpture or figurines has been pointed out as a regular social practice throughout the Old World Neolithic.20 Although the reasons may differ through space and time, it seems that the habit of intentionally breaking images formed part of the Neolithic package, the bundle of innovations that travelled from the Near East to Europe. Due to its early date, Göbekli Tepe could have been one of the places where the ideas behind that special treatment of material culture first evolved. However, as most sculptures were

19

20

Schmidt 2010, 247–249. It has to be noted that sculptures of different types (cf. List 1, A02; Fig. 6.1) feature similar heads. However, they are smaller. Hansen 2007, 351–354.

156

Oliver Dietrich – Laura Dietrich – Jens Notroff

Fig. 4   Imagery related to human heads/headless humans from Building D (photos: N. Becker, E. Kücük, K. Schmidt, © DAI)

found on the surface of the tell, more proof is needed to exclude a severe modern distortion of the archaeological record. Although some finds already pointed in that direction, final proof came only in 2009,21 when two limestone heads were discovered in situ near Building D’s western central Pillar 31 (Fig. 4). A check of the find locations of other sculptures – zoomorphic as well as anthropomorphic – revealed that the in situ pieces were generally not randomly discarded.22 They were deposited carefully in the building fillings, often next to pillars. However, the zoomorphic imagery shows no

21 22

Schmidt 2010, 249. Becker et al. 2012, figs. 19, 21.

Anthropomorphic Imagery at Göbekli Tepe

157

Fig. 5   Human-animal composite sculptures from Göbekli Tepe: 1. A10; 2. A82; 3. A85; 4. A88; 5. D34; 6. A77 (photos: N. Becker, D. Johannes, © DAI)

evidence for the intentional breaking off of heads. So, while deposition patterns for zoomorphic and anthropomorphic images are similar, pre-deposition treatment is not. A special role for separated human heads is also visible in Göbekli Tepe’s reliefs. Immediately behind the eastern central pillar of Building D, a fragmentary depiction on a stone slab included a human head among several animals (a vulture and a hyena can be clearly identified). Another example is found on Pillar 43, also in Building D (Fig. 4). There, a headless ithyphallic body is depicted among birds, snakes and a large scorpion. The interaction of animals with human heads is even clearer from the composite sculptures discovered at the site (List 2; Fig. 5). They show birds as well as quadrupeds either sitting on top of human heads or apparently carrying them away.

Neolithic death ritual carved in stone? There is one sculpture that could illustrate an aspect of what was occurring at Göbekli Tepe. It shows a kneeling individual holding what appears to be a human head in his/her hands (List 1, A51; Fig. 6.2). Another severely fragmented sculpture could be a repetition of the same motif (List 1, A53; Fig. 6.3). It is not clear whether this is an offering scene/a depiction of depositing human heads, but the sculptures are certainly thought-provoking, even more so, as tentative evidence for a ‘skull cult’ has been published from Göbekli Tepe.23 The meaningful deposition of material culture and a hierarchy of symbols is not only discernible in the monumental buildings. Although the pillars in the rectangular buildings are smaller and the decorations far less frequent, what remains important is anthropomorphic characterisation through the arms-/hands-motif on the pillars and the deposition of sculpture. For example, a large room in the south-western hilltop area was subdivided at some point by two newer walls. In one of the resulting two small chambers, a large pillar fragment was discovered. In a face-down

23

Gresky et al. 2017.

158

Oliver Dietrich – Laura Dietrich – Jens Notroff

Fig. 6   Human imagery from Göbekli Tepe: 1. A02; 2. A51; 3. A53; 4. A97; 5. A07 (photos: N. Becker, T. Goldschmidt, D. Johannes, K. Schmidt, © DAI)

position next to it was an anthropomorphic sculpture (List 1, A66; Fig. 2). In another room with two pillars, two anthropomorphic depictions were found in the filling. One (List 1, D10) is a headless small figurine, the other is a limestone head (List 1, A05; Fig. 5.1). It seems that there was a constant tradition at Göbekli Tepe of fragmenting and depositing anthropomorphic sculpture. The abstract pillars, on the other hand, were not fragmented. They were the loci around which the deposition of sculptures took place. The point has already been made that this practice is integrated into an iconography related to Neolithic death rites.24 The removal of skulls is well attested in the PPN. A prime example is the skull building from Çayönü, a site at which the emphasis is clearly on burials, while only a few anthropomorphic depictions exist.25 At Nevalı Çori, burials with separated skulls (and in one case a burial with a large flint dagger under the skull26) were discovered alongside an imagery that is very similar to that at Göbekli Tepe, including the animal-on-head-motif and separate human heads.27 For Jerf el-Ahmar, an interesting dichotomy has been highlighted: skeletons in the special buildings are missing their heads, while only the head is depicted in sculpture.28 The

24 25 26 27 28

Schmidt 1999, 7–8. Özdoğan 2011. Schmidt 1998c, 682–683, fig. 1; Notroff et al. 2016. Hauptmann – Schmidt 2007. Stordeur – Abbès 2002.

Anthropomorphic Imagery at Göbekli Tepe

159

Fig. 7   Human imagery from Göbekli Tepe: 1. A24; 2. A39; 3. A40; 4. A91; 5. A94 (photos: N. Becker, D. Johannes, K. Schmidt, © DAI)

list of further examples is long and could, of course, include the plastering of human heads in many southern Levantine sites as well as at Köşk Höyük and Çatalhöyük.29 At Çatalhöyük, many elements observable at Göbekli Tepe were still in place within a much later context. This included the iconography of birds carrying away human heads, the special treatment of heads in burials and figurines with intentionally broken off heads or with heads which were designed from the start to be taken off.30 At Göbekli Tepe, burial rites seem to have been applied to anthropomorphic sculpture, but exclusively to the smaller, naturalistic depictions. Only naturalistic anthropomorphic sculpture was intentionally fragmented. During the backfilling of the stone circles, a selection of fragments, mostly heads, was placed inside the filling, most often near the central pillars. The abstract, but nevertheless also clearly anthropomorphic pillars of the monumental buildings on the other hand were not intentionally fragmented. It seems that the abstract pillar-sculptures represent a different sphere compared to the naturalistic ones. The connection to death rites could indicate that the pillars belonged to that sphere. Whether the naturalistic sculptures are guardians31 for the pillars, depictions of ancestors (of a different category than the pillars?), or something entirely different and whether or not the deposition of heads visualised the fact that the stone figures were perceived as animate and were, thus, treated like humans upon their death remains a question for future studies. The present contribution has concentrated on only one aspect of the human imagery from the site. Further insights may derive from a closer examination of gesture/posture, as types are not limited to those similar to the ‘Urfa Man’. Schmidt has, for example, highlighted the similarities in gesture of pieces from Göbekli Tepe (such as the piece on List 1, A66; Fig. 2) with

29 30 31

Bonogofsky 2005. Hodder 2006. Schmidt 2010, 246–249.

160

Oliver Dietrich – Laura Dietrich – Jens Notroff

Neo-Sumerian ‘Beterstatuen’.32 Whether or not the gestures had a similar meaning must remain an open question for now. Another interesting group of sculptures is one where the arms were bent unnaturally behind their backs (List 1, A24, A39, A40; Fig. 7.1–3) which could imply the depiction of persons whose arms were tied. While the mediocre preservation of the sculptures renders a secure interpretation difficult, the motif is also repeated on a fragmentary relief, on which an apparently kneeling person is depicted in the same way (Fig. 8).33 Within the limited space of this contribution, we wanted to show that all imagery from Göbekli Tepe is part of a complex system of signs and narratives. The ideas highlighted here are starting points that will be followed by an in-depth study of the complete iconographic evidence.

Appendix: Anthropomorphic sculpture from Göbekli Tepe The ‘A’ and ‘D’ numbers refer to the system established by Schmidt34 for cataloguing sculptures from Göbekli Tepe. The bibliography is limited to the most detailed publication of each piece. A differentiation between high-reliefs and sculptures is often not possible due to poor preservation.35 Consequently, no such differentiation is made here. If no further information is provided, the material under discussion is limestone. No attribution to a layer has been given for recent finds which are still under evaluation.

Fig. 8   Limestone relief fragment probably showing a kneeling person with arms bent behind the back, height 27cm (photo: T. Goldschmidt, © DAI).

32 33 34 35

Schmidt 2010, 249. Schmidt 1999, 18, no. C1. Schmidt 1999. Schmidt 1999, 7.

Anthropomorphic Imagery at Göbekli Tepe

161

List 1: Depictions of the human body A02. Ithyphallic man, complete, height 40.5cm (Fig. 6.1). Surface find.36 A03. Sitting figure, possibly ithyphallic, complete but badly preserved, height 32.5cm. Surface find.37 A04. Torso, height 15.8cm. Area L9-56, Locus 10, Layer II.38 A05. Head, from a larger sculpture, height 23cm (Fig. 3.1). Area L9-56, Locus 63, Layer II building. Locus 38, see also D10.39 A19. Badly preserved fragment; after Schmidt,40 perhaps the head of an animal, after more recently found analogies (e.g. A66), probably a figure with bent arms and lower part in form of a conical tap, height 38.5 cm. Surface find.41 A23. Probably human figure42 with high, conical hat, height 30.1cm. Area L9-80, Locus 30, Layer II.43 A24. Torso with bent arms (or arms on the belly?)44, height 41cm (Fig. 7.1). Area L10-51, Locus 25.2, Layer II building.45 A27. Torso with a V-shaped necklace(?), badly preserved, height 30.5cm. Area L9-76, Locus 55.2, debris layer behind the third ring of Building C.46 A32. Head, badly preserved, from a larger sculpture, height 26.7cm (Fig. 3.2). Area L9-85, Locus 43, found face-down in wall debris, stratigraphic position unclear, to the east of the ‘dromos’ leading to Building C.47 A33. Two-faced head, badly preserved, from a larger sculpture, height 31cm (Fig. 3.3). Area L967, Locus 3, cobble layer above Layer II architecture.48 A39. Person with arms bent behind back(?)49, head missing, lower part in form of a conical tap (type similar to A24, A40), height 19.6cm (Fig. 7.2). Area L9-87, Locus 66, in the upper part of the inner wall of Building C, next to Pillar 26. Unpublished. A40. Upper part of a sculpture depicting a squat person with arms bent to the back, lower part missing, height 40cm (Fig. 7.3). Area L9-79, Locus 49.1, Layer II. Unpublished. A41. Head, from a larger sculpture, possibly hair depicted, badly preserved, height 25cm (Fig. 3.4). L9-87, Locus 52, Building C, within ‘looter’s pit’. Unpublished. A44. Head, from a larger sculpture, worn, height 23.4cm (Fig. 3.5). Area L9-87, Locus 68.1, unclear debris in eastern part of Building C. Unpublished. A47. Head, from a larger sculpture, left side with nose preserved, height 15.5cm (Fig. 3.6). Surface find. Unpublished.

36 37 38 39 40 41 42

43 44 45 46 47 48 49

Schmidt 1995, 9–10, fig. 1c. Schmidt 1999, 9, pl. 1.1. Schmidt 1999, 9, pl. 4.3–5. Schmidt 1999, 9, pl. 2.1–2. Schmidt 1999, 12. Schmidt 1999, 12. K. Schmidt pointed out that there were no good analogies to definitely identify the image as anthropomorphic at the moment of discovery (Schmidt 1999, 12); meanwhile tentative evidence has appeared in the form of sculptures A40 and A66. Schmidt 1999, 12, pl. 1.2–4. Schmidt 1999. Schmidt 2000, 30. Hauptmann – Schmidt 2007, 70. Becker et al. 2012, 26-27, fig. 17b. Becker et al. 2012, 26–27, fig. 17e. The other possibility, more unlikely considering on-site analogies, would be an animal head.

162

Oliver Dietrich – Laura Dietrich – Jens Notroff

A50. Long-necked head, from a larger sculpture, heavily worn, height 46cm (Fig. 3.7). Surface find.50 A51. Kneeling person holding an object, most likely a human head, heavily worn, damaged, height 26cm (Fig. 6.2). Surface find.51 A53. Torso, judging by the posture, possibly of a kneeling person not unlike A51, height 24cm (Fig. 6.3). Surface find. Unpublished. A66. Complete sculpture of a standing person, with bent arms and hands at the belly, wearing a cap, height 66cm (Fig. 2). Area L9-17, Locus 12, found face down inside a Layer II room.52 A67. Torso, worn, limestone, height 30cm. Area L9-70, Locus 5.4, inside a Layer II room. Unpublished. A69. Head, from a larger sculpture, damaged, height 29.5cm (Fig. 3.8). Surface find in Area L987, eroded from a wall of Building C. Unpublished. A75. Head, from a larger sculpture, height 23cm (Fig. 4). Area L9-68, immediately next to Pillar 31 in Building D.53 A76. Head, from a larger sculpture, height 24cm (Fig. 4). Area L9-68, immediately next to Pillar 31 in Building D.54 A81. Torso, badly preserved, height 16cm. Area K10-54, Locus 1.2, surface layer without architecture. Unpublished. A84. Head, from a larger sculpture, height 34cm (Fig. 3.9). Area L10-41, Locus 2. Unpublished. A87. Head, from a larger sculpture, height 22cm (Fig. 3.10). Surface find. Unpublished. A91. Torso of a standing person, indication of ribs and a garment (?), height 25.6cm (Fig. 7.4). Eastern baulk of Area L9-56, Locus 161.1, Layer II?55 A93. Head, wearing a cap or depiction of hair, from a larger sculpture, damaged, height 31cm (Fig. 3.11). Area K10-36, Locus 5.1, in front of a wall, Layer II? Unpublished. A94. Sitting person (similar to A03), damaged, badly preserved, height 44cm (Fig. 7.5). Area K10-55, Locus 21.2. Unpublished. A96. Head, long-oval, from a larger sculpture, moderately preserved, height 33cm (Fig. 3.12). Area K10-55, Locus 67. Unpublished. A97. Standing person, arms on chest and belly, broken in two parts in the neck area, lower part forming a conical tap, height 60cm (Fig. 6.4). Fragments found next to each other in Area K10-23, Locus 9. Unpublished. A98. Head, slightly amorphous, from a larger sculpture, preservation mediocre, height 28cm (Fig. 3.13). Area K10-55, Locus 69. Unpublished. A100. Torso, badly preserved, height 19.5cm. Area L9-47, Locus 500, probably Layer II. Unpublished. A101. Head, badly preserved, from a larger sculpture, height 31cm. Area K10-05, Locus 83. Unpublished. D08. Miniature head with part of torso, fragment, height 7.8cm. Surface find. Unpublished.

50 51 52 53 54 55

Becker et al. 2012, 26–27, fig. 17d. Schmidt 2006, fig. 69. Becker et al. 2012, fig. 18. Becker et al. 2012, 26–27, fig. 17f. Becker et al. 2012, 26–27, fig. 17a. Dietrich et al. 2014, 15, fig. 11.

Anthropomorphic Imagery at Göbekli Tepe

163

D10. Standing person, head and feet missing, arms in front of chest, height 3.2cm. Area L9-56, Locus 38.2, Layer II building.56 D11. Head and right shoulder of person looking up, height 3.9cm (Fig. 3.14). Surface find. Unpublished. D39. Roughly worked and damaged head and torso (fragment?), height 7.0cm. Area L9-55, Locus 1.1, Layer I/II. Unpublished. List 2: Human-animal composite depictions A08. Predator ‘sitting’ on a pillar, probably holding a head, unfinished, height 120cm.57 A09. Bird on a head, badly preserved fragment, height 34cm. Surface find.58 A10. Animal on head, badly preserved fragment, height 40.4cm (Fig. 5.1). Area L9-75, Locus 8.1, Building A, next to Pillar 3.59 A20. Probably person with snakes, badly preserved fragment, height 92cm. Surface find.60 A77. So-called ‘totem pole’ figure with head of a wildcat and humanoid arms on top of two anthropomorphic depictions (the lower depicted giving birth/presenting a phallus?), at the narrow sides snakes, damaged, height 192cm (Fig. 5.6). Area L9-46, Locus 30, Layer II building.61 A82. Quadruped sitting on head, well preserved, height c. 45.5cm (Fig. 5.2). Area L9-87, immediately east of Pillar 39 in Building C, Layer III. Unpublished, stolen in 2010. A85. Seated person or bird sitting on head like A88, damaged and worn fragment, height 25cm (Fig. 5.3). Area K10-44, surface find from the northern baulk. Unpublished. A88. Bird holding head, fragment, height 50cm (Fig. 5.4). Area L9-84, Locus 4.62 D34. Sitting person with animal (felid) on the back, complete, nephrite (?), height 4.5cm (Fig. 5.5). Surface find.63 List 3: Masks A01. Large mask, complete, height 42cm. Surface find.64 D12. Miniature mask, slightly damaged, height 5.7cm. Area L9-78, Locus 4.6, high in the filling of Building D.65 D32. Miniature mask, flint cortex, height 4.7cm. Area K10-25, Locus 8.1, next to Pillar 51 (perhaps in ‘looter’s pit’) in Building H.66 D44. Miniature mask, flint cortex, height 4.5cm. Area L9-87, Locus 116.1, next to eastern central pillar of Building C.67

56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67

Schmidt 2000, 33, fig. 14b; Müller-Neuhof 2006, 34–35, fig. 4. Beile-Bohn et al. 1998, 66–67, fig. 30. Beile-Bohn et al. 1998, 67–68, fig. 31. Schmidt 1998a, 2, fig. 1. Schmidt 1998b, 25, fig. 6. Köksal-Schmidt – Schmidt 2010. Dietrich et al. 2014, 15, fig. 9. Dietrich – Schmidt 2017. Schmidt 1996, 2–3, fig. 1. Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007, 275, Nr. 29, fig. 29. Dietrich et al. 2018, 8, fig. 6. Dietrich et al. 2018, 8, fig. 7.

164

Oliver Dietrich – Laura Dietrich – Jens Notroff

List 4: Phalli A07. Phallus, broken at shaft, height 24cm (Fig. 6.5). Surface find.68 A26. Phallus (?), broken at shaft, height 54cm. Area L9-66, Locus 67, western profile through Building B, Layer III. Unpublished. A99. Phallus, broken at shaft, height 83cm. Area K10-55, Locus 32. Unpublished. Acknowledgements: We are grateful to the General Directorate for Cultural Heritage and Museums of the Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism for permission to excavate this important site in cooperation with the Museum of Şanlıurfa. Work at Göbekli Tepe is funded by the German Archaeological Institute (DAI) and the German Research Foundation (DFG). Thanks are due to Samantha Reiter for language corrections.

References Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007 Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe (ed.), Vor 12.000 Jahren in Anatolien. Die ältesten Monumente der Menschheit. Badische Landesausstellung 20. Januar – 17. Juni 2007 im Badischen Landesmuseum Karlsruhe (Stuttgart 2007). Becker et al. 2012 N. Becker – O. Dietrich – T. Götzelt – Ç. Köksal-Schmidt – J. Notroff – K. Schmidt, Materialien zur Deutung der zentralen Pfeilerpaare des Göbekli Tepe und weiterer Orte des obermesopotamischen Frühneolithikums, Zeitschrift für Orient-Archäologie 5, 2012, 14–43. Beile-Bohn et al. 1998 M. Beile-Bohn – C. Gerber – M. Morsch – K. Schmidt, Neolithische Forschungen in Obermesopotamien. Gürcütepe und Göbekli Tepe, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 48, 1998, 5–78. Bonogofsky 2005 M. Bonogofsky, A bioarchaeological study of plastered skulls from Anatolia. New discoveries and interpretations, International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 15, 2005, 124–135. Dietrich – Schmidt 2017 O. Dietrich – K. Schmidt, A short note on a new figurine type from Göbekli Tepe, Neo-Lithics 1/17, 2017, 43–46. Dietrich et al. 2013 O. Dietrich – Ç. Köksal-Schmidt – J. Notroff – K. Schmidt, Establishing a radiocarbon sequence for Göbekli Tepe. State of research and new data, Neo-Lithics 1/13, 2013, 36–41. Dietrich et al. 2014 O. Dietrich – Ç. Köksal-Schmidt – C. Kürkçüoğlu – J. Notroff – K. Schmidt, Göbekli Tepe. Preliminary report on the 2012 and 2013 excavation seasons, Neo-Lithics 1/14, 2014, 11–17. Dietrich et al. 2018 O. Dietrich – J. Notroff – L. Dietrich, Masks and masquerade in the Early Neolithic. A view from Upper Mesopotamia, Time and Mind 11, 1, 2018, 3–21. Gresky et al. 2017 J. Gresky – J. Haelm – L. Clare, Modified human crania from Göbekli Tepe provide evidence for a new form of Neolithic skull cult, Science Advances 3, 6, 2017, e1700564. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1700564 Hansen 2007 S. Hansen, Bilder vom Menschen der Steinzeit. Untersuchungen zur anthropomorphen Plastik der Jungsteinzeit und Kupferzeit in Südosteuropa (Mainz 2007).

68

Schmidt 1999, 9, pl. 2/3–4.

Anthropomorphic Imagery at Göbekli Tepe

165

Hansen 2014 S. Hansen, Neolithic figurines in Anatolia, in: M. Özdoğan – N. Başgelen – P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 6: 10500–5200 BC. Environment, Settlement, Flora, Fauna, Dating, Symbols of Belief, with Views from North, South, East and West (Istanbul 2014) 265–292. Hauptmann 2000 H. Hauptmann, Ein frühneolithisches Kultbild aus Kommagene, in: J. Wagner (ed.), Gottkönige am Euphrat. Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in Kommagene (Mainz 2000) 5–9. Hauptmann – Schmidt 2007 H. Hauptmann – K. Schmidt, Die Skulpturen des Frühneolithikums, in: Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007, 67–82. Hodder 2006 I. Hodder, Çatalhöyük. The Leopard’s Tale (London 2006). Köksal-Schmidt – Schmidt 2010 Ç. Köksal-Schmidt – K. Schmidt, The Göbekli Tepe “Totem Pole”. A first discussion of an autumn 2010 discovery (PPN, Southeastern Turkey), Neo-Lithics 1/10, 2010, 74–76. Kurapkat 2015 D. Kurapkat, Frühneolithische Sondergebäude auf dem Göbekli Tepe in Obermesopotamien und vergleichbare Bauten in Vorderasien (PhD Diss., Technische Universität Berlin 2015). Müller-Neuhof 2006 B. Müller-Neuhof, An EPPNB human sculpture from Tell Sheikh Hassan, Neo-Lithics 2/06, 2006, 32–38. Notroff et al. 2016 J. Notroff – O. Dietrich – K. Schmidt, Gathering of the dead? The Early Neolithic sanctuaries of Göbekli Tepe, southeastern Turkey, in: C. Renfrew – M. J. Boyd – Iain Morley (eds.), Death Rituals, Social Order and the Archaeology of Immortality in the Ancient World (Cambridge 2016) 65–81. Özdoğan 2011 A. Özdoğan, Çayönü, in: M. Özdoğan – N. Başgelen – P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 1: The Tigris Basin (Istanbul 2011) 185–269. Özdoğan – Özdoğan 1998 M. Özdoğan – A. Özdoğan, Buildings of cult and the cult of buildings, in: G. Arsebük – M. J. Mellink – W. Schirmer (eds.), Light on Top of the Black Hill. Studies presented to Halet Çambel (Istanbul 1998) 581–601. Pöllath et al. 2018 N. Pöllath – O. Dietrich – J. Notroff – L. Clare – L. Dietrich – Ç. Köksal-Schmidt – K. Schmidt – J. Peters, Almost a chest hit. An aurochs humerus with hunting lesion from Göbekli Tepe, south-eastern Tukey, and its implications, Quaternary International 495, 2018, 30–48. Schmidt 1995 K. Schmidt, Investigations in the Upper Mesopotamian Early Neolithic. Göbekli Tepe and Gürcütepe, Neo-Lithics 2/95, 1995, 9–10. Schmidt 1996 K. Schmidt, The Urfa Project 1996, Neo-Lithics 2/96, 1996, 2–3. Schmidt 1998a K. Schmidt, Beyond daily bread. Evidence of Early Neolithic ritual from Göbekli Tepe, Neo-Lithics 2/98, 1998, 1–5. Schmidt 1998b K. Schmidt, Frühneolithische Tempel. Ein Forschungsbericht zum präkeramischen Neolithikum Obermesopotamiens, Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 130, 1998, 17–49. Schmidt 1998c K. Schmidt, Frühneolithische Silexdolche, in: G. Arsebük – M. J. Mellink – W. Schirmer (eds.), Light on top of the Black Hill. Studies presented to Halet Çambel (Istanbul 1998) 681–692.

166

Oliver Dietrich – Laura Dietrich – Jens Notroff

Schmidt 1999 K. Schmidt, Frühe Tier- und Menschenbilder vom Göbekli Tepe, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 49, 1999, 5–21. Schmidt 2000 K. Schmidt, »Zuerst kam der Tempel, dann die Stadt«. Vorläufiger Bericht zu den Grabungen am Göbekli Tepe und am Gürcütepe 1995–1999, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 50, 2000, 5–41. Schmidt 2006 K. Schmidt, Sie bauten die ersten Tempel. Das rätselhafte Heiligtum der Steinzeitjäger (München 2006). Schmidt 2008a K. Schmidt, Die zähnefletschenden Raubtiere des Göbekli Tepe, in: D. Bonatz – R. M. Czichon – F. Janoscha Kreppner (eds.), Fundstellen. Gesammelte Schriften zur Archäologie und Geschichte Altvorderasiens ad honorem Hartmut Kühne (Wiesbaden 2008) 61–69. Schmidt 2008b K. Schmidt, Die steinzeitlichen Heiligtümer am Göbekli Tepe, Colloquium Anatolicum – Anadolu Sohbetleri 7, 2008, 59–85. Schmidt 2009 K. Schmidt, Göbekli Tepe. Eine apokalyptische Bilderwelt aus der Steinzeit, Antike Welt 4, 2009, 45–52. Schmidt 2010 K. Schmidt, Göbekli Tepe – The Stone Age Sanctuaries. New results of ongoing excavations with a special focus on sculptures and high reliefs, Documenta Praehistorica 37, 2010, 239–256. Stordeur – Abbès 2002 D. Stordeur – F. Abbès, Du PPNA au PPNB. Mise en lumière d’une phase de transition à Jerf el Ahmar (Syrie), Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 99, 2002, 563–595.

Figurines of the Halaf Period – Early 6th Millennium calBC

167

Figurines of the Halaf Period – Early 6th Millennium calBC Jörg Becker 1 Abstract: Typical finds of the Late Neolithic in Upper Mesopotamia, i.e. the Halaf culture, are terracotta figurines. The anthropomorphic figurines, easily formed by hand, are dominated by female representations, often painted or incised. Due to their characteristic appearances – with some variations – they are often labelled as ‘mother goddess’ or ‘magna mater’ and associated with concepts/notions of fertility. Male counterparts to such female figurines are horned quadrupeds, which are mostly interpreted as bulls; together with widespread representations of bucrania on Halaf ceramics, they seem to be part of a bull cult. According to another interpretation, terracotta figurines, together with seals and tokens, may have functioned in an ‘administrative system’ as symbols testifying some kind of contractual obligation. Keeping our restricted insight into the spiritual universe symbolised by them in mind, we can observe that most of these figurines were intentionally broken within the framework of magic-ritual practices. In their socio-cultural background, they were used in rural Late Neolithic communities, based on villages and hamlets, probably organised in kinship-related groups, and could be used in every household without any agents or institutions. In the following contribution, the figurines of the Halaf culture will be presented in an overview, including their display format and regional variations of style. The figurines will be discussed in their cultural and archaeological context, also showing the limitations from the archaeological record. For their meanings and symbolism parallels from other region as well as ethnological comparisons are also used. Moreover, with a synchronous view, differences and traditions or modifications in ritual practice and symbolism between the Early and Late Neolithic in Upper Mesopotamia will also be touched upon briefly. To sum up, the Halaf figurines are seen here mainly as magic vehicles, not as representations of gods/goddesses and perhaps used on different occasions and in rituals at a household level to solve life problems or to obtain security for the small communities. Keywords: figurines; Halaf culture; Late Neolithic; fertility; rituals; symbolism

Introduction The Halaf culture represents the Late Neolithic in Upper Mesopotamia, spanning the time from c. 6100 to 5300 calBC. Geographically, its core region covers the northern Fertile Crescent, stretching from the Zagros mountains in the east and extending over northern Iraq, northern Syria and south-eastern Turkey nearly to the Mediterranean Sea in the west. Laying in the rain-fed zone of agriculture, the subsistence was based on agriculture and animal husbandry in rural village communities, augmented by hunting. The Halaf culture evolved out of the earlier Pottery Neolithic and represents the first widely distributed ceramic horizon in Upper Mesopotamia. Characteristic of the Halaf culture is a handmade, mainly monochrome pottery, with the later addition of a small number of polychrome vessels, which seem to illustrate the culmination of prehistoric painted pottery. Round buildings, some with a rectangular antechamber, i.e. with a keyhole-shaped plan, are typical for that period, in addition to rectangular working and storage buildings, including variations on an inter-site and intra-site level. Besides the intensive use of stamp seals to identify ownership, terracotta figures, especially those of females, belong to the typical features of the culture during most of the early 6th millennium calBC.2 The settlement system is mainly characterised by small villages (1–2ha), hamlets ( 40 figurines 1 figurine (?) – 3 figurines – > 9 fragments 20 figurines

xx – 2 figurines c. 22 figurines 1 figurine xx – 1 figurine xx – 1 fragment 3 figurines 4 figurines xx 8 figurines

– xx – – 1 nearly complete vessel – – – – – – – – – – – 1 fragment – 1 complete vessel –

2 fragments – – 3 fragments – – – – – – – 2 fragments 1 fragmented vessel 1 complete vessel xx

Tülintepe

1 figurine

–

–

–

Hama Tell Kurdu Ras Shamra

1 figurine 1 fragment –

7 figurines xx –

– – 1 figurine (?)

– 1 fragment –

Tell Aqab Tell Arpachiyah Çavi Tarlası Chagar Bazar Domuztepe Fıstıklı Höyük Tepe Gawra Girikihaciyan Tell Halaf Khirbet esh-Shenef Tell Kashkashok Kazane Höyük Kharabeh Shattani Tell Sabi Abyad I Sakçagözü Shams ed-Din Tell Tawila Tell Umm Qseir Yarim Tepe II Yarim Tepe III

–

Tab. 1   Distribution of terracotta figurines and figurative vessels of selected sites from the Halaf culture; sites are listed in alphabetical order; some comparable sites of adjacent regions are listed below which just show influences of the Halaf culture (xx = exact number of objects not specified)

For the Halaf culture, seated female figurines especially with a strong emphasis on the breasts and thighs, often with their hands holding their breasts, are considered as very characteristic. These female depictions are often decorated by painting or incisions to emphasise specific parts of the body (e.g. the vulva) or to represent parts of the dress, ornaments or tattoos (see Figs. 2.2–3, 8–10; 3; 4.1, 3; 5.1–4,7–13; 6.1, 3–11).14 The painting is frequently executed in the form of parallel bands and usually covers larger parts of the body, especially the arms, breasts and legs. Besides some variations, these typical Halaf figurines can often be easily distinguished from those in other neighbouring cultures.15 The head – if preserved – is seldom shaped in detail; often it is depicted just as a stump of clay, pinched together.16 However, in other cases the eyes can be painted in a

14

15 16

Cf. Mallowan – Rose 1935, 79–87, figs. 45.1–3, 6–9, 13–16; 46.4–9; 47.1–24 (Arpachiyah), here also assuming tattoos; Mallowan 1936, 19–21, fig. 5.1–12 or Mellaart 1975, fig. 101 (Chagar Bazar); von Oppenheim – Schmidt 1943, 99–100, Taf. CV or Becker 2011, Abb. 274 cf. Cholidis – Martin 2002, Abb. 26 (Tell Halaf); Merpert – Munchaev 1993a, 157–158, fig. 8.32 (Yarim Tepe II); Merpert – Munchaev 1993b, 202–203, figs. 9.38–9.40 (Yarim Tepe III). Cf. Antonova 1974. Mallowan – Rose 1935, 80 assumed that the representation of the female head was taboo.

171

Figurines of the Halaf Period – Early 6th Millennium calBC

1 2 3

4 5

8

6

0

9

7

5 cm

10

Fig. 2   Halafian human terracotta figurines from Chagar Bazar (after Mallowan 1936, fig. 5.1–10)

Fig. 3   Halafian human figurines from Tell Halaf (© O. M. Teßmer/SMB-Vorderasiatisches Museum)

172

Jörg Becker

red colour. Furthermore, as examples from Chagar Bazar in north-eastern Syria demonstrate (Fig. 2.4–5), the figures can wear a turban-like headdress.17 It is particularly the character of these female figurines with an emphasis upon the breasts and the pubic triangle which has led to the classical interpretation as representing fertility goddesses or ‘lucky charms intended to secure good fortune in childbirth’, conventionally labelled ‘mother goddess’ or ‘magna mater’.18 Among the regional and local (intra-site) variations are many figurines made in a more stylised manner. Besides three-dimensional figurines with or without legs, sometimes violin-shaped, partly flat figurines occur as well (cf. Fig. 5.12; 6.1, 8) in different sites and regions.19 Whereas figurines holding the breasts seem to be well represented in the eastern Halaf distribution area, that is, in north-eastern Syria and northern Iraq, different types can be observed, e.g. at Tell Sabi Abyad I,20 located in the Balikh Valley. Often simply made figurines are present with a triangular base, a narrow, circular waist, sometimes with incised bands, and a well-defined upper body with pronounced shoulders. Other types of regional variations can be found, e.g. at Çavi Tarlasi (cf. Fig. 4).21 Here, seated female figurines with rectangular-shaped legs, the head and arms often depicted in a stylised manner just as stumps, are well preserved, in painted as well as unpainted versions. Similar leg fragments, which are reminiscent of the female figurines from Çatalhöyük, are also known from Girikihaciyan.22 Whereas most of the figurines from Çavi Tarlası are made of a fabric that is easily comparable to the mineral-painted fine ware, here too and at Tell Halaf such figurines can also be made of a chaff-tempered, unpainted fabric. Typical for most of the Halaf figurines from Çavi Tarlasi, also known from Tell Sabi Abyad I located in the south,23 are figurines with a vertical hole in the neck that reaches down towards the hips (cf. Fig. 4.4). In these cases, the heads were certainly made of other materials and could have be changed for reasons unknown to us. The next parallels for such stick figurines, only regionally distributed in the north-western part of the Halaf area, are found at Höyüçek in the south-west Turkish Lake district in present-day Pisidia. They also date to 6th millennium calBC. In these comparisons the head is made of bone but broken in nearly all cases; bone heads that might belong unmistakably to such terracotta figurines are not preserved.24 Figurines made of other materials such as bone or different stones are only known from a few Halaf sites. Once again, they often display the characteristic details of female terracotta figurines, for example, three of these figurines are small, headless, and were made of stone. Another figurine represents the upper part of a small male-shaped depiction made of serpentine (1.5cm high), used as a pendant; his arms crossed in front of the chest, a gesture that resembles later Mesopotamian statuettes and is possibly an early example of this well-known posture. All of these objects were found in Domuztepe.25 Also from the ‘death pit’ at Domuztepe comes a piece of sandstone, which

17 18

19

20 21 22 23

24

25

Cf. Mallowan 1936, 19–21, fig. 5.8–9, 11 (for a turban-like headdress). Mallowan – Rose 1935, 79–90; Mallowan 1936, 11; Tobler 1950, 163; Munchaev – Merpert 1971, 31; Davidson – Watkins 1981, 10. Violin-shaped female figurines, here with a hole in the neck comes from Tell Sabi Abyad I (Akkermans 1989, 287, fig. VIII.3), and are known from Arpachiyah (Mallowan – Rose 1935, figs. 45.11; 46.5–6), Tepe Gawra (Tobler 1950, 170, fig. 9) and Girikihaciyan (Watson – LeBlanc 1990, 105, fig. 6.21.6). Collet 1996, 403–404, figs. 6.1–6.2. von Wickede – Herbordt 1988, 19, Abb. 5.1, Taf. 5.1–5. Watson – LeBlanc 1990, 104, fig. 6.21.1–2: also for comparison with Çatalhöyük (cf. Mellaart 1967, 211–240). Cf. Akkermans 1989, 287, fig. VIII.3; Collet 1996, 403, fig. 6.1.1, 7: in one case, this hole contained the charred remains of a thin, crooked twig with bark. Duru 1999, 178–179, fig. 24: most of the nearly 100 figurines and idols were found in three ‘Shrine Phase’ sanctuaries at Höyüçek. Carter et al. 1999, 7, 13, fig. 5.5; Carter et al. 2003, fig. 12a–c; 18.

173

Figurines of the Halaf Period – Early 6th Millennium calBC

1

2

3

0

5 cm

4 Fig. 4   Halafian human figurines from Çavi Tarlası (after von Wickede – Herbordt 1988, Taf. 5.1–2, 4–5)

shows some sexual ambiguity as the object could represent either a phallus or a schematic female figurine.26 In another case, the small head of a bearded person possibly wears a hat.27 Further fragments of male figurines are known from Çavi Tarlası:28 one is an idol made of limestone (Fig. 4.1) with its lower part broken off. The head and arms are rendered as usual as stumps. Parallel, incised lines can be seen on the left side of the waist, on the neck and on the left shoulder, with one of them running diagonally across the upper body. Perhaps these lines indicate a girdle and a cape. Another fragment of a male figurine is represented by a torso showing a navel,

26 27 28

Carter et al. 2003, 125, 128, fig. 15. Campbell 2005, 14, figure on the upper right. von Wickede – Herbordt 1988, 19, Abb. 5.1, Taf. 5.5.

174

Jörg Becker

2

1

7

0

5

4

3

5 cm

8

6

9

11

10

12

13

Fig. 5   Halafian human figurines from Arpachiyah (nos. 1–9) and Tell Halaf (nos. 10–13) (after Mallowan – Rose 1935, figs. 45.1–4, 6–7; 46.4, 6, 8; Becker 2015, Abb. 142.1–4)

which is not uncommon on Halafian figurines. Below the navel are some horizontal incised lines, which are interpreted as a belt, as a similar girdle is shown in a painted version on a Halafian figurine from Yarim Tepe III (cf. Fig. 6.11).29 Despite its fragmented state, such a torso is reminiscent of older standing male figurines, well-known from the older E/MPPNB levels at Nevalı Çori,30 located only c. 40km downstream in the middle Euphrates region. For the Pottery Neolithic,

29 30

Merpert – Munchaev 1993b, fig. 9.38.2. Morsch 2002, 148, pl. 3.3–4, 6.

Figurines of the Halaf Period – Early 6th Millennium calBC

175

Fig. 6   Halafian human figurines from Yarim Tepe II (nos. 1–9) and III (nos. 10–11) (after Merpert – Munchaev 1993a, fig. 8.32; Merpert – Munchaev 1993b, fig. 9.38)

mention should be made here of the well-known wall painting from Çatalhöyük showing a human-being in a running position (a hunter) and possibly wearing a leopard skin around the waist.31 Also surviving from the earlier Neolithic are a few phallus-shaped objects, known for example from Kazane Höyük,32 close to Şanlıurfa, which recall earlier representations in the nearby site of Göbekli Tepe. They are among the few male depictions during the Halaf period which can be seen as remnants of an Early Neolithic phallocentrism, once again also known from Çatalhöyük and also from Gritille and the older Nevalı Çori.33 In addition to a large set of luxurious goods, a collection of stone and bone objects were discovered in the ‘burnt house’ in Arpachiyah:34 the objects were found at the end of the room and interpreted by the excavator as a set of ritual figurines. Two of them again depict female figurines. Another figure, only 17mm high and made of alabaster, was said to represent a male; the arms are held against the waist and the right arm is said to hold an offering. In association with these stone

31 32 33 34

Mellaart 1967, 188, Taf. XIII; Hodder 2006, pl. 1. Bernbeck et al. 1999, 124, fig. 17e–f. Voigt 2000, 289 (with further references). – for Neolithic phallocentrism esp. see Hodder – Meskell 2010, 33–42. Mallowan – Rose 1935, 99–100, pl. Xa; cf. Campbell 1992, 184–204.

176

Jörg Becker

figurines are a miniature bowl made of steatite, five models of human finger bones, all made of stone, as well as one genuine finger bone. Finally, two stone figurines from the old excavations by Max von Oppenheim at Tell Halaf, said to have been found in association with painted Halaf pottery, should be mentioned here: one is the unique upper part of an idol made of limestone which seems to represent a female whose hair falls onto the neck. The arms are formed as short stumps in a rectangular position to the torso. Several incisions on the head, the neck and the torso might indicate some kind of ornament. Around the waist is a row of triangles, framed by horizontal lines, which might be seen as a girdle or part of the dress.35 The other fragment is a small diorite figurine (c. 3.7cm in height) of a naked female figure in seated position, her arms hanging down on both sides of the body; the head is not preserved.36 The general appearance of the figure resembles some of the seated female figurines in Çatalhöyük that are made of clay.37 Zoomorphic figurines Quadrupeds are predominant among the zoomorphic figurines (Fig. 7), but the fragments indicate that these objects are not as elaborate in detail; thus, their classification to species is sometimes difficult. However, most of these figurines seem to represent bulls, while sheep and goats, dogs, boars and birds are also depicted. Usually these figurines are not painted. The scientific discussion about these zoomorphic figurines concentrates on the depiction of bulls in particular. In connection with the common motif of bucrania on Halaf pottery, figurines and amulet-seals in the shape of a bull’s head with assumed apotropaic function, a bull cult is derived and seen as the male counterpart to the female ‘goddess’. Nevertheless, the role of the bull/cattle is also complex.38 On the one hand, bull representations became a common motif after the domestication of cattle was well established and part of the subsistence economy at most sites. In that process, cattle played an important role in meat provision, especially for feastings and rituals, but could also be used for agricultural work (ploughing) or transport. Furthermore, the importance of milk for the human diet which might have had a positive influence on the human birth rate is often discussed for the Late Neolithic Halaf period.39 On the other hand, we occasionally find a hunting scene with a bow and arrow on the inside of an Halafian bowl from Arpachiyah.40 We should mention here a fragmented bull figurine from Tell Sabi Abyad I41 in whose left flank a small piece of a triangular stone was inserted while the clay was still wet (see Fig. 7.9). This resembles the ritually slain cattle figurines from the PPNB site of ‘Ain Ghazal42 in Jordan where the cattle were slain as part of magic rites. The discrepancy between such magic rites and the zoologically underrepresented evidence for hunting bulls during the Early Neolithic has been pointed out on various occasions. But it seems to be mainly the symbolic value, especially the representation of bull, deer and other strong and dangerous animals, which was of importance and is often reflected in wall paintings, on bull horns and other

35 36 37 38

39

40 41 42

Cf. von Oppenheim – Schmidt 1943, 105–106, Taf. CVIII.1–4: the upper part of the figurine is c. 10cm high. Cf. von Oppenheim – Schmidt 1943, 106, Taf. CVIII.5–6. Cf. Mellaart 1967, Abb. 50–51, Taf. 79, and Hodder 2006, figs. 94, 105 (lower row, left and middle figurines). Cf. Mallowan – Rose 1935, 88, 154–155 or Mellaart 1975, 160–161. – Compare also the sceptical comments by Akkermans 1993, 235. – For animal-shaped amulet seals see von Wickede 1990, 11–113, Taf. 163–165. Cf. Akkermans 1993, 231–239, 250–264; Matthews 2000, 109; Akkermans 2013, 22–23; Nieuwenhuyse 2013, 141–142 (all with further references). Hijara 1997, 33–34 (no. 342A), pl. XLVIIIA; cf. Akkermans – Schwartz 2003, 132, fig. 4.19. Collet 1996, 406, fig. 6.4.10; cf. Akkermans –Schwartz 2003, 144–145. Rollefson 1986, 50, pl. II.4. – Cf. Voigt 2000, 267 for the comparison of cattle figurines and their symbolic role.

177

Figurines of the Halaf Period – Early 6th Millennium calBC

1

2

3

4

6 5 0

5 cm

10

7

8

9

Fig. 7   Halafian animal figurines from Tell Halaf (nos. 1–4) and Tell Sabi Abyad I (nos. 5–10) (after Collet 1996, fig. 6.4.1, 3, 6–7, 9–10; Becker 2015, Abb. 144)

symbolic installations in the Neolithic houses of Çatalhöyük.43 Finally it should be mentioned that for the Halaf culture in Upper Mesopotamia, hunting wild animals played an important role in the subsistence strategies of some sites, often situated on the margins of the rain-fed zone of agriculture. At least for some members of the local communities, i.e. specialised hunters, hunting

43

Mellaart 1967; Hodder 2006; Hodder – Meskell 2010. – For magic hunting rites, symbolism and esp. the bull cult in the Early Neolithic Near East see Cauvin 2000, 106–108, 123–125.

178

Jörg Becker

was a common, vital practice and also included the exchange of surplus products, such as animal hides, with other settlements.44 Finally, for the zoomorphic figurines, I wish to mention a small bird figurine from the ‘burnt house’ at Arpachiyah ascribed by the excavator as a ‘dove’.45 A similar bird figurine comes from Çavi Tarlası: there, the small painted bird was first made and then fixed on a round, small and undecorated clay column.

Anthropomorphic vessels Another kind of human representation, which can be connected with the terracotta figurines here, are anthropomorphic vessels, but these were only found in restricted numbers and again indicate regional variances. A finely made flacon with painting, about 25cm high, which shows a longhaired female, is well known (Fig. 8.5).46 This unique anthropomorphic vessel from Yarim Tepe II was found in a ritual deposit: in such cases, special pits were found that contained the remains of fire, burnt bones of animals and intentionally broken vessels. One such pit contained the scattered fragments of the aforementioned unique, painted anthropomorphic vessel in the shape of a female figurine: it was found together with a broken alabaster plate, a quadrangular stone seal with a carved design and eyelet on the back for suspension and the fragments of a simple clay bowl. Another similar pit contained fragments of several vessels, including a zoomorphic, completely painted vessel that resembles a pig (cf. Fig. 8.6).47 The Yarim Tepe II examples of ritual burials of cultic objects were discussed on a wider scale by Y. Garfinkel who traced them back and compared them with traditions of the Early Neolithic in the southern Levant.48 Similar anthropomorphic vessels are also known from Arpachiyah49 (Fig. 8.1–3) in the northern Tigris region and at Tell Tawila50 (Fig. 8.4) in the vicinity of Tell Chuera in north-eastern Syria. A slightly different type of an anthropomorphic vessel, representing a standing female, has survived at Domuztepe:51 the vessel is c. 20cm high; the legs were formed separately and then joined to the upper body. Painting on different parts may represent clothing, adornment, body painting or tattoos. Net bands encircle the ankles, knees and hips. The pubic area is also indicated. The neck of the vessel is damaged, but a single eye is preserved. Simple bands around the neck and between the breasts might represent a necklace.

Zoomorphic vessels Zoomorphic vessels comprise a final small, yet interesting group, in which bulls seem to be frequently depicted but also other species sometimes occur. Fragments of bull-shaped vessels are

44

45

46

47 48 49

50 51

For the role of hunting in Halaf communities see Akkermans 1993, 250–268; Cavallo 2000; cf. also Becker 2007, 82, fig. 41 or Becker 2015, 197–199. Mallowan – Rose 1935, 87–88, fig. 46.3. The two other bird figurines (Mallowan – Rose 1935, fig. 46.1–2) are from the succeeding Ubaid levels. Munchaev – Merpert 1981, fig. 98; Merpert et al. 1981, 26, figs. X–XI; Merpert – Munchaev 1993a, 144–145, fig. 8.13. The black painting on the neck and upper arms may represent some bracelet-like ornaments and necklaces. The navel is also reproduced, but the pubic triangle in particular is accentuated, while the long hair is shown on the back. Merpert – Munchaev 1993a, 145, fig. 8.14 and 8.15. Garfinkel 1994. Mallowan – Rose 1935, 81, fig. 45.10–12 (three upper parts of female-shaped vessels, one of them with a painted Maltese cross on the right shoulder. Another anthropomorphic vessel fragment is published by Hijara 1997, 75–76, fig. 20: on that painted fragment only the breasts and forearms are preserved. Becker et al. 2007, 244; Becker 2010, 9, Abb. 7; Becker 2015, 173, 175, Abb. 88.9; 89.7. Campbell 2004 (title page); Carter – Campbell 2006, 315–316, figs. 10–11.

179

Figurines of the Halaf Period – Early 6th Millennium calBC

2

1 0

3 4

5 cm

6

5 0

0

5 cm

5 cm

Fig. 8   Anthropomorphic vessels from Arpachiyah (nos. 1–3), Tell Tawila (no. 4) and Yarim Tepe II (no. 5); zoomorphic vessel from Yarim Tepe II (no. 6) (after Mallowan – Rose 1935, fig. 45.10–12; Merpert et al. 1981, figs. VIII, XI; Becker 2015, Abb. 88.9)

known from Tell Halaf,52 Tell Tawila53 and Fıstıklı Höyük.54 In these examples, it is mainly the bull’s head – often painted – that is preserved and from the open mouth a liquid could once have been poured. Another piece of an ungulate, perhaps from a bull-shaped vessel(?) once again, comes from Tell Umm Qseir.55 A zoomorphic vessel has long been known from Arpachiyah ascribed as a ‘hedgehog’ and found in the most recent Halaf level (TT 6) adjoining the ‘burnt house’. Another figurine represents a bird and was attributed to the older Halaf levels.56 The fragment of a similar bird-

7 52 53 54 55 56

0

5 cm

Becker 2012, 23, 26, fig. 18.1–3; Becker 2015, 308, 341–342, Abb. 145.1–3. Becker 2010, 8, Abb. 3.1–2; Becker 2015, 173, Abb. 88.7–8; 89.3–4. Bernbeck et al. 2002, 35, fig. 8d; Bernbeck – Pollock 2003, 60, fig. 37d: painted bull‘s head of a vessel. Tsuneki – Miyake 1998, 70, fig. 32.7–10, pl. 12.5–8. Mallowan – Rose 1935, 88, pl. Va/b; cf. Hijara 1997, 76–77.

180

Jörg Becker

shaped vessel is known from the old Oppenheim excavations at Tell Halaf57 and was assigned to the Late Neolithic layers (‘Buntkeramikschicht’), found in the prehistoric levels in deep soundings close to the Iron Age graves north-west of the Western Palace. Only the upper part of the bird’s body is preserved of that vessel, including a round hole in the top for filling it with a liquid. A complete vessel, richly decorated with painting, comes from Yarim Tepe II (cf. Fig. 8.6)58 and was interpreted by the excavators as the depiction of a pig. Other, as yet unpublished zoomorphic vessel fragments are mentioned from the nearby site of Yarim Tepe III.59

Context, use and function Noted in the introduction, concerning the context of such figurines and their assumed function, is the often-repeated interpretation of the dominating female figurines as ‘mother goddesses’ or ‘magna mater’, respectively fertility figurines. However, it should be mentioned that the general interpretation of such terracotta figurines ranges from ritual, goddess-like objects to children’s toys. In the latter case, it should be questioned whether this assumption is rather a very modern interpretation based on a modern middle-class way of thinking.60 Of importance is the systematic discussion of figurines by P. Ucko who focused on figures from prehistoric Egypt but also discussed Mesopotamian examples. He grouped his material into four functional classes, which he defined on the basis of ethnographic accounts:61 1. Cult figures/supernatural beings, used as symbols or object of worship, usually in community rituals. 2. Vehicles of magic/figurines used in rituals to produce, avoid or change specific situations (increased fertility, healthy children, protection of property or crops, harm to one’s enemies). 3. Teaching figures, including initiation rites to teach adolescent children the proper kinds of behaviour. 4. Toys/figurines for children’s play; adult equivalents being ornaments for decoration or an aesthetic effect. Based on this systematic analysis, such tasks were later enriched by M. Voigt in a similar study about the figurines, their context, use and function, comparing the Neolithic sites of Hajji Firuz (north-western Iran), Gritille (south-eastern Turkey) and Çatalhöyük (central Anatolia).62 The interpretation of Halaf figurines as fertility figurines mainly derives from the depiction itself, especially with the emphasis on the breasts and the vulva region. Whereas regional differences in style can be observed, we have to take into account that most of these figurines generally show an inter-site similarity and that we are dealing with female figurines only with emphasised sexual markers. It appears, indeed, that some definite cultural regulations underlay the production of these figurines and that they may well have served in ritual contexts.63 The precise context of the Halaf figurines is at first sight not very informative, given that most of the figurines were found in secondary deposits. Often, they were found outside the buildings in rubbish areas, filling layers or pits, where they were disposed of after use, seldom inside the

57 58 59 60 61 62

63

von Oppenheim – Schmidt 1943, 95, Abb. 136. Merpert et al. 1981, 26, figs. VII–VIII; Merpert – Munchaev 1993a, 144–145, figs. 8.14–15. Bader et al. 1981, 56, here with zoomorphic fragments, possibly from late Halaf levels, i.e. Halaf IIb (?). Cf. Lesure 2002. Ucko 1968; cf. Voigt 2000, 256–259. Voigt 2000, including tab. 3 with predicted patterns wear, ruinous damage and disposition associated with functional classes of figures and figurines. Akkermans 1993, 305.

Figurines of the Halaf Period – Early 6th Millennium calBC

181

houses. In other cases, e.g. at Çavi Tarlası, some fragments were found on pebble-paved working areas outside of the houses, where they were disposed of. From Arpachiyah it is reported that numerous ‘cult figurines’ were found in the domestic debris surrounding a tholos in the outlying area. However, whether this has any specific meaning seems doubtful, as the assumed ritual function of the tholoi at Arpachiyah is also doubtful.64 Once again, the distribution of the clay figurines seems to indicate that they were thrown away after use. In a similar way, the local distribution of different parts of such figurines at several sites does not point to any particular value that might have existed after their use. Fragments of legs, torsi, the vulva region or upper parts of the body display the usual distribution without any significance and can be correlated with the distribution of other products, which had lost their value after use and were simply discarded. For many clay figurines it is assumed that they were deliberately broken, with the breaks not only at points of structural weakness but often at the neck, so their head is usually missing; yet they can also be broken at the waist.65 Similar observations are reported for clay figurines in other Neolithic sites, such as Hajji Firuz and Gritille, and indicate a widespread Neolithic practice, both in geographical and in chronological terms.66 The aforementioned deliberate destruction of objects with specific value in ritual deposits in Yarim Tepe II (cf. Fig. 8.5–6) fits well with the intentional breakage of clay figurines. According to the scheme by P. Ucko (see above), such a practice of destruction would be uncommon for cult objects but fits better with vehicles of magic, similar to interpretations of Neolithic clay figurines from Hajji Firuz Tepe and Gritille.67 Of course, it is difficult to estimate the expected life of such figurines with any certainty from the archaeological context. However, it can be assumed that such figurines, if made and used for special occasions, had a shorter lifetime than cult objects.68 In this sense, it is interesting to note that the lower parts of a painted, female Halaf figurine from Tell Sabi Abyad I were slightly polished, suggesting that these parts had been frequently touched by hands.69 The generally simple shape and crude appearance of most of the Halaf figurines hardly required specific technological knowledge and suggests that their manufacture was open to more or less all members of a community and not limited to specialists such as medicine men or shamans. In combination with the lack of specific, ceremonial structures or shrines known from the Early Neolithic, the occurrence of the figurines in normal settlement structures belonging to Halafian times indicates that they were mainly used in household contexts.70 This view is also supported by the different techniques which were in use at the same location; for example, some of these figurines in Tell Halaf and Çavi Tarlasi could be easily created, with the legs firstly formed separately and then attached and applied to the torso. In other cases, the torso and legs were formed out of a single piece of clay and the legs received their final seated appearance through interfolding.71 Alternatively, such terracotta figurines were interpreted at Tell Sabi Abyad I in an ‘administrative context’, as magic symbols to confirm some kind of contractual obligation. The basis of this interpretation there is the usual association of such terracotta figurines together with stamp seals and tokens.72 A similar context is also attested in Çavi Tarlası, where in one case a stamp seal

64 65

66

67 68 69 70 71 72

Mallowan – Rose 1935, 27, and most important for his critical comments is Akkermans 1993, 305. See e.g. Collet 1996, 403: ‘The upper part of the head seems to have been intentionally broken off, perhaps for ritual purposes …’. Voigt 2000, 256 for deliberately broken clay figurines from Hajji Firuz Tepe. See also critical comments by Lesure 2002, 590. Voigt 2000, 264, 269. Cf. Voigt 2000, 264, tab. 4 (probability of figurine function based on attributes). Akkermans 1989, 287. Akkermans 1993, 306; Akkermans – Schwartz 2003, 142–143; Akkermans 2013, 25–26. Cf. Becker 2012, 23, Abb. 16.1.4–5. Akkermans – Schwartz 2003, 143.

182

Jörg Becker

was found together with a stone figurine (cf. Fig. 4.1) in a rubbish pit directly west of a Halafian dromos.73 It must also be pointed out that the use of such figurines may not be seen as monocausal but that some of these figurines may have had a dual function, i.e. as a magical vehicle later recycled as a toy, or that some of the animal figurines were used purely as children’s toys.74 Evidence for real cult objects in the Halaf period is extremely rare. Perhaps the aforementioned bone and stone objects found together as a small group inside one room of the ‘burnt house’ at Arpachiyah can be seen in this regard.75 Four other figurine-like objects came from the same building: three were made of pumice and one of sandstone; one seems to depict a human head.76 The use of stone at Arpachiyah for the manufacture of ritual objects is rather unique and only paralleled by the two stone figurines – also mentioned above – from Tell Halaf.77 The working time and care required to produce the stone objects from Tell Halaf, especially the small, yet finely made, seated figurine made of hard diorite, should be noted. Similar observations from Çatalhöyük may reinforce such interpretations; the distribution of stone figures is in complementary distribution to that of large clay figures; both groups seem to represent real cult objects.78 Finally, Hacılar and south-western Turkey may be indicative of some differences between the distribution and the function of finely made clay figurines as compared to crude stone figurines. Female clay figurines, often in the type of a mother with her child, were not found in shrines in those places but in normal houses, usually near fireplaces or storage places, and may be seen as representing fertility aspects. In contrast, flat and crude depictions made of stone or clay appear to have been grouped together in a niche and might illustrate ancestors. On those flat pieces, human features, such as the eyes, neck, parts of the body and arms, are roughly executed through incisions.79

Conclusions Figurines, with a predominance of anthropomorphic female figures and zoomorphic bull depictions, are typical finds of the Late Neolithic Halaf period in Upper Mesopotamia. Compared with the usual interpretation of a female figurine as a ‘mother goddess’ or ‘magna mater’ and the bull as the male counterpart, the figurines here are primarily there as vehicles of magic. As their simple shape indicates, these figurines were easy to make and their manufacture was apparently more or less open to all members of the community. Often, they were deliberately broken, most probably made and used for special, ritual occasions and certainly accompanied by magic sayings and other actions which were designed to help satisfy or fulfil a wish or hope. Such ritual practices were widespread. For the Halaf culture with its settlement structure based on villages, hamlets and seasonal stations and lacking special cult buildings, such rituals obviously took place on the domestic level, i.e. in the family or as individuals. For the geographically widespread Halaf culture, regional differences in the depictions can be observed on the anthropomorphic, female Halaf figurines, and are also visible on other components of the material assemblage (e.g. pottery). For some of the zoomorphic figurines, it cannot be excluded that they may have served as toys for children.

73

74 75 76 77

78 79

von Wickede – Herbordt 1988, 25, Abb. 5.1–2; for the context see Abb. 3 (here this later pit was labelled in the preliminary report as ‘Bereich 25’, west of the rectangular dromos, room 13). Voigt 2000, 267. Mallowan – Rose 1935, 99–100, pl. Xa. Mallowan – Rose 1935, 100, pl. Xd–g. von Oppenheim – Schmidt 1943, 105–106, Taf. CVIII.1–6. – For the comparison between the Tell Halaf and Arpachiyah stone figurines see Akkermans 1993, 305. Mellaart 1967, 211–240; Voigt 2000, 277–283. Mellaart 1975, 114–115; cf. Mellink 1985, 27–29.

Figurines of the Halaf Period – Early 6th Millennium calBC

183

Evidence for real cult objects is only sporadically documented for the Halaf period. As such, some bone and stone objects from the ‘burnt house’ at Arpachiyah or two stone figurines from Tell Halaf can be mentioned in this respect. Yet, their interpretation as cult objects is reinforced by comparisons with the Neolithic sites of Çatalhöyük and Hacılar in central Anatolia. Acknowledgements: I thank my colleague Dr Emily Schalk (Berlin – Prehistoric Archaeology) for the grammatical and stylistic corrections of my manuscript.

References Akkermans 1989 P. M. M. G. Akkermans, Excavations at Tell Sabi Abyad. Prehistoric Investigations in the Balikh Valley, Northern Syria, BAR International Series 468 (Oxford 1989). Akkermans 1993 P. M. M. G. Akkermans, Villages at the Steppe. Later Neolithic Settlement and Subsistence in the Balikh Valley, Northern Syria. International Monographs in Prehistory, Archaeological Series 5 (Michigan 1993). Akkermans 2013 P. M. M. G. Akkermans, Northern Syria in the Late Neolithic, ca. 6800–5300 BC, in: W. Orthmann – P. Matthiae – M. al-Maqdissi (eds.), Archéologie et Histoire de la Syrie I: La Syrie de l’Epoque Néolithique à la Âge du Fer (Wiesbaden 2013) 17–31. Akkermans – Schwartz 2003 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – G. M. Schwartz, The Archaeology of Syria. From Complex Hunter-Gatherers to Early Urban Societies (ca. 16,000–330 B.C.), Cambridge World Archaeology (Cambridge 2003). Akkermans – Verhoeven 1995 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – M. Verhoeven, An image of complexity. The burnt village at Late Neolithic Sabi Abyad, Syria, American Journal of Archaeology 99, 1995, 5–32. Akkermans – Wittmann 1993 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – B. Wittmann, Khirbet esh-Shenef 1991. Eine späthalafzeitliche Siedlung im Balikhtal, Nordsyrien, Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 125, 1993, 143–166. Antonova 1974 Е. В. Антонова, Антропоморфные статуэтки халафской культуры, Советская археология 2, 1974, 14–26. Bader et al. 1981 N. O. Bader – N. Y. Merpert – R. M. Munchaev, Soviet expedition’s surveys in the Sinjar Valley, Sumer 37, 1981, 55–95. Baird et al. 1995 D. Baird – S. Campbell – T. Watkins (eds.), Excavations at Kharabeh Shattani Vol. 2, Edinburgh University Occasional Paper 18 (Edinburgh 1995). Becker 2007 J. Becker, Nevalı Çori. Keramik und Kleinfunde der Ḥalaf- und Frühbronzezeit, Archaeologica Euphratica 4 (Mainz 2007). Becker 2009 J. Becker, Untersuchung der prähistorischen Siedlung, in: A. M. H. Baghdo – L. Martin – M. Novák – W. Orthmann (eds.), Ausgrabungen am Tell Halaf 2006 und 2007. Vorbericht über die erste und zweite syrisch-deutsche Grabungskamapgne (Teil I), Vorderasiatische Forschungen der Max Freiherr von Oppenheim-Stiftung 3, I (Saarbrücken 2009) 27–40. Becker 2010 J. Becker, Anthropomorphe und zoomorphe Terrakotten der Ḥalaf-Zeit aus Tell Tawīla, in: J. Becker – R. Hempelmann – E. Rehm (eds.), Kulturlandschaft Syrien. Zentrum und Peripherie. Festschrift für Jan-Waalke Meyer, Alter Orient und Altes Testament 371 (Münster 2010) 1–24.

184

Jörg Becker

Becker 2011 J. Becker, Frühe Siedler am Tell Halaf. Zur Bedeutung der Halaf-Kultur, in: N. Cholidis – L. Martin (eds.), Die geretteten Götter aus dem Palast vom Tell Halaf. Begleitbuch zur Sonderausstellung des Vorderasiatischen Museums vom 28.1.–14.8.2011 im Pergamonmuseum (Berlin, Regensburg 2011) 345–351. Becker 2012 J. Becker, Die Ausgrabungen in den prähistorischen Schichten, in: A. M. H. Baghdo – L. Martin – M. Novák – W. Orthmann (eds.), Ausgrabungen am Tell Halaf 2008 bis 2010. Vorbericht über die dritte bis fünfte syrisch-deutsche Grabungskampagne auf dem Tell Halaf (Teil II),Vorderasiatische Forschungen der Max Freiherr von Oppenheim-Stiftung 3, II (Wiesbaden 2012) 11–46. Becker 2015 J. Becker, Tell Ṭawīla, Tell Ḥalaf und Wādī Ḥamar: Ḥalaf- und ‘Obēd-Zeit in Nordost-Syrien. Regionale Entwicklungen, Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede (mit Beiträgen von K. Drüppel und M. Helfert), Bibliotheca Neolithica Asiae Meridionalis et Occidentalis (Berlin 2015). Becker et al. 2007 J. Becker – T. Helms – M. Posselt – E. Vila, Ausgrabungen in Tell Tawīla, Nordost-Syrien. Bericht über zwei Grabungskampagnen 2005 und 2006 (unter Mitarbeit von P. Aytaç – J. Eckardt – J. Malo), Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 139, 2007, 213–268. Bernbeck 1995 R. Bernbeck, Dörfliche Kulturen des keramischen Neolithikums in Nord- und Mittelmesopotamien. Vielfalt der Kooperationsformen, in: K. Bartl – R. Bernbeck – M. Heinz (eds.), Zwischen Euphrat und Indus. Aktuelle Forschungsprobleme in der Vorderasiatischen Archäologie (Hildesheim, Zurich, New York 1995) 28–43. Bernbeck – Pollock 2003 R. Bernbeck – S. Pollock, The biography of an Early Halaf village. Fıstıklı Höyük 1999–2000, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 53, 2003, 9–77. Bernbeck et al. 1999 R. Bernbeck – S. Pollock – C. Coursey, The Halaf settlement at Kazane Höyük. Preliminary report on the 1996 and 1997 seasons, Anatolica 25, 1999, 109–147. Bernbeck et al. 2002 R. Bernbeck – S. Pollock – A. G. Castro Gessner – R. Costello – S. Kielt-Costello – M. Foree – M. Gleba – M. Goodwin – P. Horan – S. Lepinksi – C. Nakamura – S. Niebuhr – R. Shoocongdej, Preliminary report on the 2000 season at Fıstıklı Höyük, in: N. Tuna – J. Velibeyoğlu (eds.), Salvage Project of the Archaeological Heritage of the Ilisu and Carchemish Dam Reservoirs. Activities in 2000 (Ankara 2002) 26–39. Campbell 1992 S. Campbell, Culture, Chronology and Change in the Later Neolithic of North Mesopotamia (PhD Diss. University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh 1992). Campbell 2004 S. Campbell, Domuztepe 2004 excavation season, Anatolian Archaeology 10, 2004, 4–6. Campbell 2005 S. Campbell, Domuztepe 2005, Anatolian Archaeology 11, 2005, 13–15. Carter – Campbell 2006 E. Carter – S. Campbell, Report on the 2004 excavation season at Domuztepe, Kazı Sonuçları Toplantası 27, 2006, 313–324. Carter et al. 1999 E. Carter – S. Campbell – J. Snead, Excavations and survey at Domuztepe, 1996, Anatolia Antiqua 7, 1999, 1–17. Carter et al. 2003 E. Carter – S. Campbell – S. Gauld, Elusive complexity. New data from Late Halaf Domuztepe in South Central Turkey, Paléorient 29, 2003, 117–134. Cauvin 2000 J. Cauvin, The Birth of the Gods and the Origins of Agriculture, New Studies in Archaeology (Cambridge 2000).

Figurines of the Halaf Period – Early 6th Millennium calBC

185

Cavallo 2000 C. Cavallo, Animals in the Steppe. A Zooarchaeological Analysis of Later Neolithic Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria, BAR International Series 891 (Oxford 2000). Cholidis – Martin 2002 N. Cholidis – L. Martin, Kopf hoch! Mut hoch! Humor hoch! Der Tell Halaf und sein Ausgräber Max Freiherr von Oppenheim (Mainz 2002). Cluzan et al. 1993 S. Cluzan – E. Delpont – J. Mouliérac (eds.), Syrie. Mémoire de Civilisation, Exhibition Catalogue Paris (Paris 1993). Collet 1996 P. Collet, The figurines, in: P. M. M. G. Akkermans (ed.), Tell Sabi Abyad. The Late Neolithic Settlement. Report on the Excavations of the University of Amsterdam (1988) and the National Museum of Antiquities Leiden (1991–1993) in Syria, Uitgaven van het Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul LXXVI (Istanbul 1996) 403–414. Contenson 1992 H. de Contenson, Préhistoire de Ras Shamra. Les sondages stratigraphiques de 1955 à 1976, Ras Shamra – Ougarit 8 (Paris 1992). Davidson – Watkins 1981 T. E. Davidson – T. Watkins, Two seasons of excavations at Tell Aqab in the Jezirah, N.E. Syria, Iraq 43, 1981, 1–18. du Plat Taylor et al. 1950 J. du Plat Taylor – M. V. Seton-Williams – J. Waechter, The excavations at Sakçe Gözü, Iraq 12, 1950, 53–138. Duru 1999 R. Duru, The Neolithic of the Lake District, in: M. Özdoğan – N. Başgelen (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey. The Cradle of Civilization, New Discoveries, Ancient Anatolian Civilizations Series 3 (Istanbul 1999) 165–191. Esin 1976 U. Esin, Tülintepe excavations, 1972, Keban Project Publications I, 5 (Ankara 1976) 147–163. Fiorina 1984 P. Fiorina, Excavations at Tell Hassan. Preliminary report, Sumer 40, 1984, 277–289. Frangipane 2007 M. Frangipane, Different types of egalitarian societies and the development of inequality in Early Mesopotamia, World Archaeology 39, 2007, 151–176. Garfinkel 1994 Y. Garfinkel, Ritual burial of cultic objects. The earliest evidence, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 4, 1994, 159–188. Hijara 1997 I. Hijara, The Halaf period in northern Mesopotamia, Edubba 6 (London 1997). Hodder 2006 I. Hodder, Çatalhöyük. The Leopard’s Tale. Revealing the Mysteries of Turkey’s ‘Ancient Town’ (London 2006). Hodder – Meskell 2010 I. Hodder – L. Meskell, The symbolism of Çatalhöyük in its regional context, in: I. Hodder (ed.), Religion in the Emergence of Civilization. Çatalhöyük as a Case Study (Cambridge 2010) 32–72. Huot 1994 J.-L. Huot, Les Premiers Villageois de Mésopotamie. Du Village à la Ville (Paris 1994). Lesure 2002 R. G. Lesure, The goddess diffracted. Thinking about the figurines of early villages, Current Anthropology 43, 2002, 587–610. Mallowan 1936 M. E. L. Mallowan, The excavations at Tall Chagar Bazar, and an archaeological survey of the Khabur Region, 1934–5, Iraq 3, 1936, 1–86.

186

Jörg Becker

Mallowan – Rose 1935 M. E. L. Mallowan – J. C. Rose, Excavations at Tall Arpachiyah 1933, Iraq 2, 1935, 1–178. Matthews 2000 R. Matthews, The Early Prehistory of Mesopotamia 500,000–4,500 BC, Subartu V (Turnhout 2000). Mellaart 1967 J. Mellaart, Çatal Hüyük. Stadt aus der Steinzeit. Neue Entdeckungen der Archäologie (Bergisch-Gladbach 1967). Mellaart 1975 J. Mellaart, The Neolithic of the Near East (London 1975). Mellink 1985 M. Mellink, Die Anfänge der Kunst im östlichen Mittelmeerraum und in Vorderasien, in: M. Mellink – J. Filip (eds.), Frühe Stufen der Kunst, Propyläen Kunstgeschichte 14 (Frankfurt, Berlin, Vienna 1985) 11–72. Merpert – Munchaev 1973 N. Y. Merpert – R. M. Munchaev, Early agricultural settlements in the Sinjar Plain, Northern Iraq, Iraq 35, 1973, 93–113. Merpert – Munchaev 1993a N. Y. Merpert – R. M. Munchaev, Yarim Tepe II. The Halaf levels, in: Yoffee – Clark 1993, 129–162. Merpert – Munchaev 1993b N. Y. Merpert – R. M. Munchaev, Yarim Tepe III. The Halaf levels, in: Yoffee – Clark 1993, 163–205. Merpert et al. 1981 N. Y. Merpert – R. M. Munchaev – N. O. Bader, Investigations of the Soviet expedition in northern Iraq, 1976, Sumer 37, 1981, 22–54. Morsch 2002 M. Morsch, Magic figurines? Some remarks about the clay objects of Nevali Çori, in: H. G. K. Gebel – B. Dahl Hermansen – C. Hoffmann Jensen (eds.), Magic Practices and Ritual in the Near Eastern Neolithic, Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment 8 (Berlin 2002) 145–162. Munchaev – Merpert 1971 R. M. Munchaev – N. Y. Merpert, The archaeological research in the Sinjar Valley (1971), Sumer 27, 1971, 23–32. Munchaev – Merpert 1973 R. M. Munchaev – N. Y. Merpert, Excavations at Yarim Tepe 1972. Fourth Preliminary Report, Sumer 29, 1973, 3–16. Munchaev – Merpert 1981 Р. M. Mунчаев – Н. Я. Mерперт, Раннеземледельческие поселения Северной Месопотамии. Исследования советской экспедиции в Ираке (Moscow 1981). Nieuwenhuyse 2013 O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, The social uses of decorated ceramics in Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia, in: O. P. Nieuwenhuyse – R. Bernbeck – P. M. M. G. Akkermans – J. Rogasch (eds.), Interpreting the Late Neolithic of Upper Mesopotamia, Papers on Archaeology from the Leiden Museum of Antiquities 9 (Turnhout 2013) 135–145. Rollefson 1986 G. Rollefson, Neolithic ‘Ain Ghazal (Jordan). Ritual and ceremony, II, Paléorient 12, 1986, 45–52. Schmidt 2006 K. Schmidt, Sie bauten die ersten Tempel. Das rätselhafte Heiligtum der Steinzeitjäger. Die archäologische Entdeckung am Göbekli Tepe (Munich 2006). Seeden 1982 H. Seeden, Ethnoarchaeological reconstruction of Halafian occupational units at Shams ed-Din Tannira, Berytus 30, 1982, 55–103. Souleiman – Tarekji 1993 A. Souleiman – A. Tarekji, Tell Kashkashuk à l’époque de Halaf, in: Cluzan et al. 1993, 48.

Figurines of the Halaf Period – Early 6th Millennium calBC

187

Thuesen 1988 I. Thuesen, Hama I. Fouilles et recherches de la Fondation Carlsberg 1931–1938: The Pre- and Protohistoric Periods, Nationalmuseets Skrifter Storre Beretringer XI (Copenhagen 1988). Tobler 1950 A. Tobler, Excavations at Tepe Gawra, Vol. II (Philadelphia 1950). Tsuneki – Miyake 1998 A. Tsuneki – Y. Miyake (eds.), Excavations at Tell Umm Qseir in Middle Khabur Valley, North Syria. Report of the 1996 Season, Al-Shark I (Tsukuba 1998). Ucko 1968 P. Ucko, Anthropomorphic Figurines of Predynastic Egypt and Neolithic Crete with Comparative Material from the Prehistoric Near East and Mainland Greece (London 1968). Voigt 2000 M. M. Voigt, Çatal Höyük in context. Ritual at Early Neolithic sites in central and eastern Turkey, in: I. Kujit (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communities. Social Organization, Identity and Differentiation (New York 2000) 253–293. von Oppenheim – Schmidt 1943 M. von Oppenheim – H. Schmidt, Tell Halaf I. Die prähistorischen Funde (Berlin 1943). von Wickede 1984 A. von Wickede, Çavi Tarlası. Bericht über den Survey auf dem Çavi Tarlası 1982, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 34, 1984, 112–133. von Wickede 1990 A. von Wickede, Prähistorische Stempelglyptik in Vorderasien, Münchener Vorderasiatische Studien 6 (Munich 1990). von Wickede – Herbordt 1988 A. von Wickede – S. Herbordt, Çavi Tarlası. Bericht über die Ausgrabungskampagnen 1983–1984, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 38, 1988, 5–36. Watson 1983 P. J. Watson, The Halafian Culture. A review and synthesis, in: T. C. Young – P. E. L. Smith – P. Mortensen (eds.), The Hilly Flanks and Beyond. Essays on the Prehistory of Southwestern Asia Presented to Robert J. Braidwood, November 15, 1982, Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 36 (Chicago 1983) 231–249. Watson – LeBlanc 1990 P. J. Watson – St. A. LeBlanc, Girikihaciyan. A Halafian Site in Southeastern Turkey, Institute of Archaeology Monograph 33 (Los Angeles 1990). Yener et al. 2000 K. A. Yener – C. Edens – J. Casana – B. Diebold – H. Ekstrom – M. Loyet – R. Özbal, Tell Kurdu excavations 1999, Anatolica 26, 2000, 31–117. Yoffee – Clark 1993 N. Yoffee – J. J. Clark (eds.), Early Stages in the Evolution of Mesopotamian Civilization. Soviet Excavations in Northern Iraq (Tucson – London 1993).

188

Jörg Becker

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia

189

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia Olivier Nieuwenhuyse 1 Abstract: This paper discusses applied anthropomorphic imagery from the Upper Mesopotamian Late Neolithic (7000–5300 calBC). By adopting a contextual and analytical approach, the paper advocates a multi-sensory perspective. The case study of Late Neolithic Shir in western Syria is selected to investigate the formal properties of applied anthropomorphic imagery. The analysis continues by considering the utilitarian or functional associations of the applied figures, their visibility and their depositional context at the three sites of Umm Dabaghiyah, Tell Sabi Abyad and Shir. The paper concludes by suggesting that these images were part of a tactile rather than a visual language. Often associated with voluminous pottery containers, they probably had an apotropaic function in protecting communal buildings and their contents. Keywords: Late Neolithic; anthropomorphic figures; applied pottery; apotropaic magic; South-west Asia

Introduction: towards a multi-sensory Neolithic This contribution to a volume on prehistoric human imagery comes as a tribute to the long scholarly tradition of work on the later prehistoric figurative imagery from the ancient Near East.2 Geographically, Upper Mesopotamia comprises the hilly flanks of the Anatolian Taurus, the rolling steppes of northern Syria and northern Iraq, and parts of the northern Levant (Fig. 1). The Late Neolithic (c. 7000–5000 calBC) has also been termed l’ère de la céramique peinte,3 for pertinent reasons. The later parts of this two-thousand-year epoch were characterised by a set of elaborately decorated pottery styles, associated with what are known as the Hassuna, Samarra, and Halaf cultural traditions. These have yielded several examples of human images painted on pottery vessels, some of which have rightly become instant classics.4 Here I focus on a lesser-known source of human-like imagery: anthropomorphic images applied to pottery. Anthropomorphic applied imagery in the Upper Mesopotamian Late Neolithic was never very common: sites that produced this type of image have so far yielded no more than a few examples at each site. At most of these places, they were recovered in a fragmentary condition, presumably from secondary or tertiary depositions. In contrast with their painted compadres, these images were much less conspicuous; in fact, my paper will argue that their low visibility formed an important part of their social functioning. Finally, their identification as strictly human figures remains debatable in most cases, for which reason I prefer the somewhat more neutral epithet ‘humanoid’. Such factors perhaps illustrate why these intriguing images have been relatively neglected.5 Yet they formed a consistent component of Late Neolithic symbolic life, complementary to the more intensely studied components such as painted pottery or figurines. One premise underlying this contribution is that to start understanding applied humanoids, it is imperative that Near Eastern prehistorians broaden their conceptual baggage to move away from what many have argued to be an overly one-sided emphasis on the sense of sight within the archaeological discourse.6 The prioritising of the visual as the ‘highest’ sense, at the cost of ignoring ‘lower’ senses (i.e. touch, smell and taste), has a long tradition in western thought, but it

1

2 3 4 5 6

Institut für Vorderasiatische Archäologie, Freie Universität Berlin (Alexander von Humboldt Research Fellow), Germany; [email protected]. See the various contributions in this volume. Huot 1994. For instance Hijara 1978. Streit 2015. MacGregor 1999; Ingold 2000; Croucher – Campbell 2009; Skeates 2010; Hamilakis 2011; Hamilakis 2014.

190

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Fig. 1   The geographic spread of Late Neolithic applied pottery in Upper Mesopotamia and beyond (black dots; not exhaustive), showing the locations of sites yielding humanoid applied imagery (white dots). 1. Shir; 2. Tell Sabi Abyad; 3. Umm Dabaghiyah; 4. El-Kowm; 5. Noršuntepe; 6. Tülintepe; 7. Koruҫutepe; 8. SSP-36; 9. Tell El-Kerkh; 10. Tell Halula; 11. Dja’de; 12. Mezraa Teleilat; 13. Tell Mounbatah; 14. Bouqras; 15. Tell Boueid II; 16. Kashkashok; 17. Hakemi Use; 18. Kultepe; 19. Sotto; 20. Yarim Tepe; 21. Tell Hassuna (after Nieuwenhuyse 2007; Streit 2015)

may pose a firm barrier to understanding the range of sensory experiences in past contexts.7 This conceptual critique is quite pertinent to the Neolithic period, in which the sensory conditions of life changed so profoundly. Neolithisation is not just about exploiting new species or the establishment of novel social arrangements, it is also about changes in cuisine and commensality, new smells and odours, changing colours and textures of the domestic environment, and new physical manifestations of ritual and religion.8 A multi-sensory perspective is especially pertinent to the interpretation of applied imagery, which I argue was a tactile language rather than a visual one.9 In what follows, I begin by showing that within the medium of applied pottery vessels, humanoids were an inextricable part of a much broader iconographic universe that also included non-figurative, geometric motifs. I shall then discuss the applied humanoids themselves, asking whether they should be seen as human, animal or something in between. Interpreting the humanoids as part of a non-visual ‘language’, I am using the term ‘language’ in a metaphorical sense. Adopting a post-structuralist perspective, this paper accepts that as with language sensu stricto, certain ‘rules’ structured the relationships between humans, things, and the broader material world. A useful premise of post-structuralist archaeology has therefore been that the study of such relationships can provide insights in meanings of things in past societies.10 However, as post-structuralist archaeologists have also emphasised, systems of symbolic meaning are thoroughly grounded in human practice. A close, empirical reading of specific (pre-)historical contexts is

7 8 9 10

Hamilakis 2014. Boivin 2008; Hodder 2010; Hodder 2012. Nieuwenhuyse 2017a. Hodder 1990; Shackel – Little 1992; Palavestra 2016.

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia

191

key to interpretation.11 The paper will therefore contextualise these images in order to come closer to their prehistoric meanings. First, I shall explore their utilitarian and functional associations with specific categories of pottery containers. Second, I will highlight the low visual contrasts between the applied motifs and the surface background. Third, I will briefly discuss three case studies that allow a consideration of the depositional context. At Umm Dabaghiyah, Shir and Tell Sabi Abyad applied imagery is associated with dark, cramped, poorly accessible spaces in collective storage buildings. Bringing this together I shall interpret the humanoids as a tactile language, associated mainly with activities involving long-term bulk storage. I will conclude that the humanoid and other non-figurative applications held apotropaic roles as supra-natural protectors of goods crucial to the community.

Applied pottery in the Upper Mesopotamian Late Neolithic Recent work in the ancient lands of Upper Mesopotamia has considerably improved our grasp on the various Late Neolithic ceramic traditions.12 As a result, we can now sketch the chronological and geographic spread, the ceramic-technological background and the range of applied iconographic imagery with some confidence. So we now know that in Upper Mesopotamia applied decoration first appeared at the end of the 7th millennium.13 At Tell Sabi Abyad in northern Syria, applied pottery is introduced around 6350 calBC.14 At Shir and other Northern Levantine sites, applied imagery first appears in the final centuries of the 7th millennium BC.15 As a decorative style, applied pottery gained a vast geographic spread across the Northern Levant, Upper Mesopotamia, eastern Anatolia and the Zagros, where it occurs in small but consistent quantities in the Late Neolithic ceramic assemblages (Fig. 1). Applied pottery disappeared from Upper Mesopotamia at the start of the Halaf period, c. 5850 calBC. This type of pottery lasted for a period of some five centuries between c. 6350–5850 calBC. No comprehensive synthesis exists so far, but certain structurally reoccurring properties make the applied pottery an identifiable category across Upper Mesopotamia. First and foremost, applied motifs were especially associated with the category of coarsely-textured, plant-tempered pottery variously known as Coarse Ware, Coarsely-Made Plant-Tempered Ware, Coarse Unburnished Ware, Hassuna 1a-type, Standard Ware or ‘Later Manifestation’.16 Certainly, there were other decorative techniques, including red slips, incisions, impressions and painting, applied to this plant-tempered pottery in addition to applications. However, applied motifs were very rarely combined with any of these other techniques: when they occur they usually occur as the only kind of decoration. In terms of its ‘design grammar’ the applied pottery style contrasted starkly with painted vessels. The latter relied on repetitive band patterns arranged in single or multiple horizontal, bounded zones.17 No such complicated arrangements were deemed necessary for the applied motifs, which were mostly singular, non-repetitive images placed in an unbounded fashion unhindered by any painted or applied bands (Fig. 2). Further, they invariably show a strong preference for sitting

11 12

13 14 15 16

17

Hodder 1991. Akkermans 1989; Le Mière – Picon 1991; Akkermans 1993; Bernbeck 1994; Le Mière – Picon 1998; Le Mière 2000; Le Mière – Picon 2003; Nieuwenhuyse 2007; Le Mière 2008; Nieuwenhuyse 2010; Bernbeck – Nieuwenhuyse 2013; Nieuwenhuyse 2013; Nieuwenhuyse 2014; Cruells et al. 2017; Tsuneki et al. 2017; Nieuwenhuyse in press, among many others. Nieuwenhuyse 2007. Nieuwenhuyse 2018a. Nieuwenhuyse 2009a; Odaka 2017; Nieuwenhuyse 2018b. Lloyd – Safar 1945; Adams 1983; Caldwell 1983; Akkermans 1988; Akkermans 1993; Merpert – Munchaev 1993; Le Mière – Nieuwenhuyse 1996; Le Mière 2000; Nieuwenhuyse 2000; Nieuwenhuyse 2007. Akkermans 1989; Akkermans 1993; Hole 2013; Hole 2017.

192

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Fig. 2   Tell Sabi Abyad (nos. 1–9) and Shir (nos. 10–21). Examples of coarse, large pottery vessels carrying ‘geometric’ applied decoration (after Nieuwenhuyse 2007; Nieuwenhuyse 2009a; Nieuwenhuyse 2018b)

high up on the vessel body. In the case of jars, we find them on the shoulder, or on hole mouth pots close to the rim. Inasmuch as the notion of a ‘design grammar’ may be applicable to these arrangements,18 their grammar appears to be limited within these prescriptions. Yet, the strong adherence to these rules across the vast geographic space in which applied motifs were made and used suggests they were symbolically important. Importantly, within the medium of applied pottery containers both geometric motifs and motifs of a more figurative persuasion appear. The latter include the occasional humanoid motif discussed below but also various animal species. The former include circular or ovoid blobs, ‘coffee bean’ incised ovoid dots, crescents and zigzags. Both sub-categories, i.e. geometric and figurative motifs, were made of the same raw materials and with the same techniques for shaping and firing pots, following the same underlying ‘grammar’. Their functional-utilitarian associations, too, were similar, as were their spatial-depositional contexts (see below). It follows that in all likeli-

18

For a critique, see Bernbeck 1994.

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia

193

hood they formed part of the same symbolic sphere. That is, the applied humanoids discussed below should not be studied in isolation. They formed an inextricable part of a broader, more diverse iconographic repertoire which included non-figurative items that modern scholarship might not so immediately classify together with anthropomorphic designs.

Intriguing humanoids Let us now focus on the humanoids themselves. As Katharina Streit19 has recently summarised much of the Near Eastern evidence, I shall not repeat her work but instead discuss some previously unpublished examples emerging from recent excavations at the Late Neolithic site of Shir, situated on a tributary of the Orontes River in western Syria. Excavations at this site have uncovered the remains of a Late Neolithic village inhabited for the greater part of the 7th millennium BC.20 In the south area of the site a stratified sequence was exposed that comprised six superimposed building levels (some with sublevels) dating from 7000 calBC for the oldest level I to about 6500 calBC for the uppermost level VI. In the north area, a remarkably well-preserved, multi-roomed stone building was exposed dating to the final centuries of the 7th millennium BC.21 Applied decoration was introduced in small quantities in the final parts of the ceramic sequence (starting in level V in the south area, with several additional examples coming from the north area). The available radiocarbon dates suggest a date of around 6700 calBC for its appearance at the site.22 Applied motifs were associated exclusively with the category of plant-tempered pottery locally known as Coarse Unburnished Ware; no examples have thus far been attested with the other major ceramic category, Dark-Faced Burnished Ware, at the site. Applied decoration marked fewer than 2% of this coarse pottery showing various geometric motifs, animals and several examples of anthropomorphic images.23 The first example of a humanoid found at the site (at the surface) was published promptly,24 but subsequent excavations yielded several additional examples. Shir presently offers the largest collection of these intriguing figures in the archaeology of the ancient Near East. At Shir and other Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamian sites, the anthropomorphic motifs are all unique, but structurally they resemble one another closely. They usually have an elongated, tall, vertically-oriented body that appears to be a stylised, abstracted rendering of the human body. Most of the images have arms and legs. In some instances, circular depressions suggest a navel (Fig. 3.2), but it is unclear if these depressions were deliberate or merely the result of the burnedout coarse plant fibres contained in the fabric. To the degree that the images have been preserved intact, in most cases the arms are held up high, but a few examples have the arms in a downward position (e.g. Fig. 3.1). In some exemplars toes or fingers seem to be indicated with incisions. Some of the legs, too, may have markings, for example a vertical incision (Fig. 3.2, left leg) or horizontal slits (Fig. 3.3). None of the images shows arms or legs bent; they all seem to have their limbs outstretched. The images are stylised to the degree that the bodily orientation cannot always be read with certainty. Mostly, however, the figures appear to be portrayed en face, in full frontal position. With few exceptions, they are portrayed in standing position. Often, but certainly not always, the figures carry a head. The shape of the head varies enormously but generally the heads underwent a fair degree of cranial stylisation. Sometimes the head is little more than a roughly circular or rectilinear extension of the body. In some cases, it

19 20

21 22 23 24

Streit 2015; also Garfinkel 2003; Bartl – Nieuwenhuyse 2008. Bartl et al. 2008; Bartl – Ramadan 2008; Bartl et al. 2009; Bartl et al. 2011; Bartl et al. 2012; Bartl 2013; Bartl – alHafian 2014; Bartl in press. Bartl et al. 2012, 178–180. Nieuwenhuyse 2018b. For full discussion see Bartl – Nieuwenhuyse 2008; Nieuwenhuyse 2018b. Bartl – Nieuwenhuyse 2008.

194

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Fig. 3   Shir, south area. Examples of humanoid applied decoration (after Nieuwenhuyse 2018b) (photos: I. Wagner; drawings: A. Gubisch, DAI Berlin)

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia

195

Fig. 4   Shir, north area. Examples of humanoid applied decoration (after Nieuwenhuyse 2018b) (drawings: A. Gubisch, DAI Berlin)

is a triangular, pointed shape (Fig. 4.2). None of them have identifiable hair. Characteristically, too, they mostly lack overt facial features. This seems to be a general rule for Near Eastern applied anthropomorphic figures.25 Two examples from Umm Dabaghiyah likewise lack them (see below, Figs. 7.1 and 7.3). An interesting exception from Shir is represented by a figure found at the surface of the site with a circular head that rather unequivocally shows an opened mouth, eyes, and perhaps nostrils (Fig. 3.1). Several scholars have suggested that such stylised heads point to shamans wearing masks,26 but the applied images do not readily allow this interesting suggestion to be substantiated. In most cases the images do not purposely show gender, or gender is represented in ways modern scholarship so far does not comprehend. Discussing applied anthropomorphs from Umm Dabaghiyah, Kirkbride27 suggested that they were all ‘female’; in fact her illustrations suggest an absence of obvious gender signals, as do the other Near Eastern examples listed by Streit.28 An absence of explicit gender is also noticeable at Shir. In his discussion of ithyphallic anthropomorphic representations, Bernd Müller-Neuhof shows that in the absence of explicit depictions, the phallus is often indicated indirectly by the position of arms and hands.29 This would suggest that none of the images discussed here were either male or female, as none have the hands directed to the breasts or the pubic area. As far as we can tell, the images may all have been purposely nongendered. A remarkable exception to this rule is an example, so far unique, that actually resembles the human female body, at just a few centimetres tall (Fig. 3.4). Kirkbride would have had no trouble classifying this small gem as a ‘figurine applied to pottery’.30 In a manner strongly reminiscent of some of the human figurines found at the site, the image shows a voluptuous body, in what appears to be a squatting position, with somewhat exaggerated features. The arms and legs are schematically rendered; shallow marks perhaps indicate breasts. Found isolated from its original container, the head is missing. It is not entirely clear whether a head was originally present or whether it was originally there but broken off at a specific moment in the object’s history. Fragmentation and separating heads from bodies are recurrent features of Late Neolithic ritual.31 It is interesting to speculate on the deliberate breakage or head removal of this applied image.

25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Streit 2015, fig. 6. Breniquet 1992, 75; Garfinkel 2003; Hole 2010, 234; Kielt-Costello 2013, 121. Kirkbride 1973, 5, pl. III.1–8. Streit 2015, fig. 6. Müller-Neuhof this volume. Kirkbride 1973, 5. Verhoeven 2002; Hodder – Meskell 2010.

196

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

However, even if for present purposes we have singled out the anthropomorphic images in isolation, it must be emphasised that for most cases their identification as ‘human’ is far from straight-forward. This can hardly be attributed to a lack of skill on the part of the Late Neolithic craftsperson or to an unfamiliarity with the anthropomorphic figure or even to the prevalence of social taboos preventing its representation, as shown by the example of the applied female body discussed above or the presence of figurines sculpted in the round.32 Significantly, painted representations of the human figure are known in Upper Mesopotamia already from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period33 and they continued throughout the Halaf period. In contrast with the applied examples, the painted figures are more easily identifiable as human, even if their specific social roles or identities remain difficult to comprehend.34 There appears to be a deliberate fuzziness when it comes to the ‘humanness’ of these applied images. Therefore, the more neutral term ‘humanoids’ is preferable to the more explicit ‘anthropomorph’. In some cases, the figures have an extension hanging down from below the body between the legs (e.g. Fig. 3.1, Fig. 5).35 Are these depictions of Männer mit aufgerichtetem Penis?36 MüllerNeuhof cites convincing ethnographic parallels to support this interpretation.37 On the other hand, one might expect the ‘penis’ to be more convincingly rendered in an anatomical position instead of pointing down or the sexual act to be shown more explicitly and between partners. Instead, might this represent childbirth?38 Accepting this interpretation would involve allowing that the ‘child’ was portrayed in a highly schematic fashion. Moreover, several examples show a similar

Fig. 5   Shir, north area. Example of humanoid applied decoration (after Nieuwenhuyse 2018b) (photo: I. Wagner; drawing: A. Gubisch, DAI Berlin)

32 33 34 35 36 37 38

Becker this volume; Biehl this volume. Molist 1998. Campbell 2010; Hietanen 2015; Nieuwenhuyse 2017b. Also Streit 2015, fig. 6.4. Kaplan 1969; Bartl – Nieuwenhuyse 2008. Müller-Neuhof this volume. Bar-Yosef 1992.

197

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia

‘Childbirth’ posture without a ‘child’, making this less likely as a generalised interpretation. Further, the extension might represent a skirt. After all, skirt-wearing individuals are a recurring element in painted anthropomorphic imagery from the Late Neolithic period.39 This interpretation would leave unanswered the question why most figures would appear to be undressed, but Beuger argues that clothing played a minor role in prehistoric life.40 In the painted Late Neolithic imagery, individuals not wearing skirts are often shown dressed in other types of garments.41 Alternatively, following Streit,42 these bodily extensions may represent tails. If so, the images shown would not have been fully human, but part human, part animal instead, or Mischwesen.43 The rich iconography of the Near Eastern Neolithic knows several examples of human-animal entities showing tail-like extensions going back to the very early stages of the Neolithic, for instance at Göbekli Tepe.44 The notion that at least some of the Shir humanoids were Mischwesen would tally with other animal-like properties they show. For example, some seem to more closely resemble ‘lizards’45 or ‘frogs’ rather than humans (e.g. Fig. 3.3, Fig. 5, respectively). In short, just as applied motifs more broadly range on a continuum from the purely abstract to more identifiably human, so the humanoids may have represented a fluid range of meanings from ‘human’ to ‘animal’ to, presumably, more abstract concepts and various hybrids thereof.

Big fat containers In order to grasp the potential meanings of these and other applied images it is imperative to understand their role in everyday life. How did these images function in the daily activities of Late Neolithic peoples? One way to move closer to an understanding of motifs applied to pottery is to simply ask the following: what sort of pottery are they on? A strong and consistent pattern emerges from the quantified studies of applied pottery available for the sites of Tell Sabi Abyad and Shir. First and foremost, both humanoid and non-figurative applied motifs are associated with closed shapes, very often varieties of hole mouth pots or jars (Table 1). The most common way to apply a humanoid in the Upper Mesopotamian Late Neolithic was to place it on the shoulder of a large jar (e.g. Figs. 2.1–2, 10–12). Most of the available examples, admittedly, are fragmented body sherds that do not readily allow a reconstruction of the vessel type. However, in most of these cases, the curvature, thickness of the sherd, and the rough, unfinished interior surface suggest a closed vessel type.

Bowls

Trays

Pots

Jars

Uncertain

Total

Shir – Southern Area

10

–

–

40

12

62

Shir – Northern Area

3

–

–

7

–

10

Tell Sabi Abyad – Operation I

8

–

1

6

2

17

Tell Sabi Abyad – Operation III

1

–

2

13

1

17

Total

22

–

3

66

15

106

Tab. 1   Typological associations of applied pottery at Shir (south area and north area) and Tell Sabi Abyad (Operation I and Operation III)

39 40 41 42 43 44 45

Hijara 1978; Nieuwenhuyse 2017b. Beuger this volume. Nieuwenhuyse 2017b. Streit 2015, 263. Bartl – Nieuwenhuyse 2008, 10. Schmidt 2007, 96, Abb. 25. Bartl – Nieuwenhuyse 2008, 10.

198

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Furthermore, applied motifs are associated with containers of a relatively large size. This emerges from the comparatively high values for wall thickness, vessel height and for vessel volume in particular. At Tell Sabi Abyad, applied motifs are associated with formal pottery types such as large jars or hole mouth pots, which could attain volumes of up to 50 litres. In short, most pottery vessels carrying applied motifs were big fat containers. For this paper I did not attempt a detailed comparative study of vessel type associations with applied pottery containers across Upper Mesopotamia. However, the associations between applied decoration and closed, bulky shapes appear to be a recurrent pattern.46 At Umm Dabaghiyah, applied decoration is associated mainly with tall, S-shaped closed vessels.47 At Yarim Tepe, in northern Iraq, applied imagery was the only type of decoration allocated (in very small numbers) to the functional-morphological category of ‘large storage vessels’ in the lower Hassuna levels. Smaller types of jars occasionally carried applied decoration in addition to other decorative techniques, but bowl types never possessed applied motifs.48 In this regard, the functional-utilitarian associations of applied imagery differ starkly from those observed with the painted compositions, which tend to be associated with open bowls and small goblets of a comparatively small size. Presumably these were intended for serving and displaying food and drink.49 The painted containers may have been ‘feasting’ vessels employed for crafting social identities in public, high-visibility contexts.50 In contrast, for the applied imagery the evidence from Upper Mesopotamia clearly points to an association with activities involving the long-term bulk storage of goods in pottery containers. Furthermore, the evidence suggests they were not intended to appear in public, high-visibility contexts (see below).

A non-visual language Elsewhere I investigated the development of painted pottery styles through the perspective of visual contrast, as one factor amongst others influencing the visibility of painted motifs.51 Late Neolithic potters developed different technologies for manipulating raw materials, surface appearances and firing techniques, which, through time, dramatically increased the visual contrast between the painted motifs and the unpainted vessel surface.52 Beginning in the 7th millennium with reddish paints on pinkish-brownish surfaces (low contrast), this eventually resulted in black paints on a cream surface (maximum contrast) in the Early Halaf period. These ceramic-technological innovations facilitated the use of painted serving vessels in public, high-visibility contexts of shared commensality. In the words of Frank Hole,53 they were ‘vessels to be seen’. So how does this work with applied humanoids? Applying the same analytical tools to the applied vessels shows that with the ceramic technologies employed, the applied motifs would have been very poorly visible unless from a close distance. At Tell Sabi Abyad, the plant-tempered coarse pottery, in its non-slipped variety, mostly had surface colours in the range of ‘pink’ (7.5YR7/3–5YR7/3) to ‘light brown’ (7.5YR6/3) or ‘very pale brown’ (10YR7/3). The Coarse Unburnished Ware at Shir was made in shades of ‘reddish-yellow’ (5YR6/6) to ‘pink’ (7.5YR7/3). Made of the very same materials and fired in the same kiln circumstances, the applied motifs had exactly the same colours, resulting in a minimal motif-background contrast (Fig. 6). This would have made the applied motifs almost invisible

46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53

For instance, Streit 2015, fig. 6. Kirkbride 1973, pl. III. Merpert et al. 1977; Merpert – Munchaev 1987; Merpert – Munchaev 1993. Merpert et al. 1977; Merpert – Munchaev 1987; Merpert – Munchaev 1993; Nieuwenhuyse 2007; Karsgaard 2010. Nieuwenhuyse 2009b; Nieuwenhuyse 2013; Nieuwenhuyse 2017b; Nieuwenhuyse in press. Nieuwenhuyse 2017a. Noll 1991; Robert 2010; Vsiansky – Mateiciucová 2017. Hole 2013, 85.

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia

199

Fig. 6   Tell Sabi Abyad. Comparing the contrast between painted or applied motifs and surface background for a range of Late Neolithic decorated pottery styles. Differences in Munsell values as a proxy for motif-surface contrast. Bottom line: applied pottery (after Nieuwenhuyse 2017a, fig. 10.5)

unless the appropriate lighting was available. Standing outdoors or in a well-lit room, people would have been able to see the motifs from some distance by the effects of light and shadow dancing over the vessel surface. However, as argued below, many of these vessels did not enjoy such luminous settings. In sum, the applied motifs, humanoid or otherwise, would have been imperceptible if they targeted primarily the visual senses. Was this a non-visual language?

Images in the dark To further gauge the possible meanings of the Late Neolithic applied humanoids, it is useful to consider their spatial context of use: what contexts were associated with applied pottery containers? As with later prehistoric Upper Mesopotamian material culture in general,54 we remain poorly informed on the depositional context of most of our applied examples. But at those sites for which we do have contextual-depositional information, applied images seem to be associated with specially-designed spaces facilitating storage. Typical for the later 7th and early 6th millennium in Upper Mesopotamia are large multi-roomed buildings, presumably purpose-built for the collective storage of goods and surpluses.55 Stamp seals, clay sealings and abstract counting devices were introduced in this period to coordinate these practices.56 The rooms are often small and without an apparent entry; access was via the roof. The point here is that whatever was deposited inside the dark, narrow rooms of these buildings would have been utterly invisible to spectators outside. The contents of the buildings would remain unknown to outsiders unless they were being informed or allowed entry. Human visitors to the buildings would have needed artificial lighting to see the contents of the rooms, for example oil lamps. Yet spatial analyses show that the rooms contained a broad range of objects including items bearing intricate forms or designs, including human and animal figurines, impressed clay

54 55

56

Verhoeven 1999. Kirkbride 1975; Akkermans – Le Mière 1992; Akkermans – Verhoeven 1995; Akkermans – Duistermaat 1997; Verhoeven 1999. Duistermaat 2013.

200

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Fig. 7   Umm Dabaghiyah. Village plan and associated pottery containers carrying applied decoration (after Kirkbride 1973; Kirkbride 1974)

sealings and, occasionally, applied pottery containers.57 The depositional nature of the buildings is debated: some of the richer contexts may have been ritually filled prior to the abandonment of the building and objects recovered from the room fills therefore may or may not reflect actual activities conducted at these locations.58 But the buildings often yield large pottery containers that as

57 58

Duistermaat 1996; Verhoeven 1999. Verhoeven 2000, Akkermans et al. 2012.

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia

201

far as we can reconstruct appear to be in situ; occasionally these carry applied motifs. These were images in the dark. I shall briefly discuss three case studies.

Umm Dabaghiyah A famous example of a site yielding several examples of this type of large, multi-roomed storage building was excavated in the 1970s at Umm Dabaghiyah in northern Iraq.59 Given the emphasis on large-scale, long-term storage in this village and considering its strategic location far out in the semi-arid steppes, Kirkbride suggested that it functioned as a specialised ‘trading outpost’ for exchanging specialised products from the steppe (e.g. onager hides) with items from central villages elsewhere.60 The site yielded several large closed vessels, presumably designed to facilitate bulk storage (Figs. 7.1–8). A few were found in the open courtyards,61 but large storage jars were also found buried up to their necks in the floors in some of the small cubical rooms.62 These were ‘fixtures’ rather than portable containers.63 Several carried applied decoration. Most of this was wholly geometric, but the iconographic repertoire from Umm Dabaghiyah included several examples of applied animals that made the site instantly famous amongst Near Eastern prehistorians. The repertoire included several humanoids as well (Figs. 7.1, 3, 5).64

Tell Sabi Abyad At Tell Sabi Abyad, several large pottery containers were recovered from the pre-Halaf to Transitional period occupation levels in Operation I on the south-western slopes of the mound (Operation I, levels 8–4). They also came from contemporaneous strata on the north-eastern slopes (Operation II) and from later Early Pottery Neolithic to pre-Halaf levels on the north-western slopes (Operation III, levels A1, B8–1). Some of these carried applied decoration. At Tell Sabi Abyad no applied humanoids have so far been identified, but the repertoire included stylised animals and animal-like motifs in addition to fully geometric motifs.65 The architecture in the pre-Halaf and Transitional period levels contained several agglomerated, multi-roomed buildings, surrounded by circular tholoi buildings and much open space.66 Both the architectural fills and the surrounding courtyards yielded applied motifs. It should be emphasised that most of the applied sherds were quite fragmented and presumably came from secondary or tertiary depositions. But some examples of large, virtually intact pottery containers carrying applications were excavated in situ. Significantly, the largest pottery containers came from those excavated parts that contained multi-roomed buildings (e.g. levels 8–4 in Operation I). The exposure of contemporaneous strata elsewhere on the mound yielded more irregular, smallscale architecture, and somewhat smaller, less voluminous types of jars.67 Some of the bulky, voluminous pottery containers were recovered from outdoor contexts: these must have stood outside adjacent to the buildings to which they belonged. Perhaps interestingly, one of those ‘standing-outside-on-the-courtyard’ examples, a large jar from Operation III, had its upper parts plastered. This effectively minimised the visibility of the applied crescent on

59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67

Kirkbride 1972; Kirkbride 1973; Kirkbride 1974; Kirkbride 1975. Kirkbride 1974; Kirkbride 1975. Kirkbride 1974, 88. Kirkbride 1974, 88. Cribb 1991. Kirkbride 1973, 5, pls. III; XIa. Nieuwenhuyse 2007; Nieuwenhuyse 2018a. Akkermans et al. 2006; Akkermans et al. 2014. Nieuwenhuyse 2018a.

202

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Fig. 8   Tell Sabi Abyad. Plan of the pre-Halaf (level 8) village in Operation I and associated in situ pottery container bearing applied decoration (no. 2); pre-Halaf period jar from Operation III beaing an applied crescent covered with plaster (no. 1) (after Nieuwenhuyse 2007, pl. 53.8; Akkermans et al. 2014; Nieuwenhuyse 2018a)

its shoulder (Fig. 8.1). A building from Operation I, level 8, had a square loam platform close to the largest room of the building, the only room with a door giving access from the outside. Access was not entirely public, however, as entry was only possible via an enclosed courtyard (Fig. 8). Embedded in the platform was a large hole mouth pot (Fig. 8.2). Partly buried, the container stuck out high enough to ensure that the applied crescent on its upper part was not covered.68

Shir As at most other sites, many applied examples at Shir are rather fragmented body sherds coming from severely eroded contexts. But the excavations in the north area exposed the remains of a remarkable multi-roomed building constructed in stone.69 The construction as a whole may have existed as a series of independent buildings closely aligned (Fig. 9). It may have had two storeys originally, of which only the stone-built infrastructure was preserved; the super-structure may have been made from loam or light-weight materials. No doors have so far been identified and presumably access into the rooms was via the roof. Significantly, this is the only building of its kind currently attested at the site and it contrasts with the more irregular, small-scale free-standing architecture scattered across the site.70 It may have had a centralised, collective role in the village as a whole.

68 69 70

Nieuwenhuyse 2007, 59, pl. 53.8. Bartl et al. 2012, 178–180. Bartl et al. 2012, 171–177.

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia

203

Fig. 9   Shir, Northern Area. Village plan showing the outlines of a large stone building and two associated pottery containers bearing applied decoration (after Bartl et al. 2012; Nieuwenhuyse 2018b)

Several large pottery containers and fragments thereof were recovered both from the fills of the rooms and from the open areas surrounding the construction. The more complete examples came from the room fills; items recovered from the outdoor, courtyard depositions were usually severely fragmented. This discrepancy may either reflect depositional circumstances favourable to the preservation of pottery vessels within the enclosed surroundings of the stone walls or may signal the practice of discarding the containers outside of the building after their useful life had ended: these two possibilities are evidently not mutually exclusive. The containers recovered from inside the buildings were sometimes placed carefully in pits or onto a circular layer of stones or reused sherds for support. It seems reasonable to suggest that at least some of these pottery types were recovered in situ and reflect activities conducted in the building. As most of these voluminous containers belong to the typological category of ‘Large Jar’, these activities will have involved the long-term, bulk storage of goods. Several of these large vessels carried applied decoration (Fig. 9.1–2). Most applied decoration from Shir came in geometric form, but several examples of humanoid applied images have already been discussed above.

204

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Discussion and conclusions To sum up, applied images are a relatively uncommon but intriguing phenomenon in the Upper Mesopotamian Late Neolithic. Figurative images resembling a stylised human body occasionally occur as part of a broader field of applied iconography. The ‘humanoid’ figure itself was much older than the pottery types described in this paper, formally going back at least to the ‘reptile’ shown on one of the stone pillars of Göbekli Tepe at the very dawn of the Neolithic71 or to the ‘dancers’ sculpted on a stone vessel from Pre-Pottery Neolithic Nevalı Ҫori.72 In the final parts of the 7th millennium BC this image was transferred to the medium of pottery containers. Significantly, this occurred at about the same time as a diverse suite of decorative styles was introduced pointing to a new role for pottery containers which was to transmit new kinds of symbolic messages.73 These changes in turn formed part of a much broader, profound package of change transforming later 7th millennium societies across Upper Mesopotamia.74 In this paper I have argued for a multi-sensory perspective and a contextualising analytical procedure to the applied humanoids. The strong contrasts between painted and applied pottery containers in terms of their overall design structures (‘grammar’), vessel type associations, and motif-background contrasts suggest that these two styles figured in wholly different social and symbolic activities. As to the applied images, a strong association with enclosure and storage in particular is evidenced. This is supported not only by their typological associations, which I took as a proxy for how these vessels were used in a utilitarian sense, but also by their spatial association with specialised, collective storage buildings. The Upper Mesopotamian humanoids (and other applied motifs) occur either inside these buildings or in close proximity to them. Attached to large, voluminous and heavy containers, they figured as stationary items or ‘fixtures’75 rather than as mobile, portable items. The low visibility of the non-contrasting applied images and their secluded, inaccessible setting inside dark, narrow rooms contradict the idea that the visual senses were the primary mode of perceiving these images. I interpret the applied humanoids as a tactile language, a sign language to be read with hands and fingers rather than with the eyes. Exploring the properties of the images themselves, I questioned if they realistically aimed to portray human beings, animals or something in between. Favouring the third option, I tentatively interpret the humanoids as Mischwesen.76 A close reading of the applied humanoids suggests something not-quite human, something other-worldly. They contrast sharply with contemporaneous painted images, which much more unequivocally permit an interpretation as ‘human’. Moreover, whereas painted human forms are often shown in groups, often in dancing positions,77 the applied humanoids are always portrayed as solitary figures. So far none of them is shown performing any kind of activity one might interpret as ‘shamanic’, for example beating drums or carrying shamanic instruments.78 If they ‘danced’ this would have been a solitary dance or perhaps a prayer. Their contextual associations literally put the humanoids somewhat apart from everyday life, away from the more public spaces where people slept, ate, gossiped, feasted and looked after their children. They were unseen, perhaps unknown, by most of the human users of the buildings in which they resided. Nevertheless, they would have been of vital importance to the community due to their role in serving buildings on which everyone’s fate and fortunes depended. The buildings themselves facilitated the emergence of a new role for the Upper Mesopotamian village as the focal point in

71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78

Schmidt 2007, 96, Abb. 25. Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007, 291–292, 294, item 115. Nieuwenhuyse 2007, Nieuwenhuyse 2013. Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2016; Nieuwenhuyse in press. Cribb 1991. But see Wengrow 2013 arguing for a much later urban appearance of composite religious symbols. Garfinkel 2003. Kielt-Costello 2013.

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia

205

an increasingly mobile, semi-pastoralist society with an intensifying reliance on the exploitation of secondary products.79 Within the buildings, people stored surpluses from the agricultural economy in containers made of pottery, stone, leather and basketry. Stored items additionally included tokens of contractual obligations, encoded in abstract counting tools and stamped seals.80 Rather than being instrumental in forging social identities (as has often been argued for the painted pottery styles), the applied vessels would have had other, equally important roles to play. Streit makes the interesting argument that these figures transmitted dominance or aggression, drawing a parallel with the Maori haka dance.81 Scrutinising the cultural-anthropological literature, Müller-Neuhof argues that frontal depictions of (male) figures often have either an aggressive, defensive connotation to demarcate territory or an apotropaic function.82 To archaeologists exploring the past, the depositional context is analytically key: territorial markers would be aimed at other humans in public, high-visibility contexts such as the facade of communal buildings, whereas apotropaic interpretations may be brought into play in non-public contexts in which the images would mainly address super-natural beings. Furthermore, as Müller-Neuhof points out, such frontal images and their gestures are directed towards the observer; they are confrontational.83 They aim to communicate with the outside observer rather than with other narrative elements of the composition. In line with these insightful suggestions, I interpret the role of the Late Neolithic humanoids as apotropaic. As with apotropaic images from much later times they may have been made to resemble evil itself.84 Operating in the dark, their main purpose may have been to exude an enduring protective presence, as permanent guardians against evil. As magic devices mediating between the human world and the supernatural, they were a form of distributed agency.85 Deposited inside the buildings by their human operators, they were left behind to confront demons or other supernatural agents deemed responsible for generalised evil or specific illnesses, pests or theft. As far as their human interlocutors were concerned, applied humanoids were to touch rather than to see, but the figures may have had their primary intended audience in the non-human world. To conclude, by situating the applied figures in Neolithic ritual and religion I aimed to draw attention to a hitherto relatively neglected aspect of this rich symbolic world but also to the sensual, embodied side of religious thought. Abstract ideas existed by virtue of their physical manifestation in a highly diverse material world.86 Scholars have in fact shown that ritual practice in the Late Neolithic of Upper Mesopotamia was far from uniform.87 Pushing this insight one step further is to acknowledge that different ritual forms referenced different symbolic realms, appealed to different senses and catered to different categories of spectators and participants.

References Adams 1983 R. McC. Adams, The Jarmo stone and pottery vessel industries, in: Braidwood et al. 1983, 209–232. Akkermans 1988 P. M. M. G. Akkermans, The soundings at Tell Damishliyya, in: M. N. van Loon (ed.), Hammam et-Turkman I. Report on the University of Amsterdam’s 1981–84 Excavations in Syria (Istanbul 1988) 19–67.

79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87

Akkermans – Verhoeven 1995; Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2015. Duistermaat 2013. Streit 2015, 263. Müller-Neuhof this volume. Müller-Neuhof this volume. Wiggermann 1992. Gell 1998. Nakamura – Pels 2014. Verhoeven 2002.

206

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Akkermans 1989 P. M. M. G. Akkermans, The prehistoric pottery of Tell Sabi Abyad, in: P. M. M. G. Akkermans (ed.), Excavations at Tell Sabi Abyad. Prehistoric Investigations in the Balikh Valley, northern Syria, BAR International Series 468 (Oxford 1989) 77–214. Akkermans 1993 P. M. M. G. Akkermans, Villages in the Steppe. Later Neolithic Settlement and Subsistence in the Balikh Valley, Northern Syria (Michigan 1993). Akkermans – Duistermaat 1997 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – K. Duistermaat, Of storage and nomads. The sealings of Late Neolithic Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria, Paléorient 22, 2, 1997, 17–44. Akkermans – Le Mière 1992 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – M. Le Mière, The 1988 Excavations at Tell Sabi Abyad, a Later Neolithic Village in Northern Syria, American Journal of Archaeology 96, 1992, 1–22. Akkermans – Verhoeven 1995 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – M. Verhoeven, An image of complexity. The Burnt Village at Late Neolithic Sabi Abyad, Syria, American Journal of Archaeology 99, 1, 1995, 5–32. Akkermans et al. 2006 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – R. Cappers – C. Cavallo – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse – B. Nilhamn – I. Otte, Investigating the Early Pottery Neolithic of northern Syria: new evidence from Tell Sabi Abyad, American Journal of Archaeology 110, 2006, 123–156. Akkermans et al. 2012 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – M. Bruning – N. Hammers – H. Huigens – L. Kruijer – A. Meens – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse – A. Raat – E. F. Rogmans – C. Slappendel – S. Taipale – S. Tews – E. Visser, Burning down the house. The burnt building V6 at Late Neolithic Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria, Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 43/44, 2012, 307–324. Akkermans et al. 2014 P. M. M. G. Akkermans – M. Bruning – H. Huigens – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse (eds.), Excavations at Late Neolithic Tell Sabi Abyad. Interim Report on the Archaeological Research (1994–1999) in the Balikh Valley, Syria. The 1994–1999 Field Seasons, Papers on Archaeology from the Leiden Museum of Antiquities 11 (Turnhout 2014). Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2007 Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe (ed.), Vor 12.000 Jahren in Anatolien. Die ältesten Monumente der Menschheit (Stuttgart 2007). Bartl 2013 K. Bartl, Shir, West Syria. The settlement and its surroundings in the 7th millennium cal. BCE, in: Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2013, 417–428. Bartl in press K. Bartl, The Late Neolithic site of Shir in western Syria. The final phase of occupation circa 6000 cal B.C., in: P. F. Biehl – E. Rosenstock (eds.), 6,000 BC. Times of Change in the Near East and Europe (in press). Bartl – al-Hafian 2014 K. Bartl – W. al-Hafian, Shir. Settlement and environment of the 7th millennium BC in the northern Levant, OrientArchäologie 30, 2014, 149–161. Bartl – Nieuwenhuyse 2008 K. Bartl – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, Reliefverzierte Keramik des Neolithikums aus Shir/Westsyrien, in: D. Bonatz – R. M. Czichon – F. Janoscha-Kreppner, F. (eds.), Fundstellen. Gesammelte Schriften zur Archäologie und Geschichte Altvorderasiens ad honorem Hartmut Kühne (Wiesbaden 2008) 9–16. Bartl – Ramadan 2008 K. Bartl – J. Ramadan, The Late Neolithic site of Shir. Third season of excavations in 2007, Chronique Archéologique en Syrie 3. Special Issue Documenting the Annual Excavation Reports Concerning the Archaeological Activities in Syria, 2008, 63–73.

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia

207

Bartl et al. 2008 K. Bartl – A. Haidar – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, Shir. Ein neolithischer Fundplatz am mittleren Orontes. Vorläufiger Bericht über die Ergebnisse der Testkampagne Herbst 2005 und Grabungskampagne Frühjahr 2006, Zeitschrift für OrientArchäologie 1, 2008, 54–88. Bartl et al. 2009 K. Bartl – M. Hijazi – J. Ramadan, Die spätneolithische Siedlung Shir/Westsyrien. Vorläufiger Bericht über die Ergebnisse der Grabungskampagnen Herbst 2006 und Frühjahr 2007, Zeitschrift für Orient-Archäologie 2, 2009, 140–161. Bartl et al. 2011 K. Bartl – J. Ramadan – W. al-Hafian, Shir/West Syria. Results of the sixth and seventh season of excavations in 2009, Chronique Archéologique en Syrie 5. Special Issue Documenting the Annual Excavation Reports Concerning the Archaeological Activities in Syria, 2011, 51–60. Bartl et al. 2012 K. Bartl – A. Farzat – W. al-Hafian, The Late Neolithic site of Shir. New results from 2010, Zeitschrift für OrientArchäologie 5, 2012, 168–187. Bar-Yosef 1992 O. Bar-Yosef, The Neolithic period, in: A. Ben-Tor (ed.), The Archaeology of Ancient Israel (New Haven 2012) 10–39. Bernbeck 1994 R. Bernbeck, Die Auflösung der häuslichen Produktionsweise (Berlin 1994). Bernbeck – Nieuwenhuyse 2013 R. Bernbeck – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, Established paradigms, current disputes and emerging themes. The state of research on the Late Neolithic in Upper Mesopotamia, in: Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2013, 17–37. Boivin 2008 N. Boivin, Material Cultures, Material Minds. The Impact of Things on Human Thought, Society, and Evolution (Cambridge 2008). Braidwood et al. 1983 L. S. Braidwood – R. J. Braidwood – B. Howe – C. Reed – P. J. Watson (eds.), Prehistoric Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks, Oriental Institute Publications 105 (Chicago 1983). Breniquet 1992 C. Breniquet, A propos du vase halafien de la Tombe G2 de Tell Arpachiyah, Iraq 54, 1992, 69–78. Caldwell 1983 J. Caldwell, The pottery from the soundings at Gird Ali Agha and al-Khan, in: Braidwood et al. 1983, 649–668. Campbell 2010 S. Campbell, Understanding symbols. Putting meaning into painted pottery, in: D. Bolger – L. C. Maguire (eds.), Development of Pre-State Communities in the Ancient Near East (Oxford 2010) 147–155. Carter – Phillip 2010 R. A. Carter – G. Phillip (eds.), Beyond the Ubaid. Transformation and Integration in the Late Prehistoric Societies of the Middle East (Chicago 2010). Cribb 1991 R. Cribb, Nomads in Archaeology (Cambridge 1991). Croucher – Campbell 2009 K. Croucher – S. Campbell, Dying for a change? Bringing new senses to Near Eastern Neolithic mortuary practice, in: S. Terendy – N. Lyons – M. Janse-Smekal (eds.), Que(e)rying Archaeology. Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual Chacmool Conference, University of Calgary (Calgary 2009) 95–105. Cruells et al. 2017 W. Cruells – I. Mateiciucová – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse (eds.), Painting Pots. Painting People (Oxford 2017). Duistermaat 1996 K. Duistermaat, The seals and sealings, in: P. M. M. G. Akkermans (ed.), Tell Sabi Abyad. The Late Neolithic Settlement (Leiden, Istanbul 1996) 339–401.

208

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Duistermaat 2013 K. Duistermaat, Private matters. The emergence of sealing practices in Neolithic Syria, in: Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2013, 315–322. Garfinkel 2003 Y. Garfinkel, Dancing at the Dawn of Agriculture (Austin 2003). Gell 1998 A. Gell, Art and Agency. An Anthropological Theory (Oxford 1998). Hamilakis 2011 Y. Hamilakis, Archaeologies of the Senses, in: T. Ingold (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Ritual and Religion (Oxford 2011) 208–225. Hamilakis 2014 Y. Hamilakis, Archaeology and the Senses. Human Experience, Memory, and Affect (Cambridge 2014). Hietanen 2015 R. Hietanen, A Matter of Self-Representation (Leiden 2015). Hijara 1978 I. Hijara, Three new graves at Arpachiyah, World Archaeology 10, 2, 1978, 125–128. Hodder 1990 I. Hodder, The Domestication of Europe (Oxford 1990). Hodder 1991 I. Hodder, Interpretive archaeology and its role, American Antiquity 561, 1991, 7–18. Hodder 2010 I. Hodder, Probing religion at Ҫatalhöyük. An interdisciplinary experiment, in: I. Hodder (ed.), Religion in the Emergence of Civilization. Ҫatalhöyük as a Case Study (Cambridge 2010) 1–31. Hodder 2012 I. Hodder, Entangled. An Archaeology of the Relationships between Human and Things (Chichester 2012). Hodder – Meskell 2010 I. Hodder – L. Meskell, The symbolism of Ҫatalhöyük in its regional context, in: I. Hodder (ed.), Religion in the Emergence of Civilization. Ҫatalhöyük as a Case Study (Cambridge 2010) 32–72. Hole 2010 F. Hole, A monumental failure. The collapse of Susa, in: Carter – Phillip 2010, 227–243. Hole 2013 F. Hole, Constrained innovation. Halafian ceramics, in: Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2013, 77–88. Hole 2017 F. Hole, Exploring the data. The pottery of Umm Qseir, in: Cruells et al. 2017, 186–200. Huot 1994 J. L. Huot, Les premiers villageois de Mésopotamie. Du village à la ville (Paris 1994). Ingold 2000 T. Ingold, The Perception of the Environment (London 2000). Kaplan 1969 J. Kaplan, Ein el-Jarba. Chalcolithic remains in the Plain of Esdraelon, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 194, 1969, 2–39. Karsgaard 2010 P. Karsgaard, The Halaf-Ubaid Transition. A transformation without a center?, in: Carter – Phillip 2010, 51–67. Kielt-Costello 2013 S. Kielt-Costello, Using imagery to interpret Late Neolithic religion, in: Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2013, 117–124.

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia

209

Kirkbride 1972 D. Kirkbride, Umm Dabaghiyah 1971. A Preliminary Report, Iraq XXXIV, 1972, 3–19. Kirkbride 1973 D. Kirkbride, Umm Dabaghiyah 1972. A second preliminary report, Iraq XXXV, 1973, 1–7. Kirkbride 1974 D. Kirkbride, Umm Dabaghiyah. A Trading Outpost?, Iraq XXXVI, 1974, 85–92. Kirkbride 1975 D. Kirkbride, Umm Dabaghiyah. A Fourth Preliminary Report, Iraq XXXVII, 1975, 3–10. Le Mière 2000 M. Le Mière, L’occupation proto-Hassuna du Haut-Khabur occidental d après la céramique, in: B. Lyonnet (ed.), Prospection archéologique du Haut Khabur occidental (Syrie du N.E.), vol. 1 (Beirut 2000) 127–149. Le Mière – Nieuwenhuyse 1996 M. Le Mière – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, The prehistoric pottery from Tell Sabi Abyad, in: P. M. M. G. Akkermans (ed.), Tell Sabi Abyad. A Neolithic Village in the Balikh Valley (1988 to 1992) (Leiden 1996) 119–284. Le Mière – Picon 1991 M. Le Mière – M. Picon, Early Neolithic pots and cooking, in: R. B. Wartke (ed.), Handwerk und Technologie im alten Orient, Internationale Tagung Berlin, 12.–15. März 1991 (Mainz 1991) 67–70. Le Mière – Picon 1998 M. Le Mière – M. Picon, Les débuts de la céramique au Proche-Orient, Paléorient, 24, 2, 1998, 27–48. Le Mière – Picon 2003 M. Le Mière – M. Picon, Appearing and first development of cooking and non-cooking ware concepts in the Near East, in: V. Serneez – M. Maggetti (eds.), Ceramic and Society. Papers presented at the 6th European Meeting on Ancient Ceramics, Fribourg (Switzerland) 2001 (Fribourg 2003) 174–188. Le Miere – Picon 2008 M. Le Mière – M. Picon, A Contribution to the Discussion on the Origins of the Halaf Culture from Chemical Analyses of Pottery, in: J. Córdoba – M. Molist – M. Carmen Pérez – I. Rubio – S. Martínez (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, April 3–8 2006 (Madrid 2008) 729–734. Lloyd – Safar 1945 S. Lloyd – F. Safar, Tell Hassuna. Excavations by the Iraq Government General of Antiquities in 1943 and 1944, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 4, 1945, 255–289. MacGregor 1999 G. MacGregor, Making sense of the past in the present. A sensory analysis of carved stone balls, World Archaeology 312, 1999, 258–271. Merpert – Munchaev 1987 N. Y. Merpert – R. M. Munchaev, Yarim Tepe I and Yarim Tepe II in Northern Iraq, Iraq XLIX, 1987, 1–36. Merpert – Munchaev 1993 N. Y. Merpert – R. M. Munchaev, Yarim Tepe I, in: N. Yoffee – J. J. Clark (eds.), Early Stages in the Evolution of Mesopotamian Civilization. Soviet Excavations in Northern Iraq (Tuscon 1993) 73–114. Merpert et al. 1977 N. Y. Merpert – R. M. Munchaev – N. O. Bader, The investigations of Soviet expedition in Iraq 1974, Sumer XXXIII, 1977, 65–104. Molist 1998 M. Molist, Des représentations humaines peintes au IXe millénaire BP sur le site de Tell Halula (Vallée de l’Euphrate, Syrie), Paléorient 24, 1998, 81–87. Nakamura – Pels 2014 C. Nakamura – P. Pels, Using “magic” to think from the material. Tracing distributed agency, revelation and concealment at Ҫatalhöyük, in: I. Hodder (ed.), Religion at Work in a Neolithic Society (Cambridge 2014) 187–224.

210

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Nieuwenhuyse 2000 O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, Early pottery. The ceramics from level 1, in: M. Verhoeven – P. M. M. G. Akkermans (eds.), Tell Sabi Abyad II. A Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Settlement (Istanbul 2000) 123–135. Nieuwenhuyse 2007 O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, Plain and Painted Pottery. The Rise of Regional Ceramic Styles on the Syrian and Northern Mesopotamian Plains, Papers on Archaeology from the Leiden Museum of Antiquities 3 (Turnhout 2007). Nieuwenhuyse 2009a O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, The Late Neolithic ceramics from Shir. A first assessment, Zeitschrift für Orient-Archäologie 2, 2009, 310–356. Nieuwenhuyse 2009b O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, The ‘painted pottery revolution’. Emulation, ceramic innovation and the Early Halaf in northern Syria, in: L. Astruc – A. Gaulon – L. Salanova (eds.), Méthodes d’approche des premières productions céramiques. Etude de cas dans les Balkans et au Levant, Internationale Archäologie – Arbeitsgemeinschaft, Symposium, Tagung, Kongress 12 (Rahden 2009) 81–91. Nieuwenhuyse 2010 O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, A household affair? Pottery production in the Burnt Village at Late Neolithic Tell Sabi Abyad, in: D. Bolger – L. Maguire (eds.), The Development of Pre-state Communities in the Ancient Near East. Studies in Honour of Edgar Peltenburg (Oxford 2010) 97–105. Nieuwenhuyse 2013 O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, The social uses of decorated ceramics in Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia, in: Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2013, 135–146. Nieuwenhuyse 2014 O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, A review of the ceramics from the 1994 – 1999 campaigns. in: Akkermans et al. 2014, 87–112. Nieuwenhuyse 2017a O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, Pots to be seen, in: Cruells et al. 2017, 115–128. Nieuwenhuyse 2017b O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, Civilized men drinking, in: D. Kertai – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse (eds.), From the Four Corners of the Earth. Studies in Iconography and Cultures of the Ancient Near East in Honour of F. A. M. Wiggermann, Alter Orient und Altes Testament 441 (Münster 2017) 135–152. Nieuwenhuyse 2018a O. P. Nieuwenhuyse (ed.), Relentlessly Plain. Seventh Millennium Ceramics at Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria (Oxford 2018). Nieuwenhuyse 2018b O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, The Pottery from the South Area, in: K. Bartl – A. Farzat (eds.), The Late Neolithic site of Shir/ West Syria. Volume I: The Excavations at the South Area 2006–2009 (in press). Nieuwenhuyse in press O. P. Nieuwenhuyse, Containers of change. Social and material innovation in Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia, in: P. Biehl – E. Rosenstock (eds.), 6,000 BC – Transformations and Change in the Near East and Europe (in press). Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2013 O. P. Nieuwenhuyse – R. Bernbeck – P. M. M. G. Akkermans – J. Rogasch (eds.), Interpreting the Late Neolithic of Upper Mesopotamia, Papers on Archaeology from the Leiden Museum of Antiquities 9 (Turnhout 2013). Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2015 O. P. Nieuwenhuyse – M. Roffet-Salque – R. Evershed – P. M. M. G. Akkermans – A. Russell, Tracing pottery use and the emergence of secondary product exploitation through lipid residue analysis at Late Neolithic Tell Sabi Abyad (Syria), Journal of Archaeological Science 64, 2015, 54–66. Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2016 O. P. Nieuwenhuyse – P. M. M. G. Akkermans – J. van der Plicht – A. Russell – A. Kaneda, The 8.2 event in Upper Mesopotamia. Climate and cultural change, in: P. Biehl – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse (eds.), Climate and Cultural Change in Prehistoric Europe and the Near East (Albany 2016) 67–93.

See or Touch? Applied Humanoid Imagery from Late Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia

211

Noll 1991 W. Noll, Alte Keramiken und ihre Pigmente. Studien zu Material und Technologie (Stuttgart 1991). Odaka 2017 T. Odaka, The emergence of pottery in Northern Levant. A recent view from Tell el-Kerkh, in: Tsuneki et al. 2017, 61–72. Palavestra 2016 A. Palavestra, Structuralism in archaeology, Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology 42, 2016, 137–148. Robert 2010 B. Robert, Développement et Disparition de la Production Céramique Halafienne. Implications Techniques et Sociales à Partir d’Etudes de Cas (PhD Diss. Université Lumière Lyon 2, Lyon 2010). Schmidt 2007 K. Schmidt, Sie bauten die ersten Tempel. Das rätselhafte Heiligtum der Steinzeitjäger (Munich 2007). Shackel – Little 1992 P. A. Shackel – B. J. Little, Meanings and uses of material culture, Historical Archaeology 26, 1992, 5–11. Skeates 2010 R. Skeates, An Archaeology of the Senses. Prehistoric Malta (Oxford 2010). Streit 2015 K. Streit, Interregional contacts in the 6th millennium BC. Tracing foreign influences in the hole-mouth jar from Ein El-Jarba, Israel, Levant 47, 2015, 255–266. Tsuneki et al. 2017 A. Tsuneki – O. P. Nieuwenhuyse – S. Campbell (eds.), The Emergence of Pottery in Western Asia (Oxford 2017). Verhoeven 1999 M. Verhoeven, An Ethnographical Ethnography of a Late Neolithic Community. Space, Place and Social Relations at Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria (Istanbul 1999). Verhoeven 2000 M. Verhoeven, Death, fire and abandonment. Ritual practice at Late Neolithic Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria, Archaeological Dialogues 7, 2000, 46–65. Verhoeven 2002 M. Verhoeven, Ritual and ideology in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B of the Levant and Southeast Anatolia, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 12, 2002, 233–258. Vsiansky – Mateiciucová 2017 D. Vsiansky – I. Mateiciucová, Analysis of paint on prehistoric pottery from Late Neolithic Tell Arbid Abyad (northeastern Syria), in: Cruells et al. 2017, 83–92. Wengrow 2013 D. Wengrow, The Origins of Monsters. Image and Cognition in the First Age of Mechanical Reproduction (New Jersey 2013). Wiggermann 1992 F. A. M. Wiggermann, Mesopotamian Protective Spirits. The Ritual Texts, Cuneiform Monographs I (Groningen 1992).

212

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Chalcolithic Human Representations at Çatalhöyük

213

Chalcolithic Human Representations at Çatalhöyük Goce Naumov 1 – Peter F. Biehl 2 Abstract: This paper discusses how studying visual representations of the human body from the Chalcolithic in central Anatolia can aid us in understanding identity and personhood in the past. The paper looks at anthropomorphism and miniaturisation as well as at embodiment and entanglement of the human figure as represented in figurines as well as on pottery especially from Çatalhöyük. It will also scrutinise corporeal as well as notional and symbolic attributes of the visual body in order to better understand changes and continuities in the expression of identity and personhood with human representations in the 7th–6th millennium BC. Keywords: figurines, Çatalhöyük, Neolithic, Early Chalcolithic, central Anatolia

Introduction This paper starts with an overview of recent research on cultural change at Çatalhöyük around 6000 calBC by discussing the material culture of the West Mound, the second mound at Çatalhöyük, located c. 200m west of the better-known East Mound.3 The West Mound was occupied in the Early Chalcolithic, the period with painted pottery that starts at c. 6000 calBC in commonly used periodisation schemes.4 The Early Chalcolithic of central Anatolia, and the Chalcolithic as a whole, is less well researched than the preceding Neolithic5 and this situation is exemplified at Çatalhöyük, where the Neolithic East Mound (dated 7100–5950 calBC)6 has been investigated in much greater depth than the West Mound (dated c. 6000–5500 calBC).7 Only

Fig. 1   a) Location of excavation trenches at Çatalhöyük; b) Construction features excavated in trench 5, Çatalhöyük West Mound with five excavated buildings (shaded: B.107, B.98, B.105, B.106, B.126) (plan: P. Willett and J. Anvari)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

University Goce Delcev, Institute of History and Archaeology, Republic of Macedonia; [email protected]. University at Buffalo, SUNY, Department of Anthropology, USA; [email protected]. For a detailed overview, see Anvari et al. 2017. E.g. Düring 2011a, tab. 5.1; Yakar 2011, tab. 4.1; Baird 2012, tab. 23.1; Özbaşaran – Buitenhuis 2002, tab. 2. Düring 2011a, 200; Düring 2011b, 797. Bayliss et al. 2015; Marciniak et al. 2015b. Orton et al. 2018.

214

Goce Naumov – Peter F. Biehl

recently has the Late Neolithic (6500–6000 calBC) become a focus of East Mound research. This paper will discuss human representations both in the form of figurines and pottery paintings mainly from the West Mound Early Chalcolithic (post-6000 calBC) but in reference to the representations from the preceding East Mound (pre-6000 calBC). The data presented in this paper comes from the following four West Mound excavations. In 1961, James Mellaart dug two test trenches8 and then decided to focus his efforts on the East Mound (Fig. 1a). Between 1998 and 2004, a team under the direction of Jonathan Last and Catriona Gibson re-opened and extended the Mellaart trench at the summit of the mound, Trench 1.9 In 2006, two new excavation areas were opened: Trench 8 by Burçin Erdoğu’s team10 and trenches 5–7 by our team, directed by Peter Biehl and Eva Rosenstock.11 Çatalhöyük figurines Çatalhöyük figurines were extensively studied and various interpretations have been proposed.12 The numerous excavations of this massive site provided a wide spectrum of human representations modelled in clay and stone as well as on wall paintings ranging from very stylistic to meticulously detailed elaborations (Fig. 2). Most of the figurines are miniatures, but there are some with exceptionally large dimensions.13 In regard to their context, the majority were found in middens or outside the buildings, while a much smaller number have particular locations within buildings or usage within households.14 Due to their dissimilarity and various contexts many thoughts on their meaning and use have been put forward. They fluctuate between more traditional interpretations of ‘goddesses’15 to recent broader considerations of corporeality, personhood and womanhood (Fig. 2).16 However, these studies were mainly focused on figurines from the East Mound while those found on the West Mound were rarely involved in figurine research. Consequently, the latest research on Çatalhöyük considers the figurines from the West Mound as well and provides new avenues for the understanding of the human body for both the Neolithic and Chalcolithic of central Anatolia.17 Due to the smaller scale of excavations on the West Mound (Fig. 1b) the number of figurines is much smaller than those from the East Mound. Nevertheless, these figurines provide insight into the Late Neolithic and Early Chalcolithic perception of the human body and the preservation or discontinuity of Early Neolithic practices in regard to represented corporeality. The total number of unearthed figurines from the West Mound is 86, but approximately 35 are anthropomorphic (Fig. 3a). Most of the figurines are fragmented, with mainly the heads, limbs or torso preserved, and only a few are complete. The figurine fragments were found in four trenches (1, 5, 7 and 8), most frequently in the buildings infill but also within the mudbricks of the walls (Fig. 3b). Despite their missing primary context – except the ones inside mudbricks – they provide invaluable information about the main visual principles for creating the bodies as well as the practices they were used in on the West Mound.

8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15 16 17

Mellaart 1965. Gibson – Last 2003; Gibson et al. 2004. Erdoğu – Ulubey 2011; Erdoğu 2012. Biehl – Rosenstock 2009; Biehl et al. 2012; Willett et al. 2016; Anvari et al. 2017; Biehl et al. forthcoming. Meskell et al. 2008; Nakamura – Meskell 2009; Meskell et al. 2016. Marciniak et al. 2016, 79. See Marciniak et al. 2016, 79 for two exceptional figurines which ‘have been deliberately placed on the surface of an earlier platform and then covered by two layers of makeup’. Mellaart 1967; Gimbutas 1989. Hamilton 1996; Meskell 1998; Voigt 2000; most recently Hodder 2016, 7–8; Meskell et al. 2016. Brady et al. 2014; Naumov – Biehl 2014; Naumov 2015a; Anvari et al. 2017.

Chalcolithic Human Representations at Çatalhöyük

215

Fig. 2   Limestone figurine from the Team Poznan Connection Trench on the East Mound (courtesy of A. Marciniak, and after Meskell et al. 2016, 138, figs. 1–2)

Fig. 3    a) Figurine distribution by West Mound trench; b) Figurine distribution in Trench 5 (graphs: G. Naumov)

As mentioned above, the total number of anthropomorphic figurines from the West Mound is approximately 35 of which the majority are fragments.18 There are only 11 completely or predominantly preserved figurines that provide some insight into the main corporeal preferences including gender, identity, body postures, etc. (Fig. 4). In regard to gender it should be emphasised that the majority are sexless i.e. genitalia, breasts, pregnancy, beard, moustaches or anything that would indicate male or female individuals were not represented. These sexless figurines merely outline the human body without any indication of specific body parts. This is significantly different from the traditional emphasis on femininity in the Neolithic in general, and in Neolithic Çatalhöyük in particular.19 Considering female figurines, there are nine finds with represented breasts, pubis or buttocks which are common for female representations in the Neolithic and Chalcolithic. But none of these features are exaggerated – on the West Mound, indications of the female sex are hardly visible – in the way that they are on the figurines from the East Mound or elsewhere in Anatolia and the Balkans.20

18 19 20

Naumov – Biehl 2014; Naumov forthcoming. Mellaart 1967. Biehl 1996; Biehl 2003; Bailey 2005; Hansen 2007; Biehl 2010; Naumov 2015b.

216

Goce Naumov – Peter F. Biehl

Fig. 4   Anthropomorphic clay figurines from the West Mound (photo: G. Naumov)

Fig. 5   Zoomorphic clay figurines from the West Mound (photo: G. Naumov)

Fig. 6   Abbreviated clay figurines from the West Mound (photo: G. Naumov)

This also concerns the issues of the identity, as most of the figurines do not have any traits in common for the depiction of faces, clothes, ornaments or body decoration. The face is completely absent on many and without the eyes, mouth or beard being represented, only the head outline and nose indicate the face.21 The same can be observed on other body parts: the hands are quite short while the legs are integrated within the bottom part of the figurine and rarely separated from the torso.22 When they are represented, the legs and arm are spread which emphasises the preferred

21 22

Naumov – Biehl 2014. Late Neolithic figurines from the East Mound have indicated ribs or flashy limbs (Nakamura – Meskell 2009; Nakamura – Meskell 2013), but these features are entirely absent on the West Mound figurines.

Chalcolithic Human Representations at Çatalhöyük

217

body gestures. In regard to posture, it is worth mentioning that most of the well-preserved figurines are seated. This posture of seated individuals with spread arms and legs is uncommon and an uncomfortable position in real life. In addition to human representations, zoomorphic figurines have also been unearthed on the West Mound which slightly outnumber the anthropomorphic figurines (Fig. 5). The majority of the approximately 40 zoomorphic figurines are fragments of torsos, heads, horns and legs, while only two are preserved completely.23 Although fragmented, they can be used to better understand the preferences in representing animals in Çatalhöyük’s transitional period. While most of these figurines represent cattle, some, with the exception of one goat, cannot be identified as particular species due to the lack of specific features. Their bodies are also stylised without explicit details, with the exception of the polished goat head that is exquisitely modelled. Few figurines should be distinguished from the others as they have deep incisions on their bodies which were made during production. We would argue that they were intentionally done in order to indicate stubbing that was most likely associated with the symbolic imitation of hunting or sacrificial rituals. Despite the small number of these finds, zoomorphic figurines from the West Mound show the main visual preferences of communities interacting with various domestic and wild animals at the turn of the 7th to 6th millennium BC. Miniaturism and reduction among West Mound figurines Despite the small number of approximately 90 figurines – in comparison to the number of anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figurines from the East Mound – unearthed from Çatalhöyük’s West Mound, it provides important insights into corporeal principles of the community that witnessed significant social transformation during the transition from the Neolithic to the Chalcolithic. The repetitive production of particular anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figurines indicates the preferences the community had in regard to representing the human body and species of domestic animals during the process of moving the settlement from the East to the West Mound around 6000 BC. Material culture in general and figurines in particular can be studied in order to understand better how a community copes visually and symbolically with a changing world by creating and using the human and animal body in a certain way.24 It can be highlighted that the majority of West Mound figurines are more stylised and reduced in detail than their counterparts on the East Mound. It seems that the Neolithic focus on the fleshy and exaggerated body25 was redirected towards more simplified and abstract bodies in the Early Chalcolithic. There were abbreviated bodies on the East Mound as well, but their quantity increases dramatically on the Early Chalcolithic West Mound where they dominate over those with detailed elaboration of heads, limbs or genitalia (Fig. 6). Only the animal figurines remain unchanged and they do resemble the visual traditions initiated at the beginning of the East Mound settlement at the end of the 8th millennium. In regard to the barely humanoid body, i.e. the abbreviated figurines, it retains a similar appearance, although a particular simplification is apparent on that of the West Mound. Even though there are discussions about whether these figurines actually depict human or animal bodies,26 some of the figurines from trenches 1 and 7 clearly have faces and genitalia. The more realistic anthropomorphic figurines – even if we consider them far from being realistic body portrayals of the human body – do resemble individuals mainly in seated positions. They are miniatures with a hint of detail that could indicate a face, a garment or an ornament and are therefore detached

23 24 25 26

Naumov forthcoming. Anvari et al. 2017. Nakamura – Meskell 2009. Nakamura – Meskell 2009.

218

Goce Naumov – Peter F. Biehl

from any accentuation of individual character or status.27 In terms of the archaeology of identity and personhood we are just at the beginning of tackling this important question and a more comprehensive study of all figurines from Çatalhöyük is needed to understand better the visual messages associated with the creation of these human and animal bodies.28 Even without facial features, clothes and jewellery, they assert something that is the opposite to individuality, i.e. uniformity as the main principle. They were not intended to assert the social differences of the individuals represented but to indicate the body itself or something behind this uniformity.29 The creators of the West Mound figurines were skilful craftspeople and were able to produce well-made objects – as evidenced by a few figurines – but it was not their intention to make them beautiful or impressive. The figurines were purposed to represent a visual body.30 As indicated before on the figurines in Europe, ‘certain meanings are borrowed or evoked through the process of citation, which is reflected in the similarities of certain types of visual bodies. A ‘central body’ is created and maintained over time, due to aesthetic and symbolic ideas about how bodily representations were carried out.’31 This could express the idea of belonging to a group or to somewhere but without any insignia or mark that would emphasise this idea. As several figurines represent a sitting posture, this posture might be related to an action or practice specific to this community.

27

28 29 30 31

The production of miniature and simplified figurines at Çatalhöyük is also clarified as a section within the process of overall gradual disinvestment in this settlement that resulted in the diminution of communal ties (Hodder 2013; Naumov – Biehl 2014; Marciniak et al. 2015a). Whether this social transformation can also be explained through figurines and whether the reduction in bodily features on them is a reflection of a lack of interest or lack of knowledge about these changes is still being discussed. Fowler 2004; Insoll 2007. Biehl 2010, 104. Biehl 2015, 201. Biehl 2010, 104–105.

Fig. 7   Anthropomorphic representations on pottery from the West Mound (photo: I. Franz; design: G. Naumov)

Chalcolithic Human Representations at Çatalhöyük

219

This body technique32 has also been seen in the context of their short, outstretched arms as a wide-spread gesture in anthropomorphic representations.33 Spread arms are quite uncomfortable in a sitting position and they seem to hold a special meaning as a particular action practised by the community. Though the actual practice is unknown, it seems to be associated with women as there are no male figurines from the West Mound. The representation of women in the form of figurines in the community of the West Mound differs considerably from the East Mound where we find their representations not only modelled in clay but also in stone (Fig. 2) as well as painted on the inside walls of buildings. The body features of some East Mound figurines are exaggerated, especially the stomach, buttocks and breasts, but also the limbs which are rather fleshy.34 None of these features are common for the West Mound figurines. But most importantly, beside the decrease in the overall quantity as well as visual quality of figurines, the main difference in body representation between the East and West Mound is the fact that on the West Mound there is for the first time the emergence of paintings of the human body on ceramic vessels (Fig. 7) as well as sculptures of the human head in the form of pot stands.35 Namely, many simplified human representations with or without indicators of their sex appear on vessels from the West Mound36 as well as in other Early Chalcolithic settlements in central Anatolia,37 which indicates an apparent refocus of body representations at the turn of the 7th to 6th millennium BC. In regard to animal representations, there were no significant changes relating to their production from the Neolithic to the Early Chalcolithic. This once more emphasises the importance of human representations and their modification along with the transformation of social processes. Although there were also changes regarding the animal diet on the West Mound,38 their depiction was not substantially altered when compared to those on the East Mound. Only the ratio between zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figurines changed, so that the predominance of animal representations in the Neolithic decreased and was nearly equivalent to that of humans in the Early Chalcolithic.39 Nevertheless, zoomorphic figurines still had a significant role in the visual culture of the West Mound and echoed the social processes of Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic communities at Çatalhöyük. Most of the zoomorphic figurines were cattle representations in spite of other animal species that are almost absent from the repertoire of these miniatures. There are a few that cannot be identified and just one goat with a body modelled in detail. This indicates that cattle were the predominantly depicted animals and as they were increasingly incorporated into the economy and diet of the West Mound community. Their symbolic value increased in the number of representations of them as well. Zooarchaeological analysis of the cattle from the West Mound suggests their intensive involvement in feasts which may explain the increase in representations of them.40 The above-mentioned incisions and also puncture marks in the bottom area of the animal figurines most likely indicate stubbing associated with the feasting. Such figurines are not rare in the Near East and they assert the incorporation of these animals within social and ritual events.41 The hunting of wild cattle is an image painted on the walls of a Neolithic building of the East

32 33 34

35 36 37 38 39 40 41

Mauss 1979. Biehl 2003; Joyce 2005. The increase in female representations on the East Mound is explained as a novel focus on house specific production and abundance, apparently evidenced on figurines which emphasise longevity, maturity and copiousness (Nakamura – Meskell 2009; Hodder 2013). See Willett 2010, 38–41. Naumov forthcoming. Biçakçi et al. 2007. Anvari et al. 2017; Orton forthcoming. Nakamura – Meskell 2013; Anvari et al. 2017; Naumov forthcoming. Anvari et al. 2017; Orton forthcoming. Rollefson 2000; Meskell et al. 2008; Martin – Meskell 2012; Arntz 2016.

220

Goce Naumov – Peter F. Biehl

Mound,42 so the production of these figurines could reflect the use of imitative magic that might be related with hunting or the ritual killing of these animals. It is noteworthy that one of the stubbed figurines from the West Mound has puncture marks in the heart area and is notably the largest figurine found at the site.43 It is evident that zoomorphic figurines contributed greatly to the visual representations and associated practices both on the East and West Mound at Çatalhöyük.

Conclusions Though largely fragmented, the preserved features of figurines indicate the major iconographic preferences of the Chalcolithic community at Çatalhöyük and their involvement in the spheres of visual culture. These figurines substantially elucidate the interaction between the miniature world and the one that surrounded those who produced and used them.44 They bear witness to the entanglement of the embodied environment that integrated both human and animal bodies, modelled in clay or painted on the vessels and walls. Such symbolic employment of anthropomorphic and zoomorphic representations was largely a continuation of initial Neolithic traditions at Çatalhöyük, but also evidenced momentous changes in the transformative period of this community at the dawn of the Early Chalcolithic. The transformative period at Çatalhöyük has recently been thoroughly studied and evidence for both changes and continuities in the community inhabiting the two neighbouring mounds has been published.45 This is also reflected in the figurine production and the embodiment of the manmade environment. The anthropomorphic figurines apparently depart from Neolithic corporal traditions and emphasise the abstraction of the human body and subsequently its miniaturisation both in the form of figurines and paintings on ceramics. It was no longer important to portray a specific person or the features indicating status or gender. Such features were present earlier but at the turn of the 7th to 6th millennium BC they become a visual principle that encompassed the entire repertoire of figurines and paintings. The human body was entirely miniaturised and the faces were fully gone, although at the same time some animal figurines were significantly larger and made of different material and with a particular purpose. A few of the cattle representations were made of marl, a material not used for human representations, and some were painted or had puncture marks. This clearly demonstrates that cattle were important and involved in imitative actions in regard to stubbing, so that they were produced for handling in contrast to the anthropomorphic miniature counterparts which had no traits of a particular usage. It seems that animal figurines had more symbolic importance, although their number is not much higher than that of anthropomorphic figurines. However, it should be asserted that the abstractness of anthropomorphic miniatures does not indicate lack of consideration for the human body.46 It could be regarded as a different sphere of embodiment which does not concern individuality and specific body features. In order to understand these corporeal fluctuations, a broader overview of not just the miniatures, but also the material culture from Çatalhöyük’s East and West Mounds is necessary. Along with this process of human body abstractness and handling with zoomorphs, paintings of human bodies on ceramic vessels appear in the Early Çatalhöyük West.47 The hybridism is initiated as a

42 43 44 45 46 47

Mellaart 1967. Naumov forthcoming. Biehl 2003; Bailey 2005; Naumov 2014. Anvari et al. 2017. See Biehl 2015 for a similar argument regarding the rare representations of children as figurines. This completely changes the concept, use and meaning of human representations as their message/meaning could be transported and ‘shared’ along with the food/drink in the ceramic containers with other community members as well as with neighbouring communities, i.e. symbolism becomes more accessible and mobile in the Early Chalcolithic in contrast to the limited access and ‘immobility’ of Neolithic wall paintings on the East Mound.

Chalcolithic Human Representations at Çatalhöyük

221

visual process and human or animal bodies were represented in various contexts. While the East Mound evidences painting of animals and people on the walls, a short time later the painting of figures appears on vessels, and many pots and pot stands are modelled with human features on the West Mound. This shift to different media indicates the refocusing of symbolic preferences from the body on figurines to figures on vessels and on pot stands. Therefore, the bodies of figurines were stylised while those painted on vessels were incorporated in a narrative context and illustrated the particular engagement of represented character(s). Consequently, the West Mound figurines, in addition to other segments of visual culture, should be further studied in order to understand thoroughly the employment of human and animal bodies as images produced and used in this transitional period. This paper is a first step towards a better understanding of the complexity of human representations and their multi-layered meanings and functions within both the Neolithic and Early Chalcolithic in central Anatolia.

References Anvari et al. 2017 J. Anvari – J. Brady – I. Franz – G. Naumov – D. Orton – S. Ostaptchouk – E. Stroud – P.T. Willet – E. Rosenstock – P.F. Biehl, Continous change: Venturing Into the Early Chalcolithic at Çatalhöyük, in: S. R. Steadman – G. McMahon (eds), The Archaeology of Anatolia: Recent Discoveries - Volume II (Newcastle upon Tyne 2017, in press). Arntz 2016 M. Arntz, Figurines as functional objects. Researching markings to get to figurine production and use, in: Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2016, 151–164. Online (last accessed 10 Oct 2018). Bailey 2005 D. Bailey, Prehistoric Figurines. Representation and corporeality in the Neolithic (London 2005). Baird 2012 D. Baird, The Late Epipaleolithic, Neolithic and Chalcolithic of the Anatolian Plateau, 13,000–4000BC, in: D. Potts (ed.), A Companion to the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East (Malden 2012) 431–465. Bayliss et al. 2015 A. Bayliss – F. Brock – S. Farid – I. Hodder – J. Southon – R. Taylor, Getting to the bottom of it all. A Bayesian approach to dating the start of Çatalhöyük, Journal of World Prehistory 28, 2015, 1–26. Biçakçi et al. 2007 E. Biçakçi – Ç. Altinbilek Algül – S. Balci – M. Godon, Tepecik-Çiftlik, in: M. Özdögan – N. Başgelen (eds), Türkiye’de Neolitik Dönem (Istanbul 2007) 237–253. Biehl 1996 P. F. Biehl, Symbolic communication systems. Symbols on anthropomorphic figurines in Neolithic and Chalcolithic southeast Europe, Journal of European Archaeology 4, 1996, 153–176. Biehl 2003 P. F. Biehl, Studien zum Symbolgut des Neolithikums und der Kupferzeit in Südosteuropa, Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 64 (Bonn 2003). Biehl 2010 P. F. Biehl, Representing the human body. Figurines of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic of southeast Europe, in: V. Becker – M. Thomas – A. Wolf-Schuler (eds.), Zeiten – Kulturen – Systeme. Gedenkschrift für Jan Lichardus, Schriften des Zentrums für Archäologie und Kulturgeschichte des Schwarzmeerraumes 17 (Langenweißbach 2009) 103–110. Biehl 2015 P. F. Biehl, Children in the anthropomorphic imagery of the European and Near Eastern Neolithic, in: G. Coşkunsu (ed.), The Archaeology of Children. Interdisciplinary Approaches, The Institute for European and Mediterranean Archaeology Distinguished Monograph Series (New York 2015) 189–204.

222

Goce Naumov – Peter F. Biehl

Biehl – Rosenstock 2009 P. F. Biehl – E. Rosenstock, Von Çatalhöyük Ost nach Çatalhöyük West. Kulturelle Umbrüche an der Schwelle vom 7. zum 6. Jt. v. Chr. in Zentralanatolien, in: R. Einicke – S. Lehmann – H. Löhr – G. Mehnert – A. Mehnert – A. Slawisch, Zurück zum Gegenstand. Festschrift für Andreas E. Furtwängler (Langenweißbach 2009) 471–482. Biehl et al. 2012 P. F. Biehl – I. Franz – D. Orton – S. Ostaptchouk – J. Rogasch – E. Rosenstock, One community and two tells. The phenomenon of relocating tell settlements at the turn of the 7th and the 6th millennia in central Anatolia, in: R. Hoffmann – F.-K. Moetz – J. Müller (eds.), Tells. Social and Environmental Space. Proceedings of the International Workshop ‘Socio-Environmental Dynamics over the Last 12,000 Years: The Creation of Landscapes II (14th–18th March 2011)’ in Kiel, Volume 3 (Bonn 2012) 53–65. Biehl et al. forthcoming P. F. Biehl – J. Anvari – E. Rosenstock (eds), The End of Çatalhöyük. The West Mound Excavations, UCLA Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press Monograph Series (forthcoming). Brady et al. 2014 J. Brady – P. F. Biehl – I. Franz – G. Naumov – D. Orton – S. Ostaptchouk – J. Rogasch – E. Rosenstock – P. Ryan – E. Stroud – P. T. Willet, Re-assembling the Çatalhöyük East and West Mound material culture. How the people from the West Mound interacted with the already ancient East Mound, in: Ö. Yilmaz (ed.), 20th Annual Meeting of the European Association of Archaeologists, 10–14 September 2014, Istanbul, Turkey. Abstracts of the Oral and Poster Presentations (Istanbul 2014) 482–483. Düring 2011a B. Düring, The Prehistory of Asia Minor. From Complex Hunter-Gatherers to Early Urban Societies (New York 2011). Düring 2011b B. Düring, Millennia in the Middle? Reconsidering the Chalcolithic of Asia Minor, in: S. Steadman – G. McMahon (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia. 10,000–323 B.C.E. (Oxford 2011) 796–812. Erdoğu 2012 B. Erdoğu, West Mound Trench 8, 2012, in: Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2012, 103–104. Online (last accessed 10 Oct 2018). Erdoğu – Ulubey 2011 B. Erdoğu – A. Ulubey, Colour symbolism in the prehistoric architecture of central Anatolia and Raman spectroscopic investigation of red ochre in Chalcolithic Çatalhöyük, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 30, 1, 2011, 1–11. Fowler 2004 C. Fowler, The Archaeology of Personhood. An Anthropological Approach (London 2004). Gibson – Last 2003 C. Gibson – J. Last, An early Chalcolithic building on the West Mound at Çatalhöyük, Anatolian Archaeology 9, 2003, 12–14. Gibson et al. 2004 C. Gibson – J. Last – S. Frame – T. Raszick, Study Season Report West Mound, in: Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2004. Online (last accessed 10 Oct 2018). Gimbutas 1989 M. Gimbutas, The Language of the Goddess (London 1989). Hamilton 1996 N. Hamilton, Figurines, Clay balls, small finds and burials, in: I. Hodder (ed.), On the Surface. Çatalhöyük 1993–1995 (Cambridge 1996) 215–263. Hansen 2007 S. Hansen, Bilder vom Menschen der Steinzeit. Untersuchungen zur anthropomorphen Plastik der Jungsteinzeit und Kupferzeit in Südosteuropa, Archäologie in Eurasien 20 (Mainz 2007). Hodder 2013 I. Hodder, Becoming entangled in things, in: I. Hodder (ed.), Substantive Technologies at Çatalhöyük. Reports from the 2000–2008 Seasons. Çatalhöyük Research Project Volume 9 (London, Los Angeles 2013) 1–25.

Chalcolithic Human Representations at Çatalhöyük

223

Hodder 2016 I. Hodder, Ups and downs at Çatalhöyük 2016, in: Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2016, 7–11. Online (last accessed 10 Oct 2018). Insoll 2007 T. Insoll, The Archaeology of Identities. A Reader (London 2007). Joyce 2005 R. A. Joyce, Archaeology of the body, Annual Review of Anthropology 34, 2005, 139–158. Marciniak et al. 2015a A. Marciniak – E. Asouti – C. Doherty – E. Henton, The nature of household in the upper levels at Çatalhöyük. Smaller, more dispersed, and more independent acquisition, production, and consumption unit, in: I. Hodder – A. Marciniak (eds.), Assembling Çatalhöyük (Leeds 2015) 151–165. Marciniak et al. 2015b A. Marciniak – M. Barański – A. Bayliss – L. Czerniak – T. Goslar – J. Southon – R. Taylor, Fragmenting times. Interpreting a Bayesian chronology for the Late Neolithic occupation of Çatalhöyük East, Turkey, Antiquity 89, 2015, 154–176. Marciniak et al. 2016 A. Marciniak – M. Dembowiak – J. Hordecki – W. Stosik, Excavations in the TPC Area, Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2016, 73–84. Online (last accessed 10 Oct 2018). Martin – Meskell 2012 L. Martin – L. Meskell, Animal figurines from Neolithic Çatalhöyük. Figural and faunal perspectives, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 22, 2012, 401–419. Mauss 1979 M. Mauss, Body techniques, in: Sociology and Psychology. Essays by Marcel Mauss (London 1979) 97–123. Mellaart 1965 J. Mellaart, Çatal Hüyük West, Anatolian Studies 15, 1965, 135–156. Mellaart 1967 J. Mellaart, Çatal Hüyük. A Neolithic Town in Anatolia (London 1967). Meskell 1998 L. Meskell, Twin Peaks. The archaeologies of Çatalhöyük, in: C. Morris – L. Goodison (eds.), Ancient Goddesses. The Myths and the Evidence (London 1998) 46–62. Meskell et al. 2008 L. Meskell – C. Nakamura – R. King – S. Farid, Figured lifeworlds and depositional practices at Çatalhöyük, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 18, 2, 2008, 139–161. Meskell et al. 2016 L. Meskell – C. Nakamura – L. Der – C. Tsoraki – M. Arntz, Figurines, in: Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2016, 137–164. Online (last accessed 10 Oct 2018). Nakamura – Meskell 2009 C. Nakamura – L. Meskell, Articulate bodies. Forms and figures at Çatalhöyük, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 16, 2009, 205–230. Nakamura – Meskell 2013 C. Nakamura – L. Meskell, Figurine worlds at Çatalhöyük, in: I. Hodder (ed.), Substantive Technologies at Çatalhöyük. Reports from the 2000–2008 Seasons, Çatalhöyük Research Project Volume 9 (London, Los Angeles 2013) 201–234. Naumov 2014 G. Naumov, Neolithic privileges. The selection within burials and corporeality in the Balkans, European Journal of Archaeology 17, 2, 2014, 184–207. Naumov 2015a G. Naumov, From Anatolia to Pelagonia and from XRF to Geophysics: archaeology and science in prehistory. Paper presented at international conference ‘One Step Beyond: multidisciplinary research in archaeology’ (Skopje 2015).

224

Goce Naumov – Peter F. Biehl

Naumov 2015b Г. Наумов / G. Naumov, Неолитски фигурини во Македонија / Neolitski figurini vo Makedonija (Skopje 2015). Naumov forthcoming G. Naumov, Figurines, in: P. F. Biehl – J. Anvari – E. Rosenstock (eds), The End of Çatalhöyük. The West Mound Excavations, UCLA Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press Monograph Series (forthcoming). Naumov – Biehl 2014 G. Naumov – P. F. Biehl, Faceless gender. The corporeality in the Çatalhöyük West Mound, in: Ö. Yilmaz (ed.), 20th Annual Meeting of the European Association of Archaeologists, 10–14 September 2014, Istanbul, Turkey. Abstracts of the Oral and Poster Presentations (Istanbul 2014) 548–549. Orton forthcoming D. Orton. Fauna, in: P. F. Biehl – J. Anvari – E. Rosenstock (eds), The End of Çatalhöyük. The West Mound Excavations, UCLA Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press Monograph Series (forthcoming). Orton et al. 2018 D. Orton – J. Anvari – A. Bogaard – C. Gibson – J. Last – E. Rosenstock – P. F. Biehl, A tale of two tells. Dating the Çatalhöyük West Mound, Antiquity 92, 363, 620–639. Özbaşaran – Buitenhuis 2002 M. Özbaşaran – H. Buitenhuis, Proposal for a regional terminology for Central Anatolia, in: F. Gérard – L. Thissen (eds.), The Neolithic of Central Anatolia. Internal Developments and External Relations During the 9th–6th Millennia cal BC (Istanbul 2002) 67–77. Rollefson 2000 G. Rollefson, Ritual and social structure at Neolithic ‘Ain Ghazal, in: I. Kuijt (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communities. Social Organization, Identity and Differentiation (New York 2000) 165–190. Voigt 2000 M. M. Voigt, Çatal Höyük in context. Ritual at Early Neolithic sites in central and eastern Turkey, in: I. Kuijt (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communities. Social Organization, Identity and Differentiation (New York 2000) 253–293. Willett 2010 P. Willett, Continuity and Clay. Anthropomorphic Representation at Çatalhöyük (Honors Thesis, University at Buffalo, New York 2010). Willett et al. 2016 P. Willett – I. Franz – C. Kabukcu – D. Orton – J. Rogasch – E. Stroud – E. Rosenstock – P.F. Biehl, The aftermath of the 8.2 event. Cultural and environmental effects in the Anatolian Late Neolithic and Early Chalcolithic, in: P. F. Biehl – O. Nieuwenhuyse (eds.), Climate and Cultural Change in Prehistoric Europe and the Near East, Institute for European and Mediterranean Archaeology Distinguished Monograph Series (New York 2016) 95–116. Yakar 2011 J. Yakar, Anatolian chronology and terminology, in: S. Steadman – G. McMahon (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia. 10,000–323 B.C.E. (Oxford 2011) 56–93.

When Do Human Representations Become Superhuman Agents?

225

When Do Human Representations Become Superhuman Agents? Trevor Watkins 1 Abstract: Is it possible to go beyond Jacques Cauvin’s attractive idea that the Neolithic saw ‘the birth of the gods’ and Klaus Schmidt’s suggestion that the great enclosures at Göbekli Tepe were built as temples to house the gods? Are the pairs of central monoliths in the early aceramic Neolithic circular enclosures at Göbekli Tepe representations of supernatural agents? Given that most large-scale, historic and contemporary polities and societies are associated with religions focused on moralising gods, while the ethnographic record of small-scale forager and horticulturalist societies offers examples of religions with no god or gods at their centre, it has been reasoned that religious ideas have evolved in parallel with the evolution of the scale of societies. Neolithic societies are in the middle of this evolutionary theory. By contrast with the preceding Palaeolithic mobile forager band societies, Neolithic societies, consisting of extensive networks of large, permanently co-resident communities, were the first large-scale societies. On the other hand, unlike later, larger-scale societies, there is no sign of the existence of institutionalised or hereditary hierarchies of power. Following Bellah’s (2011) analysis, chiefs with varying levels of power and authority are associated with corresponding sizes of large-scale societies that are smaller than states; and there seems to be a parallel between the extent of the power of chiefs and the authority and power attributed to the god or gods in these societies. The discussion here concludes that, while the T-shaped monoliths at Göbekli Tepe may represent supernatural beings, perhaps something like ancestor-gods, there is no reason to suppose that they were supernatural agents, that is, that they were believed to be able to act in the everyday human world. Keywords: Göbekli Tepe; anthropomorphic sculpture; supernatural beings; supernatural agents; Neolithic; PPN; evolution of religion; social evolution; cultural evolution

Jacques Cauvin wrote powerfully of ‘la naissance des divinités’ in the early aceramic Neolithic of the Levant.2 His arguments were very much in the mind of the late Klaus Schmidt, when he wrote that the builders and sculptors of Göbekli Tepe ‘built the first temples’, with the implication that the monolithic figures in the large enclosures represented the gods for whom those temples were built.3 Those arguments may be plausible, and to many they are attractive, but they are essentially speculative. I want to ask if we can go further and make an evidence-based and reasonable case for some of the early aceramic Neolithic anthropomorphic sculptures as material representations of supernatural gods. Can we situate these early Neolithic representations at a particular point in the cultural evolution of religion, when communities first began to imagine a cosmos in which there were supernatural agents that were in some senses human or human-like? The first examples of the monolithic, schematic representations of human-like form were found at Nevalı Çori, dating to the middle and late 9th millennium BC, technically the early to middle of the PPNB period. The sculptured monoliths were built into a unique, semi-subterranean building that was quite different from the houses of the settlement.4 There was a pair of monoliths in the middle of the floor of the building, and more monoliths were embedded in the stone bench around the base of the walls. Most of the monoliths had been broken at the end of the life of the building; of the peripheral stones, only the stumps in the stone bench were found. One of the central pair was represented only by the cavity in the floor from which it had been removed. The only monolith to survive is rectangular in cross-section and resembles a T-shape, about 3m tall. The figure has human characteristics: it has arms, hands and fingers, and it wears some kind of collar at its neck. The arms, hands, and the collar around the neck tell us that the narrow face is the front of the figure. It is at once human and non-human: while it has rudimentary hands and arms, it has no other features of a human figure, no indication of sex, and, most significantly, no facial features.

1 2 3 4

School of History, Classics and Archaeology, University of Edinburgh, UK; [email protected]. Cauvin 1994; Cauvin 2000. Schmidt 2006; Schmidt 2012. Hauptmann 1993; Hauptmann 2011.

226

Trevor Watkins

Nevalı Çori has also given us a number of other puzzling human sculptures. It is important to put the massive, impressive anthropomorphic monoliths into some kind of material symbolic context; in terms of their scale and their pre-eminent positioning, the T-shaped monoliths are a central element in a complex suite of strange representations. There are several three-dimensional, realistic representations of the human head but set in non-realistic situations. These representations of human heads in the round emphasise the contrast with the strict, rectangular, smooth-surfaced block shapes of the ‘heads’ of the T-monolith. There is a head that has a large raptor perched above it and gripping it. Like most of the sculptures at Nevalı Çori, this example was found broken; indeed, it was effectively smashed. Another, more complicated situation is portrayed in a fragmentary sculpture in which there are two human figures, one somewhat above the other, standing or sitting back to back, with interlocking arms; again, a very large raptor grasps the upper head. Another human head is represented very schematically; it has a snake, carved in raised relief, on the back of the head. The way that the snake is represented, incidentally, with its body in rippling movement and its head as a solid triangle, is a form of stylised motif that we encounter frequently elsewhere, and in different contexts. Göbekli Tepe is the site where the form of the T-shaped anthropomorphic monolith is explored over and over again in a series of massive circular enclosures. The arrangement of monoliths within the enclosure is standardised. As in the slightly later building at Nevalı Çori, a pair of taller monoliths stands in the centre and ten or twelve more, less tall but still massive, monoliths stand around the perimeter of the enclosure. Some of the enclosures have a stone ‘bench’ around the base of the perimeter wall, as at Nevalı Çori, and the peripheral monoliths are embedded within the bench. Only a few of the monoliths have overtly human features. The pair at the centre of Enclosure D, like the surviving monolith from Nevalı Çori, have bent arms, hands and fingers in flat, low relief. This pair are unusual in having ornate belts, from which fox skins are suspended to cover their genital area. Like the Nevalı Çori monolith and a number of other Göbekli Tepe monoliths, they have a shallow groove on the narrow front side of the stone. And again, like the Nevalı Çori monolith, this pair have some sort of a collar at the neck. Each of these two monoliths has a different symbolic object suspended on the collar. At 5.5m tall, these are the tallest monoliths so far discovered at Göbekli Tepe, and they tower over anyone standing on the floor of the enclosure. One cannot see their faces or look into their eyes. In any case, they do not have any facial features on their highly schematised heads. Psychologists are very clear on the importance of the face, and especially the eyes. Human infants fix their eyes on their mother’s face within days or a few weeks of birth and are especially responsive to the mother’s eyes. When we look at the newsreader on the TV news programme, we relate to their face, and the newsreader appears to be looking directly at us. When we watch a politician being interviewed, we assess our acceptance of what they are saying as much by the posture of their head, their eye movements and the subtle changes of facial expression as by their verbal rhetoric. When we encounter someone who does not want to meet our eyes or who will not look at us when we speak to them, we are disconcerted and worried, and unwilling to trust them. But we cannot look into the eyes of these figures, and they have no faces that allow us to assess whether they are looking at us. In general, they tower over us, so that their unseen eyes do not seem to be concerned with us. They are certainly un-natural, but are they supernatural? Most attention has been given to the monoliths, but, as at Nevalı Çori, there are many other sculptured stones at Göbekli Tepe, many of them representing very strange and sometimes frightening imaginary creatures or scenes. Many of the monoliths have quite recognisable representations of natural wild animals, birds, snakes, scorpions, and so on, carved in raised relief. In addition, some of the individual sculptures are fantastic creations. Some of the smaller, three-dimensional sculptures represent individual creatures or a human head. As at Nevalı Çori, other sculptures depict a combination of a human head and a large bird, a raptor, which is clutching the top of the human head in its claws. The most complex sculpture takes the form of a smaller stone pillar, carved in the round. It would be possible to look into the faces of the humans and creatures,

When Do Human Representations Become Superhuman Agents?

227

but the faces were deliberately broken away before the pillar was finally concealed within a stone wall. It is a work of imagination in which the figure at the top, which has a massive, bear-like head, grasps with human-like arms and hands the head of the figure below; in turn the second figure grasps the small head of a third character. What did this pillar say to the early Neolithic viewer? It is certainly a quite complicated reference and it would have taken many words to explain what it signified. There are two classes of sculpture both at Nevalı Çori and at Göbekli Tepe: the smaller semi-realistic representations of human heads, animals, and combinations of birds and human heads are rather different from the T-shaped monoliths, which, although they are anthropomorphic, have featureless, rectangular blocks for heads and never have facial features. Together with all the anthropomorphic, T-shaped monoliths and the creatures carved on their bodies, and all the other sculptures, there is a very complex mythology or series of mythologies that made them comprehensible and meaningful to those who designed and carved them and to those who encountered them. The parallel that comes to my mind is that of a Byzantine church full of mosaics or frescos; the many figures would each be identified to a contemporary Christian by means of various attributes but also by means of their placing, both in relation to one another and in relation to the overall design and structure of the building. We are faced with a difficulty: while the information that enables us to comprehend the rich iconography of a Byzantine church is accessible to us (though most of us would require expert guidance), we have no means of decoding the similarly complex iconography of the early Neolithic site of Göbekli Tepe. However, there are many researchers from different disciplines interested in the phenomenon of religion and there is a rapidly growing interest in the cultural and cognitive evolution of religion; see, for example, the list of recent book-length treatments of the subject with which Harvey Whitehouse illustrates this point.5 Inevitably, my reading as an archaeologist in the field of the evolution of religion has been introductory, and I am no doubt naively selective. First, it is useful to remind ourselves that religions do not necessarily involve beliefs in superhuman deities. Indeed, the classic definitions of religion offered by sociologists and anthropologists make no mention of superhuman deities as essential elements in the phenomenon. In his foundational book Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse,6 Emil Durkheim had a working definition that was both succinct and simple: ‘Une religion est un système solidaire de croyances et de pratiques relatives à des choses sacrées, c’est-à-dire séparées, interdites, croyances et pratiques qui unissent en une même communauté morale, appelée Église, tous ceux qui y adherent’. The eminent American anthropologist Clifford Geertz wrote in an essay on ‘Religion as a cultural system’7 that a religion is: (1) a system of symbols which acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by (3) formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic. More recently, the American sociologist Robert Bellah paraphrased Geertz’s definition as follows: religion is a system of symbols that, when enacted by human beings, establishes powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations that make sense in terms of an idea of a general order of existence.8 Religious beliefs and practices are culturally constructed and culturally transmitted within the overall package of cultural knowledge, skills, practices and beliefs. Pascal Boyer observes that all societies possess culturally shared concepts of gods, spirits, ancestors or humans with some supernatural abilities or powers.9 It has also been observed that there is a general correlation between the kind of religious package of practices and beliefs and the scale of social organisation:

5 6 7 8 9

Whitehouse 2008, 35. Durkheim 1912. Geertz 1966, 2; reprinted in Geertz 1973. Bellah 2011, 2. Boyer 1994; Boyer 2001.

228

Trevor Watkins

very large-scale human societies tend to possess complex bodies of religious beliefs that include deities that are at least in some ways anthropomorphic. Within the span of ancient history, not only did the scale of socio-political organisations grow – larger kingdoms, greater and greater empires – but new developments in philosophy and religion emerged in different parts of the world around the middle of the 1st millennium BC. Karl Jaspers drew attention to what he called an ‘Achsenzeit’,10 an idea that the American sociologist Robert Bellah has done much to develop as the ‘Axial Age’.11 This was the time when new ideas emerged about the nature of the individual and the individual’s responsibilities and morality, accompanied, in some civilisations, by new ideas about the god’s moral authority and the individual’s personal relations with the god. A multi-disciplinary group of researchers refer to this Axial Age as the time when ‘moralizing gods’, or ‘big gods’, emerged.12 Gods must be the following: (1) counterintuitive (that is, while human-like, and therefore comprehensible in some ways, they are out-of-the-ordinary in other ways; for example, they are invisible and they exist outside of time); (2) an intentional agent (that is, like us humans, they are capable of forming intentions and of understanding the intentions of others); (3) they should possess strategic information (put simply, they are omniscient and can detect and comprehend your actions and motives); (4) they are able to act in the human world in detectable ways (they can, for example, speak to humans, advising, informing, warning them); (5) typically, they are capable of motivating behaviours, such as rituals, prayers, that reinforce belief.13 ‘Moralizing gods’ are further capable of motivating ultra-social behaviour and they may punish misbehaviour and failure to live up to moral standards. Before the Axial Age, for example in 3rd and 2nd millennium BC Mesopotamia, there were anthropomorphic deities, which were represented in human form, and which in some ways behaved in ways familiar to humans. They were able to act in the human world, and they required human service, including worship, which, it might be hoped, could bring about benign action on behalf of humans or divert divine anger from retributive acts. But there is no evidence that early Mesopotamian gods were thought to be omniscient, or capable of motivating ultra-social behaviour; they were supernatural agents, according to the terms defined by Justin Barrett,14 but they were not ‘moralizing gods’. There is, thus, evidence that the Axial Age represents an evolutionary development in religious concepts. Before the mid-1st millennium BC, there were powerful, anthropomorphic deities; their anthropomorphic representations, their temple-houses, and the ritual service that was owed can be seen to have been already in existence in the proto-literate and proto-historic period. The question becomes, therefore, can we extrapolate backwards into the earlier, pre-literate and pre-historic millennia of the Holocene period? We can go so far – a few more centuries, or perhaps a millennium – by noting that sanctuaries of the proto-literate period in southern Mesopotamia which can be clearly identified as temples that were the houses of specific historically documented deities have been traced back in the stratigraphy, as a succession of re-buildings of essentially the same building constructed on the exact same site. But that tells us only that similar temples that served as the houses of gods were in existence for some time before cuneiform texts begin to give us their names and sometimes something of their actions and role in this world, such as having chosen X to be king and to govern in their name. Turning to the theories of the cultural evolutionists of religion, the ethnographic evidence shows that there is a general correlation between the scale of societies and the kind of religious beliefs and practices that they espouse. Joyce Marcus and Kent Flannery present a rare archaeological example derived from their work at sites in the Oaxaca Valley in Mexico.15 Over a quite

10 11 12

13 14 15

Jaspers 1949. Bellah – Joas 2012. Atran 2002; Shariff et al. 2011; Bulbulia et al. 2013; Atkinson et al. 2015; Norenzayan 2015; Slingerland 2015; Purzycki et al. 2016. Barrett 2008, 150–155. Barrett 2008. Marcus – Flannery 2004.

When Do Human Representations Become Superhuman Agents?

229

short period, small hunter-gatherer bands were replaced by settled populations living in permanent villages and cultivating maize which in turn were overtaken by the emergence of a hierarchically organised society, from which the archaic Zapotec state developed. Marcus and Flannery note the parallel changes in and increasing complexity of rituals and the scale of special buildings, through small temples, to full-blown pyramids and the portrayal of extreme ritual practices. Unfortunately, their perspective on the expansion of religious demands does not extend to the nature of any supernatural beings or agents earlier than the times of state-level societies. The first step for us is to note that population density and the size of population units in parts of south-west Asia increased exponentially from the Upper Palaeolithic, through the Epipalaeolithic and especially through the early Neolithic. Nigel Goring-Morris and Anna Belfer-Cohen have graphed the increase in the number of sites per millennium (as a proxy for population numbers).16 The growth over this period for the southern Levant, for which we have the best information, is dramatic. For the Neolithic period in the southern Levant, Ian Kuijt has graphed the exponential growth in the mean size of settlement sites and the equally dramatic rise in the density of buildings within settlements.17 In the Upper Palaeolithic, there were groups of a few hundred or a thousand or so, made up of several mobile forager bands each numbering a few tens of people; from the Neolithic period there were networks of densely populated and long-lived, permanent settlements, where communities numbering many hundreds of people and sometimes several thousand lived together. These were the first large-scale, permanent communities, functioning as autonomous units within networked super-communities.18 These networked super-communities were held together by powerful, intensive and sophisticated practices of sharing and symbolic exchange (so much so that archaeologists, following Gordon Childe,19 used to call them ‘cultures’ or ‘cultural groups’). They exchanged things and materials, such as obsidian and marine shells, and they emulated each other in practices such as the specific design and ways of making things, such as intricate projectile points, or the strongly emotive practices concerning intramural burial, skull retrieval and curation. I have argued that these networks of communities were the Neolithic pre-cursors of what Colin Renfrew described as peer polity interaction spheres,20 engaging in the exchange of valued goods and materials, sharing value-systems, knowledge and innovations, and engaging with each other in ‘competitive emulation’. We may set this picture of the emergence of large-scale societies alongside the changes in scale of societies described by Robert Bellah in his great book21 which was the summation of a huge amount and range of knowledge. Bellah structures his book showing how, as societies become larger and larger, their religious beliefs and practices become more complex and more demanding. Interestingly, Bellah also links changes in the form of religious beliefs and practices to modes of cultural communication and cognition, as these have been formulated in Merlin Donald’s evolutionary account of three stages in the evolution of culture and cognition.22 In general, small-scale societies are associated with religious rituals and practices that are focused on building group solidarity without the need for supernatural agents; Bellah illustrates with examples how these rituals use Donald’s mimetic (through mime, gesture, action, dance and music) and mythic (story-telling and myth-telling) modes. In the step up to larger-scale societies, Bellah sets out to ‘consider how the resources for the production of meaning … can be expanded to deal with much larger and more stratified societies through the development of new forms of ritual and myth, new understandings of the relations between cosmos, society, and self’.23 This is where he

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Goring-Morris – Belfer-Cohen 2011, S199, fig. 2. Kuijt 2000, 83–85, fig. 2, tab. 2. Watkins 2008. Childe 1929. Renfrew 1986; Watkins 2008. Bellah 2011. Donald 1991. Bellah 2011, 175.

230

Trevor Watkins

turns to Donald’s third stage, which Donald calls theoretic culture. Donald wrote that the capacity to think and communicate in terms such as, for example, ‘the relations between cosmos, society and self’ required the evolution of systems of external symbolic storage, in particular alphabetic writing.24 Donald’s third stage, theoretic culture, may have reached its fulfilment with the capacity to store and transmit in written form anything that we could think, imagine, and put into words; but it began to emerge much earlier, in the material form of European Upper Palaeolithic twoand three-dimensional art (and we should remember that Donald was writing a decade before our attention was drawn to the examples of symbolic expression in later Middle Stone Age Africa25). In response to Colin Renfrew’s challenge at an archaeological conference on his ideas,26 Donald explained his thinking more fully, taking account of other, non-linguistic modes of material expression.27 Since then, he has written on art and architecture as forms of external symbolic storage in the service of religion.28 Elsewhere I have several times drawn on Donald’s work in support of the view that early Neolithic symbolic architecture and sculptural representations were systems of external symbolic storage, ways that Neolithic communities devised for materialising ideas about their world and their place in the world.29 Now it may be possible to link those views about the Neolithic world, Donald’s theoretical culture and external symbolic storage, and Bellah’s account of religion in human evolution. After what he calls ‘tribal religion’, and its mimetic and mythic rituals and stories as the means to produce meaning, Bellah turns to larger-scale societies, in which we may expect to find new forms of meaning-making. His examples take the form of a spectrum of the chiefdoms of Polynesia and their religious practices and beliefs, for which he is reliant on the work of P. V. Kirch.30 For Bellah, larger societies are hierarchical societies, ranging from quite small population units and simple chiefdoms up to complex, multi-level chiefdoms that were emergent states. He points to the general inter-relationship between anthropomorphic gods and their ritual service and chiefs and their authority. And in the following chapter, where he discusses religion in the archaic states such as those of southern Mesopotamia and early Egypt, he extends that relationship to the closely linked roles of (divine) kings and powerful, anthropomorphic gods. But he presents no examples of larger-scale societies, such as the networks of sedentary Neolithic communities, which are not chiefdoms. Unless we can make a case that our Neolithic communities were chiefdoms, they find no parallel in Bellah’s ethnographic assemblage; and I do not find any evidence to suggest that our Neolithic communities were chiefdoms, although they were certainly a scale-order larger than their Upper Palaeolithic predecessors. Were the Neolithic super-communities not large enough to be considered large-scale? Or is the existence of a social hierarchy the critical factor that produces religious ideas that give power to gods that mirror the power of chiefs? It seems that our early Neolithic societies were the first large-scale societies, but they were acephalous, or segmentary, societies in which no-one enjoyed ascribed positions of authority and power. Acephalous, or segmentary, societies, together with chiefdoms, kingdoms, empires and modern industrialised societies, are counted among large-scale societies by a group of sociologists and anthropologists writing about the evolution and structure of human groups.31 In the opposite direction, some of the simplest ethnographically documented chiefdoms can number smaller than the population of one of the mega-sites of the later aceramic Neolithic; structure is at least as important as raw population numbers. Our Neolithic networked super-communities were a scale-order larger than the small-scale societies of earlier times; yet, on the other

24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Donald 1991. McBrearty – Brooks 2000. Renfrew 1998. Donald 1998. Donald 2006; Donald 2009. Watkins 2004a; Watkins 2004b; Watkins 2006. In particular, Kirch 1984; Kirch 2000. Jordan et al. 2013.

When Do Human Representations Become Superhuman Agents?

231

hand, they differed from subsequent large-scale societies, whether chiefdoms of various levels of complexity, or emergent kingdoms. They were thus liminal, different in important ways from what had gone before but different also in important ways from what followed. In their material systems of external symbolic storage, they represent a distinct increase in recursive complexity compared to what had gone before: however, they did not employ a system of signs to represent words and sentences. In terms of their mode of religiosity, Whitehouse would term them imagistic, with infrequent rituals that are highly arousing, involving ecstatic practices and altered states of consciousness.32 The alternative mode of religiosity, which Whitehouse terms doctrinal, is typical of large-scale societies, involving frequent, repetitious rituals, often controlled by religious leaders, requiring explicit knowledge of complex religious teachings, which, in literate societies, are often held in written form. At Çatalhöyük, Harvey Whitehouse and Ian Hodder believe that the beginnings of the dogmatic mode of religiosity can be seen in changes in the rituals and the forms of symbolic representation.33 I believe that we can say that the recursive complexity of the symbolism that we can see (although we cannot ‘read’ it) at Göbekli Tepe was as richly informative to the people who contributed to its making as was a Byzantine basilica or a European cathedral to Christians, whether learned doctors of the church or simple laity. I would therefore argue that the monumental architecture, richly symbolic sculpture and lexicon of carved signs represent, in Whitehouse’s terms, the beginning of a doctrinal mode of religiosity. After a number of years of indecision based in ignorance, I have come to the provisional conclusion that the early Neolithic T-shaped monoliths, such as those of Nevalı Çori and Göbekli Tepe, probably were representations of powerful, anthropomorphic, supernatural beings but not supernatural agents. They have the right characteristics and occur in appropriate contexts. They are both human-like and at the same time counterintuitive. They inhabit monumental constructions, which resemble archaic, semi-subterranean, domestic ‘houses’, and the communal buildings that have been found at settlements in the region and further afield in southern Jordan and contemporary Cyprus. Cultural evolutionary theory indicates that large-scale societies need powerful, shared belief systems that are expressed in material form and demanding common practices. Historical evidence shows that the beliefs and practices of such cultural systems are centred on powerful, supernatural, anthropomorphic deities. In that context, the construction of the enclosures, the quarrying and making of the monoliths, the assembling of monoliths in each enclosure, and all the other demanding activities at Göbekli Tepe can be understood as the challenging practices of a set of complex beliefs that support the ultra-sociality of a super-community. And the faceless, counterintuitive, T-shaped monoliths of Göbekli Tepe can readily be understood as representations of powerful, supernatural beings. So far as I am aware, supernatural agents, gods who communicate with and act in the everyday world, gods to whom people cede power and authority, and who generally require the service of their people, are found in large-scale societies in which there are chiefs, kings, or emperors whose status and authority are founded on their relations to the divine. To be clear, the T-shaped monoliths of Göbekli Tepe and Nevalı Çori can be described as supernatural beings because of their non-natural characteristics, but it is difficult to claim that they were supernatural agents. To return to the starting point of this paper, Jacques Cauvin proposed that the small-scale, three-dimensional representations of females and of bulls were the realisation of powerful female and male deities, the prototypes of deities that can be identified in the iconography of the early cities of southern Mesopotamia. Here, I have been considering the case for the great, faceless monoliths of the same early aceramic Neolithic period as gods, that is, supernatural agents. Unfortunately, Cauvin’s case is hard to accept because of the lack of continuity between the images of the early aceramic Neolithic, whether faceless monoliths, or Cauvin’s female figures

32 33

Whitehouse 2002; Whitehouse 2004. Whitehouse – Hodder 2010.

232

Trevor Watkins

and bull figurines. Around the middle of the aceramic Neolithic period, the T-shaped monoliths ceased to be made. In an early chapter in which he discusses how we should put together the various components of the Neolithic transformation, Cauvin dismisses exogenous factors such as climate change or population pressure as the cause that set the process of change in motion. Rather, he gives us, with typical brevity, his view of how change takes place: ‘The different factors continually impact on one another in an almost circular movement of reciprocal interactions, without anyone being able to identify exactly what set the wheel of change in motion …’34 It seems to me that we could re-phrase Cauvin’s account of the working of the process of change in terms of cultural niche construction theory35 and argue that ideas of authority and power co-evolved reciprocally in the emergence of hereditary chiefs and of gods as supernatural agents active in the world and requiring service and respect. The correlation of scales of social organisation, from simple chiefdoms, to states and empires, with beliefs in increasingly active, demanding and even ‘moralizing’ gods that is proposed by Robert Bellah and others is a form of co-evolution within the cultural niche. In the present context, however, we should conclude that the T-shaped monoliths are representations of very impressive supernatural beings, perhaps something like ancestor-gods but that we cannot define them as supernatural agents. In this regard, too, societies of the aceramic Neolithic were liminal. On the one hand, their religious concepts were a scale order different and more complex than those of their Palaeolithic predecessors, and their rituals, such as the construction of enclosures at Göbekli Tepe and the making of their strange inhabitants, were likewise hugely more demanding of labour, resources and commitment; however, on the other hand, it seems that concepts of supernatural beings that could be powerful agents, acting in the everyday world, had to wait for the emergence of chiefs with hereditary power. Big gods needed big men to attend to their service, as big men needed the authority with which their association with big gods endowed them; and, at the time of Göbekli Tepe, that was in the future.

References Atkinson et al. 2015 Q. D. Atkinson – A. J. Latham – J. Watts, Are big gods a big deal in the emergence of big groups?, Religion, Brain and Behavior 5, 2015, 266–274. Atran 2002 S. Atran, In Gods We Trust. The Evolutionary Landscape of Religion (Oxford, New York 2002). Barrett 2008 J. Barrett, Why Santa Claus is not a god, Journal of Cognition and Culture 8, 2008, 149–161. Bellah 2011 R. N. Bellah, Religion in Human Evolution. From the Paleolithic to the Axial Age (Cambridge 2011). Bellah – Joas 2012 R. N. Bellah – H. Joas, The Axial Age and its Consequences (Cambridge 2012). Boyer 1994 P. Boyer, The Naturalness of Religious Ideas. A Cognitive Theory of Religion (Berkeley, London 1994). Boyer 2001 P. Boyer, Religion Explained. The Human Instincts that Fashion Gods, Spirits and Ancestors (London 2001).

34 35

Cauvin 2000, 65. Cf. Sterelny – Watkins 2015; Watkins 2015; Watkins 2017.

When Do Human Representations Become Superhuman Agents?

233

Bulbulia et al. 2013 J. Bulbulia – A. W. Geertz – Q. D. Atkinson – E. Cohen – N. Evans – P. François – H. Gintis – R. D. Gray – J. Henrich – F. M. Jordon – A. Norenzayan – P. J. Richerson – E. Slingerland – P. Turchin – H. Whitehouse – T. Widlok – D. S. Wilson, The cultural evolution of religion, in: P. J. Richerson – M. H. Christiansen (eds.), Cultural Evolution. Society, Technology, Language, and Religion (Cambridge, Mass. 2013) 381–404. Cauvin 1994 J. Cauvin, Naissance des Divinités, Naissance de l’Agriculture. La Révolution des Symboles au Néolithique (Paris 1994). Cauvin 2000 J. Cauvin, The Birth of the Gods and the Origins of Agriculture (Cambridge 2000). Childe 1929 V. G. Childe, The Danube in Prehistory (Oxford 1929). Donald 1991 M. Donald, Origins of the Modern Mind. Three Stages in the Evolution of Culture and Cognition (Cambridge 1991). Donald 1998 M. Donald, Material culture and cognition. Concluding thoughts, in: C. Renfrew – C. Scarre (eds.), Cognition and Material Culture. The Archaeology of Symbolic Storage (Cambridge 1998) 181–187. Donald 2006 M. Donald, Art and cognitive evolution, in: M. Turner (ed.), The Artful Mind. Cognitive Science and the Riddle of Human Creativity (Oxford 2006) 3–20. Donald 2009 M. Donald, The roots of art and religion in ancient material culture, in: C. Renfrew – I. Morley (eds.), Becoming Human. Innovation in Prehistoric Material and Spiritual Culture (Cambridge 2009) 95–103. Durkheim 1912 E. Durkheim, Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse. Le système totémique en Australie (Paris 1912). Geertz 1966 C. Geertz, Religion as a cultural system, in: M. Banton (ed.), Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion (London 1966) 1–46. Geertz 1973 C. Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures. Selected Essays (New York 1973). Goring-Morris – Belfer-Cohen 2011 A. N. Goring-Morris – A. Belfer-Cohen, Neolithization processes in the Levant. The outer envelope, Current Anthropology 52, 2011, S195–S208. Hauptmann 1993 H. Hauptmann, Ein Kultgebaüde in Nevali Çori, in: M. Frangipane – H. Hauptmann – M. Liverani – P. Matthiae – M. Mellink (eds.), Between the Rivers and Over the Mountains. Archaeologica Anatolica et Mesopotamica Alba Palmieri Dedicata (Rome 1993) 37–69. Hauptmann 2011 H. Hauptmann, The Urfa region, in: M. Özdoğan – N. Bașgelen – P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 2: The Euphrates Basin (Istanbul 2011) 85–138. Jaspers 1949 K. Jaspers, Vom Ursprung und Ziel der Geschichte (Zurich 1949). Jordan et al. 2013 F. M. Jordan – C. P. Van Schaik – P. François – H. Gintis – D. B. M. Haun – D. J. Hruschka – M. A. Janssen – J. A. Kitts – L. Lehmann – S. Matthew – P. J. Richerson – P. Turchin – P. Wiessner, Cultural evolution of the structure of human groups, in: P. J. Richerson – M. H. Christiansen (eds.), Cultural Evolution. Society, Technology, Language, and Religion (Cambridge, Mass. 2013) 87–116. Kirch 1984 P. V. Kirch, The evolution of the Polynesian chiefdoms (Cambridge 1984).

234

Trevor Watkins

Kirch 2000 P. V. Kirch, On the Road of the Winds. An Archaeological History of the Pacific Islands Before European Contact (Berkeley 2000). Kuijt 2000 I. Kuijt, People and space in early agricultural villages. Exploring daily lives, community size and architecture in the late Pre-Pottery Neolithic, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 19, 2000, 75–102. Marcus – Flannery 2004 J. Marcus – K. V. Flannery, The coevolution of ritual and society. New 14C dates from ancient Mexico, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101, 2004, 18257–18261. McBrearty – Brooks 2000 S. McBrearty – A. S. Brooks, The revolution that wasn’t. A new interpretation of the origin of modern human behaviour, Journal of Human Evolution 39, 2000, 453–563. Norenzayan 2015 A. Norenzayan, Big Gods. How Religion Transformed Cooperation and Conflict (Princeton 2015). Purzycki et al. 2016 B. G. Purzycki – C. Apicella – Q. D. Atkinson – E. Cohen – R. A. McNamara – A. K. Willard – D. Xygalatas – A. Norenzayan – J. Henrich, Moralistic gods, supernatural punishment and the expansion of human sociality, Nature 530, 2016, 327–330. Renfrew 1986 C. Renfrew, Introduction. Peer polity interaction and social change, in: C. Renfrew – J. F. Cherry (eds.), Peer Polity Interaction and Social Change (Cambridge 1986) 1–18. Renfrew 1998 C. Renfrew, Mind and matter. Cognitive archaeology and external symbolic storage, in: C. Renfrew – C. Scarre (eds.), Cognition and Material Culture. The Archaeology of Symbolic Storage (Cambridge 1998) 1–6. Schmidt 2006 K. Schmidt, Sie bauten die ersten Tempel. Das rätselhafte Heiligtum der Steinzeitjäger (Munich 2006). Schmidt 2012 K. Schmidt, Göbekli Tepe. A Stone Age Sanctuary in South-Eastern Anatolia (Berlin 2012). Shariff et al. 2011 A. F Shariff – A. Norenzayan – J. Henrich, The birth of high gods. How the cultural evolution of supernatural policing influenced the emergence of complex, cooperative human societies, paving the way for civilization, in: T. Schaller – M. Norenzayan – A. Heine – S. J. Yamagishi – T. Kameda (eds.), Evolution, Culture, and the Human Mind (New York 2011) 119–136. Slingerland 2015 E. Slingerland, Big Gods, historical explanation, and the value of integrating the history of religion into the broader academy, Religion 45, 2015, 585–602. Sterelny – Watkins 2015 K. Sterelny – T. Watkins, Neolithization in Southwest Asia in a context of niche construction theory, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 25, 2015, 673–691. Watkins 2004a T. Watkins, Architecture and ‘theatres of memory’ in the neolithic South West Asia, in: E. DeMarrais – C. Gosden – C. Renfrew (eds.), Rethinking Materiality. The Engagement of Mind with the Material World (Cambridge 2004) 97–106. Watkins 2004b T. Watkins, Building houses, framing concepts, constructing worlds, Paléorient 30, 2004, 5–24. Watkins 2006 T. Watkins, Architecture and the symbolic construction of new worlds, in: E. B. Banning – M. Chazan (eds.), Domesticating Space. Construction, Community, and Cosmology in the Late Prehistoric Near East (Berlin 2006) 15–24.

When Do Human Representations Become Superhuman Agents?

235

Watkins 2008 T. Watkins, Supra-regional networks in the Neolithic of Southwest Asia, Journal of World Prehistory 21, 2008, 139–171. Watkins 2015 T. Watkins, Ritual performance and religion in early Neolithic societies, in: N. Laneri (ed.), Defining the Sacred. Approaches to the Archaeology of Religion in the Near East (Oxford 2015) 153–160. Watkins 2017 T. Watkins, Architecture and imagery in the early Neolithic of southwest Asia. Framing rituals, stabilizing meanings, in: C. Renfrew – I. Morley – M. Boyd (eds.), Ritual, Play, and Belief in Early Human Societies (Cambridge 2017) 129–142. Whitehouse 2002 H. Whitehouse, Modes of religiosity. Towards a cognitive explanation of the sociopolitical dynamics of religion, Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 14, 2002, 293–315. Whitehouse 2004 H. Whitehouse, Modes of Religiosity. A Cognitive Theory of Religious Transmission (Walnut Creek 2004). Whitehouse 2008 H. Whitehouse, Cognitive evolution and religion. Cognition and religious evolution, Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology 3, 2008, 35–47. Whitehouse – Hodder 2010 H. Whitehouse – I. Hodder, Modes of religiosity at Çatalhöyük, in: I. Hodder (ed.), Religion in the Emergence of Civilization. Çatalhöyük as a Case Study (Cambridge 2010) 122–145.

236

Trevor Watkins

Index

237

Index

A

Belt   98–101, 104, 174, 226

Abstraction   17, 18, 65, 99, 132, 151, 153, 158, 159, 193, 197, 199, 205, 217, 220

Bench   90, 151, 153, 225, 226

Aceramic Neolithic   225, 230–232

Beterstatuen   160

Acolytes   122, 125, 126

Binary   121

Adapa   104

Binding   89, 127

Aetiology   25, 28, 29, 48

Bioarchaeology   14, 25, 26

Age   15, 18, 25–29, 31–33, 35–40, 45, 49, 50, 57, 59, 61, 63, 67, 77, 78, 88, 89, 103, 119, 120, 133, 141, 143, 180, 228, 230

Bird   100, 112, 157, 159, 163, 176, 178–180, 226, 227

Agent   7, 14, 18, 24, 168, 205, 225, 228, 229, 231, 232

Bereavement   15, 85, 90, 91

Blouse   101 Body painting   97, 100, 101, 117, 126, 178 Bone   18, 26–28, 30, 36, 37, 57, 59, 61, 63, 67, 77, 120, 153, 172, 175, 176, 178, 182, 183

Aggression   142, 143, 205 Aggressive   143, 144, 205 Agricultural economy   205 Ambiguous sexuality   16, 120–122, 124 Anaemia   28, 37, 39–41, 43, 45, 48 Ancestor   14, 15, 17–19, 24, 77, 87, 90, 91, 98, 101, 102, 142, 143, 159, 182, 225, 227, 232 ancestor cult   19, 87 ancestor figurine   142 ancestor-god 18, 225, 232 Ancestral 11, 12 Anthropomorphic figurine   see Figurine Anthropomorphic representation   see Representation Anthropomorphic sculpture   see Sculpture Apotropaic   14, 17, 18, 142–144, 176, 189, 191, 205 Appearance   16, 18, 28, 60, 87, 89, 91, 100, 123, 126, 131–133, 135, 138, 140, 141, 143, 145, 167, 168, 176, 181, 193, 198, 204, 217 Appeasement   17, 142, 144 Application   18, 36, 76, 86, 131, 141, 191, 201 Apron   99, 100 Archaeometric analysis   76 Arm   73, 75, 77, 85, 98, 114, 135, 136, 142, 143, 151, 153, 157, 160–163, 170, 172, 173, 175, 176, 178, 182, 193, 195, 217, 219, 225–227 bent arm   135, 136, 143, 160–162, 193, 226 Ash   91 Attachment   90, 120, 126 B Backfilling   17, 153, 159 intentional backfilling  153

Breaking   65, 155, 157 intentional breaking   13 Breast   75, 101, 102, 104, 120, 121, 124, 133, 135, 136, 138, 139, 141–144, 170, 172, 178, 180, 195, 215, 219 breast presentation   136, 139, 141, 142, 144 Bridal garment   see Garment Bronze Age   25, 27–29, 31– 33, 37–40, 49, 50, 59 Bucrania   65, 79, 167, 176 Building   58, 59, 61, 63, 67, 97, 112, 151, 152, 156–158, 161–164, 182, 193, 199, 201–203, 219, 225–229 buried building   153 circular building   58, 151 communal building   18, 189, 205, 231 domestic building   73 monumental building   151, 153, 157, 159 rectangular building   58, 59, 61, 153, 157 ritual building   17, 167 round building   167 skull building   158 subterranean building   18, 225, 231 working and storage building   167 Bull   11, 17, 57, 65, 78, 103, 167, 176–179, 182, 231, 232 bull cult   17, 167, 176, 177 bull figurine   17, 176, 232 Burial   9, 12–15, 17, 19, 33, 35, 37, 40, 43, 46, 47, 57, 60–63, 67, 71, 73, 77, 78, 80, 85, 86, 88, 97, 98, 103, 119, 141, 153, 158, 159, 168, 178, 229 collective burial   15, 60–63 multiple burials   60 Burial practice   9, 13, 15, 19, 57, 73, 80 Buried building   see Building Burnt house   58, 175, 178, 179, 182, 183

Barefoot   114, 115

Bust   11

Bead   77, 78, 98

Byzantine (period)   25, 27, 41–45, 48, 49, 51, 227, 231

238

Index

C Cattle   18, 79, 176, 217, 219, 220

death rites   158, 159 death pit   172 Decapitation   17

Celtic   142 Cephalic emanations   115, 122, 123 Ceramic   167, 191, 193, 198, 219, 220 Chalcolithic   7, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 24, 65, 72, 85, 97–99, 111, 112, 115, 119, 213–215, 217, 219–221 Early Chalcolithic   12, 97, 213, 214, 217, 219–221 Late Chalcolithic   16, 98, 99, 115

Deceased   15, 25, 63, 77, 86, 89–91, 97, 98 Deer   176 Defensive connotation   205 Deficiency disease   25, 28, 32, 36, 39, 48 Deformation   48, 98 Degenerative joint disease   33, 34, 47

Chalk   57, 64–66, 73

Dental caries   48

Chedammu   142

Dental disease   26

Cheering   142

Deposition   9, 13, 24, 60, 77, 88, 89, 91, 151, 153, 157– 159, 189, 191, 192, 199–201, 203, 205

Child   14, 15, 17, 25–33, 35–45, 48–50, 77, 78, 80, 112, 120, 121, 126, 127, 133, 180, 182, 196, 197, 204, 220 Childbirth   65, 172, 196, 197 Circular building   see Building Clay   12, 13, 15, 57, 63, 66, 67, 71, 77, 78, 80, 168, 170, 176, 178, 181, 182, 199, 214, 216, 219, 220 Cloth   16, 64, 66, 67, 97, 98–105, 120, 140, 216, 218 Clothing   7, 16, 19, 24, 63, 77, 97, 98, 100, 101, 103– 105, 111, 112, 115, 119, 120, 133, 140, 153, 178, 197, 227 clothing lice   103

Design grammar   191, 192 Destruction    17, 181 Diagenesis   27, 30 Disease profiles   25, 32, 33, 39 Domestic building   see Building Dyeing   119, 120 E Early Dynastic   100, 102, 143 Eipo   142

Coarse Ware   191 coarse Unburnished Ware   191, 193, 198

Elite   12, 88, 102, 104, 125

Codification   131

Embodiment   213, 220

Collective burial   see Burial

Emotion   16, 85, 91, 126, 132, 134

Commensality   190, 198

EN   99

Communal building   see Building

En face   134, 193

Emblem   132

Container   189, 190–192, 195, 197–205, 220

Enthesopathies   25

Corporeality   214

Epidemiology of diseases   31

Counting tool   205

Ethnography   12

Courtyard   85, 89, 201–203

Ethnographic   16, 90, 91, 97, 103, 120, 141, 180, 196, 225, 228, 230

Cranial modification   88, 89, 104 Cranium   85, 86, 88

Ethnographical   101, 105, 144, 230 Ethnology   14, 141, 142

Cribra cranii   28

Ethology   141, 142

Cribra orbitalia   28, 48

Etruscan   141

Cuisine   190 Cult figurines   see Figurine Cultural niche construction   232 Cuneiform   12, 101, 104, 228 records   11, 25, 37, 41, 79, 97–104, 112, 119, 125, 144, 151, 156, 167, 225 texts   12, 51, 65, 101, 105, 118, 120, 122–124, 145, 228 D Dark-Faced Burnished Ware   193 Death   12, 15, 28, 36, 48, 57, 61, 63, 67, 77, 80, 89–91, 98, 122, 143, 157–159, 172

Evil   142, 144, 205 Evolution of religion   18, 225, 227 Clifford Geertz   227 Robert Bellah   227–230, 232 Expression   9, 12, 13, 15, 16, 24, 28, 57, 80, 97, 132, 134, 141, 143, 213, 226, 230 of emotion   91 of grief   85, 90, 141 Eye   18, 87, 90, 115, 122, 123, 170, 178, 182, 195, 204, 216, 226 F Farmer-breeder   59

239

Index

Feast   204, 219 Feasting   59, 176, 198, 219 Female   13, 15–17, 33–35, 46, 57, 63–65, 67, 75, 78–80, 87, 98, 99, 100, 102, 104, 121, 122, 124, 126, 131, 133, 135, 136, 138–141, 143–145, 167, 169, 170, 172, 173, 175, 176, 178, 180–182, 195, 196, 215, 219, 231 Feminine   16, 120

iconic gesture   132 lexical gesture   132, 133, 143 male gesture   140, 143 metaphoric gesture   132 mourning gesture   132 rhythmical gesture   132 God 13, 18, 19, 101, 102, 104, 127, 133, 145, 167, 225, 227, 228, 230–232

Feminity   121, 215

Goddess   11, 13, 17, 19, 98, 122, 131, 167, 172, 176, 180, 182, 214

Fertility   9, 11, 13, 17, 57, 63, 65, 67, 102, 131, 142, 144, 145, 167, 172, 180, 182

Grave   15, 33, 59, 60, 63, 67, 77–80, 98, 180

Figural   24, 111, 112, 114, 116, 121 Figurine   7, 11–19, 24, 57–59, 61, 63–67, 72, 77–80, 97– 102, 104, 105, 131, 133, 135, 139–145, 155, 158, 159, 167–183, 189, 195, 196, 199, 213–221, 232 ancestor figurine   142 anthropomorphic figure/figurine   24, 57, 59, 63, 65, 78, 111, 131, 167, 168, , 195, 196, 215, 217, 219, 220 bull figurine   see Bull cult figure/figurines   13, 18, 180, 181 guardian figurine   142 zoomorphic figurine  78, 176, 178, 182, 217, 219, 220 Finger   18, 117, 124, 132, 193, 204, 225, 226 Flagstone   58 Flax   100, 119, 120 Foot   117, 75, 114, 115, 117, 163

Grave good   15, 33, 77, 78, 80, 98 Greek   49, 122, 142 Grief   7, 15, 85, 90, 91, 141 Grooved stones   15, 58, 59, 72, 78, 79 Guardians   18, 142, 159, 205 guardian figurine see Figurine H Hair   90, 121–123, 133, 161, 162, 176, 178, 195 Haka dance   205 Halaf culture/period   7, 17, 18, 24, 85, 98–101, 103, 133, 167–183, 189, 191, 196, 198, 201, 202 Hand   18, 75, 78, 101, 114, 117, 118, 124, 132, 135, 136, 139, 141–143, 151, 153, 157, 162, 170, 181, 195, 204, 216, 225–227 Harp   117, 124

footstool   115, 117 footwear   115, 117

Harris’s lines   48

Fox pelt   99, 101 Fresco   76, 112, 114–125, 127, 227 Frontal depiction   205 Frontal image   205

Head   12, 17, 51, 75, 86, 89, 91, 103, 117, 122, 123, 135, 151, 155–159, 161–163, 169, 170, 172, 173, 176, 179, 181, 182, 193, 195, 214, 216, 217, 219, 226, 227 Headdress 98, 172

Frontal position   193

Headless 156–158, 172

Funerary custom   14, 25

Hennessy   112

Funerary practice   14, 15, 17, 24, 57–59, 65, 67, 80, 89 Fur   103

Hierarchy   17, 85, 87, 89, 90, 125, 153, 157, 230 social hierarchy   87, 230

G Garment   16, 97, 98, 99, 101, 104, 119, 120, 140, 162, 197, 217 bridal garment   101 Gebärde   132, 134 Momentangebärde   132 Zustandsgebärde   132, 134 Gender   13, 16, 63, 65, 67, 77, 80, 97, 99, 102, 104, 120–122, 124, 126, 195, 215, 220 Genital/Genitalia   101, 102, 120, 121, 135, 215, 217, 226 Geste   132, 134 Gesture   7, 13, 14, 16, 17, 24, 60, 131–136, 138–145 deictic gesture   132 female gesture   140, 141, 143, 144

High-visibility   198, 205 Hole mouth pot   192, 197, 198, 202 Holocene   98, 102, 103, 228 Horn  17, 78, 115, 122, 123, 167, 176, 217 Household   15, 17, 71, 77–78, 80, 89–91, 102, 167, 181 House of Paintings   58, 59, 65 House of the Dead   57, 59, 61–63, 67 Human figurine   18, 57, 63, 171, 173–175, 195 Humanoids   7, 18, 189–191, 193, 196–199, 201, 204, 205 Hybrid   142, 197 Hybridism   220 Hyperflexed   59

240

Index

I

Lugal   99 Lyre   124

Ice Age   103 Iconography   7, 9, 11–13, 17, 19, 24, 67, 97, 101, 103, 104, 111, 112, 124, 131, 158, 159, 169, 197, 204, 227, 231

Mad’arovce Culture   38

Identity   18, 77, 121, 126, 213, 215, 216, 218

Magic   9, 14, 17, 65, 102, 190, 205, 220

Ideology   16, 115, 120–123, 125 Ideological   12, 125, 126, 131 Image   7, 11–13, 16, 18, 19, 24, 77, 91, 98, 99, 103–105, 111, 112, 114, 115, 121, 122, 133, 134, 151, 155, 157, 161, 189, 191, 193, 195–197, 199, 201, 203–205, 219, 221, 231 Imagery   7, 9, 17, 24, 151, 153, 156, 158–160, 189–191, 197, 198 Implements   111, 120 Inanna   102, 103, 115, 121, 122, 124 Individual   16, 18, 24–27, 30, 31, 33, 35–37, 39, 41, 43, 49, 50, 57, 59–63, 67, 77, 87–89, 97, 104, 105, 111, 112, 114, 115, 117, 118, 120, 121, 123, 125–127, 133, 134, 157, 182, 197, 215, 217, 218, 226, 228 Infant-care   89

M

magic devices   205 magic hunting rites   177 magic rites   176 magic-ritual practices   167 magic sayings   182 magic symbols   181 magic vehicles   13, 98, 167, 182 vehicles of magic   13, 180–182 Male   11, 16, 33–35, 46, 47, 57, 64–67, 78, 87, 98, 99, 101, 102, 120–122, 124, 126, 133, 135, 138, 139, 140, 141, 143, 144, 167, 169, 172–176, 182, 195, 205, 215, 219, 231 Malnutrition   28, 30, 40 Mandible   46, 61, 63, 85, 86 Maori   142, 205 Marker   18, 28, 114, 115, 120–124, 126, 180, 205 Masculine   16, 57, 120, 121

Infectious diseases   28, 36, 37, 39, 40 Instruments   115, 123, 124, 126, 204 Intentional 17, 48, 59, 61, 65, 78, 80, 122, 151, 155, 157, 181, 228 intentional backfilling   see Backfilling intentional breaking   see Breacking intentional fragmentation   65, 151, 155 Iron Age   27, 49, 103, 141, 143, 180

Mask   7, 11, 24, 111, 112, 115, 119, 120, 122, 123, 126, 153, 163, 195 Meningeal reactions   28, 30, 31, 37–45, 47, 48 Meningitis   28, 30, 31, 36, 37, 39–41, 43, 45 Metallic minerals   78 Middle Ages   31, 33, 50, 119 Middle Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (MPPNB) MPPNB   15, 17, 73, 78, 174

Ishtar   102, 103, 142 Ithyphallic   99, 135, 143, 157, 161, 195

Miniaturisation   213, 220 Mischwesen   18, 197, 204

J Jewellery   15, 33, 90, 91, 97, 117, 218 L Labret   97 Large Jar   197, 198, 201, 203 Late Neolithic   7, 11–14, 16, 18, 97–100, 104, 131, 133, 134, 139–141, 167, 169, 176, 180, 182, 189–191, 193, 195–199, 204, 205, 214, 216, 219

Mockery   142, 144 Mogollon   32, 35, 50 Mohave   142 Monumental building   see Building Morbific parasite  103 Mother goddess   11, 17, 19, 131, 167, 172, 180, 182 Motif   12, 73, 75–77, 79, 111, 112, 115, 157, 158, 160, 176, 190–193, 197–199, 201, 204, 226

Late Pre-Pottery Neolithic B   49

Mound   18, 151, 153, 201, 213–218, 219–221

Leader   99, 115, 117, 125, 231

Mourning   7, 85, 90, 132

Leather   98, 103, 115, 205 Leopard   99, 100, 175 Lice see clothing lice  Linear Pottery people   31 Loincloth   97, 99, 101, 103, 104, 140, 143 LPPNB   see Late Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Luba   142

Mourning gesture see Gesture mourning jewellery and ornament   90 Multiple burials   see Burial Murals   112, 125, 127, 133, 134 Musical instrument   115, 123, 124, 126 N Nakedness   16, 101, 102, 115

241

Index

Natufian   11, 14, 71

mud plaster   73, 86

Neolithisation   11, 57, 59, 71, 190

Plastered skull   7, 12, 24, 85– 91

Nitra Culture   31–33, 38, 39, 50

Plaster floor   73

Non-visual language   198, 199

Plastering   15, 89, 91, 159

Notables   112, 113, 115, 120

Pleistocene   103

Nude   7, 24, 63, 67, 102, 111, 115, 117, 120–122, 124, 126, 127

Polydactylism   16, 118

Nudity   7, 16, 24, 97, 103, 111, 112

Position   14, 80, 98, 140–142, 144, 145, 204, 217, 230

O

Portable art   58, 59 somatic position   141, 142 Post-mortem   13, 88–90

Occupational stress   14, 25

Posture   16, 111, 131–135, 140, 144, 145, 159, 162, 172, 197, 215, 217, 218, 226

Odour   190 Ornate   119, 226

Pot stand   219, 221

Osteoarthritis   47, 48 Osteomyelitis   28, 37–45, 47, 48

Pottery   18, 79, 85, 133, 134, 167–169, 174, 176, 182, 189–193, 195, 197 –205, 213, 214, 218

Otitis media   28, 35, 37, 39–41, 43, 45, 48

PN   see Pottery Neolithic

P

Pottery Neolithic   15, 72, 78, 79, 85, 89, 91, 167, 168, 174, 201

Pachymeningeosis   28

PPN   see Pre-pottery Neolithic A/B/C

Painted vessel   99, 178, 191

Prayer   141, 143, 204, 228

Painting   7, 15, 16, 18, 24, 58, 59, 63, 65, 71–73, 75–77, 79, 80, 89, 97–101, 111, 112, 117, 119, 126, 134, 170, 175, 176, 178, 180, 191, 214, 219–221

Pregnancy wish   141

Paleopathology   14

Pre-Pottery Neolithic A/B/C   7, 11, 12, 14–17, 24, 25, 27, 45, 49, 57–61, 65, 67, 71–73, 77–79, 85, 97–101, 103, 118, 133–137, 139–141, 143–145, 151– 153, 158, 168, 169, 174, 176, 196, 204, 225

Paul   122

Pregnant   57, 60, 61, 63, 65–67, 169

Pebble bed   59, 63, 67

Preliterate   111, 121, 125

Pelt   99, 101

Priest   12, 102,104

Pendant   77, 78, 172

Priestess   124

Penis   124, 196

Primary burial   62, 86

Performance   89, 123, 124, 127

Procession   7, 16, 24, 111, 115, 117, 123–126

Perinatal   62, 63, 78

Processional fresco   see Fresco

Permanent modification   98

Prudery   16, 97, 101, 102, 104, 105

Phallic   142, 170

Psycho-cultural   57

Paleolithic   24

phallic threat   142 Phallic figurine   see Figurine Phallus   63, 99, 133, 135, 139, 141–144, 163, 164, 173, 175, 195

Pubic area   99, 133, 135, 136, 139, 141, 144, 178, 195 pubic area presentation   136, 141, 142, 144 Public   111, 124, 125, 198, 202, 204, 205 Q

phallus presentation   135, 139, 141, 142, 143, 144 Phenomenological   111, 112, 126

Queen Atalia   36

Physical anthropology   9, 13, 14, 24–26

Queen Hama   36

Piercing   97

Queen Jaba   36

Pigment   73, 87, 127

R

Pillar   9, 17–19, 98–101, 135, 137, 139, 143, 151–153, 156–159, 161–163, 204, 226, 227

Reburied   89, 90

Plait   123

Receptivity   142, 144

Plaster   12, 73, 76, 86, 89, 117 gypsum plaster   65, 77, 86 lime plaster   73, 76, 86

Rectangular building   see Building Relief   9, 11, 12, 99, 104, 133, 153, 157, 160, 226 Religion   18, 122,190, 205, 225, 227, 228, 230

242

Index

Representation   9, 11–19, 24, 57, 63–65, 67, 71, 75, 79, 80, 97–99, 102, 104, 111, 112, 114–118,121, 126, 131–135, 138–145, 167, 169, 170, 175, 176, 178, 195, 196, 213–215, 217–221, 225–228, 230–232 anthropomorphic representation   11–14, 16–19, 114, 115, 131, 133–136, 138–141, 143–145, 169, 195, 218, 219, 228

Short skirt   97, 99, 102, 103 Siglanagcíoch   142 Sinusitis frontalis and maxillaris   46–48 Skeleton   25–27, 30, 33, 36, 37, 41, 43, 45, 48, 59, 60– 62, 86, 158 Skeletonisation   86

Retention pose   141

Skin   16, 103, 115, 120, 121, 126, 175, 226

Revolution of symbols   11, 65

Skull   7, 12, 15, 17, 24, 25, 28, 30, 36, 38–42, 44, 45, 48, 59, 63, 85–91, 98, 157, 158, 229

Ricket   28, 30, 37, 39–41, 43, 45, 48 Ritual   9, 13–17, 19, 77, 80, 88, 97, 102, 104, 111, 112, 114, 115, 117, 120–126, 157, 167, 175, 176, 178, 180–182, 190, 195, 200, 205, 217, 219, 220, 228–232 ritual killing   220 ritual building   17, 167

skull building   see Building skullcap   60, 61 skull deposit   59 Smell   126, 189, 190 Social identity   198, 205 Spinning   100, 119

Robe   7, 16, 24, 97, 99, 101, 103, 104, 115, 117,119, 120, 123, 126, 127 Round building   see Building

Spook mask   112, 113 Squatting position   195 Stamp seal   17, 167, 181, 199

Ruler   12, 133

Stationary item   204

Rulership   118, 125 S Sambia   121

Status   14, 16, 25, 26, 30, 33, 37, 43, 48, 85, 87–91, 103, 104, 115, 117, 120, 123, 124, 140, 218, 220, 231 Steppe   201

Samuel   118, 127

Stole   101

Sandals   115, 117

Stone   12, 13, 15, 18, 58, 59, 63–65, 67, 71–73, 77–80, 90, 100, 102, 119, 144, 155, 157, 159, 172, 175, 176, 178, 182, 183, 193, 202–205, 214, 219, 225–227

Scarification   57, 66, 98 Sculptures   9, 11–13, 15–18, 151, 153, 155–161, 219, 225–227 anthropomorphic sculpture   11, 17, 151, 155, 158– 160, 225 Scurvy   28, 30, 37, 39–41, 43, 45, 48 Secondary burial   15 Self-expression   7, 9, 13, 15, 16, 24, 57, 80 Self-perception   7, 9, 13, 16, 24, 57, 97, 102 Semiotic repertoire   131, 144 Semi-pastoralist society   205

Storage   18, 73, 124, 167, 182, 191, 198, 199, 201, 203, 204, 230, 231 Stripes   101, 117, 122 Stubbing   217, 219, 220 Stylisation   193 Subterranean building see Building Superhuman   7, 24, 227 Supernatural agent   18, 205, 225, 228, 229, 231, 232

Senses   126, 189, 199, 204, 205, 225

Supernatural being   18, 98, 133, 143–145, 180, 225, 229, 231, 232

Sensory   18, 126, 189, 190, 204

Switzerland   31, 50, 51

Sensustricto   190

Symbolism   7, 9, 13, 17, 24, 57, 67, 80, 111, 119, 167, 169, 177, 220, 231

Sex   13, 15, 18, 27, 57, 59, 63, 65, 67, 99, 103, 120, 122, 133–135, 138–140, 219, 225

Systems of external symbolic storage   230, 231

Sexual   16-18, 97, 99, 100, 120–122, 131, 133, 135, 136, 138, 139, 142–144, 173, 180, 196

T

Sexuality   16, 120–122, 124

Tactile language   18, 190, 191, 204

sexless   98, 215

Tail   78, 99, 102–104, 197

Shaman   26, 181, 195

Tassel   115, 119, 120

Shame   16, 97, 101, 102, 104, 105

Taste   126, 189

Shell   77, 87, 229

Tattoo   16, 91, 97, 100, 101, 117, 126, 170, 178

Shirt   97, 100, 103

Terracotta figurine   see Figurine

Shoe  114,  115, 117

Territorial behaviour   14, 145

243

Index

V

Territorial claim   145 Territory demarcation   144

Vehicles of magic   see magic vehicles

Texts   see Cuneiform

Veneration   9, 12, 14, 87, 91, 141

Textile   77, 97–100, 103, 104, 119, 120, 140

Vessel   11, 18, 99, 100, 122, 133, 134, 167, 170, 178– 180, 189–192, 197–199, 201, 203–205, 219–221

The living   15, 85, 89–91 Tholos   181, 201

Věteřov Culture   37, 50

Touch   24, 126, 189, 205

Visibility   18, 88, 189, 198, 201, 204, 205

Toraya   90

Visual language   189, 198, 199

Toys   13, 17, 180, 182

Voluptuous body   195

Tradition   11, 12, 14, 18, 38, 71, 77, 91, 104, 123, 158, 167–169, 178, 189, 191, 217, 220 Transversal linear enamel hypoplasias   36

W Warka vase   99, 102, 104, 115 Weaving   119

Trauma   25, 28, 48

Woman   15, 18, 57, 60, 61, 63, 65–67, 77, 78, 80, 97, 99–104, 112, 122, 135, 136, 142, 219

Trephination   25 T-shaped pillar   17, 18, 98–100, 135, 139, 143, 151, 153

Working and storage building   see Building

U

Y

Ubaid period   16, 99, 100, 104

Yarmoukian   145

Únětice Culture   31–33, 38–40, 50

Yombe   142

Unterwölbling Culture   37, 49

Yoruba   142

Uruk iconography   104 Z

Uruk period   12, 99, 100, 102, 104

Zoomorphic figurine   see Figurine

Geographical Index A

Basta (Jordan)   10, 25, 27, 45–49

‘Ain Ghazal (Jordan)   10, 11, 65, 85, 86, 89, 90, 117, 134, 136, 137, 138, 176

Beisamoun (Israel)   10, 12, 85, 87

Aiterhofen-Ödmühle (Germany)   31, 49

Boğazkale (Turkey)   25, 27, 31, 41, 42, 43, 49, 51

Anatolia   18, 25, 27, 28, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 45, 51, 85, 90, 134, 180, 183, 189, 191, 213, 214, 215, 219, 221

Borneo   142

Bettingen (Germany)   31, 50

Byblos (Lebanon)   10, 134, 137

Arizona (USA)   25, 27, 32, 33, 35, 50, 51, 142

C

Arslantepe (Turkey)   25, 27, 41, 42, 49, 51

Cameroon   142

Australia   103

Çatalhöyük (Turkey)   7, 10, 11, 18, 65, 85, 89, 98–100, 103, 104, 131, 134, 137, 138, 159, 172, 175–177, 180, 182, 183, 213–215, 217–220, 231

B Bali (Indonesia)   142

Çayönü (Tepesi) (Turkey)   12, 71, 75, 158

Balikh valley   172

Cave of the Warrior (Israel)   10, 119

Barbing-Kreuzhof (Germany)   31, 50

Çavi Tarlası (Turkey)   10, 168, 170, 172, 173, 178, 181

244

Index

Central Anatolia   18, 31, 37, 41, 180, 183, 213, 214, 219, 221

Hajji Firuz (Iran)   10, 180, 181

Central Europe   14, 25, 27, 31

Hama (Syria)   10, 168, 169, 170

Central Turkey   49

Hammeh, El- (Jordan)   10, 134, 137

Chagar Bazar (Syria)   10, 168, 170, 171, 172

Harting (Germany)   31, 50

Choga Mami (Iraq)   10, 100, 134, 136, 138

Hirschlanden (Germany)   141

Choga Mish (Iran)   10, 99, 101

Höyüçek (Turkey)   10, 134, 137, 138, 172

D

Hainburg-Teichtal(Austria)   31, 50

Horvat Duma (Israel)   10, 123

Dead Sea   112, 127

I

Deh Luran (Iran)   97

Indonesia   90

Dhuweila (Jordan)   10, 134

İkiztepe (Turkey)   10, 25, 27, 31, 37, 38, 40, 49

Dja’de el-Mughara (Syria)   10, 12, 14, 15, 24, 57, 58, 59, 63, 65, 67, 71, 75, 76, 77, 79, 98, 99, 101, 190

Ireland   142 J

Domuztepe (Turkey)   10, 99, 168, 170, 172, 178 E

Jarmo, Qal‘at (Iraq)   10, 99, 168 Jelšovce (Slovakia)   25, 27, 31, 32, 33, 38, 39, 40, 41, 50

Easter Island (Chile)   142

Jerf el-Ahmar (Syria)   10, 11, 71, 72, 79, 158

Ecuador   142 Egypt   14, 25, 27, 40, 41, 49, 100, 142, 145, 180, 230 Elephantine Island (Egypt) 25, 27, 40, 41, 49, 50 Ephesos (Turkey)   25, 27, 43, 44, 45, 49, 51

Jericho (Palestine)   10, 12, 24, 85, 86, 87, 88, 90, 91, 115, 117, 119 Jordan   7, 25, 27, 45, 47, 49, 85, 99, 111, 134, 176, 230, 231

Eridu (Iraq)   10, 98, 99, 134, 137, 169

K

Etruria (Italy)   141 Kalimantan (Borneo)   142

Eurasia   13

Kazane Höyük (Turkey) 10, 170, 175 F Falklands (United Kingdom)   142

Kfar Ha’Horesh (Israel)   10, 12, 85, 87, 89 Kilisik (Turkey)   10, 134, 137, 151

Fertile Crescent   9, 11, 167

Kharabeh Shattani (Iraq)   10, 168, 170

Fıstıklı Höyük (Turkey)   10, 133, 168, 170, 179

Khirbet esh-Shenef (Syria)   10, 168, 170

France   57, 142

Kleinlangheim (Germany)   25, 27, 33, 34, 35, 50

Franzhausen-I (Austria)   25, 27, 31, 37, 38, 40, 49

Körtik Tepe (Turkey)   10, 24, 100

G Ganj Dareh (Iran)   10, 98

Köşk Höyük (Turkey)    10, 85, 90, 99, 100, 133, 134, 138, 159 Kosovo   142

Gaziantep (Turkey)  10, 134, 136

Kuruçay (Turkey)   10, 134, 137, 138

Gemeinlebarn-F (Austria)   31, 50 Germany   11, 25, 27, 31, 33, 34, 50, 51, 97, 101, 131, 142, 151, 167, 189 Gilgal (Palestine)   10, 99 Girikihaciyan (Turkey)   10, 168, 170, 172 Göbekli Tepe (Turkey)   7, 9–11, 13, 17, 18, 24, 65, 72, 97–99, 134–140, 143–145, 151–155, 157–160, 164, 169, 175, 197, 204, 225–227, 231, 232

L Latmos area/mountains (Turkey)   99, 134 Levant   11, 12, 24, 27, 57, 72, 85, 111, 117, 120, 124, 134, 169, 178, 189, 191, 225, 229 Lidar Höyük (Turkey)   10, 25, 27, 28, 29, 49, 50 Lower Austria   27, 31, 37, 49, 50 Lower Bavaria   31, 49

Grasshopper Pueblo (Arizona, USA)   25, 27, 32, 33, 35, 50 Gritille (Turkey)   10, 99, 175, 180, 181 H Hacılar (Turkey)   10, 131, 133, 134, 137, 138, 140, 182, 183

M Madagascar   90 Mari (Syria)   10, 121 Megiddo (Israel)   10, 118, 124 Melanesia   142

245

Geographical Index

Mesopotamia   7, 12–14, 18, 24, 25, 27, 65, 85, 90, 98, 100, 102–104, 115, 125, 141, 143, 167, 169, 177, 182, 189–191, 196, 198, 199, 204, 205, 228, 230, 231 Middle Euphrates (valley)   14, 71, 72, 80, 174 Montenegro   142 Munḫata (Israel)   10, 134, 137, 138 Mureybet (Syria)   10, 65, 72, 97, 134, 137, 169 N Nahal Hemar Cave (Israel)   10, 98, 119, 123 Nahal Mishmar (Israel)   10, 119 Near East   7, 9, 11–14, 16, 19, 24–27, 48–50, 58, 85, 97, 98, 103, 105, 124, 155, 177, 189, 193, 219 Nevalı Çori (Turkey)   10, 11, 18, 71, 99, 101, 134, 137, 143, 151, 158, 168, 169, 174, 175, 204, 225, 226, 227, 231 New Guinea   105, 121, 142

Southern Germany   33, 50 Southern Jordan   45, 49, 231 Southern Levant   12, 111,117, 120, 124, 159, 169, 178, 229 Southern Slovakia   31, 38, 50 South-west Asia   7, 9, 11, 13, 16, 17, 85, 131, 133, 135, 136, 138–141, 143–145, 189, 229. South-eastern Turkey   49, 151, 167, 168, 180 South-western Turkey   47, 71,182 Straubing (Germany)   31, 50, 51 Susa (Iran)   10, 99, 101, 104 Syria   24, 57, 58, 71, 72, 80, 85, 100, 115, 134, 167, 168, 172, 178, 189, 191, 193 Switzerland   31, 50, 51 T Tall-e Bakun (Iran)   10, 98 Taurus (Turkey)   11, 189

New Zealand   142

Teleilat Ghassul (Jordan)   7, 10, 16, 17, 24, 111, 112, 114, 116, 117, 120

Nigeria   142 Nimrud (Iraq)   10, 25, 27, 35, 49 Northern Iraq   49, 167, 168, 172, 189, 198, 201 Northern Levant   57, 72, 169, 189, 191 Northern Turkey   49

Tell ‘Abr 3 (Syria)   10, 71, 79 Tell Abu Hureyra (Syria)   10, 72, 79, 80 Tell Aqab (Syria)   10, 168, 170 Tell Arpachiyah (Iraq)   10, 99, 101, 134, 138, 168, 170, 172, 174–176, 178, 179, 181–183

North-western Turkey   49 O

Tell Aswad (Syria)   10, 12, 85, 87, 89, 134, 137 Tell Banat (Syria) 10, 90

Orontes River (Syria)   193

Tell Bouqras (Syria)   10, 79, 80, 98, 190 P

Tell Cheikh Hassan (Syria)   99, 100, 134, 136 Tell el Oueili (Iraq)   10, 99, 101

Palau   142 Papua New Guinea   see New Guinea

Tell el-Ubaid (Iraq)   10, 169

Pergamon (Turkey)   25, 27, 31, 42–44, 48, 49, 51

Tell es-Sawwan (Iraq)   10, 134, 137, 138

Peru   142

Tell Fakhariyah (Syria)   10, 134, 137

Philippines   142

Tell Halaf (Syria)   10, 97–100, 103, 134, 138, 168, 170– 172, 174, 176, 177, 179–183

Punjab (India)   142

Tell Halula (Syria)   7, 10, 15, 24, 67, 71, 72, 76–80, 190 R Ras Shamra (Syria)   10, 168, 169, 170 S Sabi Abyad (Syria)   see Tell Sabi Abyad Sakçagözü (Turkey)   10, 168, 170 Şanlıurfa (Turkey)   10, 134, 137, 151, 164, 175 Segovia (Spain)   142

Tell Hassan (Syria)   10, 168 Tell Kashkashok (Syria)   10, 168, 170, 190 Tell Kosak Shamali (Syria)   10, 100 Tell Kurdu (Syria)   10, 168–170 Tell Mureybet (Syria)   see Mureybet Tell Qaramel (Syria)   10, 144 Tell Ramad (Syria)   10, 85

Shams ed-Din (Syria)   10, 168, 170

Tell Sabi Abyad (Syria)   10, 100, 103, 134, 137, 168, 170, 172, 176, 177, 181, 189–192, 197–199, 201, 202

Shir (Syria)   10, 189–198, 202, 203

Tell Sheikh Hassan   see Tell Cheikh Hassan

South-eastern Turkey   49, 151, 167, 168, 180

Tell Songor (Iraq)   10, 99, 134, 137, 138

Southern Egypt   49

Tell Tawila (Syria)   10, 168, 170, 178, 179

Sha’ar Hagolan (Israel)   10, 134, 137, 138

246

Index

Tell Umm Qseir (Syria)   10, 168, 170, 179

Uruk(-Warka) (Iraq)   10, 12, 99, 121

Tell Zeidan (Syria)   10, 100 Tepe Gawra (Iraq)   10, 98, 99, 134, 138, 168, 172 Thuringia (Germany)   31, 49

V Vancouver Island (Canada)   142 W

Tierra del Fuego (Cape Horn, Argentinia)   103 Titriş Höyük (Turkey) 10, 90

Wandersleben (Germany)   31, 49

Trobriand Islands (Papua New Guinea)   142 Tülintepe (Turkey)   10, 168–170, 190 U Uluçak (Turkey)   10, 134, 137 Umm Dabaghiyah (Iraq)   10, 189–191, 195, 198, 200, 201

Y Yarim Tepe (Iraq)   10, 99, 134, 137, 138, 168, 170, 174, 175, 178–181, 190, 198 Yeni Mahalle (Turkey)   10, 65, 155 Yiftahel (Israel)   10, 85, 87 Z

Upper Mesopotamia   18, 167, 169, 177, 182, 189, 190, 191, 193, 196–199, 204, 205

Zagros   11, 80, 167, 191

Ur (Iraq)   10, 90, 99, 115

Zaire   142