Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-fvjsw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T20:43:12.590Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Excavations at Çatal Hüyük, 1962: Second Preliminary Report

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

James Mellaart
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The excavations at Çatal Hüyük, the neolithic city mound in the Konya Plain, which were begun in 1961 were continued during the summer of 1962. The second season of excavation began on 7th June and lasted until 14th August, sixty working days, with a labour force which never exceeded thirty-five men, mostly trained under our foreman, Veli Karaaslan, at Beycesultan and Hacılar. Once again our trusted ustas included Rifat Çelimli, Mustafa Duman and Bekir Kalayci. Survey equipment and transport for the expedition were generously provided by Turkse Shell, Ankara.

The 1962 season was financed by the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, New York, a bequest from the late Mr. Francis Neilson, the Australian Institute of Archaeology and its President, Mr. W. J. Beasley, The British Academy, the University of Edinburgh and the University of Canterbury, New Zealand. In addition the Director had a personal fellowship from the Bollingen Foundation, New York.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Anatolian Studies , Volume 13 , December 1963, pp. 43 - 103
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 1963

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 See First Preliminary Report, in AS. XII, 1962, pp. 41–65Google Scholar.

2 AS. XII, 1962, Pl. II (cf. Fig. 9Google Scholar; 4 inches), and Pl. VIIc.

3 AS. XI, 1961, p. 71Google Scholar; Fig. 28.

4 AS. XI, 1961, p. 47 ffGoogle Scholar.

5 AS. XII, 1962, p. 159Google Scholar.

6 Anatolia IV, 1959, Pls. I and XVGoogle Scholar.

7 AS. XII, 1962, p. 59Google Scholar; Pls. Xb and XIa–b.

8 Bandi, H. G., Die Steinzeit (Kunst der Welt), Baden-Baden, 1960, ill. p. 79Google Scholar.

9 AS. XII, 1962, p. 64Google Scholar; Pls. XIVb–c and XVb–c.

10 AS. XII, 1962, p. 57Google Scholar.

11 As in the E.B.2 shrines at Beycesultan. Lloyd, Seton and Mellaart, James, Beycesultan Vol. I. London, 1962, p. 43Google Scholar.

12 In view of AS. XII, 1962, p. 46Google Scholar, where doorways are described, it can now be categorically stated that there were none at Çatal Hüyük. Accidental gaps in the walls due to later disturbance led to this erroneous view.

13 See note 12.

14 Not decoration as was suggested in AS. XII, 1962, p. 48 fGoogle Scholar.

15 AS. X, 1960, Fig. 4Google Scholar, or AS. XII, 1962, p. 30Google Scholar, Fig. 4 and Pl. Ia.

16 cf. plaster reliefs in shrine of Level VII (AS. XII, 1962, Pl. IIIb, Fig. 8, pp. 49–51Google Scholar).

17 Like the one in E VI, 10, and cf. the white figures of women in shrine E IV, 1 (AS. XII, 1962, p. 60Google Scholar).

18 The name of “Bull mountains” would seem to be hardly a coincidence, but has not been much commented upon.

19 Not incorporated in the drawing which was made before it was found.

20 Found on the floor of the building, cf. position in E VI, 14 (Third Shrine).

21 There may be even more, but the head had to be preserved at a certain stage.

22 Which still contained the carbonized and shrunk remains of squared timber.

23 AS. XII, 1962, Pl. VcGoogle Scholar.

24 ibid., Pl. VIIa.

25 AS. XI, 1959, pp. 171–3Google Scholar.

26 Picard, Ch., Les Religions Préhelléniques, Paris, 1948, pp. 58 f., 102, 117 ffGoogle Scholar.

27 ibid., pp. 77, 85, 171, 198.

28 ibid., p. 116.

29 ibid., pp. 83, 116–7.

30 ibid., pp. 257, 269.

31 ibid., pp. 145, 214.

32 AS. X, 1960, Pl. XIVbGoogle Scholar (the hand is on the other side of the pot!).

33 AS. XII, 1962, p. 59Google Scholar; Pls. Xb, XI.

34 Concretions of “funny stones” are called bebek, i.e. baby, by the Turkish peasants in our area. One is reminded of the story of Cronos swallowing the stone instead of the infant Zeus. See Picard, op. cit., p. 118.

35 Graziosi, P., Palaeolithic Art, London, 1960, p. 24Google Scholar.

36 Wace, Helen, Ivories from Mycenae. The Ivory Trio, 1961Google Scholar. Picard, op. cit., p. iii.

37 Pocock, R. I., in Journal of the Bombay Nat. Hist. Society, 1930, pp. 65–82Google Scholar.

38 AS. IV, 1954, p. 184, No. 83Google Scholar.

39 PEQ. 1960, p. 5 and Pl. XII, AGoogle Scholar.

40 AS. XI, 1961, Figs. 15–17Google Scholar.

41 ibid., Figs. 22, 23, Pls. XII and XIIIb.

42 ibid., Pl. Xa; note the spots left by burnt peas or lentils.

43 AS. XII, 1962, Pl. IXGoogle Scholar.

44 ibid., Pl. VIIIb.

45 Houses oflevels I and O, VIII–X, have not yet been removed so that we have no evidence yet for burials in these layers.

46 Removed en bloc to the Ankara Museum.

47 Badawy, A., A history of Egyptian Architecture, Figs. 16, 18Google Scholar, and a purification hut in Fig. 48. Perrot, J., in Atiqot. III, 1961Google Scholar.

48 Illustrated London News, 14th January, 1956.

49 Bialor, Perry A.. “The chipped stone industry of Çatal Hüyük,” AS. XII, 1962, pp. 67–110Google Scholar.

50 See AS. XII, 1962, pp. 52–5Google Scholar and Fig. 9.

51 Also in Hacılar IX and in the Early Chalcolithic of Çatal Hüyük West; see AS. XI, 1961, p. 183, Fig. 14, 1–3Google Scholar.