‘It all began with ritual’ (p. 2) sounds like an utterly provocative statement to make about world history. Many theoretical views would challenge such a notion, arguing it was the ecology, population pressure, means of production, technological progress or social behaviour that must have triggered the unprecedented historical developments that took place in southwest Asia following the Ice Age. Nevertheless, in one way or the other, all 11 chapters included in this volume accentuate the centrality of religion, ritual and cult for the study and interpretation of the Neolithic in southwest Asia and Anatolia. Throughout his introductory chapter, Hodder argues that Neolithic religion in a southwest Asian context manifests itself through strong continuity in the use of space, delineation of place and meaningful deposition of things, which all culminates in what he calls ‘history-making’ practices as a means to facilitate a ‘transcendental social’ entity in a group.
If indeed we are to view religion and all practices related to it as the ‘cement’ of a given social group, then it becomes extremely critical to focus on prehistoric ritual indices, in whatever form they are displayed in the archaeological record. Therefore, Hodder's introductory chapter presents numerous cases from all across southwest Asia about history-making practices. Hodder distinguishes two separate forms of history making in Neolithic southwest Asia: House-based (as at Çatalhöyük) and sodality-based (as at Göbekli Tepe or Jerf el Ahmar). These two forms, although they probably competed with each other, functioned to create, maintain and deepen social networks that allowed bonding, sharing, cooperation and solidarity in an economical system that was increasingly based upon delayed returns for labour (i.e. farming and herding).
The—rather demanding—first chapter of the book by Shults and Wildman presents a complex systems-dynamics model for the Konya Plain to assess the differences between ‘Low-Investment’ and ‘High-Investment’ lifestyles throughout the Çatalhöyük sequence. The model's strength originates from its theoretical architecture that allows a multitude of variables, including religion, to act on the results. It turns out that the radical transformation archaeologists observe in the Çatalhöyük sequence after 6500 bc might indeed have had to do with increasing population size, which led to greater social intensity and intensification of ritual practices to ensure social cohesion and bonding.
Matthews postulates that there is compelling archaeological evidence for ritual practices at Neolithic sites in Iran which suggest that, similarly to other regions in southwest Asia, religion played an important role during the neolithization processes of this region as well. A re-evaluation of old excavation data and micromorphological analyses at the newly excavated sites by the Central Zagros Archaeological Project create a novel narrative about Neolithic groups of the Central Zagros in Iraq and Iran. Matthews discovered ample evidence of repetitive use of space for the same purposes over an extended period of time and possible ritual depositions at sites, which imply, according to her, continuity of social roles and relations in this area. One remarkable, and even surprising, resemblance highlighted by Matthews, in terms of ritual practices between the Central Zagros sites and Çatalhöyük, is the repetitive application of white and clean plaster to specific locales inside the houses at both regions. In short, this chapter produces a new theoretical framework for Neolithic studies on Central Zagros and Iran in general by emphasizing the methodological contribution of micromorphological analyses for arriving at previously neglected aspects of early sedentism and food production in this region.
The chapter written by Goring-Morris and Belfer-Cohen argues that history-making activities for social cohesion purposes reach at least back to the Early Epipalaeolithic period in the Levant (if not further back to the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic). Multiple Levantine Early Epipalaeolithic sites such as Ohalo II or Ein Gev I contain architectural features that display repetitive construction in the same space for generations. Other remarkable cases for history making originate from lavish burials at Natufian sites with articulated depositions of a ritual nature. It is suggested that these carefully curated objects, skull caches and animal parts were symbolically meaningful to the communities as representations of their shared past and identity. Thus, the authors conclude that the Neolithic ritual practices of history making and long-term memory construction had their deep roots in the forager communities, long before delayed-return economies appeared in southwest Asia.
Göbekli Tepe is the par excellence of any compilation dealing with prehistoric rituals and their meanings. Clare and colleagues discuss history and memory making at Göbekli Tepe by outlining the life cycle of a typical Göbekli Tepe enclosure: erection, modification and burial. They argue that each of these stages may have been marked through ritually charged feasting events to emphasize the existential significance of these buildings for the community. Such events could have generated the notion of belonging to a shared tradition for the individuals involved. In contrast to many other authors in this book, Clare and colleagues imply that these public events may have gone beyond history and myth-making by being instrumental in endorsing political agendas of certain individuals. To me, the most outstanding discussion in this chapter is the indication that buried PPNA enclosures in the hollows were intentionally left visible to the higher-lying EPPNB houses, producing an ‘amphitheatre’-like sensation that possibly commemorated the mythical times of extravagant performances and rituals.
Benz and colleagues propose the idea that the Körtik Tepe community both created and experienced the birth of new social ethics from the Younger Dryas into the Initial Holocene. Increasing population size and sedentism necessitated novel social practices to strengthen communal feeling, cohesion and commitment; thus history-making practices thrived at this fascinating site. Here, starting with the Younger Dryas layers, certain ritual depositions are repeatedly observed over superimposed layers inside and outside of the houses. The most eye-catching features are obviously the curated burials that are, as a rule, found beneath the house floors. The evidence suggests that at Körtik Tepe social differentiation was based on age, rather than sex or wealth, as sub-adult burials contain the highest number and diversity of burial goods, whereas individuals over 40 receive few to no objects in their graves. As the authors wonderfully discuss, it was not only the possession of finely made objects that created the link to the past, but rather the performative burial ceremonies—which involved intentional breakage of chlorite vessels—that enhanced the collective feeling of belonging to a group and a place.
In his essay, Duru outlines the psychological stress and cognitive transformation forager groups had to go through in the long transition to sedentism. The profound change in social life reflected itself in the intensifying forms of rituals and public events that were generally accompanied by symbolic behaviours. According to Duru, the juxtaposition of private and public sectors at Aşıklı created a social tension in the community that was perhaps addressed by ritual activities. History making, on the other hand, is clearly indicated by continuity in the space use, both in houses and special buildings, over many generations.
Aşıklı is the main focus of yet another chapter in the book; Anspach argues that hearths at Aşıklı can be considered as ritual features, as these are not found in each house; they are built in the same spot over centuries and they are kept conspicuously clean (as opposed to Çatalhöyük hearths). Also there seems to be a correlation between hearths and burials, as they tend to co-appear in the same rooms. All this suggests that the hearth was a ritually installed feature in some Aşıklı rooms to accompany and commemorate buried individuals.
Joyce focuses on a specific aspect of pottery technology at Çatalhöyük to argue for the existence of what is labelled ‘immaterial property’ in anthropological literature. By citing a large number of ethnographic studies, she aims to demonstrate that different ways of pottery production are an indication of variability of and differential access to knowledge in Çatalhöyük community, which in turn may suggest some sort of emergent social differentiation within the group. Another aspect emphasized by Joyce is the intentional deposition of ceramic containers inside elaborately designed ‘history houses’, which can be related to the history-making processes at the site.
Tsoraki's chapter deals with a ground stone assemblage carefully deposited in one of the most elaborate houses at Çatalhöyük—Building 77. This building contained more than 400 ground stone objects such as querns, grinders, polished axes and hammerstones. The quantity and quality of these artifacts, as well as their structured deposition in the usually clean, ritually charged northern section of the building, are so exceptional that Tsoraki argues that these are articulated remains of a house closure deposit which most possibly involved the participation of multiple households. By seeing the history-making process at the site as a performative event of social inclusion, Tsoraki transcends the mutually exclusive categories such as ‘profane’ and ‘ritual’, even for mundane daily-life objects like grinding stones. She argues that Çatalhöyük inhabitants deliberately employed mundane objects in ritual performative acts to ‘narrate household history’ and thus reproduce social structure.
The last chapter of the book, by Lercari, examines how data-driven 3D virtual reconstructions can potentially add to the current knowledge gained through archaeological methods at ancient sites. By focusing on buildings from the Mellaart excavations designated as ‘shrines’, Lercari demonstrates that history-making processes can well be explored while designing and implementing a virtual environment. He suggests that archaeological interpretation of space and time will increasingly benefit from 3D virtual environments in near future.
In sum, this is a thought-provoking, captivating and well-edited book on history-making practices in Neolithic Anatolia and southwest Asia. The only downside of the volume is the low quality of the images that in some cases fail to contribute to the text. Whether you view religion (as Marx famously put it) as ‘the heart of a heartless world’, ‘soul of soulless conditions’ or ‘opium of the people’, I whole-heartedly recommend the volume to all students who are eager to broaden their horizons on the spiritual activities of Neolithic societies.
