Addendum: Another hunter warrior settlement in Sayburç Tepe in Anatolia
How does this redefine egalitarianism?
NEWS FLASH
I am interrupting regular programming with an update.
It has come to my attention, thanks to my new Turkish colleague, Dr. Ayşe Bursalı, who told me about one of the important finds in Sayburç in Anatolia! I totally missed this! And I am excited to share this with you.
In one of my favourite posts of all time, we learned about twin settlements Çatalhöyük and Karahan Tepe which are cultural mirrors of each other. Çatalhöyük (7100 - 5950 calibrated BC) is largely female-oriented with less remarked social ranking while Karahan Tepe (10,000 - 6,500 BC) appears to be male-oriented and symbolically values hunting as its core identity.
Sayburç is another site in the Şanlıurfa district of south-eastern Turkey, 60 kilometers east of the headwaters of the Euphrates River in the Taurus Mountain ranges. The excavation only started in 2021 and by 2022 this find was presented to the public.
There were two sites discovered under a modern village of the same name. One is a residential area and the other is a communal building where the carved stone bench was found.
Public assembly or guild hall?
The communal building measures 11 meters in diameter and currently sits between two modern houses built in 1949. The modern homes will eventually be demolished to make way for further excavations in the future. The photo shows post holes that indicate pillars or columns that may separate portions of the area or openness to the general public.
At the moment, we do not have a clear picture of what type of communal building this is until further excavation. However, the archaeologists strongly believe that this might be a communal point of gathering based on the reliefs found similar to what we have seen in Karahan Tepe with man and animals.
…the Neolithic images must have served in the assembly areas so that everyone can learn the story. Therefore, they can be seen as the first ontological narratives.” Eylem Özdoğan for The Art Newspaper
The stone bench is carved on the limestone wall and topped with a wall of stones. It measures about 0.6 to 0.8 meters high with 0.4-meter cavities along the wall to indicate columned partitions.
To answer our question, I looked into how archaeologists have been interpreting these findings. One interesting framework is made by Bernd Müller-Neuhof (2019) who categorised 17 gesture types out of the 88 different iconography and anthropomorphic gestures found in pottery to murals from the Early to Late Neolithic period (10,000 - 5,000 BC) from Anatolia, the Levant, and Mesopotamia.
Once, he tabulated the features, he integrated contemporary ethnological or ethnographic descriptions, theology, religious, and psychology studies with archaeological findings to help him reconstruct some of the ancient meanings. While the study refers to the Mature and Late Çatalhöyük period, I think some of his ideas remain significant for an early interpretation of Sayburç.
In our case, the standing man would be categorised as a Type 6 gesture
The man is addressing the viewer directly with his phallus gesture but not in a sexual or erotic manner. There is a range of interpretations here from a benign to an aggressive one using Müller-Neuhoff’s categories. On the one hand, it has the function of warding off evil aimed at demons or illnesses, and on the other, it is an aggressive stance of marking territory. Or both simultaneously.
Unfortunately, the left figurine in the middle of a movement pose is not classified. Since the left figure faces the bull, the figure is in a dialogic communication with the animal. Therefore, the scene is an example of a narrative sequence. Its purpose is to express emotions or generate feelings from the viewer.
Egalitarian warrior settlement?
What do you think these designs are communicating to the viewer?
Given the male-oriented decor, I am almost tempted to say this was a fraternity hall dedicated to discussions related to hunting, celebrating hunting, or even special religious occasions linked to hunting. To cut into rock, obsidian tools would have been used. This is a material imported from up north. So I do agree that this area would be out of the ordinary from an undecorated stone dwelling. These reliefs communicate either healing-related space or a display of individual or ancesteral power.
If there are no finds within the area, we need to contrast our hypothesis with the other residential layout and design of Sayburç. It would be easier to surmise whether this is indeed a communal hall exclusive to a small group of hunter elites, religious practitioners, or secular orators. We could then think about whether a communal hall automatically indicates an egalitarian culture. (It doesn’t - think about what a pub or discotheque would indicate).
On the other site of Karahan Tepe, we know that they have a warrior-based value system. Does it mean that we have the first instance of a system of autocratic rule or a case of a hybrid rule among the benches in Sayburç? We have seen in Chapter 5 that power over another in contemporary, small-scale, pre-historic human societies is quite difficult to maintain and expensive in terms of social resources and labour power. This is why this arrangement is limited to certain activities.
If Sayburç is ruled by a small elite lineage or group embodied within this small exclusive communal hall, then a scaled-down permanent settlement appears to support a more autocratic system of governance. This would be strengthened by a male-oriented, hunting value system. It is quite ironic that the larger the settlements and the more extensive the bureaucracy is, the more egalitarian a settlement tended to be as in Çatalhöyük and in Mesopotamia. Scaling up beyond the household level with a centralised bureaucracy (or group arrangements) seems to support egalitarianism.
Next…
It is exciting to hear what the upcoming excavations will reveal about Sayburç. Is this another proof of an egalitarian site, a warrior-based settlement, or as yet hybrid form of governance? If so, what does a hybrid social arrangement look like then? We know that it would be temporary or in a limited capacity. What form does it take in small-scale Neolithic societies? Perhaps hunting is the ideal, but only in one aspect of social life. How about the others?
Perhaps, we will know more as we go into China before the Shang Dynasty (1200 BC) and see how mobile nomads built their cities. This might show us what a warrior-led governance looks like.