The principal objective of this study is to perform an intracemetery analysis of biological distance at the Neolithic site of Çatalhöyük, Turkey, to better understand its social organization. Biological distance is a statistical measure of observable phenotypic similarities that are equated to genotypic similarities. Measures of biological distance serve as a way to determine biological affinity both between populations and individuals.
Çatalhöyük is located in Central Anatolia and dates to 7400 – 5600 cal BC. The inhabitants of Çatalhöyük interred their dead underneath the floors of their mudbrick homes, thus creating a cemetery structure with small subgroupings of individuals. Data were collected on dental metrics and morphology to explore biological relationships within Çatalhöyük as related to interment location. These data were subject to statistical analyses at several levels including the individual, the home, the neighborhood, and the site.
The results of this study indicate that inclusion for interment within a home was only minimally related to biological affinity. However, there is evidence to suggest that within homes that endured over time, there is a preference to inter biological kin. Neighborhoods were not defined by biology and instead were centered on large houses (history houses) that served as a focus for interment of non-related individuals from throughout the site. Biological distinctions were found at a larger division of the site into two smaller northern and southern mounds. Furthermore, it was found that females were the more variable sex, suggesting that they were immigrants from other localities.
These findings suggest that Çatalhöyük social structure was centered on the house as the unifying social principle. Membership within a house cemetery transcended biological lines, creating a fluid definition of “kin.” However, in rare instances, there is a suggestion of lineal descent groups in houses rebuilt over time. In addition, it appears that the northern and southern components represent two moieties important in defining social structure.
Dental data from Çatalhöyük were also compared to two other Neolithic Central Anatolian sites (Aşıklı Höyük and Musular). This comparison showed that variation between all three sites was low, which may be the result of gene flow within Central Anatolia. There is also evidence to suggest that there was temporal phenotypic variation within Çatalhöyük, which may also be the result of migration to the site. Finally, a fourth skeletal sample was subject to biological distance analysis. Within Çatalhöyük there are several late skeletons with dates spanning from AD 60-1650. Comparisons of all four populations (Çatalhöyük, Aşıklı Höyük, Musular, and the late Çatalhöyük sample) indicated that the late sample was most like the Neolithic populations and Neolithic Musular was the least similar skeletal sample. These results could indicate that these Central Anatolian populations are ancestral to later Near Eastern populations.
The findings of this study have allowed for a discussion of several key points of Çatalhöyük social structure and expounded upon the nature of Central Anatolia during the Neolithic. This research can be used to understand how the transition to settled life was organized and inform the discussion on cultural evolution.