This analysis is based on the 242 specimens of birdbone recovered from the BACH Area excavations(see Figure 4.1). This assemblage should closely

approximate the total bird remains recovered from this ex-cavation area, as virtually all units that were not fully studiedreceived a Phase 1 assessment in which bird bones werepulled for study. The density of bird bone in the BACHArea (0.004 per liter) is about average for Çatalhöyük andthe same as that in neighboring Building 1 in the NORTHArea, which is at least roughly the same in age and broadlysimilar in terms of the range of contexts excavated (Russelland McGowan 2005). The bird bones were identified withthe help of reference collections at the Cornell UniversityMuseum of Vertebrates and the Smithsonian Institution(National Museum of Natural History), and published cri-teria as noted in the discussions of individual taxa.

TAXA

The range and distribution of taxa (Table 9.1; Figure 9.1)are generally similar to those seen in the material from theNORTH, SOUTH, and KOPAL Areas that has been ana-lyzed previously (Russell and McGowan 2005). In bothcases, tallies have been adjusted so that articulated sets arecounted only once. Waterfowl make up 70 percent of theassemblage, but there are some differences from other areasin the composition of the waterbirds. While geese andducks remain the most common groups, ducks outnumbergeese, whereas in the previously analyzed assemblage as awhole, geese were more frequent. However, in some levelsof the NORTH and SOUTH Areas, ducks were also morecommon than geese, including in Building 1 of the NORTHArea. More strikingly, waterbirds other than ducks andgeese form a larger part of the assemblage in the BACHArea. In particular, herons here account for 15 percent ofidentified birds, vs. 6 percent in the previously analyzed

assemblage. Grebes and coots also occur more frequentlyin the BACH assemblage. Raptors are less frequent in theBACH Area, and less varied, with no owls. Galliforms andgulls, neither of them very common in the previously ana-lyzed assemblage, are totally absent here. More surprisingly,Great Bustard, the most common single species in the pre-viously analyzed assemblage, is represented by a singlespecimen. Corvids, mostly Rooks and Hooded Crows butwith one Eurasian Magpie specimen, are particularly com-mon here, as they are in Level VIII in the SOUTH Area.

GrebesAll the grebes identified from the BACH Area are GreatCrested Grebes (Podiceps cristatus), on the basis of meas-urements and characters in Boche!ski (1994). These grebeswould probably have been present throughout the year inthe Konya Plain. Three of the four specimens are tibiotarsi,the remaining a mandible fragment. The tibiotarsus is amoderately meaty area, suggesting food use. Moreover, oneof them (8622.F5) shows classic signs of roasting in theform of a tiny patch of low-temperature burning on one ofthe distal condyles.

CormorantsThe BACH Area yielded one specimen each of Great Cor-morant (Phalacrocorax carbo) and Pygmy Cormorant (P.pygmeus). The Pygmy Cormorant would be resident year-round, while the Great Cormorant more likely winters onthe coast and thus would have been taken in spring orsummer. Both specimens are wing bones (ulna for theGreat Cormorant, humerus for the Pygmy Cormorant).

HeronsAs noted above, herons are particularly abundant in theBACH Area. In addition to one ulna fragment from an

243

CHAPTER 9

BIRD REMAINS FROM THE BACH AREA

Nerissa Russell and Kevin J. McGowan

244 HOUSE LIVES

Table 9.1. Bird taxa

Taxon Common Name Count* % Habitat

Podiceps cristatus dnalteW44eberG detserC taerG

Phalacrocorax carbo Great Cormorant 1 1 Wetland

Phalacrocorax pygmeus dnalteW11tnaromroC ymgyP

Heron 2 2 Wetland

Ixobrychus minutus dnalteW22nrettiB elttiL

Egretta garzetta Little Egret 5 6 Wetland

Ardea cinerea dnalteW44noreH yerG

Ciconia sp. Stork 1 1 Wetland

dnalteW33llibnoopS naisaruEaidorocuel aelatalP

Cygnus sp. Swan 1 1 Wetland

dnalteW11esooG

Large Goose 6 7 Wetland

dnalteW44esooG llamS

Branta ruficollis Red-Breasted Goose 2 2 Wetland

dnalteW11kcuD

Anas sp. Dabbling Duck 3 3 Wetland

Anas crecca dnalteW33laeT degniW-neerG

Anas platyrhynchos Mallard 1 1 Wetland

Aythya dnalteW44kcuD gniviD.ps

Aythya ferina Common Pochard 3 3 Wetland

Aythya fuligula dnalteW11kcuD detfuT

Gyps fulvus Eurasian Gri!on Vulture 3 3 Mountains

Circus aeruginosus dnalteW11reirraH hsraM

Buteo sp. Buzzard 1 1 Forest/Open

Aquila 11elgaE.ps

Fulica atra Eurasian Coot 6 7 Wetland

Grus grus dnalteW22enarC nommoC

Otis tarda Great Bustard 1 1 Steppe

dnalteW11driberohS

Small Passerine 7 8

indeterminate small heron and a phalanx fragment of amedium heron, multiple specimens are present from theLittle Bittern (Ixobrychus minutus), Little Egret (Egrettagarzetta), and Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea). The Little Bit-tern winters in Africa, so would be unavailable duringthat part of the year. A tarsometatarsus comes from themidden in Space 85 to the west of Building 3, while an ar-ticulated wing (from the distal humerus down; the partwith feathers but virtually no flesh) forms part of a specialdeposit in Space 88.

The Little Egret was probably also absent in the winter.In contrast to those analyzed previously, which consistedentirely of non-meaty wing bones, in the BACH Area allthe egret remains are from meaty areas (two coracoids,scapula, furcula, humerus), suggesting food use. GreyHerons were probably present throughout the year. Thespecimens (humerus, carpometacarpus, tibiotarsus, andtarsometatarsus) come from the leg and wing. The humerusand tibiotarsus would have a little meat.

StorksA cervical vertebra is most likely from a stork. White Storks(Ciconia ciconia) currently breed in the area and passthrough in large flocks during migration but are absent inthe winter.

SpoonbillEurasian Spoonbill (Platalea leucorodia) seems to haveserved as food elsewhere at Çatalhöyük (Russell and Mc-Gowan 2005), but in the BACH Area it appears to be thebeak and feathers that were of interest. An articulated wingtip (carpometacarpus and phalanges) was placed in the fillnear the floor of Building 3, while the upper and lowerbeaks were part of a special deposit in Space 88. Spoonbillswould be available locally from February to September.

SwansSwans are represented by a single coracoid, a meaty regionof the body. The specimen comes from a bird larger than a

245CHAPTER 9. BIRD REMAINS FROM THE BACH AREA

* Corrected for articulations.

Taxon Common Name Count* % Habitat

Pica pica egdE11eipgaM naisaruE

Corvus frugilegus Rook 4 4 Edge

Corvus corone egdE98worC dedooH

Total identified 89

51driB llamS

Medium Bird 49

75driB egraL

Bird 6

721etanimretedni latoT

Total Birds 216

Table 9.1 (continued). Bird taxa

Figure 9.1. Bird types in the BACH Area (NISP).

Tundra Swan (Cygnus columbianus) and thus would befrom either the Mute Swan (C. olor) or the Whooper Swan(C. cygnus). The Whooper Swan does not breed in Anatolia,but the Mute Swan may have been present year-round inthe Konya Plain.

GeeseGeese are less common here than in some other areas ofthe site but still account for 13 percent of the identified birdbones. Two specimens are fairly certainly from the Red-breasted Goose (Branta ruficollis) based on measurementsand characters in Bacher (1967), while the rest cannot beattributed to species. Most of those in the smaller group aretoo big to be Red-breasted Goose, but too small to be Grey-lag Goose (Anser anser); hence, they must be either GreaterWhite-fronted Goose (A. albifrons) or Lesser White-frontedGoose (A. erythropus). The specimens in the larger groupare bigger than the Lesser White-fronted Goose, and wouldthus be Greylag or Greater White-fronted Goose. Only theGreylag Goose would be present year-round in the KonyaPlain, while the others would winter there. Many of thegeese were therefore probably taken in winter.

There are no goose leg bones in this assemblage. Sevenof 13 specimens are from meaty parts of the breast or wing;six are from the wing (mostly non-meaty areas). Therefore,the pattern seen elsewhere at Çatalhöyük is maintained:geese seem to have been eaten, but there is probably alsoan additional selection for wings, probably for their feathers.The only bone not from the breast or wing is a cervicalvertebra burned at one end, suggesting that a whole, be-headed bird may have been roasted over a fire.

DucksThe ducks are the most common bird group in the BACHassemblage and are evenly divided between dabbling (Anasspp.) and diving (Aythya spp.) ducks. Measurements andcharacters in Woelfle (1967) permit some specimens to beidentified to species. Among the dabbling ducks, three canbe attributed to Green-winged Teal and one to Mallard.The three Anas spp. specimens all fall in the middle of thesize range for the genus; hence, they are probably A. acuta,A. penelope, A. strepera, or A. clypeata. All of these wouldhave been at least potentially present year-round in theKonya Plain. The dabbling duck body-part distribution re-sembles that of the geese: all specimens are from the wingand breast, with four of seven from meaty areas.

One of the diving ducks is surely a Tufted Duck (Aythyafuligula), based on size and morphology. Three are probablyCommon Pochards (A. ferina) but might just possibly belarge Tufted Ducks. The diving duck specimens not iden-tifiable to species are all larger than the Ferruginous duck(A. nyroca) and thus are probably Common Pochard, Tufted

Duck, or Greater Scaup (A. marila), although two are toosmall to be Greater Scaup. The Greater Scaup would onlybe present in winter, but the others would be available year-round. The diving duck body-part distribution is somewhatdifferent from the dabbling ducks. There is one tibiotarsus(lower leg) and two coracoids (breast), and the rest arewing bones, mostly from the non-meaty portion.

RaptorsRaptors are considerably less frequent in the BACH Areathan in the previously analyzed assemblage (Russell andMcGowan 2005). The harriers that predominated in otherareas are absent here, save one Marsh Harrier (Circus aerug-inosus) talon. Instead, we have a femur fragment from amid-size Aquila eagle, a buzzard (Buteo sp.) ulna, a virtuallycomplete tarsometatarsus of a Eurasian Griffon Vulture(Gyps fulvus), and two skull fragments that are probablyalso Eurasian Griffon Vulture. All of these, save some speciesof buzzard that would be present only in winter, would beavailable year-round.

RailsThe rail family is represented in the BACH Area solely bythe Eurasian Coot (Fulica atra), which is even more commonhere than elsewhere at the site (7 percent of the identifiedbirds). The Eurasian Coot specimens are spread through thebody, with even numbers from breast, wing, and leg. Thissuggests that, as elsewhere, they were used for food.

CranesThe Common Crane (Grus grus) is represented by a pha-lanx from the wing and a worked tarsometatarsus(8178.F55; see Chapter 15). This fits the pattern elsewhereat the site, suggesting that food may not have been the pri-mary use of cranes.

BustardsWith a single specimen (tibiotarsus) of Great Bustard (Otistarda), this species is far less common in the BACH Areathan in the previously analyzed assemblage. Since this isthe main representative of the steppe habitat in the birdassemblage, perhaps the inhabitants of this house were lessinclined to exploit this zone than were some others at thesite.

CrowsThe only identified passerines from the BACH Area arecorvids: the Eurasian Magpie (Pica pica), Rook (Corvus frugi-legus), and Hooded Crow (C. corone) as identified by traitsand measurements in Tomek and Boche!ski (2000). Thecorvids are strikingly abundant in the BACH Area, with theHooded Crow the most frequent single taxon, and corvids

246 HOUSE LIVES

as a group nearly as abundant as geese. In part this is due toa concentration in Space 85, but crows are common overall.

The Eurasian Magpie is represented by a carpometacar-pus, a non-meaty wing bone. The Rook specimens includeslightly more wing than leg bones, with two tibiotarsi theonly (slightly) meaty bones. One set of wing and one set ofleg bones are articulated. On the whole, this body-part dis-tribution does not suggest food use, but an articulated tibio-tarsus and tarsometatarsus show slight burning and possiblemarrow fractures that might suggest consumption. Manyof the Hooded Crow remains derive from a concentrationof bones from at least two birds in a concentration in Space85. These are spread throughout the body, including eventhe delicate cranial areas, but seem to have been only semi-articulated in the ground. Elsewhere, body parts are limitedto non-meaty portions of the wing (mostly) and leg. Inter-estingly, some bones from both inside Building 3 and theSpace 85 concentration show burning patterns that mightresult from roasting, just as with the Rooks. Thus, it is likelythat crows were at least sometimes eaten, although theremay also be some selection for wings and feet.

BUTCHERY, COOKING, AND BODY PARTS

In the previously analyzed assemblage (Russell and Mc-Gowan 2005), we found no cut marks except those relatedto tool manufacture, and no burning resulting from cookingon the bird bones. While such butchery and cooking tracesremain rare, they do occur in the BACH bird bone assem-blage. A fragment of a duck-size humerus (2228.F232)bears a transverse cut on the posterior shaft just below thedeltoid tuberosity that probably results from meat removalduring consumption, unless it is a poorly aimed dismem-berment cut. As mentioned in the taxon descriptions, burn-ing that may result from roasting occurs on specimens ofgrebe, goose, and crow. Perhaps the Building 3 inhabitantstended to cook their birds differently from people else-where on the site. Or perhaps they simply cooked more oftheir birds. The consolidated body-part distribution forall identified elements (Table 9.2) shows a greater propor-tion of meaty body parts than the previously analyzed as-semblage, although the feathery portion of the wings stillseems somewhat overrepresented. While in the previouslyanalyzed assemblage only bustards and coots showed abody-part distribution suggesting use primarily as food,in the BACH Area such patterning is seen for the grebes,egrets, swan, coots, and to some extent, geese, dabblingducks, and crows.

BIRDS IN CONTEXT

Since nearly all the units in the BACH Area were examinedfor bird bone, we have a greater opportunity than in othersite areas to consider contextual variation. Table 9.3 presents

the distribution of bird taxa distribution among contexttypes; once again, articulated sets of bones are tallied onlyonce. Both taxa and contexts have been grouped in orderto reveal patterning.

Midden deposits include the remains of many activities,mainly in secondary context—that is, gathered up anddumped after use. Their contents are therefore reasonablyfairly closely associated in time with the deposits, and, sincemidden areas occur frequently across the site, are likely tobe spatially associated with nearby houses. Some of thesemiddens occurred outside of Building 3, mainly to the west,and may contain waste from the building’s occupants, whileothers were formed inside the walls after abandonment, andhence relate to slightly later occupation nearby.

247CHAPTER 9. BIRD REMAINS FROM THE BACH AREA

Table 9.2. Bird body-part distribution

Note: Shaded elements indicate meaty parts

Body zone ElementNumber of specimens

4llukSdaeH

4elbidnaM

7earbetreVkceN

Breast/body Rib 2

Coracoid 15

Furcula 1

Scapula 1

Sternum 15

Synsacrum 5

Wing Humerus 18

01suidaR

02anlU

1slapraC

Carpometacarpus 16

First phalanx, major digit 6

Minor phalanges 4

Leg Femur 4

Tibiotarsus 13

Tarsometatarsus 8

8segnalahPtooF

Packing deposits under floors and other features varyin nature but often seem to include some very fresh bone(and bird bone is often among these fresh bits), suggestingthat when floors were relaid, bits of debris lying about onthem were incorporated into the packing. Thus, the contentsof packing deposits include both relatively primary materialand tertiarily deposited material brought in with the pack-ing material from elsewhere, with little relation to the oc-cupation of Building 3. For this reason, we have separatedpacking from the other construction materials (bricks,mortar, plaster, etc.), which appear to consist entirely ofmaterial brought from elsewhere and thus are probablyearlier and of unknown relation to Building 3.

Fill is material from elsewhere dumped into the houseafter abandonment, also often containing a considerableamount of construction material from the house itself. Likethe construction material, therefore, the contents of fill de-posits have little relation to the occupation of Building 3.We have separated pit fills (including the fill of post-re-trieval pits and burials) and fills and other deposits lyingdirectly on floors, since these may contain primary depositsplaced there in addition to the contents of the fill. The con-tents of hearths are likely to be fairly primary remains ofdomestic activities, and special deposits have been delib-erately placed, presumably by the building’s inhabitants.

The bird taxa have been grouped according to theirsignificance here and elsewhere on the site. Thus, whilemost are fairly general groupings, we have separated outcranes, bustards, and corvids, since cranes occur in the artand in special deposits on the site, and bustards and corvidsare notable for their frequency in the general site assem-blage. The waterbird category includes storks, shorebirds,and aquatic birds such as grebes, coots, and cormorantsthat fall outside the anatid and heron categories.

Since the excavated quantities of different deposit typesvary, we need to examine densities (given here as countsper liter of all bird specimens, corrected for articulations)to compare the occurrence of bird bone among the deposittypes. To some degree, the densities of bird bone reflect theoverall faunal densities in these context types, but there aresome areas of divergence. Bird bones are relatively muchless common in midden deposits, which are richest in animalbone in general. Bird bone is particularly scarce in the Phase0 middens that lie under the floors of Building 3. On theother hand, hearths (with a very small sample size), specialdeposits, and to some extent packing have relatively higherbird bone densities. The elevated bird densities in the specialdeposits reflect the important role that bird remains play inthese deposits in the BACH Area. The higher levels in hearthdeposits and packing, and perhaps the slightly higher levels

248 HOUSE LIVES

Table 9.3. Bird taxa by context type

Context Type

Indet. bird Anatid Heron Raptor Crane

Water-bird Bustard Corvid Total

Total identified

Count per liter

Midden 19 1238%

722%

39%

13%

26%

722%

51 32 .0069

Packing 4 225%

338%

113%

225%

12 8 .0040

Construc-tion material

31 542%

18%

217%

433%

43 12 .0018

Fill 67 941%

418%

732%

15%

15%

89 22 .0041

Pit fill 19 350%

350%

25 6 .0092

Fill on floor 7 1100%

8 1 .0093

Hearth 150%

150%

2 2 .0106

Special deposit

9 133%

133%

133%

12 3 .0165

in fill on floor deposits, vs. the reduced frequency in themiddens, may mean that bird bone was more likely to stayin the house rather than being dumped on middens. Itmight also reflect taphonomic factors, with bird bone morelikely to suffer from attritional forces in the midden deposits.However, the BACH middens are not particularly heavilyworked over by dogs, and, while bird bone is fragile, itscortex is dense in many of the bones (Broughton et al. 2007;Dirrigl 2001; Higgins 1999). In the previously analyzed as-semblage, density-mediated attrition did not seem to be amajor factor in bird bone body-part distributions. Rather,the small size of bird bones and their sparse occurrencemay have given them a low hindrance value (Hayden andCannon 1983) in comparison with macro-mammalianbones, so there was less incentive to remove them.

Figure 9.2 compares the proportions of the taxon cate-gories for the context types that have at least five identifiedspecimens. Given that sample sizes are small, these propor-tions should be interpreted with caution. It is interesting tonote, though, that while anatids (ducks, geese, and swans)occur in similar proportions in the three context types withthe largest sample sizes (midden, fill, and construction ma-

terial), heron proportions are similar in midden and fill buttotally lacking in construction material. If the relatively highproportion of herons is indeed a peculiarity of Building 3 orits neighborhood, this might suggest that fill is coming fromrelatively nearby, while construction material is derived fromdeposits with a more distant relationship to the building.The single specimen of bustard from the BACH Area occursin fill. While the heron proportions might argue for muchof the fill being derived from more or less associated deposits,nevertheless this is not a context firmly associated with theuse of Building 3. It therefore raises the possibility that thishousehold or neighborhood did not eat bustard, whetherbecause of a taboo or because they did not target the steppezone of the landscape. As noted above, corvids are particu-larly common in the BACH Area. Their distribution amongcontext types is uneven and hard to interpret. They are totallyabsent from some context types, although this may be chieflyan effect of sample size. They occur in greatest numbers inthe middens but in highest proportion in the constructionmaterial. Therefore, they would seem to derive both fromthe activities of the inhabitants in the Building 3 vicinityand from farther away. The high proportion of indeterminate

249CHAPTER 9. BIRD REMAINS FROM THE BACH AREA

Figure 9.2. BACH bird types by context type: (a) midden; (b) packing; (c)construction material; (d) fill; (e) pit fill.

bird bone in construction material and fill, including pit filland fill on floor, is no doubt the result of these deposits beingreworked, which has led to the loss of the more delicate anddiagnostic articular areas, leaving the denser long bone shafts.

Figure 9.3 presents the taxon categories according totheir occurrence in primary, secondary, or tertiary context,individually assessed. While the sample size is limited, it isstriking that the anatids are totally absent from the primarycontexts. Since these contexts are mainly special deposits,it suggests that the anatids tended to play utilitarian ratherthan ritual roles. In the secondary (mostly midden) andtertiary (mostly fill and construction material) contexts,anatids are common. Herons and corvids are frequent inall three context types, but more so in the primary andsecondary contexts that are more closely tied to the inhab-itants of Building 3.

As there were almost no primary deposits of faunalmaterial in Building 3 itself, the bird bones from Building 3proper (Spaces 86, 158, and 201) will mainly relate to periodsprior to its occupation (construction material, underlyingmiddens, and some fill) or subsequent to its abandonment(middens and some fills inside the house). The same is trueof the small rooms to the south, Spaces 87, 88, and 89. Themidden in Space 85 to the west of the house, however, is atleast potentially contemporary with Building 3’s occupation.Since only the strip along the outer wall of Building 3 wasexcavated, it is quite likely that much of this material wastipped into it off the roof by the inhabitants of Building 3.Figure 9.4 compares the bird taxa from Building 3 properto those from Space 85; Spaces 87, 88, and 89 have samplesizes too small for meaningful comparison. Of course, thereare contextual issues in the comparison, since the Space 85deposits are all middens, while those from Building 3 includea variety of deposit types. Still, if we take the Space 85 de-posits as representative of activities in Building 3, we notehigher levels of corvid (much of this from a single event),

somewhat higher anatid, somewhat lower heron, and sub-stantially less of the other waterbirds. This suggests a balanceof culinary waste and the remains of other activities suchas bead making and featherwork. It also indicates perhapsless exploitation of wetlands than the palimpsest of otherperiods and households represented by the Building 3 as-semblage, with wetland bird acquisition more specificallytargeted to anatids (possibly meaning that such hunting ortrapping was largely restricted to fall migration).

Some of the bird remains may suggest tentative linksbetween the spaces in the BACH Area. Eurasian Spoonbillis quite rare at Çatalhöyük, and most of it is from the BACHArea. Spoonbill beaks (upper and lower) were found in aspecial deposit in Space 88, while an articulated wing tip(from the carpometacarpus down) with a very fresh surfacecondition was found in the fill just above the floor in Space158. There is no way to know if these are from the samebird, but if so, it suggests the special deposit in Space 88 iscontemporary with the abandonment of Building 3, or elsethe wing tip was curated for some time and placed in thehouse at abandonment. It is likely that the wing retainedits white feathers when deposited.

Similarly, the Little Bittern has so far been found onlyin the BACH Area: an articulated wing in the same specialdeposit in Space 88, and a tarsometatarsus in the unit 6672midden in Space 85. Possibly this links unit 6672 to thetime of Building 3’s abandonment, which would mean thatthe several midden layers above it postdate the occupationof the house. Since these pieces do not directly articulate,however, these links can only be viewed as possibilities tobe explored with other materials.

While the crow remains are too numerous to make asimilar argument linking specific deposits, both Rook andHooded Crow occur at generally higher levels in the BACHArea than elsewhere. As noted above, they are most com-mon in primary and secondary deposits that are relatively

250 HOUSE LIVES

Figure 9.3. BACH bird types by (a) primary, (b) secondary, and (c) tertiary contexts.

closely linked to the occupation of Building 3. Therefore,their occurrence in primary and secondary deposits inSpaces 85, 87, 88, and 89 as well as Building 3 proper maysuggest that all these spaces received waste from the in-habitants of Building 3. Most of the crow bones are foundin midden and packing deposits and have a fresh surfacecondition, suggesting they were directly deposited ratherthan coming in with the construction material.

Much of the bird bone occurs in small concentrations(often of more than one species), while most units, evenmidden units, lack bird remains. These occasional pocketsof bird remains give the impression of seasonal or perhapsjust sporadic use of birds. Most likely they are taken inci-dentally on trips made to wetlands for other purposes.

Three bird bone deposits are worthy of special discus-sion. Interestingly, all of them occur outside Building 3proper. First, in the Space 85 midden deposits, many bonesfrom at least two Hooded Crows were found spread acrossunits 6334 and 6350. Most body zones are represented, in-cluding skull, mandible, coracoid, synsacrum, all major wingbones, and tibiotarsus. These do not seem to have been ar-ticulated in the ground, as many of the bones have oldbreaks and the ulna is burned along one side. This suggeststhat they may be food remains, but it is unusual to findthem discarded in such a concentrated manner, and withdelicate cranial bones. The crow bones were found slightlysouth of a feasting deposit composed of a rich concentrationof minimally processed sheep/goat limb bones. It may be,then, that the crow remains derive from the same occasion,and perhaps the crows were part of a ceremonial meal.

Second, in Space 89, two more Hooded Crow wingbones, a right ulna and left carpometacarpus, were foundin unit 2210. The distal articulation of the ulna has burning

that might result from roasting. This unit contained a spe-cial deposit that included a large set of cattle horns withconnecting skull, a pile of several other cattle horns, a flintdagger with a carved bone handle, a human skull, and alarge deposit of bones that are probably another feastingdeposit, along with much burned plant material. It is notimpossible that these are remains of the same feast and thesame crows found in Space 85. At any rate, it supports theassociation of crows with feasts and ceremonies in theBACH Area.

Finally, bird remains form an important part of a spe-cial deposit (8505) in Space 88. Next to a plaster basin, asmall depression under a platform in the northern end ofthe room contained a Spoonbill mandible lying on a layerof phytoliths (reeds), and over it the front of a female wildboar mandible, some segments of a sheep spine with artic-ulated rib heads (Chapter 8), some obsidian and groundstone objects, and on top of all these, a necklace of marineshells and one large stone bead. Nearby, against the wall inthis same packing layer but not in the depression, was anarticulated Little Bittern wing. A small fragment of Spoon-bill upper beak was found in a midden layer lower downin this same space. It may also be associated with this de-posit, carried down in an animal burrow. Such collectionsof objects, usually including faunal remains, have beenfound in many platforms and sometimes elsewhere underthe floor, and seem to commemorate ceremonies. Perhapsthe Eurasian Spoonbill and Little Bittern remains were partof costumes or paraphernalia at this ceremony. If the LittleBittern was a male, the wing would have had a strikingpattern of black with a whitish patch. Since neither theSpoonbill nor the Little Bittern winters in Anatolia, if theywere procured specifically for this ceremony it would havetaken place in spring or summer.

CONCLUSION

Focusing on the bird remains from in and around a singlehouse, Building 3, has provided further insight into the useof birds at Çatalhöyük. While general patterns, such as thedominance of waterbirds and selection of wings, seem tohold broadly throughout all areas analyzed, the examinationof the BACH Area reveals localized variation within the site.Contextual analysis indicates that much of this variation isspecific to the inhabitants of Building 3, or at least to themand their immediate neighbors. One aspect of this variationis an elevated use of herons and crows. There are indicationsthat crows may have formed part of ceremonial meals forthe inhabitants of the building. The herons, for the mostpart, seem to have been used in more mundane contexts, al-though the Little Bittern is found in a ceremonial context.The Little Bittern and the Eurasian Spoonbill do not appearas food remains but rather as ceremonial paraphernalia.

251CHAPTER 9. BIRD REMAINS FROM THE BACH AREA

Figure 9.4. Bird types in Building 3 and Space 85.

Building 3 (inner circle) and Space 85 (outer circle)

They can be added to the list of birds that seem to carrysymbolic significance at Çatalhöyük, although it is not clearwhether they have specific symbolism or just visually strikingbody parts.

The body-part distribution suggests that the BACHArea residents ate a wider range of bird taxa than we haveseen elsewhere on the site, although bird bone occurs herein about the same densities as elsewhere. Such variation,along with the differences in the balance of taxa, likely re-sults from a combination of differing tastes, differentialtargeting of parts of the landscape by individual households,and possibly selective taboos that affect certain groups onsite.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We identified these bird bones with the aid of the referencecollections of the Cornell University Museum of Vertebratesand the Division of Birds at the Smithsonian Institution.We are grateful to James Dean for providing access to thelatter, and to our colleagues on the BACH team for nu-merous discussions through the years that have illuminatedthe context of these finds.

252 HOUSE LIVES