Zittende vrouw van Çatalhöyük

De zittende vrouw van Çatalhöyük is een neolithisch beeld daterend van ergens tussen het 7e en 5e millennium v.Chr. Dit beeld werd in 1961 door archeoloog James Mellaart opgegraven in het Turkse Çatalhöyük. De zittende vrouw is aan beide kanten geflankeerd door katachtigen en is een naakte vrouwenfiguur in terracotta.

De archeologen James Mellaart en Marija Gimbutas interpreteerden het beeldje als een moedergodin en veronderstelden het bestaan van een godinnencultus. Vanaf 1993 werden de opgravingen hervat, nu onder leiding van Ian Hodder met Lynn Meskell als hoofd van het Stanford Figurines Project dat de beeldjes van Çatalhöyük onderzocht. Dit team kwam tot andere conclusies dan Mellaart en Gimbutas. Slechts enkele van de vele beeldjes werden als vrouwelijk geïdentificeerd. De beeldjes werden niet zozeer in gewijde ruimtes gevonden, maar leken willekeurig weggegooid, soms in vuilnishopen. Daarmee lijkt een cultus van de moedergodin op deze locatie weinig waarschijnlijk.^[1]

Zie ook[bewerken | brontekst bewerken]

Cybele (mythologie)

Literatuur[bewerken | brontekst bewerken]

Mellaart, James : Çatal Hüyük, A Neolithic Town in Anatolia, London, 1967
Guide book of "The Anatolian Civilizations Museum"
Balter, M., (2005): The Goddess and the Bull, Free Press
Hodder, I. (2010): Religion in the Emergence of Civilization. Çatalhöyük as a Case Study, Cambridge University Press

Noten[bewerken | brontekst bewerken]

↑ As an example, the publication by Meskell et al. (2008) of detailed data on the figurines from the site has transformed our understanding of these objects. In much earlier work and writing on the site, including by Mellaart, these objects were seen as representational and as religious, relating to a cult of the mother goddess. The work of the figurine team has thoroughly undermined this interpretation. In fact, when properly quantified, few of the figurines are clearly female. In addition, examination of their context of deposition shows that the objects are not in 'special' locations, but were discarded, often in middens. A study of the fabric of the figurines by Chris Doherty (pers. comm.) has shown that they are made of local marls and that they are unfired or low fired. Many have survived only because they were accidentally burned in hearths and fires. Thus all the evidence suggests that these objects were not in a separate religious sphere. Rather, it was the process of their daily production – not their contemplation as religious symbols – that was important. They gave meaning, at the everyday, low-intensity level, to subjectivities and to the social world that they helped imagine. Hodder (2010)

[1] As an example, the publication by Meskell et al. (2008) of detailed data on the figurines from the site has transformed our understanding of these objects. In much earlier work and writing on the site, including by Mellaart, these objects were seen as representational and as religious, relating to a cult of the mother goddess. The work of the figurine team has thoroughly undermined this interpretation. In fact, when properly quantified, few of the figurines are clearly female. In addition, examination of their context of deposition shows that the objects are not in 'special' locations, but were discarded, often in middens. A study of the fabric of the figurines by Chris Doherty (pers. comm.) has shown that they are made of local marls and that they are unfired or low fired. Many have survived only because they were accidentally burned in hearths and fires. Thus all the evidence suggests that these objects were not in a separate religious sphere. Rather, it was the process of their daily production – not their contemplation as religious symbols – that was important. They gave meaning, at the everyday, low-intensity level, to subjectivities and to the social world that they helped imagine. Hodder (2010)

[1]