Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

“A Network of Mutualities of Being”: Socio-material Archaeological Networks and Biological Ties at Çatalhöyük

  • Research
  • Published:
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent advances in archaeogenomics have granted access to previously unavailable biological information with the potential to further our understanding of past social dynamics at a range of scales. However, to properly integrate these data within archaeological narratives, new methodological and theoretical tools are required. Effort must be put into finding new methods for weaving together different datasets where material culture and archaeogenomic data are both constitutive elements. This is true on a small scale, when we study relationships at the individual level, and at a larger scale when we deal with social and population dynamics. Specifically, in the study of kinship systems, it is essential to contextualize and make sense of biological relatedness through social relations, which, in archaeology, is achieved by using material culture as a proxy. In this paper, we propose a Network Science framework to integrate archaeogenomic data and material culture at an intra-site scale to study biological relatedness and social organization at the Neolithic site of Çatalhöyük. Methodologically, we propose the use of network variance to investigate the association between biological relatedness and material culture within networks of houses. This approach allows us to observe how material culture similarity between buildings is associated with biological relationships between individuals and how biogenetic ties concentrate at specific localities on site.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

References

  • Abel, S., & Schroeder, H. (2020). From country marks to DNA markers: The genomic turn in the reconstruction of African identities. Current Anthropology, 61(S22), 198–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abel, S., & Frieman, C. J. (2023). On gene-ealogy: Identity, descent, and affiliation in the era of home DNA testing. Anthropological Science, 131(1), 15–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abram, S., & Lien, M. E. (2023). Kinning and De-Kinning. Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale, 31(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3167/saas.2023.310302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aktürk, Ş, Mapelli, I., Güler, M. N., Gürün, K., Katırcıoğlu, B., Vural, K. B., Sağlıcan, E., Çetin, M., Yaka, R., Sürer, E., Atağ, G., Çokoğlu, S. S., Sevkar, A., Altınışık, N. E., Koptekin, D., & Somel, M. (2024). Benchmarking kinship estimation tools for ancient genomes using pedigree simulations. Molecular Ecology Resources, 24(5), e13960. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.13960

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alber, E. (2023). Multiple relations: Towards an anthropology of parenting. In H. Meller, J. Krause, W. Haak, & R. Risch (Eds.), Kinship, Sex, and Biological Relatedness: The contribution of archaeogenetics to the understanding of social and biological relations. 15. Mitteldeutscher Archäologentag vom 6. bis 8. Oktober 2022 in Halle (Saale) (pp. 35–41). Heidelberg: Propylaeum. https://doi.org/10.11588/propylaeum.1280.c17992

  • Alber, E. (2003). Denying biological parenthood: Fosterage in northern Benin. Ethnos, 68(4), 487–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/0014184032000160532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alberti, B., & Bray, T. (2009). Animating archaeology: Of subjects, objects and alternative ontologies. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 19(3), 337–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, A. (2011). Landscapes of relations and belonging body, place and politics in Wogeo, Papua New Guinea. Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asouti, E. (2006). Group identity and the politics of dwelling at Neolithic Çatalhöyük. In Hodder, I. (Ed.), Çatalhöyük Perspectives. Reports from the 1995–1999 Seasons. (pp. 75–91). London and Cambridge: British Institute at Ankara and McDonald Institute.

  • Baird, D. (2019). Connected communities and constructed identities. The Konya plain 15000–6000 cal BC. In C. Maner (Ed.), Crossroads: Konya Plain from Prehistory to the Byzantine Period (pp. 35–54). Istanbul: Ege Yayınları.

  • Bamford, S. (2009). ‘Family trees’ among the Kamea of Papua New Guinea: A non-genealogical approach to imagining relatedness. In S. Bamford & J. Leach (Eds.), Kinship and Beyond. The Genealogical Model Reconsidered (pp. 159–174). New York - Oxford: Berghahn Books.

  • Bamford, S. (2007). Biology unmoored. Melanesian reflections on life and biotechnology. University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bamford, S. (1998). Humanized landscapes, embodied worlds: Land and the construction of intergenerational continuity among the Kamea of Papua New Guinea. Social Analysis: THe International Journal of Anthropology, 42(3), 28–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barad, K. M. (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway. Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bayliss, A., Chivall, D., Farid, S., Goslar, T., Issavi, J., & Tung, B. (2022). A northern timescape. In I. Hodder (Ed.), Çatalhöyük excavations. Reports from the 2009–2017 Seasons (pp. 329–386). British Institute at Ankara.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayliss, A., Brock, F., Farid, S., Hodder, I., Southon, J., & Taylor, R. E. (2015). Getting to the bottom of it all: A Bayesian approach to dating the start of Çatalhöyük. Journal of World Prehistory, 28(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10963-015-9083-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basso, K. H. (1996). Wisdom sits in places: Landscape and language among the Western Apache. University of New Mexico Press.

  • Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter. A political ecology of things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822391623

  • Birch, J. (2024). Material networks and culture change. In T. Brughmans, B. J. Mills, J. Munson, & M. A. Peeples (Eds.), The Handbook of Archaeological Network Research (pp. 87–102). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birch, J., & Hart, J. P. (2018). Social networks and northern Iroquoian confederacy dynamics. American Antiquity, 83(1), 13–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/aaq.2017.59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bird-David, N. (2018). Persons or relatives? Animistic scales of practice and imagination. In M. Astor-Aguilera & G. Harvey (Eds.), Rethinking Relations and Animism Personhood and Materiality. London: Routledge.

  • Bird-David, N. (2017). Us, relatives: Scaling and plural life in a Forager World. University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bird-David, N. (2006). Animistic epistemology: Why do some hunter-gatherers not depict animals? Ethnos, 71(1), 33–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair, E. (2023). Material culture similarity and co-occurrence networks. In T. Brughmans, B. J. Mills, J. Munson, & M. A. Peeples (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Archaeological Network Research (pp. 103–116). Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Blake, E. (2014). Social Networks and Regional Identity in Bronze Age Italy. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blöcher, J., Brami, M., Feinauer, I. S., Stolarczyk, E., Diekmann, Y., Vetterdietz, L., Karapetian, M., Winkelbach, L., Kokot, V., Vallini, L., Stobbe, A., Haak, W., Papageorgopoulou, C., Krause, R., Sharapova, S., & Burger, J. (2023). Descent, marriage, and residence practices of a 3,800-year-old pastoral community in Central Eurasia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 120(36). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2303574120

  • Bogaard, A. (2017). Neolithic “cooperatives”: Assessing supra-household cooperation in crop production at Çatalhöyük and beyond. In H.-G. K. Gebel, M. Benz, & T. Watkins (Eds.), Neolithic Corporate Identities. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment 20. (pp. 117–134). Berlin: ex oriente.

  • Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., Johnson, J. C., & Agneessens, F. (2018). Analyzing social networks. Sage.

  • Bogaard, A., Charles, M., Filipović, D., Fuller, D.Q., González Carretero, L., Green, L. Kabukcu, C. and Stroud, E. (2021). The archaeobotany of Çatalhöyük: Results from 2009–2017 excavations and final synthesis, in Hodder, I. (Ed.), Peopling the Landscape of Çatalhöyük. Reports from the 2009–2017 Seasons (pp. 91–120). London: British Institute at Ankara.

  • Bogaard, A., Filipović, D., Fairbairn, A., Green, L., Stroud, E., Fuller, D., & Charles, M. (2017). Agricultural innovation and resilience in a long-lived early farming community: The 1,500-year sequence at Neolithic to early Chalcolithic Çatalhöyük, central Anatolia. Anatolian Studies, 67(July), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0066154617000072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brück, J. (2023). Bronze Age relations: Genetics, kinship and gender in Britain. In Meller, H., Krause, J., Haak, W. & Risch, R. (Eds.), Kinship, Sex, and Biological Relatedness: The Contribution of Archaeogenetics to the Understanding of Social and Biological Relations. 15. Mitteldeutscher Archäologentag vom 6. bis 8. Oktober 2022 in Halle (Saale) (pp. 250–259). Heidelberg: Propylaeum.

  • Brück, J. (2021). Ancient DNA, kinship and relational identities in Bronze Age Britain. Antiquity, 95(379), 228–237. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2020.216

  • Brück, J. (2019). Personifying prehistory: Relational ontologies in Bronze Age Britain and Ireland. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brück, J., & Frieman, C. J. (2021). Making kin, the archaeology and genetics of human relationships. TATuP - Zeitschrift Für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Theorie und Praxis, 30(2), 99–103. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv11cw25q.9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brughmans, T., & Peeples, M. A. (2023). Network science in archaeology. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, I. (Ed.). (1976). Transactions in Kinship: Adoption and Fosterage in Oceania (ASAO monograph ; no. 4). University of Hawai’i Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvp2n5mp

  • Busby, C. (1997). Permeable and partible persons: A comparative analysis of gender and body in South India and Melanesia. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 3(2), 261–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, V. (1970). Adoption in Eastern Oceania. University of Hawaii Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, J. (2019). The stuff of kinship. In S. Bamford (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Kinship (pp. 133–150). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139644938.006

  • Carsten, J. (2004). After Kinship. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, J. (2000). Cultures of relatedness. New approaches to the study of kinship. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, J. (1997). The heat of the hearth: The process of kinship in a Malay fishing community. Clarendon Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, J. (1995). The substance of kinship and the heat of the hearth: Feeding, personhood, and relatedness among Malays in Pulau Langkawi. American Ethnologist, 22(2), 223–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, J. (1991). Children in between: Fostering and the process of kinship on Pulau Langkawi, Malaysia. Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 26, 425–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, T. and Milić, M. (2013). The chipped stone, in Hodder, I. (Ed.), Substantive Technologies at Çatalhöyük. Reports from the 2000–2008 Seasons. Çatalhöyük Research Project (pp. 417–478). London: British Institute at Ankara; Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.

  • Chyleński, M., Ehler, E., Somel, M., Yaka, R., Krzewińska, M., Dabert, M., Juras, A., & Marciniak, A. (2019). Ancient mitochondrial genomes reveal the absence of maternal kinship in the burials of Çatalhöyük people and their genetic affinities. Genes, 10(3), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes10030207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coscia, M. (2022). Generalized Euclidean measure to estimate distances on multilayer networks. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data, 16(6), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3529396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coscia, M. (2021). The Atlas for the aspiring network scientist. http://arxiv.org/abs/2101.00863. Accessed 31 Dec 2024.

  • Coscia, M., Gomez-Lievano, A., McNerney, J., & Neffke, F. (2020). The node vector distance problem in complex networks. ACM Computing Surveys, 53(6), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3416509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coscia, M., & Neffke, F. M. H. (2017). Network backboning with noisy data. 2017 IEEE 33rd International Conference on Data Engineering, 425–436. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDE.2017.100

  • Coward, F. (2010). Casting the netwide: Small world, material culture and social networks during the Epipaleolithic and early Neolithic. Bulletin of the Council for British Research in the Levant, 5, 52–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crellin, R. J. (2021). Making posthumanist kin in the past. Antiquity, 95(379), 238–240. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2020.235

  • Crellin, R. J., & Harris, O. J. T. (2020). Beyond binaries. Interrogating Ancient DNA. Archaeological Dialogues, 27(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1380203820000082

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crown, P. L. (2007). Learning about Learning. In J. M. Skibo, M. W. Graves, & M. T. Stark (Eds.), Archaeological anthropology: Perspectives on method and theory (pp. 198–217). University of Arizona Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Czerniak, L., & Marciniak, A. (2022). Abandoning Çatalhöyük: Re-shuffling, re-___location and migration as the means of mitigating social unease in the Late Neolithic. In P. F. Biehl & E. Rosenstock (Eds.), 6000 BC. Transformation and Change in the Near East Europe (pp. 136–157). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Descola, P. (2013). Beyond Nature and Culture. University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Devriendt, K., Martin-Gutierrez, S., & Lambiotte, R. (2022). Variance and covariance of distributions on graphs. SIAM Review, 64(2), 343–359. https://doi.org/10.1137/20M1361328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnellan, L. (2020). Objects that bind, objects that separate. In L. Donnellan (Ed.), Archaeological Networks and Social Interaction (pp. 116–145). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Düring, B. S. (2007). The articulation of houses at Neolithic Çatalhöyük, Turkey. In R. Beck (Ed.), The Durable House: House Society Models in Archaeology (pp. 130–153). Southern Illinois University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Düring, B. S., & Marciniak, A. (2006). Households and communities in the central Anatolian Neolithic. Archaeological Dialogues, 12(02), 165–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebron, P., & Tsing, A. (2017). Feminism and the Anthropocene: Assessing the field through recent books. Feminist Studies, 43(3), 658–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ensor, B. E. (2021). The not very patrilocal European Neolithic Strontium, aDNA, and archaeological kinship analyses. Archaeopress.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ensor, B. E. (2013). The archaeology of kinship. Advancing Interpretation and Contributions to Theory. The University of Arizona Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ensor, B. E. (2011). Kinship Theory in archaeology: From critiques to the study of transformations. American Antiquity, 76(2), 203–227. https://doi.org/10.7183/0002-7316.76.2.203

  • Farid, S., Hodder, I., Taylor, J., & Tung, B. (2022). Chronology and overall phasing of North and South Areas. In I. Hodder (Ed.), Çatalhöyük Excavations the seasons 2009-2017 (pp. 45–84). British Institute at Ankara and McDonald Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishburne Collier, J., & Yanagisako, S. J. (1987). Gender and kinship: Essays toward a unified analysis. Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, C., Olalde, I., Cummings, V., Armit, I., Büster, L., Cuthbert, S., … Reich, D. (2022). A high-resolution picture of kinship practices in an Early Neolithic tomb. Nature, 601(7894), 584–587.

  • Frieman, C. J. (2023). Kin and connection: Bodies and relations in archaeology and ancient genetics. In In H. Meller, J. Krause, R. Risch, & W. Haak (Eds.) Kinship, Sex, and Biological Relatedness. The contribution of archaeogenetics to the understanding of social and biological relations. 15th Archaeological Conference of Central Germany October 6–8, 2022 in Halle (Saale) Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vorg (pp. 43–49). Halle (Saale): Heidelberg: Propylaeum.

  • Frieman, C. J. (2021). Emergent or imposed? Antiquity, 95(379), 247–248. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2020.238

  • Frieman, C. J., & Hofmann, D. (2019). Present pasts in the archaeology of genetics, identity, and migration in Europe: A critical essay. World Archaeology, 51(4), 528–545. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2019.1627907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furholt, M. (2021a). Mobility and social change: Understanding the European Neolithic Period after the archaeogenetic revolution. Journal of Archaeological Research, 29, 481–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10814-020-09153-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furholt, M. (2021b). Exploring human possibilities. Antiquity, 95(379), 244–246. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2020.233

  • Furholt, M. (2019). De-contaminating the aDNA-archaeology dialogue on mobility and migration: Discussing the culture-historical legacy. Current Swedish Archaeology, 27, 53–68. https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.03

  • Furholt, M. (2018). Massive migrations? The impact of recent aDNA studies on our view of third millennium Europe. European Journal of Archaeology, 21(2), 159–178. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2017.43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gell, A. (1998). Art and agency: An anthropological theory. Clarendon Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Goldfarb, K. E., & Schuster, C. E. (2016). Introduction: (De)materializing kinship—Holding together mutuality and difference. Social Analysis, 60(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3167/sa.2016.600201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadad, R. (2024). Re-territorializing the Neolithic: Architecture and rhythms in early sedentary societies of the Near East. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 66(3), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417524000100

  • Haddow, S. D., Mazzucato, C., Mangaloğlu-Votruba, S., Yağcı, B., Booth, T., Schotsmans, E. M. J., & Knüsel, C. J. (2023). Scratching the surface? A histotaphonomic study of human remains at Neolithic Çatalhöyük. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 15(74).

  • Haddow S.D., Schotsmans E.M.J., Milella M., Pilloud M.A., Tibbetts B., Betz B., & Knusel C.J., (2021). Funerary practices I: Body treatment and deposition. In Hodder, I. (ed.), Peopling the Landscape of Catalhoyuk: Reports from the 2009–2017 Seasons (pp.281–314). London: British Institute at Ankara; Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.

  • Haddow, S. D., & Knusel, C. J. (2017). Skull retrieval and secondary burial practices in the Neolithic Near East: Recent insights from Catalhoyuk. Turkey. Bioarchaeology International, 1(1–2), 52–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haddow, S. D., Sadvari, J. W., Knüsel, C. J., & Hadad, R. (2016). A tale of two platforms: Commingled remains and the life-course of houses at Neolithic Çatalhöyük. In A. J. Osterholtz (Ed.), Theoretical Approaches to Analysis and Interpretation of Commingled Human Remains. New York: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22554-8

  • Haraway, D. (2008). When species meet. University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodder, I. (2022a). Staying egalitarian and the origins of agriculture in the Middle East. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 32(4), 619–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodder, I. (2022b). Questions, history of work and summary of results. In Hodder, I. (Ed.), Çatalhöyük Excavations: The Reports from the 2009–2017 Seasons (pp. 1–34). London: British Institute at Ankara; Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.

  • Hodder, I. (2021). Changing Çatalhöyük worlds. In Hodder, I. (Ed.), Peopling the Landscape of Çatalhöyük. Reports from the 2009–2017 Seasons (pp. 1–29). London: British Institute at Ankara; Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.

  • Hodder, I. (2018). Introduction: Two forms of history making in the Neolithic of Southwest Asia. In I. Hodder (Ed.), Religion, History, and Place in the Origin of Settled Life (pp. 3–32). University Press of Colorado.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hodder, I. (2014a). Çatalhöyük: The leopard changes its spots. A summary of recent work. Anatolian Studies, 64, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodder, I. (2014b). Mosaics and networks: The social geography of Çatalhöyük, in Hodder, I. (Ed.) Integrating Çatalhöyük. Themes from the 2000–2008 Seasons (pp.149–168). London: British Institute at Ankara; Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.

  • Hodder, I. (2013). Dwelling at Çatalhöyük. In Hodder, I. (Ed.), Humans and Landscapes’ of Çatalhöyük Reports from the 2000–2008 Seasons (pp. 1–29). London: British Institute at Ankara; Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.

  • Hodder, I., & Tsoraki, C. (2021). Communities at work: 25 years of research at Çatalhöyük. In Hodder, I. & Tsoraki, C. (Eds.), Communities at Work. The Making of Çatalhöyük. London: British Institute at Ankara; Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.

  • Hodder, I., & Pels, P. (2010). History house: A new interpretation of architectural elaboration at Catalhoyuk. In I. Hodder (Ed.), Religion in the Emergency of Civilization: Çatalhöyük as a Case Study (pp. 163–186). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hodder, I., & Cessford, C. (2004). Daily practice and social memory at Çatalhöyük. American Antiquity, 69(1), 17–40. https://doi.org/10.2307/4128346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, D., Hanscam, E., Furholt, M., Bača, M., Reiter, S. S., Vanzetti, A., … Holleland, H. (2021). Forum: Populism, Identity politics, and the archaeology of Europe. European Journal of Archaeology, 24(4), 519–555. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2021.29

  • Holmes, H. (2019). Material affinities: ‘Doing’ family through the practices of passing On. Sociology, 53(1), 174–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038518777696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howell, S. (1984). Society and Cosmos: Chewong of Peninsular Malaysia. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howell, S. (2007). The Kinning of Foreigners. Berghahn Books.

  • Howell, S. (2012). Knowledge, morality, and causality in a “luckless” society: The case of the Chewong in the Malaysian rain forest. Social Analysis, 56(1), 133–147. https://doi.org/10.3167/sa.2012.560109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, G., Burgio-Ericson, K., McChesney, L., Green, A. G., Charley, K. K., Church, K., & Dillard, R. W. (2024). Making kin is more than metaphor: Implications of responsibilities toward Indigenous knowledge and artistic traditions for museums. Museum Anthropology. https://doi.org/10.1111/muan.12283

  • Jayyab, K. A., & Gibbon, E. (2022). Stability and change in potting communities across Mesopotamia from the Early Ubaid to Late Chalcolithic. Paléorient, 48(1), 9–40. https://doi.org/10.4000/paleorient.1502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, R. (2021). Bronze age worlds: A social prehistory of Britain and Ireland. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, K. M. (2019). Investigating social organization and community composition at the Tiwanaku-style temple complex of Omo M10 in the Moquegua Valley, Peru through analysis of phenotypic variation. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 168, 115–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, K. M., & Paul, K. S. (2016). Bioarchaeology and kinship: Integrating theory, social relatedness, and biology in ancient family research. Journal of Archaeological Research, 24(1), 75–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10814-015-9086-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J. (2016). Matriliny. In Cambridge Encyclopedia of Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.29164/16matriliny

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennett, D. J., Plog, S., George, R. J., Culleton, B. J., Watson, A. S., Skoglund, P., Rohland, N., Mallick, S., Stewardson, K., Kistler, L., Leblanc, S. A., Whiteley, P. M., Reich, D., & Perry, G. H. (2017). Archaeogenomic evidence reveals prehistoric matrilineal dynasty. Nature Communications, 8. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14115

  • Knappett, C. (2011). An archaeology of interaction. Network perspectives on material culture and society. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Koptekin, D., Aydoğan, A., Karamurat, C., Altınışık, N. E., Vural, K. B., Kazancı, D. D., Doğu, A. K., Kaptan, D., Gemici, H. C., Yüncü, E., Umurtak, G., Duru, R., Fidan, E., Çevik, Ö., Erdoğu, B., Korkut, T., Knüsel, C. J., Haddow, S., Larsen, C. S., … Somel, M. (2024). Out-of-Anatolia: cultural and genetic interactions during the Neolithic expansion in the Aegean. BioRxiv, 2024.06.23.599747. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.06.23.599747

  • Kuijt, I. (2018). Material geographies of house societies: Reconsidering Neolithic Çatalhöyük. Turkey. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 28(04), 565–590. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0959774318000240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leach, J. (2019). Kinship and place: The existential and moral process of landscape formation on the Rai Coast of Papua New Guinea. In S. Bamford (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Kinship (pp. 211–230). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leach, J. (2003). Creative land. Place and procreation on the Rai Coast of Papua New Guinea. Berghahn.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lien, M. E., & Abram, S. (2023). Passing it on. Kinship, temporality and moral personhood in Norwegian ‘Hytte’ succession. Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale, 31(3), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.3167/saas.2023.310304

  • MacCormack, C. P., & Strathern, M. (Eds.). (1980). Nature, culture and gender. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maher, L., & McDonald, D. (2020). Communities of interaction: Tradition and learning in stone tool production through the lens of the Epipaleolithic of Kharaneh IV, Jordan. In Groucutt, H. S. (Ed.), Culture History and Convergent Evolution Can We Detect Populations in Prehistory? New York: Springer.

  • Marciniak, A. (2019). A history of the house at Late Neolithic Çatalhöyük. In A. Marciniak (Ed.), Concluding the Neolithic (pp. 137–162). Lockwood Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Marciniak, A., Barański, M. Z., Bayliss, A., Czerniak, L., Goslar, T., Southon, J., & Taylor, R. E. (2015a). Fragmenting times: Interpreting a Bayesian chronology for the Late Neolithic occupation of Çatalhöyük East, Turkey. Antiquity, 89(343), 154–176. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2014.33

  • Marciniak, A., Asouti, E., Doherty, C., & Henton, E. (2015b). The nature of household in the upper Levels at Çatalhöyük - Smaller, more dispersed, and more independent acquisition, production, and consumption unit. In I. Hodder & A. Marciniak (Eds.), Assembling Çatalhöyük (pp. 141–165). Maney Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, J. (2008). Tangible affinities and the real life fascination of kinship. Sociology, 42(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038507084824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mauss, M., & 1990,. (1954). The gift: The form and reason for exchange in Archaic societies. Routledge.

  • Mazzucato, C. (2021). Unravelling the knot. A socio-material approach to the study of Neolithic megasites: The view from Çatalhöyük. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Stanford University.

  • Mazzucato, C. (2019). Socio-material archaeological networks at Çatalhöyük a community detection approach. Frontiers in Digital Humanities, 6(May), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdigh.2019.00008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzucato, C., Doyle, S., Issavi, J., Love, S., Tarkan, D., Tsoraki, C., Vasić, M., & Veropoulidou, R. (2021). An integrated approach to the study of socio-material networks at Çatalhöyük. In Hodder, I. and Tsoraki, C. (Eds.), Communities at Work the Making of Çatalhöyük. London: British Institute at Ankara.

  • Miller, D. (2005). Materiality: An introduction. In D. Miller (Ed.), Materiality (pp. 1–50). Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, B. (2017). Social network analysis in archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology, 46, 379–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49736-5_13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, B. J. (2014). Relational networks and religious sodalities at Çatalhöyük. In Hodder, I. (Ed.), Religion at Work in a Neolithic Society. Vital Matters. (pp. 159–186). Cambridge University Press.

  • Mills, B. J., Clark, J. J., Peeples, M. A., Haas, R. W., Roberts, J. M., Brett Hill, J., Huntley, D. L., Borck, L., Breiger, R. L., Clauset, A., & Shackley, A. S. (2013). Transformation of social networks in the Late Pre-Hispanic U.S. Southwest. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 110(15), 5785–5790.

  • Minar, C. J., & Crown, P. L. (2001). Learning and craft production: An introduction. Journal of Anthropological Research, 57, 369–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mol, A. A. A. (2014). The connected Caribbean: A socio-material network approach to patterns of homogeneity and diversity in the pre-colonial period. Sidestone Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morphy, H. (1995). Landscape and the reproduction of the ancestral past. In E. Hirsch, E. & O’Hanlon, M. (Eds.), The Anthropology of Landscape (pp. 184–209). London: Clarendon Press.

  • Morton, C. (2007). Remembering the house: Memory and materiality in Northern Botswana. Journal of Material Culture, 12(2), 157–179. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359183507078123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nazaroff, A. J., Tsoraki, C., & Vasic, M. (2016). Aesthetic, social, and material networks: A perspective from the Flint Daggers at Çatalhöyük Turkey. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 26(01), 65–92. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959774315000347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ning, C., Zhang, F., Cao, Y., Qin, L., Hudson, M. J., Gao, S., … & Cui, Y. (2021). Ancient genome analyses shed light on kinship organization and mating practice of Late Neolithic society in China. IScience, 24(11), 103352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2021.103352

  • Notermans, C. (2003). Sharing home, food, and bed: Paths of grandmotherhood in East Cameroon. Africa, 74(1), 6–27. https://doi.org/10.3366/afr.2004.74.1.6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, B. (2010). In defense of things: Archaeology and the ontology of objects. AltaMira Press. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1433.2011.01365_15.x

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Östborn, P., & Gerding, H. (2014). Network analysis of archaeological data: A systematic approach. Journal of Archaeological Science, 46(1), 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2014.03.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan, N., Posth, C., Coia, V., Schuenemann, V. J., Price, T. D., Wahl, J., Pinhasi, R., Zink, A., Krause, J., & Maixner, F. (2018). Ancient genome-wide analyses infer kinship structure in an Early Medieval Alemannic graveyard. Science Advances, 4(9), eaao1262. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aao1262

  • Özbaşaran, M., & Duru, G. (2015). The early sedentary communities of Cappadocia: Aşiklı Höyük. In Beyer, D., Henry, O., & Tibet, A. (Eds.), La Cappadoce Meridionale de la prehistoire a la periode byzantine. Istanbul 8–9 Novembre, 2012 (pp. 43–51). Institut Français d’Études Anatoliennes Georges Dumézil - CNRS USR 3131.

  • Pearson, J. (2013). Human and animal diet as evidenced by stable carbon and nitrogen isotope analysis. In Hodder, I. (Ed.), Catalhoyuk Excavations: Humans and Landscapes of Catalhoyuk (pp. 271–298). London: British Institute at Ankara; Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.

  • Pearson, J. A., Haddow, S. D., Hillson, S. W., Knüsel, C. J., Larsen, C. S., & Sadvari, J. W. (2015). Stable carbon and nitrogen isotope analysis and dietary reconstruction through the lifecourse at Neolithic Çatalhöyük, Turkey. Journal of Social Archaeology, 15(2), 210–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469605315582983

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, J., Lamb, A., & Evans, J. (2021). Multi-isotope evidence of diet (carbon and nitrogen) and mobility (strontium) at Neolithic Çatalhöyük. In I. Hodder (Ed.), Peopling the landscape of Çatalhöyük : Reports from the 2009–2017 seasons (pp. 217–255). British Institute at Ankara; Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, J., Evans, J., Lamb, A., Baird, D., Hodder, I., Marciniak, A., Larsen, C. S., Knüsel, C. J., Haddow, S. D., Pilloud, M. A., Bogaard, A., Fairbairn, A., Plug, J. H., Mazzucato, C., Mustafaoğlu, G., Feldman, M., Somel, M., & Fernández-Domínguez, E. (2023). Mobility and kinship in the world’s first village societies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 120(4), e2209480119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2209480119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, D., Manen, C., & Rigaud, S. (2023). The shaping of social and symbolic capital during the transition to farming in the Western Mediterranean: Archaeological network analyses of pottery decorations and personal ornaments. PLoS ONE, 18 (11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0294111

  • Pilloud, M. A., & Larsen, C. S. (2011). “Official” and “practical” kin: Inferring social and community structure from dental phenotype at Neolithic Çatalhöyük Turkey. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 145(4), 519–530. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.21520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risch, R., Haak, W., Krausse, J., & Meller, H. (2023). Kinship, sex, and biological relatedness – The contribution of archaeogenetics to the understanding of social relations. In Meller, H., Krause, J., Haak,W., & R. Risch, R. (Eds.), Kinship, Sex, and Biological Relatedness: The contribution of archaeogenetics to the understanding of social and biological relations. 15. Mitteldeutscher Archäologentag vom 6. bis 8. Oktober 2022 in Halle (Saale) (pp. 9–25). Heidelberg: Propylaeum. https://doi.org/10.11588/propylaeum.1280.c18044

  • Rivollat, M., Rohrlach, A. B., Ringbauer, H., Childebayeva, A., Mendisco, F., Barquera, R., … Haak, W. (2023). Extensive pedigrees reveal the social organization of a Neolithic community. Nature, 620(7974), 600–606. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06350-8

  • Russell, N. (2022). Cattle for the ancestors at Neolithic Çatalhöyük, Turkey. In E. Wright & C. Ginja (Eds.), Cattle and People Interdisciplinary Approaches to an Ancient Relationship (pp. 225–240). Lockwood Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, N., Wright, K. I., Carter, T., Ketchum, S., Ryan, P., Yalman, N., Reagan, R., Milić, M., & Stevanović, M. (2014). Bringing down the house: House closing deposits at Çatalhöyük. In Hodder, I. (Ed.), Integrating Catalhoyuk. Themes from the 2000–2008 Seasons (pp. 109–122). London: British Institute at Ankara; Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.

  • Sahlins, M. (2013). What kinship is - And is not. Chicago University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Santos-Granero, F. (Ed.). (2009). The occult life of things: Native Amazonian theories of materiality and personhood. University of Arizona Press.

  • Schlanger, S. H. (1992). Recognizing persistent places in Anasazi settlement systems. In Rossignol, J., Wandsnider, L. (Eds) Space, Time, and Archaeological Landscapes. Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archaeology (pp. 91–112). Boston: Springer.

  • Scheider, D. M. (1984). A critique of the study of kinship. The University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sikora, M., Seguin-Orlando, A., Sousa, V. C., Albrechtsen, A., Korneliussen, T., Ko, A., Rasmussen, S., Dupanloup, I., Nigst, P. R., Bosch, M. D., Renaud, G., Allentoft, M. E., Margaryan, A., Vasilyev, S. v, Veselovskaya, E. v, Borutskaya, S. B., Deviese, T., Comeskey, D., Higham, T., … Willerslev, E. (2017). Ancient genomes show social and reproductive behavior of early Upper Paleolithic foragers. Science, 358(6363), 659–662https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao1807

  • Sjögren, K. G., Olalde, I., Carver, S., Allentoft, M. E., Knowles, T., Kroonen, G., … Heyd, V. (2020). Kinship and social organization in Copper Age Europe. A cross-disciplinary analysis of archaeology, DNA, isotopes, and anthropology from two Bell Beaker cemeteries. PLoS ONE, 15(11 November). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241278

  • Somel, M., Altınışık, N. E., Erdal, Y. S., Atakuman, Ç., & Özer, F. (2023). Intramural burials in Neolithic Anatolia: What do they tell us about social organisation? In Meller, H., Krause, J., Haak, W. & Risch, R. (Eds.), Kinship, Sex, and Biological Relatedness: The contribution of archaeogenetics to the understanding of social and biological relations. 15. Mitteldeutscher Archäologentag vom 6. bis 8. Oktober 2022 in Halle (Saale) (pp. 137–147). Heidelberg: Propylaeum.https://doi.org/10.11588/propylaeum.1280.c18003

  • Souvatzi, S. (2017). Kinship and social archaeology. Cross-Cultural Research, 51(2), 172–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397117691028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stasch, & Rupert. (2009). Society of others. Kinship and Mourning in a West Papuan Place. Berkeley: University of California Press.

  • Strathern, M. (2014). Kinship as a relation. L’homme, 210, 43–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrauwers, A. (1999). Negotiating parentage: The political economy of “kinship” in central Sulawesi, Indonesia. American Ethnologist, 26, 310–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stojanowski, C. M., & Hubbard, A. R. (2017). Sensitivity of dental phenotypic data for the identification of biological relatives. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 27, 813–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TallBear, K. (2013a). Genomic articulations of indigeneity. Social Studies of Science, 43(4), 509–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tallbear, K. (2013b). Native American DNA. Tribal belonging and the false promise of genetic science. University of Minnesota Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • TallBear, K. (2018). Making love and relations beyond settler sex and family. In A. E. Clarke & D. Haraway (Eds.), Making Kin Not Population (pp. 145–164). Prickly Paradigm Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Telban, B. (2019). Places and paths in Melanesian landscapes. In H. Hirsch & W. Rollason (Eds.), The Melanesian World (pp. 487–499). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Thelen, T. (2023). Kinship: Old problems and new prospects in the conversation between archaeology and social anthropology. In H. Meller, H., Krause, J., Risch, R. & Haak, W. (Eds.), Kinship, Sex, and Biological Relatedness. The contribution of archaeogenetics to the understanding of social and biological. 15th Archaeological Conference of Central Germany October 6–8, 2022 in Halle (Saale). relations. (pp. 29–34). Halle (Saale). Heidelberg: Propylaeum.

  • Thelen, T., & Lammer, C. (2021). Introduction: Measuring kinship, negotiating belonging. Social Analysis, 65(4), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3167/sa.2021.650401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsoraki, C., Barton, H., Crellin, R. J., & Harris, O. J. T. (2023). From typology and biography to multiplicity: Bracers as “process objects.”. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 33(4), 693–714. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959774323000094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tung, B. (2013). Building with mud: An analysis of architectural materials at Çatalhöyük. In Hodder, I. (Ed.), Substantive Technologies at Çatalhöyük. Reports from the 2000–2008 Seasons. (pp. 67–80). London: British Institute at Ankara; Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.

  • Tusinski, G. (2016). Fates worse than death: Destruction and social attachment in Timor-Leste. Social Analysis: THe International Journal of Social and Cultural Practice, 60(2), 13–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viveiros de Castro, E. (2012). Cosmological perspectivism in Amazonia and elsewhere. HAU.

  • Weiner, A. (1992). Inalienable possessions. The paradox of keeping-while giving. University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weismantel, M. (1989). Making breakfast and raising babies: The Zumbagua household as constituted process. In R. R. Wilk (Ed.), The Household Economy: Reconsidering The Domestic Mode of Production (pp. 55–72). Westview Press (Republished bu Routledge in 2019).

  • Weismantel, M. (1995). Making kin: Kinship theory and Zumbagua adoptions. American Ethnologist, 22(4), 685–709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wendrich, W. (2012). Archaeology and apprenticeship body knowledge, identity, and communities of practice. In W. Wendrich (Ed.), Archaeology and apprenticeship body knowledge, identity, and communities of practice (pp. 1–19). The University of Arizona Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wunderlich, M., Heitz, C., Hinz, M., & Furholt, M. (2023). Promoting bottom-up approaches to social archaeology. In Rethinking Neolithic Societies. New Perspectives on Social Relations, Political Organization and Cohabitation (pp. 9–21). Leiden: Sidestone Press.

  • Yaka, R., Mapelli, I., Kaptan, D., Doğu, A., Chyleński, M., Erdal, Ö. D., Koptekin, D., Vural, K. B., Bayliss, A., Mazzucato, C., Fer, E., Çokoğlu, S. S., Lagerholm, V. K., Krzewińska, M., Karamurat, C., Gemici, H. C., Sevkar, A., Dağtaş, N. D., Kılınç, G. M., et al. (2021). Variable kinship patterns in Neolithic Anatolia revealed by ancient genomes. Current Biology, 31(11), 2455–2468.e18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2021.03.050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yalman, N., Tarkan, D., & Gültekin, H. (2013). The Neolithic pottery of Çatalhöyük: Recent studies. In Hodder, I. (Ed.), Substantive Technologies at Çatalhöyük. Reports from the 2000–2008 Seasons (pp. 147–182). London: British Institute at Ankara; Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.

  • Yüncü, E., Kucukakdag Dogu, A., Kaptan, D., Kilic, M. S., Mazzucato, C., Guler, M. N., Eker, E., Katircioglu, B., Chylenski, M., Vural, K. B., Sevkar, A., Atag, G., Altinisik, N. E., Kucuk Baloglu, F., Bozkurt, D., Pearson, J., Milella, M., Karamurat, C., Akturk, S., … Somel, M. (2024). Female lineages and changing kinship patterns in Neolithic Çatalhöyük. BioRxiv, 2024.06.23.600259. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.06.23.600259

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Ian Hodder

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cross-Cultural and Regional Studies, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Camilla Mazzucato & Scott Haddow

  2. IT University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Michele Coscia

  3. Department of Biological Sciences, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey

    Ayça Küçükakdağ Doğu, Eren Yüncü & Mehmet Somel

  4. Department of Health Informatics, Graduate School of Informatics, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey

    Muhammed Sıddık Kılıç

Authors
  1. Camilla Mazzucato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michele Coscia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ayça Küçükakdağ Doğu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Scott Haddow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  5. Muhammed Sıddık Kılıç
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  6. Eren Yüncü
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mehmet Somel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

C. M. and M.C. Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing—Review & Editing A.K.D. Genetic analyses S.H. Context, bioarchaeology, editing M.S.K Genetic analyses E.Y Genetic analyses M.S. Genetic analyses, editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Camilla Mazzucato.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (XLSX 163 KB)

Supplementary file2 (PDF 548 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mazzucato, C., Coscia, M., Küçükakdağ Doğu, A. et al. “A Network of Mutualities of Being”: Socio-material Archaeological Networks and Biological Ties at Çatalhöyük. J Archaeol Method Theory 32, 25 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-024-09692-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-024-09692-3

Keywords