Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6587cd75c8-6qszs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-24T08:30:12.681Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Religion As Anthropomorphism at Çatalhöyük

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2014

By
Stewart Elliott Guthrie
Edited by
Ian Hodder
Ian Hodder
Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The first question put to the 2006–2009 Templeton scholars was, How can archaeologists recognize the spiritual, religious, and transcendent in early time periods? The question is difficult, not least because the very meanings of the terms “spiritual,” “religious,” and “transcendent” are contested. The initial question thus immediately devolves to theoretical issues both broad and hoary. That question was not addressed to our cohort; yet the issues are so central, rich, and refractory as to merit further comment. I therefore wish to offer another answer to the question What is religion? and to apply it to a few topics at Çatalhöyük. These include the nature of ancestral remains, the house, leopards, and teeth and claws in walls. More specifically, my answer helps account for the vitality – that is, the animacy – that these objects apparently had for the people who created or curated them.

In addressing the question of what is religion, I assume that religion is a concept, not a real thing in the world, and that this concept originated at a particular time in a particular part of the world. In contrast, in most of the ancient and modern world, including Çatalhöyük (Hodder 2010a: 16, Hodder this volume), religion does not stand out as a separate concept but is part of the cultural fabric. As Pels (2010: 233) writes, we should not look for a “distinct practice, with institutional and doctrinal unity or coherence” at Çatalhöyük. Nonetheless, religion there as elsewhere can be given a particular, substantive definition, one based on a category of human thought and action that is even broader than religion, yet still distinctive.

Type
Chapter
Information
Religion at Work in a Neolithic Society
Vital Matters
 , pp. 86 - 108
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Angulo, J., and Garcia-Diez, M. 2009. Male Genital Representation in Paleolithic Art: Erection and Circumcision before History. Urology 74(1):10–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bacon, F. 1960. The New Organon and Related Writings, ed. Anderson, F. H.. New York: Liberal Arts Press.Google Scholar
Bering, J. 2006. The Folk Psychology of Souls. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29:453–498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bering, J. 2002. Intuitive Conceptions of Dead Agents’ Minds. Journal of Cognition and Culture 2 263–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloch, M. 2010. Is there religion at Catalhoyuk ... or are there just houses? In Religion in the Emergence of Civilization, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 146–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloch, M. 2008. Why Religion Is Nothing Special but Is Central. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 363(1499): 2055–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloch, M. 2007. Durkheimian anthropology and religion: Going in and out of each other’s bodies. In Religion, Anthropology and Cognitive Science, eds. Whitehouse, H. and Laidlaw, J.. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 63–80.Google Scholar
Bloom, P. 2004. Descartes’ Baby: How the Science of Child Development Explains What Makes Us Human. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Bloom, P., and Veres, C. 1999. The Perceived Intentionality of Groups. Cognition 71:B1–B9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyer, P. 2001. Religion Explained. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Braithwaite, R. 1970. An empiricist’s view of the nature of religious belief. In The Philosophy of Religion, ed. Mitchell, B.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 72–91.Google Scholar
Carsten, J., and Hugh-Jones, S. 1995. About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherry, J. 1992. Animism in thought and language. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
Cohen, E., Burdett, E., Knight, N., and Barrett, J. 2011. Cross-Cultural Similarities and Differences in Person-Body Reasoning: Experimental Evidence from the United Kingdom and Brazilian Amazon. Cognitive Science 35(7):1282–1304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Csibra, G., Gergeley, S., Biro, S., Koos, O., and Brockbank, M. 1999. Goal Attribution without Agency Cues. Cognition 72(3):237–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cziko, G. 2000. The Things We Do. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Descola, P. 2006. Beyond Nature and Culture. Radcliffe-Brown Lecture in Social Anthropology, 2005. Proceedings of the British Academy 139:137–155.Google Scholar
Descola, P. 2009. Human Natures. Social Anthropology / Anthropologie Sociale 17(2):145–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drake, S. 2008. A Well-Composed Body: Anthropomorphism in Architecture. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller Aktiengesellchaft & Co.Google Scholar
Durkheim, E. [1912] 1995. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, trans. Fields, K.. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Ehnmark, E. 1939. Anthropomorphism and Miracle. Uppsala: Amqvist & Wiksells Boktryckeri.Google Scholar
Farah, M. J., and Heberlein, A. 2007. Personhood and Neuroscience: Naturalizing or Nihilating?American Journal of Bioethics 7(1):37–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forshee, J. 2006. Customs and Culture of Indonesia. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Foster, K., and Kokko, H. 2008. The Evolution of Superstitious and Superstition-like Behavior. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, doi:.
Frascari, M. 1991. Monsters of Architecture: Anthropomorphism in Architectural Theory. Savage, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Frascari, M. 1987. The Body and Architecture in the Drawings of Carlo Scarpa. RES, Autumn, 123–142.Google Scholar
Freud, S. 1990 [1912–1913]. Totem and Taboo, trans. and ed. Strachey, J.. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Gell, A. 1998. Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gillespie, S. D. 2007. When is a house? In The Durable House: House Society Models in Archaeology, ed. Beck, R. A.. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper No.35. Copyright 2007 by the Board of Trustees, Carbondale:Southern Illinois University.Google Scholar
Gillespie, S. D. 2002. Body and soul among the Maya: Keeping the spirits in place. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, 11:67–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gombrich, E. 1973. Illusion and art. In Illusion in Nature and Art, eds. Gregory, R. and Gombrich, E.. London: Gerald Duckworth, 193–243.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J., and Lewontin, R. C. 1979. The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 205B, 581–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guthrie, S. E. 2008. Spirit beings: A Darwinian, cognitive account. In The Evolution of Religion: Studies, Theories, and Critiques, eds. Bulbulia, J., Sosis, R., Genet, C., Harris, E., and Wyman, K.. Santa Margarita, CA: Collins Foundation Press, 239–245.Google Scholar
Guthrie, S. E. 2007a. Anthropology and anthropomorphism in religion. In Religion, Anthropology and Cognitive Science, eds. Whitehouse, H. and Laidlaw, J.. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 37–62.Google Scholar
Guthrie, S. E. 2007b. Bottles Are Men, Glasses Are Women: Religion, Gender, and Secular Objects. Material Religion 3(1):14–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guthrie, S. E. 2000. Projection. In Guide to the Study of Religion, eds. McCutcheon, R. and Braun, W.. London: Cassell, 225–238.Google Scholar
Guthrie, S. E. 1993. Faces in the Clouds: A New Theory of Religion. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guthrie, S. E. 1988. A Japanese New Religion: Risshō Kōsei-kai in a Mountain Hamlet. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Center for Japanese Studies.Google Scholar
Guthrie, S. E. 1980. A Cognitive Theory of Religion, with CA Comment. Current Anthropology 21(2):181–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haidt, J. 2006. The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Harvey, V. A. 1995. Feuerbach and the Interpretation of Religion (Cambridge Studies in Religion and Critical Thought). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hassin, R. R., Uleman, J. S., and Bargh, J. A. eds. 2005. The New Unconscious. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Henshilwood, C., and Dubreuil, B. 2011. The Still Bay and Howiesons Poort, 77–59 ka: Symbolic Material Culture and the Evolution of Mind during the African Middle Stone Age. Current Anthropology 52(3):361–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodder, I. n.d. The vitalities of Çatalhöyük. In Religion and the Transformation of Neolithic Society: Vital Matters, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hodder, I. n.d. Theories and their data: interdisciplinary interactions at Çatalhöyük. In Religion and the Transformation of Neolithic Society: Vital Matters, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hodder, I. 2010a. Probing religion at Catalhoyuk: An interdisciplinary experiment. In Religion in the Emergence of Civilizatioln, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodder, I. 2010b. Conclusions and evaluation. In Religion in the emergence of Civilization, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 332–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodder, I. 2006. The Leopard’s Tale: Revealing the Mysteries of Çatalhöyük. London: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
Hodder, I., and Meskell, L. 2011. A “Curious and Sometimes a Trifle Macabre Artistry”: Some Aspects of Symbolism in Neolithic Turkey, with CA Comment. Current Anthropology 52:235–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodge, K. M. 2008. Descartes’ mistake: How afterlife beliefs challenge the assumption that humans are intuitive Cartesian substance dualists. Journal of Cognition and Culture 8:387–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horton, R. 1993. Patterns of Thought in Africa and the West: Essays on Magic, Religion and Science, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, D. 1957 [1757]. The Natural History of Religion, ed. Root, H. E.. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Inagaki, K., and Hatano, G. 1993. Young Children’s Understanding of the Mind-Body Distinction. Child Development64,1534–1549.Google ScholarPubMed
Keane, W. 2010. Marked, absent, habitual: Approaches to neolithic religion at Çatalhöyük. In Religion in the Emergence of Civilization: Çatalhöyük as a Case Study, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 187–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelemen, D. 2012. Teleological Minds: How natural intuitions about agency and purpose influence learning about evolution. In Evolution Challenges: Integrating Research and Practice in Teaching and Learning about Evolution, eds. Rosengren, K., Brem, S., Evans, M., and Sinatra, G.Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kelemen, D. 2004. Are Children ‘Intuitive Theists’?Psychological Science 15(5):295–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, G. 2008. The cognitive origins of soul belief: Empathy, responsibility and purity. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of the Study of Religion, Aarhus University.
Kuhlmeier, V., Bloom, P., and Wynn, K. 2004. Do 5-Month-Old Infants See Humans as Material Objects?Cognition 94(1):95–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lahelma, A. 2008. Communicating with “stone persons”: Saami religion and Finnish rock art. In A Touch of Red: Archaeological and Ethnographic Approaches to Interpreting Finnish Rock Paintings, ed. Lahelma, A.. Helsinki: The Finnish Antiquarian Society, 121–142.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Boods.Google Scholar
Leder, D. 1990. The Absent Body. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Liebert, A. 1909. Der Anthropomorphismus der Wissenschaft. Zeitschrift fuer Philosophie und Philosophische Kritik 136:1–22.Google Scholar
Lillard, A., and Skibbe, L. 2005. Theory of mind. In The New Unconscious, eds. Hassin, R. J., Uleman, J. S., and Bargh, J. A.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 277–305.Google Scholar
Lohmann, R. I. 2003. The Supernatural Is Everywhere: Defining Qualities of Religion. Anthropological Forum 13(2):175–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mar, R., and MacRae, C. N. 2006. Triggering the intentional stance. In Empathy and Fairness, eds. Bock, G. and Goode, J.. London: Wiley, Chichester, 110–132.Google Scholar
Meskell, L., and Nakamura, C., with King, R. and Farid, S. 2007. Archive Report: Çatalhöyük Figurines. Çatalhöyük Research Project, 277–302.Google Scholar
Mithen, S., and Boyer, P. 1996. Anthropomorphism and the Evolution of Cognition. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 2(4):717–721.Google Scholar
Morris, W. E. 2009. David Hume. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta (Summer 2009 Edition). .
Nakamura, C. 2010. Magical deposits at Çatalhöyük: A matter of time and place? In Religion in the Emergence of Civilization, ed. Hodder, I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 300–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, C. and Meskell, L. 2013. The Çatalhöyük burial assemblage. In Humans and Landscapes of Çatalhöyük: Reports from the 2000–2008 Seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute.Google Scholar
Pels, P. 2010. Temporalities of “religion” at Çatalhöyük. In Religion in the Emergence of Civilization, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 220–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phelps, E. A. 2007. The Neuroscience of a Person Network. American Journal of Bioethics 7(1):49–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pilloud, M., and Larson, C. 2011. “Official” and “Practical” Kin: Inferring Social and Community Structure from Dental Phenotype at Neolithic Çatalhöyük, Turkey. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 145(5):519–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saxe, R. T., Tzelnic, T., and Carey, S. 2006. Five-Month-Old Infants Know Humans Are Solid, like Inanimate Objects. Cognition 101:B1–B8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scholl, B., and Tremoulet, P. 2000. Perceptual Causality and Animacy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4(8):299–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shults, L. 2010. Spiritual entanglement: Transforming religious symbols at Çatalhöyük. In Religion in the Emergence of Civilization, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 73–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spinoza, B. 1955. The Chief Works of Benedict de Spinoza: On the Improvements of the Understanding; The Ethics; Correspondence, trans. Elwes, R. H. M.. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Stent, G. 1998. Epistemic Dualism of Mind and Body. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 142(4):578–588.Google ScholarPubMed
Thompson, S. 1955. Motif-Index of Folk-Literature. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Tylor, Edward B. 1964 [1878]. Researches into the Early History of Mankind, ed. Bohannon, P., Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Van Huyssteen, W. 2010. Coding the nonvisible: Epistemic limitations and understanding symbolic behavior at Çatalhöyük. In Religion in the Emergence of Civilization, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 99–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitruvius, P. 1960. The Ten Books on Architecture. Mineola, NY: Courier Dover.Google Scholar
Vitruvius, P. 1931. On Architecture. Vol. 1: Books 1–5 (Loeb Classical Library No.251) trans. Granger, F.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wason, P. 2010. The Neolithic cosmos at Çatalhöyük. In Religion in the Emergence of Civilization, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 268–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterson, R. 2010. The Living House: An Anthropology of Architecture in South-East Asia. Rutland, VT: Tuttle.Google Scholar
Wegner, D. 2005. Who is the controller of controlled processes? In The New Unconscious, eds. Hassin, R. R., Uleman, J. S., and Bargh, J. A.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 19–36.Google Scholar
Westh, P. 2013. Anthropomorphism in god concepts: The role of narrative. In Origins of Religion, Cognition and Culture, ed. Geertz, A.. London: Equinox, 396–413.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, H., and Hodder, I. 2010. Modes of religiosity at Çatalhöyük. In Religion in the Emergence of Civilization, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 122–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×