Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-thh2z Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-26T11:12:35.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Report of Textiles from Çatal Hüyük

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

Extract

The textiles examined were from building-level VI provisionally dated as c. 6000 B.C. They were black, stiff and brittle, apparently owing to carbonization, and comprised some found in 1962 and others found in 1963. No attempt will be made to describe the structure of the cloth except to say that no weave was evident in the 1962 specimens; one series of yarns lay parallel, with no other yarns woven through them. In places other parallel yarns were fused at an angle across (but not interwoven with) the first ones. It was as if either the warp or weft had decayed, but there were no waves in the remaining yarns to indicate where the decayed yarns had been. This was probably the material described by Helbaek as resembling fishnet without knots. The yarns were less than 0·5 mm. in width, yet despite this fineness most were clearly two-ply. The specimens found in 1963 comprised one that had apparently been like the above but had broken into many short, straight pieces of yarn. There were also two pieces of cloth clearly woven, in apparently plain weave, from even finer yarns that nevertheless appeared to be two-ply. One piece of cloth had a selvedge.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 1965

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.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Helbaek, H. (1963). “Textiles from Çatal Hüyük.” Archaeology, 16, 3946.Google Scholar
2.Ryder, M. L. (1961). “A specimen of Asiatic sheepskin from the 4th or 5th century B.C.Austral. J. Sci., 24, 246–8.Google Scholar
3.Ryder, M. L. (1964). Submitted to Nature for publication.Google Scholar
4.Ryder, M. L. (1963). “Remains derived from Skin.” In Brothwell, D. R., and Higgs, E. S., Science in Archaeology. Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
5.Gustus, E. L. (1964). J. Biol. Chem. (in the press).Google Scholar