Prerequisites for the Neolithization of the Near East through the Lens of Research on the Göbekli Tepe Archaeological Complex
Abstract
The purpose of the research paper is to characterize the preconditions for the transition of Near Eastern hunter-gatherer societies to agriculture based on the latest research on the paleoclimate of Upper Mesopotamia in the Early Holocene, on socio-economic processes, and on the functioning and decline of the Göbekli Tepe archaeological complex (Southeastern Turkey), dated to 9500-8000 BCE.
The scientific novelty lies in the comprehensive analysis of Göbekli Tepe’s role in the Neolithization of the Near East through an interdisciplinary approach that reassesses its significance as a syncretic cultic-residential site of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic. Considerable attention is given to recent interpretations and the regional context.
Conclusions. An analysis of the scientific literature indicates that until 2014, the prevailing interpretation of Göbekli Tepe was Klaus Schmidt’s concept of a ‘Stone Age sanctuary’. However, over the past decade, it has undergone significant revision. Modern archaeologists argue that the complex functioned primarily as a permanent settlement. This likely contributed to the refinement and expansion of subsistence strategies, particularly the consumption of wild cereals, which eventually led to the transition to agriculture.
Thus, Göbekli Tepe was a settlement with a permanent population and a developed social organization in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (10th – 9th millennia BCE). The site’s monumental structures (‘special buildings’ and T-shaped pillars) reflected a complex symbolic system of hunter-gatherers that preceded the emergence of agriculture. At the same time, favorable environmental changes in Upper Mesopotamia during the Early Holocene facilitated sedentarization and the accumulation of knowledge about wild plant and animal species, forming the foundation for their subsequent domestication in other settlements of the region.
The complex’s decline at the turn of the 9th/8th millennium BCE was not caused by internal conflicts or ritual ‘burial’, as previously considered. Instead, natural factors, particularly the instability of the hillside where the site is located, played a significant role. Additionally, the creators of Göbekli Tepe failed to adapt to the changes they had initiated. There is no evidence of domestication at the site, whereas in riverine settlements (e.g., Nevalı Çori), a gradual transition to agriculture was already taking place.
References
Atakuman, Ç. (2014). Architectural Discourse and Social Transformation During the Early Neolithic of Southeast Anatolia. Journal of World Prehistory, 27 (1), 1-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10963-014-9070-4 [in English].
Ayaz, O., Çelik, B. & Çakmak, F. (2022). ‘Status Society’: Sociological Thinking of Göbekli Tepe and Karahan Tepe in The Context of Social Stratification. Karadeniz Uluslararası Bilimsel Dergi, 1 (56), 122-142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17498/kdeniz.1186376 [in English].
Banning, E.B. (2023). Paradise Found or Common Sense Lost? Göbekli Tepe’s Last Decade as a Pre-Farming Cult Centre. Open Archaeology, 9 (1), 1-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/opar-2022-0317 [in English].
Bengisu, E. (2020). Human History and Göbeklitepe. International Journal of Social, Political and Economic Research, 7 (1), 1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3759612 [in English].
Benz, M. & Bauer, J. (2013). Symbols of Power – Symbols of Crisis? A Psycho-Social Approach to Early Neolithic Symbol Systems. Neo-Lithics, 2, 11-24 [in English].
Biltekin, D., Güzel, A., Özcanli, M., Gökgöz, D.D. & Akbiyik, M. (2024). Exploring pre-neolithic environmental dynamics: paleoecology around the Göbekli Tepe based on a multiproxy approach in southeastern Türkiye. Plant Soil, 502 (1-2), 297-313. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-024-06548-3 [in English].
Caletti, C.C. (2020). Göbekli Tepe and the Sites around the Urfa Plain (SE Turkey): Recent Discoveries and New Interpretations. Asia Anteriore Antica. Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Cultures, 2, 95-123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13128/asiana-679 [in English].
Çelik, B. & Ayaz, O. (2022). Rise Of Göbekli Tepe Culture: «Hunting Ground Economy» and The Role of Speculative «Knowledge». Karadeniz Uluslararası Bilimsel Dergi, 1 (56), 143-160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17498/kdeniz.1189781 [in English].
Clare, L. (2024). Inspired individuals and charismatic leaders: Hunter-gatherer crisis and the rise and fall of invisible decision-makers at Göbeklitepe. Documenta Praehistorica, 51, 6-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4312/dp.51.16 [in English].
Dietrich, L. (2021). Plant Food Processing Tools at Early Neolithic Göbekli Tepe. Oxford: Archaeopress. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.15135970 [in English].
Dietrich, L., Meister, J., Dietrich, O., & et al. (2019). Cereal processing at Early Neolithic Göbekli Tepe, southeastern Turkey. PLoS ONE, 14 (5), 1-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215214 [in English].
Dietrich, O., Dietrich, L. & Notroff, J. (2017). Cult as a driving force of human history. A view from Göbekli Tepe. Expedition, 59 (3), 10-25 [in English].
Dietrich, O., Heun, M., Notroff, J., Schmidt, K. & Zarnkow, M. (2012). The role of cult and feasting in the emergence of Neolithic communities. New evidence from Göbekli Tepe, south-eastern Turkey. Antiquity, 86 (333), 674-695. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00047840 [in English].
Dietrich, O., Notroff, J. & Schmidt, K. (2017). Feasting, Social Complexity, and the Emergence of the Early Neolithic of Upper Mesopotamia: A View from Göbekli Tepe. In Chacon, R.J. & Mendoza, R.G. (Eds.). Feast, Famine or Fighting? Multiple Pathways to Social Complexity). New York: Springer, 91-132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48402-0_5 [in English].
Gifford, P. & Antonello, P. (2015). Rethinking the Neolithic Revolution: Symbolism and Sacrifice at Göbekli Tepe. In Antonello, P. & Gifford, P. (Eds.). How We Became Human: Mimetic Theory and the Science of Evolutionary Origins. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 261-288 [in English].
Güzel, A., Parmaksiz, A. & Özcanli, M. (2023). Investigation of climate and vegetation change in Göbekli Tepe (Türkiye) region using pollen data. Biological Diversity and Conservation, 16 (3), 210-217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46309/biodicon.2023.1263014 [in English].
Hadad, R. (2022). In the Shadow of the Monoliths: Göbekli Tepe and the Monumental Tradition of the Pre-Pottery Levant. In Laporte, L., Large, J.-M., Nespoulous, L., Scarre, C. & Steimer-Herbet, T. (Eds.). Megaliths of the World. Oxford: Archaeopress, 823-836. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.15135898.62 [in English].
Jeunesse, C. (2020). Elite houses or specialised buildings? Some comments about the special buildings of Göbekli Tepe in relation to Chatpters 2 and 3. In Gebauer, A.B., Sørensen, L., Teather, A. & Valera, A. (Eds.), Monumentalising Life in the Neolithic: Narratives of Change and Continuity. Oxford; Philadelphia: Oxbow Books, 53-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv13pk66m.9 [in English].
Kinzel, M. & Clare, L. (2020). Monumental – compared to what? A perspective from Göbekli Tepe. In Gebauer, A.B., Sørensen, L., Teather, A. & Valera, A. (Eds.). Monumentalising Life in the Neolithic: Narratives of Change and Continuity. Oxford; Philadelphia: Oxbow Books, 29-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv13pk66m.7 [in English].
Knitter, D., Braun, R., Clare, L., Nykamp, M. & Schütt, B. (2019). Göbekli Tepe: A Brief Description of the Environmental Development in the Surroundings of the UNESCO World Heritage Site. Land, 8 (72), 1-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/land8040072 [in English].
Korol, D. (2024). ‘The First Temple in the World’ Status Legitimacy Problems: Göbekli Tepe in Scientific Discussions of the Last Two Decades. Naukovi zapysky NaUKMA. Istoriia i teoriia kultury, 7, 118-129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-8907.2024.7.118-129 [in Ukrainian].
Lewis-Williams, D. & Pearce, D. (2006). An Accidental Revolution? Neolithic Religion & Economic Change. Minerva, 17 (4), 29-31 [in English].
Peters, J., Buitenhuis, H., Grupe, G., Schmidt, K. & Pöllath, N. (2013). The long and winding road. Ungulate exploitation and domestication in early Neolithic Anatolia (10,000-7,000 BC). In Colledge, S., Conolly, J., Dobney, K., Manning, K. & Shennan S. (Eds.). The origins and spread of domestic animals in Southwest Asia and Europe). Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press, 83-114 [in English].
Peters, J., Schmidt, K., Dietrich, O. & Pöllath, N. (2014). Göbekli Tepe: Agriculture and Domestication. In Smith, C. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology. New York: Springer, 3065-3068. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51726-1_2226-2 [in English].
Renfrew, C. (2013). Centres of Congregation. Neo-Lithics, 2, 30-34 [in English].
Schmidt, K. (2005). ‘Ritual Centers’ and the Neolithisation of Upper Mesopotamia. Neo-Lithics, 2, 13-21 [in English].
Schmidt, K. (2006). They built the first temples. Mysterious sanctuary of Stone Age hunters. Archaeological discoveries at Göbekli Tepe. München: Beck [in German].
Uzdurum, M., Schönicke, J., Kinzel, M. & Barański, M.Z. (2023). Studying the Use of Earth in Early Architecture of Southwest and Central Asia. Open Archaeology, 9 (1), 1-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/opar-2022-0321 [in English].
Zimmermann, T. (2020). A Decline in the Orient? Göbekli Tepe as a case study for the completion and extinction of a late Ice Age hunter-gatherer culture. The Journal of the Oswald Spengler Society, 3, 7-25 [in German].
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
