{"id":562,"date":"2016-05-05T14:22:41","date_gmt":"2016-05-05T12:22:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tepetelegrams.wordpress.com\/?p=562"},"modified":"2023-02-06T10:30:32","modified_gmt":"2023-02-06T09:30:32","slug":"losing-your-head-at-gobekli-tepe","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.dainst.blog\/the-tepe-telegrams\/2016\/05\/05\/losing-your-head-at-gobekli-tepe\/","title":{"rendered":"Losing your head at G\u00f6bekli Tepe"},"content":{"rendered":"

Just back from this year\u00b4s ICAANE in Vienna, where a very inspiring workshop on the \u201cIconography and Symbolic Meaning of the Human in Near Eastern Prehistory\u201d was organized by J\u00f6rg Becker, Claudia Beuger and Bernd M\u00fcller-Neuhof. As publication of the contributions will take some time, here is a small summary of our musings on anthropomorphic imagery at G\u00f6bekli Tepe.<\/em><\/p>\n

G\u00f6bekli Tepe is a special site in many respects: its location is hostile to settlement, no water sources are in vicinity; clear evidence for domestic building types missing so far in Layer III<\/a>; only selection of material culture is present (very few bone tools, clay figurines absent); and there is a considerable investment of resources and work. This investment was not only made in building G\u00f6bekli Tepe. At the end of their uselifes, all buildings of layer III (PPN A, 10th millennium) were at least partially intentionally backfilled. The filling consists of limestone rubble from the neolithic quarry areas on the adjacent plateaus, mixed with large quantities of animal bones, flint debitage, artefacts and tools. Before backfilling started, it seems that the buildings were cleaned. If roofs should have existed, they were dismantled at that time, because absolutely no traces of them were found.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The backfilling obviously is a limiting factor for our understanding of the function of the enclosures, as very few in situ deposits connected to the use-time of the buildings remain. However, it seems that the backfilling was a very structured process that included certain deliberate acts. Between them, the deposition of artefacts and sculptures [here<\/a>, here<\/a>, here<\/a>, and here<\/a>] inside the filling, often next to the pillars, is most striking.<\/p>\n

\"Figure

Deposition of a boar sculpture an stone plates next to one of the central npillars of Enclosure C (Photo: K. Schmidt, Copyright DAI).<\/p><\/div>\n

So, at G\u00f6bekli Tepe we do not know very much about the actual usetime of the buildings. We have however the enclosures themselves, their layout, and the richly decorated pillars as starting points. And we know a lot of the things people did with these enclosures at the end of their uselife. It seems that they tried to highlight certain aspects of the enclosures\u00b4 meaning through their actions.<\/p>\n

\"G\u00f6bekli

Western central pillar of Enclosure D (Photo: N. Becker, Copyright DAI).<\/p><\/div>\n

There are several different categories of human imagery at G\u00f6bekli Tepe. Most impressive are the T-shaped pillars. The T-shape is clearly an abstract depiction of the human body seen from the side. Evidence for this interpretation are the low relief depictions of arms, hands and items of clothing like belts and loinclothes on some of the central pillars. There is a clear hierarchy of pillars inside the enclosures. The central pillars are up to 5,5 m high, they have the already described anthropomorphic elements. The surrounding pillars are smaller, but more richly decorated with animal reliefs than the central ones. They are always \u201elooking\u201c towards the central pillars, and the benches between them further amplify the impression of a gathering of some sort. Whether we are dealing with depictions of ancestors of different importance, or even of gods, would be a topic for itself and an answer is hard to find at the moment.
\nWhat is clear however is that both central and surrounding pillars share the abstracted form. This abstraction is not due to the limited skills of Neolithic people in depicting the human body. It is a deliberate choice that has a meaning.<\/p>\n

\"Abb.

Anthropomorphic sculpture; torso and head, limestone. The only case in which fitting fragments of an anthropomorphic sculpture were found at G\u00f6bekli Tepe\u00a0 (Photo: N. Becker, Copyright DAI).<\/p><\/div>\n

The other important category of depictions are more naturalistic sculptures. A total of 143 sculptures was found so far at G\u00f6bekli Tepe. Of those, 84 depict animals, 43 humans, 3 phalli and 5 are human-animal composite sculptures. It is striking that most anthropomorphic sculpture at G\u00f6bekli Tepe is fragmented. Of the 43 human-shaped depictions, only 9 can be regarded as complete, if we do not take smaller damages into account. What is also striking is that \u2013 in spite of large-scale excavations \u2013 there is only one case in which fitting fragments were found. If we have a closer look at the fragments preserved, a pattern emerges. The fragments preserved in the highest numbers are heads, not the often bigger torsi. The large number of broken off heads, and the regulated fractures, speak in favor of intentional fragmentation.<\/p>\n

\"G\u00f6bekli_ZOrA_Abb.

A selection of anthropomorphic heads from G\u00f6bekli Tepe (Photos: DAI).<\/p><\/div>\n

Further, the heads were not discarded randomly. They were deposited carefully in the enclosure fillings, often next to pillars. Their treatment is similar to zoomorphic sculpture in this respect. However, zoomorphic depictions are most often complete, there is no indication of intentional damage. So while deposition patterns are similar, pre-deposition treatment is not. Human heads seem to have had a special role in the beliefs connected with the enclosures.<\/p>\n

\"G\u00f6bekli_ZOrA_Abb.

Distribution of sculptures in the main excavation area of G\u00f6bekli Tepe (Map: Thomas G\u00f6tzelt, Graphics N. Becker, Copyright DAI).<\/p><\/div>\n

The special role of separated human heads is also visible in G\u00f6bekli Tepe\u00b4s reliefs. Immediately behind the eastern central pillar of Enclosure D the fragment of a relief was found. It shows a human head among several animals \u2013 a vulture and a hyena can be clearly identified. Another example is Pillar 43, also in Enclosure D. There, a headless ithyphallic body is depicted among several birds, snakes and a large scorpion. The interaction of animals with human heads is even clearer from several composite sculptures discovered at G\u00f6bekli Tepe. They show birds, but also quadrupeds sitting on top of human heads or carrying them away. A relation of this kind of iconography with early Neolithic death rite and cult is evident.<\/p>\n\n\t\t