Gobekli Tepe: The World’s First Temple?
Predating Stonehenge by 6,000 years, Turkey's stunning Gobekli Tepe upends the conventional view of the rise of civilization
- By Andrew Curry
- Photographs by Berthold Steinhilber
- Smithsonian magazine, November 2008, Subscribe
(Page 2 of 3)
Schmidt returned a year later with five colleagues and they uncovered the first megaliths, a few buried so close to the surface they were scarred by plows. As the archaeologists dug deeper, they unearthed pillars arranged in circles. Schmidt's team, however, found none of the telltale signs of a settlement: no cooking hearths, houses or trash pits, and none of the clay fertility figurines that litter nearby sites of about the same age. The archaeologists did find evidence of tool use, including stone hammers and blades. And because those artifacts closely resemble others from nearby sites previously carbon-dated to about 9000 B.C., Schmidt and co-workers estimate that Gobekli Tepe's stone structures are the same age. Limited carbon dating undertaken by Schmidt at the site confirms this assessment.
The way Schmidt sees it, Gobekli Tepe's sloping, rocky ground is a stonecutter's dream. Even without metal chisels or hammers, prehistoric masons wielding flint tools could have chipped away at softer limestone outcrops, shaping them into pillars on the spot before carrying them a few hundred yards to the summit and lifting them upright. Then, Schmidt says, once the stone rings were finished, the ancient builders covered them over with dirt. Eventually, they placed another ring nearby or on top of the old one. Over centuries, these layers created the hilltop.
Today, Schmidt oversees a team of more than a dozen German archaeologists, 50 local laborers and a steady stream of enthusiastic students. He typically excavates at the site for two months in the spring and two in the fall. (Summer temperatures reach 115 degrees, too hot to dig; in the winter the area is deluged by rain.) In 1995, he bought a traditional Ottoman house with a courtyard in Urfa, a city of nearly a half-million people, to use as a base of operations.
On the day I visit, a bespectacled Belgian man sits at one end of a long table in front of a pile of bones. Joris Peters, an archaeozoologist from the Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich, specializes in the analysis of animal remains. Since 1998, he has examined more than 100,000 bone fragments from Gobekli Tepe. Peters has often found cut marks and splintered edges on them—signs that the animals from which they came were butchered and cooked. The bones, stored in dozens of plastic crates stacked in a storeroom at the house, are the best clue to how people who created Gobekli Tepe lived. Peters has identified tens of thousands of gazelle bones, which make up more than 60 percent of the total, plus those of other wild game such as boar, sheep and red deer. He's also found bones of a dozen different bird species, including vultures, cranes, ducks and geese. "The first year, we went through 15,000 pieces of animal bone, all of them wild. It was pretty clear we were dealing with a hunter-gatherer site," Peters says. "It's been the same every year since." The abundant remnants of wild game indicate that the people who lived here had not yet domesticated animals or farmed.
But, Peters and Schmidt say, Gobekli Tepe's builders were on the verge of a major change in how they lived, thanks to an environment that held the raw materials for farming. "They had wild sheep, wild grains that could be domesticated—and the people with the potential to do it," Schmidt says. In fact, research at other sites in the region has shown that within 1,000 years of Gobekli Tepe's construction, settlers had corralled sheep, cattle and pigs. And, at a prehistoric village just 20 miles away, geneticists found evidence of the world's oldest domesticated strains of wheat; radiocarbon dating indicates agriculture developed there around 10,500 years ago, or just five centuries after Gobekli Tepe's construction.
To Schmidt and others, these new findings suggest a novel theory of civilization. Scholars have long believed that only after people learned to farm and live in settled communities did they have the time, organization and resources to construct temples and support complicated social structures. But Schmidt argues it was the other way around: the extensive, coordinated effort to build the monoliths literally laid the groundwork for the development of complex societies.
The immensity of the undertaking at Gobekli Tepe reinforces that view. Schmidt says the monuments could not have been built by ragged bands of hunter-gatherers. To carve, erect and bury rings of seven-ton stone pillars would have required hundreds of workers, all needing to be fed and housed. Hence the eventual emergence of settled communities in the area around 10,000 years ago. "This shows sociocultural changes come first, agriculture comes later," says Stanford University archaeologist Ian Hodder, who excavated Catalhoyuk, a prehistoric settlement 300 miles from Gobekli Tepe. "You can make a good case this area is the real origin of complex Neolithic societies."
What was so important to these early people that they gathered to build (and bury) the stone rings? The gulf that separates us from Gobekli Tepe's builders is almost unimaginable. Indeed, though I stood among the looming megaliths eager to take in their meaning, they didn't speak to me. They were utterly foreign, placed there by people who saw the world in a way I will never comprehend. There are no sources to explain what the symbols might mean. Schmidt agrees. "We're 6,000 years before the invention of writing here," he says.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.
Related topics: Archaeology Rituals and Traditions Neolithic Turkey Places of Worship
Additional Sources
"Seeking the Roots of Ritual" by Andrew Curry, Science, January 18, 2008






Comments (565)
+ View All Comments
Re Curious April 21: many of the stones were damaged on the top: the suggestion is that this was done by much later farmers attempting to break up the stones to clear the land for agriculture. re Tom Carberry April 21: I don't think flooding is possible - the Tepe is the highest point for a long way around, so I don't see how earth and/or other debris could have been washed into the structures. The structures were in use for some time before being buried - it wasn't just a case of building them then immediately burying them, which I agree doesn't make any sense at all. Jim Cleary.
Posted by Jim Cleary on May 9,2013 | 06:58 AM
(sorry I missed my details off the previous posting) Jim Cleary.
Posted by Jim Cleary on May 9,2013 | 06:46 AM
Hello, Thank you for this excellent article on Gobekli Tepe; I was lucky enough to visit there last week. Due to the understandable limits placed on user access, your photos give more details than I could see. One minor issue with the article - the map you give is slightly wrong, as it shows Gobekli Tepe as being south-east of Urfa, while your text correctly states that the site is north-east. Please can you fix that? Your map has been picked up by Wikipedia and so this error is very widely disseminated now. Thanks & Regards, Jim Cleary.
Posted by on May 9,2013 | 06:44 AM
Absolutely Incredible, mind boggling. It never ceases to amaze me what science continues to uncover, the questions that it brings with each new discovery. That Faith and worship seem to have always been a large part of the human experience, validating something much more important than simply being here, that A Higher Power, whatever you chose to call it, does and always has existed.
Posted by Gazelle Richardson on May 7,2013 | 12:09 PM
It's simple reasoning! Correlate fact. Seperste from fiction and realize. It's not rocket science people! It's people before science says so! Our society is deeply rooted In religious fact that came from religious ideals. Ideals are fairy tales fiction. Truth behind every UN covered hillside.
Posted by Ccrider on April 28,2013 | 04:03 AM
Humans build grand things to take their minds off of their own misery.
Posted by teresa Ballard on April 26,2013 | 12:33 PM
What are the indentations on top of the structures? What do they mean, or has no one noticed?
Posted by Curious. on April 21,2013 | 07:53 PM
"Then, Schmidt says, once the stone rings were finished, the ancient builders covered them over with dirt." Why? To me it makes no sense that hundreds of people could work building these monuments, carving the animals, lugging the stones up the hill, and then bury it. I don't think human nature has changed over the last 10,000 years or so. We don't have any modern examples of people building some giant structures and then burying them. What about flooding? What about some other explanation?
Posted by Tom Carberry on April 21,2013 | 11:21 AM
Bruce, You bring up a good point. The only reason why Gobekli Tepe is currently regarded as the oldest man made megalithic site is because it was burried for 10,000 years and no other subsequent civilization was able to inhabit it and leave its remnants behind. Many sites such as Puma Punku, Pyramids, Petra, amchu Pichu, etc. have been settled in many times over, so it's impossible to tell when they were originally constructed. For instance, some of the "H" markings at Puma Punku seem very similar to Gobekli Tepe, but current archaological dating has them being built 10,000 years apart.
Posted by on April 9,2013 | 05:35 PM
Did they find the quarry site? Is there a possibility that the date of the site is much older and the stone tools, etc., are those of the people who found the site and used it to some degree 10,000 B.C.E.? Plus if the site had been buried intentionally, would it not be necessary to go to a nearby site where the soil was undisturbed and go down through the layers to determine the age of the site by reaching the comparable surface when the monoliths were erected? Could not all the bone fragments of wild game, once again, be the detritus of the stone age people who simply visited the site? Is there evidence of more than one episode of burying a particular site, or, once buried, it remained buried. I always get amazed that once archeologists discover an ancient site, it becomes a site of rituals and religious ceremonies as if our ancient ancestors had nothing else to do. Once they do this, they shut down on looking at the sites with a creative and open mind. There is no modern precedent where we build sites and abandon them except to go to them once or twice a year. Why do we assume our ancestors did this?
Posted by Bruce M on April 5,2013 | 11:16 AM
The idea that this is the oldest "temple" in the world carries with it the implied suggestion (even the hope) that it's not the oldest, and that there are many older sites yet to be discovered. Archeologists, after all, are scientists; and science, by very definition, constantly seeks out new and clarifying information in order to update mankind's understanding of the world. So they DO mean it is the oldest to date; "to date" is an implied part of every scientific statement. The people who have difficulty with discoveries like this are those who embrace ONLY the traditional views of religion. I believe that religion and science are after the same thing: fact-based truth. But science has a great advantage over religion in that it IS constantly looking for change -- constantly looking for better, more correct answers. The problem religion has with discoveries like this is that they DO suggest change; they do require that we re-evaluate how we see the past, and that is a tough pill to swallow for people who base everything on traditional views and interpretations that they ONLY THOUGHT were facts. For example, the statement below that seems to limit the definition of the word "create" to a process involving (God's) hands, when "create" can mean many things. Religious people should be able to concede that scientific discovery is the process of learning the facts about God's methods of creation, organization, etc. I'm religious, and I've adopted that view, because it just makes sense. So, civilization is older that we thought it was. Let's be happy that we have new information; then let's accept it, adjust our understanding for it, and move on to the next exciting find.
Posted by Dwayne Donkersgoed on April 4,2013 | 06:37 AM
Very cool, but we have been modern H S Sapiens for a long while. There has to be earlier stuff.
Posted by Zach on March 19,2013 | 02:24 PM
This may be the oldest religious site (temple) in the world but no one can Know that. It may be the oldest and it may be religious; However, what was the "oldest" before this site was discovered? All too often the "Scientific Method" practice by many scientist of today consists of first coming up with a theory then collecting data that agrees with that theory and discarding data that doesn't. Why is it so difficult for "scientists" to say; this is the oldest, biggest, or whatever that we Know of to date?
Posted by Martin W Mosier, PG on March 18,2013 | 03:18 PM
The problem with modern day archaeology is that it often gets confused about the triangular relationships between agriculture, astronomy and religion. Ample scientific evidence points to the capacity for religious experience being hardwired in the human brain. Likewise exciting new evidence is showing that often complex behaviors can be found to be hardwired into the animal genome. Animals and thus also humans use geo-location based on magnetic fields, gravity or light. Archaeology would be much more of a scientific enterprise if it took into consideration environmental factors (e.g. climate, vegetative cover, available animal species etc.) to see how these affect hardwired behaviors in humans. Therefore the Gobekli Tepe religious hypothesis does not make sense. Where do hunter gatherers get the time to specialize themselves in rather sophisticated masonry and edifice building while still not living in organized towns? Astronomy is the driving force behind civilization NOT religion. And only when man realizes that knowledge of natural phenomena can be used for harvesting food, does the modern era of man begin. And agriculture presupposes hardwired and learned behaviors of utilization of astronomical knowledge (weather and seasons predictable through astronomical observations). The romanticized concepts of Schmidt thus do not obey Occam's Razor. We should be looking for an astronomical basis.
Posted by Milton Ponson on March 18,2013 | 11:03 AM
+ View All Comments