Category Archives: TURKEY

Rock-Cut Tomb of a Hero in the City of Tlos

The following week, together with my two little cousins, I joined a daily jeep tour to the second longest gorge in Europe, known as Saklikent, situated approximately fifty kilometres south-east from Fethiye, in Lycian Turkey. After forty minutes of enjoying the bumping off-road, we eventually reached the ruins of an ancient city of Tlos, believed to have been one of the most important religious city of Lycia (Miszczak 2009; Bean 1989:65).

To see the ancient city of Tlos and its tombs, together with my two little cousins, I joined a daily jeep tour to the second longest gorge in Europe, known as Saklikent, situated approximately fifty kilometres south-east from Fethiye. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

In 1838, it was discovered by Sir Charles Fellows (1799-1860), a British archaeologist, famous for his expeditions in Turkey (Bean 1989:65). The settlement of the acropolis is on the hill, which though does not seem very high from the side of a modern town, it rises to almost perpendicular cliffs on the north-east (Ibid.:66). On top of the hill, there is now an unoccupied Turkish castle from the nineteenth century (Ibid.:65-66). Below it, on the hill’s east slope, there are traces of successive constructions, including Lycian remains of the walls and Roman masonry with re-used building material (Ibid.:66). There are also two groups of Lycian tombs; the first one is just below the summit, whereas the second group stretches towards the north (Ibid.:66). In a large open and now cultivated flat space, just at the foot of the hill, there are scattered numerous and various stone elements (Ibid.:66). Some scholars claim these are the remains of the agora (Ibid.:66).

In Tlos, there are two groups of Lycian rock-cut tombs; the first one is just below the summit, whereas the second group stretches towards the north. Among sepulchral architecture, there are also sarcophagi. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Simultaneously, along the west hillside and below the ancient city-wall, there are still visible rows of seats of a stadium, whose originally regular line now is disrupted by a modern installation of walls and a running stream (Bean 1989:66). Nevertheless, such an arrangement of the agora, which apparently used to be situated alongside the stadium, is quite outstanding for ancient Lycian or Greek urban architecture (Ibid.:66). On the east side of the open space, there are remains of a market-building and a large complex of chambers with arched windows (Ibid.:66). To the south-east, there is in turn a baths, called by locals Yedi Kapi (‘Seven Doors’), which apparently refers to the remaining building’s apsidal projection with seven windows (Ibid.:66). To the east of the baths, there is a huge open square, which according to another thesis, should be acknowledged as an actual agora of the city (Ibid.:66-67). To the west of the square there is an Early Byzantine church, and to the east, a large and well-preserved Roman theater, which comes from around the first century A.D. or even earlier (Ibid.:67).

The city of Tlos

The city of Tlos is very ancient, as it had already been mentioned in the Hittite records of the fourteenth century BC., under the name of Dalawa, situated in the occupied by the Hittites territory of Lukka (Bean 1989:65).

Legend says that one of the greatest tombs in the necropolis of Tlos was built just a Lycian hero, Bellerophon, and that it was dedicated by citizens of Lycia. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Simultaneously, it was called Tlawa by the Lycians themselves, for whom it was one of the six principial cities in their lands (Bean 1989:65). When it was incorporated into the Province of the Roman Empire, it was known as ‘a very brilliant metropolis of the Lycian nation’, and in the Christian times, under the Byzantine Empire, Tlos was granted with its own episcopate as a part of the metropolitan of Myra (Ibid.:65). Nonetheless, the city was hardly mentioned by ancient writers, except for few notes given by contemporary geographers or two historic incidents occurring there, recorded in inscriptions (Ibid.:65). The latter also tell that ancient citizens of Tlos were divided into at least three demes (a political division of Attica in ancient Greece), which were named after famous Lycian heroes, such as Iobates, Sarpedon or Bellerophon (Ibid.:65).

Bellerophon and his Pegasus

According to myths, the site is strongly associated  especially with one of Lycian heroes, Bellerophon, from whom the early rulers of the Tlos claimed to descend (Miszczak 2009). This famous mythological figure is best known as a great rider who managed to tame and ride Pegasus (Ibid.). Pegasus was a winged steed miraculously brought to life; namely, it had jumped out of the neck of Medusa after Perseus cut off her head (Ibid.). Bellerophon mounted Pegasus with the help of the goddess Athena and her magical bridle (Ibid.). Unfortunately, towards the end of his life, he lost gods’ favour, when he tried to reach the summit of Olympus on his Pegasus (Ibid.).

The so-called Tomb of Bellerophon (on the left) is anonymous as there is no inscription revealing its owner’s name. Like in the case of the Tomb of Amyntas in ancient Telmessus (Fethiye), the Tomb of Bellerophon also falls into the temple-tomb category. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Bellerophon was worshiped as a hero in Lycia, especially in Tlos, where he was also believed to have lived in the fourth century BC., and where he was said to have eventually been buried (Miszczak 2009; Bean 1989:68). Legend says that one of the greatest tombs in the necropolis of Tlos was built just  for him and that it was dedicated by citizens of Lycia (Miszczak 2009). Archaeologists, in turn, have never supposed that the tomb belonged to Bellerophon himself (Bean 1989:68). As a matter of fact, the grave is anonymous as there is no inscription revealing its owner’s name (Ibid.:68). The only thing referring there directly to the hero is a relief depicting Bellerophon flying on Pegasus (Miszczak 2009; Bean 1989:67-68).

Typical temple – tomb of Lycia

Among all the tombs cut in the acropolis hillside, the so-called Tomb of Bellerophon is also the greatest and most significant, which can suggest it was prepared for someone important, almost as much as the mythological hero (Bean 1989:67). Dating from the first half of the fourth century BC., the tomb is located low down, on the north side of the cliff (Miszczak 2009; Bean 1989:67).

Lycian tombs of different categories in Tlos, Turkey. In the foreground, there are sarcophagi, whereas in the background house-tombs are carved high up in the rock. Apart from those, the most outstanding of all tombs in Tlos is the one cut in the rock as a temple-tomb. Photo by Nikodem Nijaki (2012). CC BY-SA 3.0. Image modified. Photo source: “Lycian tombs in Tlos” (2021). In: Wikimedia Commons.

Like in the case of the Tomb of Amyntas in ancient Telmessus (Fethiye), the Tomb of Bellerophon also falls into the temple-tomb category (Ibid.:67). It has got two squared pilasters in antis, with Ionic capitals and a pediment above them (Ibid.:67). Inside the porch, the front wall is articulated into three parts; on either side of the imitated stone doorway with studs and decorations, there are two real side-doors raised almost one metre above the threshold blocks; they lead directly to grave-chambers (Ibid.:67-68). The left-hand door opens to a chamber with four benches for the corpses; the one on the right additionally features a stone pillow for the dead’s head, alongside the niche for offerings (Ibid.:68). Most likely it was the bench reserved for the principal member of the family (Ibid.:68). The door on the right leads, in turn, to a smaller funeral room, equipped only with three benches (Ibid.:68).

Reliefs and a mystery of their mutual connections

The most important of all features of the tomb is, however, the mentioned above relief representing Bellerophon. It is situated on the left-side of the upper part of the front wall of the porch (Bean 1989:67). The hero is riding a flying Pegasus while rising his left arm (Ibid.:67). The rider and his steed are facing right, towards another relief, positioned above the left-hand side door (Ibid.:67). The latter shows a feline-like animal, a lion or leopard, facing left, towards the coming hero (Ibid.:67). At first sight, the position of the both reliefs suggests that they are related, and some scholars interpret them as two components of the same mythological scene; according to a Greek myth, Bellerophon fights against and slays a monster, Chimera, after she devastates Caria and Lycia (Bean 1989:67-68; The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica 2021).

Bellerophon on Pegasus spears the Chimera, on an Attic red-figure epinetron, 425–420 BC. Photo by Marsyas (2005). Uploaded in 2020. CC BY-SA 2.5. Photo and caption source: “Bellerophon” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

The myth of Chimarea is also strongly associated with another site in ancient Lycia, namely the Mount Chimaera, which is often localized in Yanartaş , in geothermically active region with naturally burning flames (“Yanartaş” 2021; “Mount Chimaera” 2021). “It has been suggested that the fires are the inspiration for the fire-breathing Chimarea in Homer’s Iliad” (“Yanartaş” 2021). Nevertheless, George E. Bean assumes “that the original location of the ancient Mount Chimarea was further west, as cited by Strabo, at a location where similar fires burned” (Ibid.).

Chimarea is usually described as a fire-breathing female hybrid, composed of parts of such animals as a lion, a goat and a dragon (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica 2021). Nonetheless, the relief representing the feline does not resemble the mythological hybrid at all (Bean 1989:68). What is more, the both representations are shown in a different scale, which may be against the thesis that they belong to the same narrative (Ibid.:68). The relief showing the lion-like animal may be rather related to two other reliefs of the tomb, each appearing on the threshold blocks below the two side-doors, which also represent animals, interpreted either as horses or dogs (Ibid.:67).

Just passing by history

Tlos was just a short stop on our way to the gorge of Saklikent and, unfortunately, I did not have enough time to explore it properly. My little cousins curiously listened to the story of Bellerophon, his winged horse, Pegasus and flying mermaids, crouching at the tombs in order to transport souls of the dead into the afterlife. But I was able to capture their attention just for a while; as children usually do, they got bored quickly with the crumbles of stone and wanted to move on. Fortunately, I came back to the site years later on a proper study trip to Tlos.

My little cousins curiously listened to the story of Bellerophon, his winged horse, Pegasus and flying mermaids, crouching at the tombs in order to transport souls of the dead into the afterlife. Yet, it was just a short stop at the Lycian history. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

At the time of my first visit to this ancient site, it was more like a relaxing tour with a brief meeting with the Lycian past, just before jumping into the icy cold blue water of Saklikent and exploring the beauty of the canyon.

Featured image: The ancient city of Tlos towering over the area, believed to have been one of the most important religious city of Lycia. Over its ancient remains, there is a Turkish castle. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

By Joanna
Faculties of English Philology, History of Art and Archaeology.
University of Silesia in Katowice, Poland;
Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw, Poland;
University College Dublin, Ireland.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

“Bellerophon” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3sa1V66>. [Accessed on 10th April, 2021].

“Lycian tombs in Tlos” (2021). In: Wikimedia Commons. Available at <https://bit.ly/3jqJMk3>. [Accessed on 25th June, 2021].

“Mount Chimaera” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3wKpFBr>. [Accessed on 10th April, 2021].

“Tlos” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3d64v8X>. [Accessed on 10th April, 2021].

“Yanartaş” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3t70B5f>. [Accessed on 10th April, 2021].

Bean G. E. (1989). Lycian Turkey. An Archaeological Guide, Vol. 4. London: John Murray Publishers.

Miszczak I. (2009). ”Dzieje Licyjczyków”. In: Miszczak I., Miszczak J. Turcja w sandałach. Available at <https://bit.ly/3kVybIh>. [Accessed on 8th March, 2021].

The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica (2021). “Chimera. Greek mythology”. In: Encyclopaedia Britannica. Available at <https://bit.ly/391nAqy>. [Accessed on 20th March, 2021].

Story of The Rock-Cut Tombs of Ancient Telmessus

Lycian Turkey is just one of numerous parts of the world, where monumental tombs were carved out of the rock to satisfy religious needs of contemporaries, who by all means wished their dead kings, rulers and relatives to find the right way to the afterlife. As it seems, the more large and intricate a tomb was, the more privileged the dead was and the more direct and straight was their journey to the next world.

Worldwide phenomenon

The idea of making rock-cut tombs is a very ancient one (Ching et al. 2010:173). The oldest known examples come from Egyptian Thebes as they date back to the sixteenth or fifteenth century BC. (the Middle Kingdom) (Ibid.:173). There are also Hittite rock-hewn sanctuaries, which were made in 1250 BC. (Ibid.:173). Examples of such sepulchral architecture can be also found in Italy and they belong to the so called Etruscan culture (from the eight to the third centuries BC.) (Ibid.:173). A huge necropolis of rock-cut tombs is also present near the town of Paphos, in Cyprus, where several tombs are designed in the form of an impluvium (Ibid.:173). The roc-cut tombs in Lycia on the southern coast of Turkey date back to the end of the fifth century BC. (Ibid.:173).

Nowadays, some of the tombs are largely damaged. In the time of their construction, there was a financial fine for any violation of the tombs. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

The custom of cutting the tombs out of the rock was brought further eastwards by Darius the First (522-486 BC.), whose own tomb was carved out of the cliffs (Ching et al. 2010:173:173). It is actually one of the four rock-cut tombs of Achaemenid kings at the site of Naqsh-e Rustam, near Persepolis, in modern-day Iran (“Tomb of Darius the Great” 2020). “They are all at a considerable height above the ground” (Ibid.), as much as the tombs in Lycia. One of the most impressive site with rock-hewn tombs of strikingly similar character are located in the lost city of the Nabateans, which is Petra, in Jordan (Ching et al. 2010:173; see: Markoe ed. 2003). They are said to have been built between 300 BC. and 200 AD. (Ching et al. 2010:173).  

Common but outstanding

Although rock-cut tombs were often made in imitation of traditional buildings, their construction techniques are very different (Ching et al. 2010:173).

The “Harpy Tomb” of Kybernis, a solid sandstone pillar with the sarcophagus of Kybernis on top (c. 480 BC). One of the best preserved examples of a typical Lycian pillar-tomb. Photo by Panegyrics of Granovetter (2010). CC BY 2.0. Photo and caption source: Photo source: “Lycia” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Masons building such sepulchral monuments must have started from the top of cliffs and continue downwards so that the discarded stones did fall down to destroy the new building elements (Ching et al. 2010:173). Working from the top down required a different type of planning and engineering (Ibid.:173). It is also significant to remember that such a technique was used not only for sepulchral architecture but also for temples (Ibid.:173). Buddhist chaityas or viharas in China and India, and Hindu caves (Ellora, Ajanta) probably go back to the third century BC. and were continued throughout the first millennium AD. (Ibid.:173). The same technique was equally applied for rock-carved churches in Cappadocia, Turkey (around 900 AD.), and in Lalibela, Ethiopia (around 1200 AD.) (Ibid.:173). What is unique is the fact that the same technique was also used in secular architecture, namely, in the case of urban buildings, like houses, carved out in solid rock at a mysterious ancient site of Tiermes, located on the edge of the Duero valley in modern-day Spain (Ibid.:173). The dating of the fortress, as it is referred to, is questionable (Kosmiczne opowieści 2017). Nevertheless, it is believed to have been carved either at the Celtiberian or Roman times, probably between the first century BC. and the first century AD. (Ibid.).

Tombs commemorating ancestors

Veneration, or even, worship for ancestors, was undoubtedly universal in the ancient world (Bean 1989:31).

One of the most impressive temple-tombs in Fethiye sepulchral complex. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

All peoples inhabiting Anatolia before the Greek colonization built beautiful, monumental tombs in commemoration of their ancestors; the Lycians developed this art to perfection, which was undoubtedly easy for them thanks to the soft sandstones found in their land (Miszczak 2009). Although early Lycian buildings were mostly overbuilt, as elsewhere in Asia Minor, first by Hellenistic and then Roman constructions, Lycia remains one of the best places in Anatolia, where the native culture of the region is still visible and can be admired at each step (Bean 1989:30). Although various foreign influences are visible in the Lycian monuments, they have yet retained its unique character (Bean 1989:20; Miszczak 2009).

Transporter of the souls

Many examples of the sepulchral art shows a high quality of still well-preserved mason work and are covered in tell-tale sculptures adorning the tombs (Bean 1989:30; Miszczak 2009). Reliefs depict, among others, mythological scenes, funeral feasts, battles and animals (Miszczak 2009).

Persian influence on the tombs is evident in the way scenes of feasts, battles and hunts are depicted, for example in the tombs of Xanthos, while he Greek influence is most clearly manifested in mythological scenes, for example, in the original Lycian representations of lions, the favourite royal symbol in this land (Ibid.). On the other side, the distinctive feature that distinguishes the Lycian tombs from the classical Greece and Rome is their location (Ibid.). While in the Greek and Roman cultures, the burial places of the dead were customarily located outside residential areas, often along the roads leading to cities, the Lycians made the tombs an integral part of the urban landscape, which is evidence of their relationship with contemporary cultures of the East (Ibid.). A good example is Patara, where monumental tombs are proudly presented along the port (Ibid.).

House-tombs in Fethiye. As their name indicate, they were built in a way imitating the wooden architecture of Lycia. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Accordingly, the Lycians interacted with the ghosts of their past by inviting them to their everyday life (Miszczak 2009). The Lycians seem to have believed that the souls of their dead relatives were transported from their tombs to the afterlife by winged mermaid-like creatures, represented as hybrid birds, so they often placed tombs along the coast or on top of steep cliffs to facilitate the task to the flying creatures (Ibid.). Round altars decorated with inscriptions or ornaments were often placed near the tombs (Ibid.). They were used to make offerings to the deceased (Ibid.). The offerings to the ancestors varied greatly, as can be seen from the finds from the tombs (Ibid.). Often these were terracotta statues and jewellery (Ibid.). After the Greek custom, the Lycian also put a coin in the mouths of the deceased, as a fee for Charon – the carrier (Ibid.). Sometimes it is even possible to determine the social status and profession of the dead, by means of a character of objects buried along them (Ibid.).

Cult of the dead and its legal protection

Owing to the rich legends and history of these lands, the landscape of all of Lycia is decorated with fascinating monuments of the past; the Lycian tombs scattered around the region mostly date back to the times before Alexander the Great (before 334-333 BC.) (Bean 1989:30; Miszczak 2009). Rock-hewn tombs and those of masonry are typical of the whole Asia Minor but they do not appear in such an abundance as in Lycia (Bean 1989:31). According to the latest research, there have remained one thousand eighty-five tombs carved in the rock in the land of Lycia, and partially also at its western border with Caria (Miszczak 2009).

Owing to the rich legends and history of these lands, the landscape of all of Lycia is decorated with fascinating monuments of the past; the Lycian tombs scattered around the region mostly date back to the times before Alexander the Great. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

An opportunity to see them all in our times should be at least partially ascribed to the fact that already in the times of ancient Lycians, the tombs had been carefully preserved from any damage of profanation, sometimes by a special committee, called the mindis (Bean 1989:31). Also epitaphs inscribed on Lycian tombs often end with a warning of uttering a curse or imposing  financial fine for any violation of the tombs (Ibid.:31). Later, the responsibility for the protection of the Lycian tombs was taken over by the city (Ibid.:31). Such efforts visibly show how important for the ancient was the cult of the dead and the places of their final rest (Ibid.:31).

The tombs of Lycia

The tombs of Lycia are usually divided into four separate categories, according to their distinctive features, namely pillar-tombs, temple-tombs, house-tombs and sarcophagi (Bean 1989:30).

The Lycians seem to have believed that the souls of their dead relatives were transported from their tombs to the afterlife by winged mermaid-like creatures, represented as hybrid birds, so they often placed tombs along the coast or on top of steep cliffs to facilitate the task to the flying creatures. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Most typical of Lycia are the pillar-tombs, which are also believed the earliest preserved of all (Ibid.:30). They mostly appear in the western part of the region and feature a huge rectangular pillar situated on the stone base, whereas at the top of it, there is a grave-chamber, additionally crowned with a massive cap-stone (Ibid.:30). Their sculptured surfaces are limited to the top sides of the grave-chamber, if such carved decoration appears at all (Ibid.:30-31). Temple-tombs present on their front temple facades in miniature, which is the Hellenistic influence having appeared since the fourth century BC. and therefore they are not exactly in Lycian artistic character, though they definitely used to express Lycian beliefs of the afterlife, as much as the previous category of the tombs (Bean 1989:30; Ching et al. 2010:173).

Temple-tombs are also typical of Caria (Caunus) and other parts of Anatolia (Bean 1989:30; see Bean, v.3 1989:139-151). However, those from Lycia slightly vary from the former; the façade of a temple is adorned with two columns in antis (two columns between antae) which are usually in Ionic order (Bean 1989:30). Such a façade also has an epistyle and a pediment (frontispiece) (Ibid.:30). A grave-chamber, which is a plain room with stone benches for the corpses, can be reached through the door from the porch (Ibid.:30). Similar interiors are characteristic of the third category, though its exteriors differ (Ibid.:30). House-tombs, as their name indicate, were built in a way imitating the wooden architecture of Lycia, namely one, two or three-storeys wooden houses, including the projecting square or round beam-ends above the door opening, which later developed into a dentil frieze (Bean 1989:30; Ching et al. 2010:173).

Numerous examples of different tomb types are encrusted together in the cliff-face in Fethiye; two of them belong to the category of temple-tombs, whereas the lowest ones are of house-type. The rest of the tombs resemble pigeon-holes. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Sometimes, their façades feature a pediment that can be in the form of a pointed arch, similar to the one in the Gothic style (Bean 1989:30). The walls of this type of Lycian tombs usually are carved in relief, which also appear in the pediment, and occasionally on the adjacent rocks (Ibid.:30-31). When it comes to the last category, it was very common in the contemporary world, however, the early Lycian sarcophagi vary from typical forms of generally known tombs (Ibid.:30). Firstly, the Lycian version is much higher and is composed of the three successive parts: a base, which played the role of hyposorion (a second grave-chamber for the owner’s dependants), an actual grave-chamber, and a crested, ‘Gothic’-like massive lid, which are both frequently in reliefs (Ibid.:30-31). In the Roman times, the Lycian sarcophagi diminished in size and intricacy, and the corner of their lids, yet still with the crest, became rounded (Ibid.:31). Apart from those four major categories of the Lycian tombs, there also exist their different variations (Ibid.:31).

Telmessus or Fethiye?

The finest specimens of the Lycian tombs are at the ancient site of Telmessus or Telmessos, located by the Aegean Sea, in Lycia (Bean 1989:40). The city’s name was only changed in the eighth century to Anastasioupolis, in order to commemorate Anastasios the Second, the Byzantine Emperor, who ruled from 713 to 715 (Bean 1989:39; “Telmessos” 2021).

View of Fethiye Marina. The modern city of Fethiye was once known as Makre or Makri, which in Greek means ‘long one’, referring to the name of the island at the entrance to the harbour. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

That name, however, had been forgotten till the tenth century, when the city was commonly known as Makre or Makri, which in Greek means ‘long one’, referring to the name of the island at the entrance to the harbour (Bean 1989:39; “Telmessos” 2021). Finally, in the twentieth century, the city was renamed as Fethiye and it is called so in present (Bean 1989:39; “Telmessos” 2021). The town and its district, incorporating a long beach, Çaliş Plaji (Beach), with an extensive promenade along the coast, on which a row of hotels are based, remain today one of the most prominent tourist destinations in the Turkish Riviera (“Fethiye” 2021). Fethiye is slipped away in the south corner of the gulf, and although it is quite hot in summer there, a fresh breeze coming from the sea makes the heat tolerable (Bean 1989:38), which is contrary to Alanya in the Mediterranean region, where the humidity reaches in summer 100%, and at around 40 degrees one feels boiling hot.

During our three-week stay in Fethiye, I visited the city a few times to enjoy its ancient remains and silent atmosphere of its streets. At that time I was spending my holidays with my little sister, Agnieszka, and my aunt’s large family (see: Island of the Sun in Favour of Gods). As my uncle is a university lecturer of Fine Arts and a real devotee of antique art, he seizes any occasion to sightsee, even though his family prefers to spend their time in a slightly different manner. Once we all headed off to Fethiye for the best döner kebab in the area. Afterwards, we decided to wander around the town in search of its ancient remains, which are scattered within its modern boundaries.

Little known site with monumental architecture

Unfortunately, very little is known about the origins of the ancient site of Fethiye (Bean 1989:38). Although its monuments feature Lycian inscriptions, it does not appear as Lycian at first in history (Ibid.:38). After some records, in the fourth century BC., the Lycian dynast, Pericles, fought against the Telmessians and besieged their city (Ibid.:38). Since then, Telmessus had become a part of Lycia, as it is attested by a contemporary historian, known as Scylax (Ibid.:38).

Historic map of Fethiye by Piri Reis (c. 1465 – 1553). Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons by Hayk using CommonsHelper (2006). Public domain. Photo cropped. Photo and caption source: “Fethiye” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Naturally, it had also been a member of the Lycian League till the time Lycia stayed under the Roman Empire (Ibid.:38). The Telmessians held then a peaceful agreement with Alexander the Great (334-333 BC.), and at the time of by Ptolemy the Third, in 240 BC., the city was offered to Ptolemy, son of Lysimachus (Ibid.:38-39). After the battle of Magnesia, in 189 BC., it was handed over by the Romans to Eumenes of Pergamum and it stayed within the Pergamene kingdom till its end, in 133 BC. (Ibid.:39). Consequently, it was then included to the Roman province of Asia (Ibid.:39). Yet in the first century BC. the city possibly did not belong to Lycia anymore (Ibid.:38).

Treasure is either underground or high-up

First, we decided to take a closer look of the famous Lycian rock-hewn tombs; so far we had just had an occasion to catch a tantalising glimpse of their façades and mysterious openings in the hillsides, from the distance, while we were travelling by bus through the region. The major group of the tombs of Telmessus are located on the east, just outside the modern town (Bean 1989:40). Numerous examples of different types are encrusted together in the cliff-face; two of them belong to the category of temple-tombs, whereas the lowest ones are of house-type, in two or three storeys, and are much smaller than those of the previous group (Ibid.:40). The rest of the tombs resemble pigeon-holes (Ibid.:40). They are all cut in the rock, encrusting the hillside, which looks out on to the east and west (Ibid.:40). Some of them may be reached by a stone staircase or by the strength of one’s own muscles, while climbing up the hill (Ibid.:40). Nevertheless, others are more or less inaccessible without special equipment (Ibid.:40).

Who was Amyntas?

The most impressive of all the tombs of Telmessus is situated to the right of the major group and can be easily reached by visitors (Bean 1989:40).

An inscription from the fourth century BC. on the left-hand pilaster of the tomb, reveals the name of “Amyntou tou Ermagiou”, which stands for Amyntas son of Hermapias Although, such a name is unknown in history, it could have been a person of importance due to the size and masonic mastery of his tomb. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Obviously, I was to climb the hill to see the details of the ancient grave. Together with my uncle, we quickly left behind other members of our family, who were walking lazily up towards the monument. From the foot of the hill, we were led up there by a modern stepped zig-zag path, which directs straight to the most famous and magnificent of all the tombs (Ibid.:40). It clearly manifests its temple façade, which is already very easily seen for those who look at it from below the hill (Ibid.:40). Nevertheless, only at closer look, this temple-tomb fully demonstrates its monumental size (Ibid.:40). At the foot of the tomb, there are yet four steps to reach the porch in the Ionic order, characterized by two columns in antis (Ibid.:40), of which the left-hand is broken at its base. Each pilaster features a row of three rosettes at their top (Ibid.:40). They are surmounted by a pediment (fronton) with three acroteria, mounted at its apex and its two corners; unfortunately, two of them bear the traces of large damage (Ibid.:40). Below the pediment, there is a dentil frieze, also known as a teethed cornice, which in this category of the tombs exchanged the wooden ornamental elements carrying the roofs in Lycian houses (Bean 1989:30, 40; Dosseman 2019).

Fethiye Rock graves Amyntas tomb. Photo by Dosseman (2019). CC BY-SA 4.0. Photo and caption source: “Tomb of Amyntas” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

These were in turn also imitated in stone by the Lycian house-tombs (Bean 1989:30; Dosseman 2019). An inscription from the fourth century BC. on the left-hand pilaster, reveals the name of “Amyntou tou Ermagiou”, which stands for Amyntas son of Hermapias (Bean 1989:40; Dosseman 2019). Although, such a name is unknown in history, it could have been a person of importance due to the size and masonic mastery of his tomb (Ibid.:40).

Robbers and vandals have already done their job

From the space of the porch (the narthex), I could see in detail the massive double doors to the grave chamber, which in Greek architecture, were hidden from the outside view by a portico; the door of the tomb is believed to be the most ancient and best preserved in Greek art, which greatly influenced this type of the Lycian tombs (Bean 1989:40; Dosseman 2019).

Amyntas Tomb among Fethiye rock – cut tombs. Photo by Dosseman (2019). CC BY-SA 4.0. Photo and caption source: “Tomb of Amyntas” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

My uncle had already stayed in front of it, analyzing its particular components. The imitated doorway opening of the grave-chamber is squared and framed by mouldings; additionally, above it, there is a protruding moulded cornice supported on console brackets in the form of volutes. The stone surface of the door is divided into four panels, which are additionally covered in decorations imitating iron studs (Bean 1989:40). It was possible to enter the chamber through the bottom right panel, initially sealed with a sliding stone slab (Ibid.:40). It the recent past, it has been damaged by grave robbers who broke into the chamber; as a result, the entrance now remains open (Ibid.:40). When we both came through the broken panel, we found ourselves inside a single chamber with a flat ceiling and three separate benches hewn in the rock along the sides of the walls, where the dead used to be deposited (Ibid.:40). Some modern ‘vandals’ had decided the grave chamber would have been the best place to confess their love, as the walls have been covered in graffiti inscriptions in black and red paint (Dosseman 2019).

When we finally decided to come back, we realised we were alone in front of the tomb, and our family had been lost somewhere on the way up. After a while, we clearly discerned colourful figures on descend the hill; they were sitting down or impatiently looking in our direction. Deeply engaged in studying the tomb, we only now understood they had never climbed up the hill with us.

Sarcophagus outside the city centre

Apart from the visited site, there are many more tombs of different types within and around Fethiye (Bean 1989:40). Possibly, the best preserved and the most excellent in all Lycia is the tomb of sarcophagus category, which now stands beside the municipal building of the town (Ibid.:40). Like the Tomb of Amyntas, the sarcophagus dates back to the fourth century BC. (“Telmessos” 2021).  Its façade imitates two-storey wooden building with protruding house-beams (Bean 1989:40). However, the most interesting is its ‘Gothic’ arched lid that, along with the surmounting crest, is richly covered in reliefs, representing warriors (Ibid.:40-41). The ends of the lid, likewise the ends of the main chamber, are divided into four squared panels (Ibid.:40-41).

My sister and cousins resting at the stones of the Theater, in the shadow of massive blocks of stairs and surrounded by dispersed remains of decorated architectural elements. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Telmessos Theater

Our sightseeing of Fethiye finished just behind the city harbour, where there are remains of one of the two theaters of Telmessus that remind today a trace of the Roman times of Lycia (Bean 1989:41; TripHobo 2021). The so-called Telmessos Theatre is actually dated back to the Late Hellenistic, which is supported by the sign on the site, and it was reused by the Romans who added the stage in the second century BC. (Fethiye 2021). What has been preserved are seating stairs and reddish walls surrounding a huge space of the amphitheater, which was once designed for six thousand spectators on twenty-eight rows. (TripHobo 2021; Fethiye 2021). We were resting there for a while, in the shadow of massive blocks of stairs and surrounded by dispersed remains of decorated architectural elements.

The remains of one of the two theaters of Telmessus that remind today a trace of the Roman times of Lycia. What has been preserved are seating stairs and reddish walls surrounding a huge space of the amphitheater, which was once designed for six thousand spectators on twenty-eight rows. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

In the late afternoon, full of excitement after experiencing the Lycian past, I finally left the hot city of Fethiye, and with the rest of the tired group we went back to the sandy shores, washed by the refreshing sea waves.

Featured image: The most impressive of all the tombs of Telmessus is situated to the right of the major group and can be easily reached by visitors. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

By Joanna
Faculties of English Philology, History of Art and Archaeology.
University of Silesia in Katowice, Poland;
Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw, Poland;
University College Dublin, Ireland.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

“Fethiye” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3bHABY4>. [Accessed on 13th March, 2021].

“Lycia” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3dQEJEV>. [Accessed on 10th April, 2021].

“Telmessos” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3cqsqOZ>. [Accessed on 13th March, 2021].

“Tomb of Amyntas” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3lbH68H>. [Accessed on 13th March, 2021].

“Tomb of Darius the Great” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/38rzGJ6>. [Accessed on 10th March, 2021].

Bean G. E. (1989). Lycian Turkey. An Archaeological Guide, Vol. 4. London: John Murray Publishers.

Bean G. E. (1989). Turkey Beyond the Meander. An Archaeological Guide, Vol. 3. London: John Murray Publishers.

Ching F. D.K., Jarzombek M. M., Prakash V. (2010). A Global History of Architecture. USA: Wiley Publishing. The Second Edition.

Dosseman (2019). In: “Tomb of Amyntas” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3wL1Au2>. [Accessed on 13th March, 2021].

Kosmiczne opowieści (2017). ”Zagadka Tiermes – starożytna budowla która pozostaje tajemnicą”. In: Kosmiczne opowieści Youtube Channel. Available at <https://bit.ly/3ccRpoQ>. [Accessed on 10th March, 2021].

Markoe G. ed. (2003). Petra Rediscovered. London: Thames & Hudson Ltd.

Miszczak I. (2009). ”Dzieje Licyjczyków”. In: Miszczak I., Miszczak J. Turcja w sandałach. Available at <https://bit.ly/3kVybIh>. [Accessed on 8th March, 2021].

TripHobo (2021). “Roman Theatre, Fethiye”. In: TripHobo. Available at <https://bit.ly/3eCrzgO>. [Accessed on 13th March, 2021].

Noah’s Beasts Released on the Hills of Göbekli Tepe

Perhaps the key to understanding the site of Göbekli Tepe lies in its impressive carvings situated on the cluster of pillars (Conrad 2012). As described in my previous article (see: The Oldest Temple in the World and its Mystery), they are ‘T’-shaped and decorated with strange zoomorphic imagery. The latter represent elaborate and naturalistic animal characters, both in low, high and full relief, showing three-dimensional figures, signifying improbable menagerie (Conrad 2012; Noren 2020).

Images of various animals found, including birds and insects, all in all, create an astonishing menagerie that continues to amaze archaeologists who have studied the site to this day (Burns 2010). An archaeologist, Paul Bahn, PhD., admits that there is no other archaeological site in the world with a similar variety of zoomorphic representations in stone (Burns 2017). Their juxtaposition is also interesting (Ibid.). Therefore, there are many different speculations concerning their interpretation; for example, an author, Andrew Collins, suspects that Noah’s Ark had actually been immortalized on the stones of the site, as if it had been a livestock inventory of the Ark (Burns 2010; 2017). Discovered five hundred kilometres south of Mount Ararat, considered by Biblical scholars to be the resting place of Noah’s Ark, the reliefs of Göbekli Tepe suggest that certain species of animals come from other regions than it has been previously considered (Ibid.). Could these sculptures prove that the memories of the Great Flood described in the Bible and its aftermath were preserved by the builders of Göbekli Tepe? (Ibid.). Some researchers believe that the traces of this cataclysm and the story of Noah’s Ark were actually written on the stone pillars (Ibid.). If so, the Great Flood would have occurred at the end of what scientists call the end of the Ice Age (Ibid.).

Stone Age masterpiece of sculpture

Sumber sci-news.com/mage credit: by Nico Becker, Göbekli Tepe Archive, German Archaeological Institute, DAI. Source: Kompasiana (2018).

The mystery of the imagery of the site became even greater when discovered reliefs have revealed animal species that have never been endemic to the region, such as geese, armadillos or wild boars (Burns 2017). Moreover, the masterpiece of the sculpture found also suggests their builders must have been highly advanced artists with engineering skills, taking into account the fact there is no trace of their tools in situ (Conrad 2012). Physical characteristics of the animals carved are very clearly depicted (Ibid.). In many cases anatomical details openly express a rather aggressive attitude, embodied by their posture and grinning teeth (Ibid.).

T-shaped pillars and their flock

Klaus Schmidt argues that the animal component of the site is crucial in its iconographic interpretation (Conrad 2012). According to the Professor, represented animals have mainly wild, male and predatory connotations (Busacca 2017:313-314). He interprets the zoomorphic depictions either as having a protective role as the guardians of the pillars (especially high-relief sculpture), or being a part of a horrifying spectacle (Conrad 2012; Busacca 2017).

Eastern central pillar of Enclosure D. Image cropped. Photo by Nico Becker, DAI. Photo and caption source: German Archaeological Institute (DAI) (2020). “The Site”. In: The Tepe Telegrams. News & Notes from the Göbekli Tepe Research Staff.

The ‘T’-shaped pillars, as he points out, are in turn the abstract representations of human bodies with the upper part resembling a man’s head in profile, the shaft of the ‘T’ standing for the human corpus, with arms, palms and fingers incised in stone (Conrad 2012; Busacca 2017). Below them, there is the representation of a belt encircling the pillar with loincloth looking like an animal skin (Ibid.). Such features as the hands with elongated fingers on the stomach, around the the navel area, amazingly reappear on other ancient representations in the wold (Burns 2017). Such a motif repeats, for example, carved in the great Moai statues on the Easter Island (Ibid.) or even on sculpted stone fragments crumbling among the old-Irish idols at the cemetery on the Boa Island, in Northern Island. They equally occur on anthropomorphic menhirs in France, Italy, Romania and elsewhere in the world (Ibid.). A similar iconographic element in some a way joins all these statues of different cultures and age and so testifies to the fact that Göbekli Tepe may not have developped in isolation, but was a part of a worldwide, prehistoric culture that once existed (Ibid.). Or it itself may have given rise to a later universal iconography by means of its mysterious heritage (Ibid.). Are the anthropomorphic statues from Göbekli Tepe and other parts of the world a carved in stone story of an alien race that lived on the earth before the cataclysm? (Ibid.). If so, maybe such monuments were erected in places where people were rebuilding civilization after the Great Flood (Ibid.). Maybe the builders of the site tried to save from oblivion what had taken place about 12,000 years ago? (Ibid.).

Professor Schmidt says that the ‘T’-shaped pillars are gathered on the hillside as if there was “a meeting of stone beings” (Scham 2008:27). Despite their anthropomorphic features, the pillars are deprived of facial features, which makes Schmidt think that the human-like monoliths personify spiritual beings, and probably they are the earliest imagery of deities or god-like ancestors (Conrad 2012). Accordingly, Schmidt also suggests that the disintegrated now temple doorway could metaphorically have stood for the entrance to the netherworld (Conrad 2012). If so, Göbekli Tepe must have been related to the cult of the death (Ibid.).

One of the most enigmatic symbology shown on the ‘T’-shaped pillar 43 with vultures flying above the scorpion. Source: Sandra Scham (2008:25). The World’s First Temple. Archaeology, v. 61, no. 6, New York: Archaeological Institute of America, pp. 22-27.

Vital to creating that dark world are the creatures carved on the pillars (Conrad 2012). It is not even difficult to imagine the site as a temple devoted to the dead, especially at night, when the portal leading to the flickering by the fire netherworld may have involved humans into strange rituals performed beneath the monumental human-like pillars, dressed up with the aggressive elements of nature (Ibid.). In the course of ritual performances, including sound, scents and probably under shamanic drug haze, the images on the pillars may have seemed alive and active (Busacca 2017). Gusaldo Busacca (2017), a PhD. student at Stanford University, admits, however, that very little can be said on the purpose and nature of such rituals. Some kind of ritual paraphernalia have been found at the site, such as benches, niches (altars), cup holes and limestone vessels, probably used for libations to the spirits and extensive feasting (Schmidt, 2010; Dietrich et al. 2012).

According to Klaus Schmidt, the site may have been also a pilgrimage location (Scham 2008:26). He assumes “that once pilgrims reached Göbekli Tepe, they made animal sacrifices” (Ibid.:26). That theory is supported by the archaeological finds of animal bones belonging to various species, such as gazelles, goats, boars, sheep, wild birds and so on (Scham 2008; Busacca 2017). Most of these animals belong to the carved menagerie in question (Ibid.).

What was first: religion or civilisation?

As Prof. Joris Peters notices, although the animistic nature dominates in the Palaeolithic art of the caves, at Göbekli Tepe the control over the nature is visibly taken by humans in the disguise of the ‘T’-shaped pillars (Conrad 2012).

Pillar 27 from Enclosure C with the three-dimensional sculpture of an animal catching a prey in low relief below. Photo (2008). Public domain. Source: “Göbekli Tepe” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Schmidt also notices that all the zoomorphic images are carved only below the so-called head of the pillars, which suggests that people had already became superior to animals (Conrad 2012). Gods themselves had left their animal disguise and started to look like humans (Ibid.). As Schmidt underlines, such imagery may reveal the Stone Age man’s desire for having control over the nature (Ibid.). The new religion gave humans an enormous psychological advantage (Ibid.). It placed people above the animals and above nature, and that mental leap forward, as Prof. Joris Peters says, was needed to start to domesticate animals and plants (Ibid.). Accordingly, it was first the urge to worship that sparked civilization (Ibid.). The theory is yet radical: namely, it suggests that it was the religion itself which brought people to farming, and not the other way round, as it has been believed so far… (Ibid.). In this context, Göbekli Tepe would have been a dramatic point in mankind development (Ibid.).

The hardest challenge that archaeologists have to face

Gusaldo Busacca (2017) underlines in his study of Göbekli Tepe that he takes “the hardest challenge that archaeologists have to face” (Ibid.:313) due to fragmentary evidence, time and cultural distance, and finally lack of written sources or oral traditions (Ibid.). Many scholars working at the site have already proposed their interpretations of the complex animal symbolism present there by using different contexts, such as shamanism (Benz & Bauer, 2015; Lewis – Williams & Pearce 2009), human-animal linkage (Verhoeven 2002), and burial rituals (Schmidt 2012), with a particular emphasis on the aggressive attitudes, predatory and wild aspects of the depicted animals. Other scholars also identify phallocentrism (the ideology that the male aspect is the central element in the organization of the social world) (“Phallocentrism” 2019), as the major symbolic theme of the most aggressive representations at the site (Hodder and Meskell 2011).

Most of the ‘T’-shaped pillars at the site show wild animals, such as lions/leopards. Source: Sandra Scham (2008:22). The World’s First Temple. Archaeology, v. 61, no. 6, New York: Archaeological Institute of America, pp. 22-27

Basing on Schmidt’s research, Busacca (2017) claims that the most frequently represented animals are snakes, then foxes, boars, bulls and wild ducks. Less often motifs include cranes, spiders, quadrupeds, vultures, wild sheep, asses, gazelles and felids (Ibid.). Although the majority of depicted animals belong to predatory and venomous species, it is worth remarking there are also non-dangerous animals in the iconographic repertoire (Ibid.). Along the zoomorphic imagery, there are also abstract motifs, especially ‘H’- shaped pictograms, as well as some anthropomorphic motifs, like headless human bodies, which would suit the theory the temple was dedicated to the dead (Conrad 2012; Busacca 2017). Furthermore, Busacca (2017:316) notices that “the depicted motifs and their distribution vary markedly throughout the four main enclosures.”

Further attempts of interpretation

In terms of animistic ontology, Busacca (2017) focuses on exploring the role of images as a category of animated non-human beings (Ibid.).

Pillar with the sculpture of a fox. Photo by Zhengan (2012). CC BY-SA. Source: “Göbekli Tepe” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

He calls these images “composite entities constituted by both material and immaterial components” (Ibid.:315) as they are placed between two different spaces: the present and the absent, the visible and the invisible (Belting, 2011). The scholar argues that prehistoric artists may have believed that the act of making an image sparked a specific relation between the carver and the spirit inside the material medium (Busacca 2017:315-316). The carver did not create an animal out of the stone but he released it (Carpenter 1973). In this context, the zoomorphic images should be reconsidered as active participants between humans and material objects (Busacca 2017:315-316). Animals do not simply represent but they are material personification of animal spirits (Ibid.:315-316). The author also underlines the importance of their location within the architectural space in which they first appeared (Ibid.:315-316).

As the author remarks, the zoomorphic imagery has been mainly defined as a human concern with wild animals, “masculinity and violence prior to the ‘domestication of symbols’ that accompanied the transition toward agriculture and settled life” (Busacca 2017:319). The violent part of the iconography can be also linked to the dominant agents in prehistoric communities, identified as shamans (Benz & Bauer 2013). Another researcher, Borić (2013:54) claims that the dynamic and narrative postures of the carved beasts are the notions of “strong, dangerous spirits lurking beneath the skin of the depicted animals” (Borić 2013:54). Quite innovative interpretation is proposed by Yeşilyurt (2014) who argues that the site should be interpreted as prehistoric research laboratory, where the representations of animals actually illustrate research carried out on specific species.

Stone Age menagerie in motion

Busacca (2017:322) also analyses the sculpture in the context of stylistic features, such as the dynamism and movement of the animal figures. In order to refer to stylistic techniques used at Göbekli Tepe, the author has borrowed the terminology used in the studies on Franco-Cantabrian Upper Palaeolithic rock art, where similar style can be observed (Ibid.:322). Nevertheless, he underlines that “these similarities in techniques of visual representations should not be considered evidence of direct contact, ancestry or diffusion, but as independent, though similar, phenomena” (Ibid:322).

The use of ‘split action’ in the depiction of possible bird figures. Photo by Klaus-Peter Simon (2012). CC BY-SA 3.0. Source: “Göbekli Tepe” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

The movement is shown at Göbekli Tepe by means of two major techniques which seem to have been applied selectively only to certain types of animals depicted (Ibid.:322). Both predatory and non-predatory species, including gazelle, wild ass and crane, have their legs bent and/or are caught in oblique position (postural information) which generates some sort of motion (Ibid.:322). The wavy lines of the snake depictions are equally the representations of movement (Ibid.:322). Also the use of ‘split action’ technique is applied by the reiteration (superimposition or juxtaposition) of the subject, where an animal is depicted at successive stages in time (Ibid.:322). Examples of such artistic approach is clearly shown in the representations of water birds, especially wild ducks (Enclosures C and D) (Ibid.:322).  

Description of the stylistic traits is followed by an analysis of the orientation of the carved imagery (Busacca 2017:313,324). To conduct the study, the author makes a distinction between the central  pillars, which are those arranged in pairs, usually larger in size, and radial pillars – those arranged along the enclosures (Ibid.:313,324).

Internal subdivision of T-shaped pillars Photo by Irmgard Wagner, German Archaeological Institute (DAI) (modified). Source: Gesualdo Busacca (2017:322). “Places of Encounter: Relational Ontologies, Animal Depiction and Ritual Performance at Göbekli Tepe”. In: Cambridge Archaeological Journal, v. 27, issue 2, pp. 313-330.

Radial pillars have been furthermore subdivided into two groups, frontal and lateral (Ibid.:313,324). All the locations of the carvings on pillars have been clearly labelled by means of simple abbreviations that the author has provided together with the photographs illustrating his concept (Ibid.:313,322,324). Accordingly, he marked them as follows: ‘FH’, ‘BS’, ‘LH’, ‘LS’, where ‘F’ stands for frontal, ‘B’ for back, ‘H’ for head ‘S’ for side, ‘L’ for lateral and left in some cases (Ibid.:313,322,324). Taking into consideration the lateral sides of the radial pillars, the author notices that 29 out of 34 total animals depicted on the pillars are facing toward the centre of the enclosure (Ibid.:313,322,324). High relief and full relief sculptures also indicate a centripetal orientation (Ibid.:313,322,324). As the author suggests “emerging from the walls or from the top of them with their full bodies or only with the head, these sculptures suggestively resonate with the general impression of a centripetal ‘jump’ of the animals into the enclosures”(Busacca 2017: 324).

On the other hand, the bas-reliefs carved on the frontal sides are facing either downwards or upwards or the right or left (Ibid.:313,322,324). Hence their pattern is less clear to be easily defined (Ibid.:313,322,324). The author suggests that the dynamism and mostly centripetal orientation of zoomorphic depictions may refer to the liminal space of the enclosure calling for animal spirits to its centre (Ibid.:313,322,324). Providing that the ‘T’- shaped pillars represent anthropomorphic spiritual beings, as mentioned above (Schmidt 2010), the enclosures can be identified as places of encounter between humans and animal spirits (Busacca 2017:313,322,324). In this context zoomorphic images play the role of the bridge between human and non-human beings (Ibid.:313,322,324).

Pillar 2 from Enclosure A with low reliefs of possibly a bull, fox and a crane. Photo by Teomancimit  (2011).CC BY-SA 3.0. Source: “Göbekli Tepe” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Busacca (2017) also emphasizes the importance of the iconographic repertoire in any attempt of interpreting enigmatic functions of Göbekli Tepe. Unlike in post-agricultural societies within which wild animals meant danger and wilderness, hunter-gatherers would have had rather social and inter-personal attitudes towards such beasts, still without excluding the always present threat of their violence, which is probably expressed by aggressive aspects of zoomorphic representations (Ibid.:327). The author suggests that “socialising with the animal on the peer-to-peer basis would be just another way of ‘domesticating’ the animal without bringing it under complete human control” (Ibid.:327). Such an idea, however, would contradict the interpretation proposed by Schmidt, according to which the carved ‘T’- shaped pillars at Göbekli Tepe show humans completely superior to animals. Although Schmidt’s assumption does not negate the whole idea of ontological relations between humans and animals, their character would be quite different from that defined by Busacca (2017).

Vulture Stone

On the other side, some independent researchers, such as Paul Burley (2013), Graham Hancock (2016) and Martin Sweatman (2019) claim that at least a few zoomorphic representations on the pillars of Göbekli Tepe are grouped and arranged in a way to create the sky map. Such features are mainly revealed by the limestone ‘T’- shaped Pillar 43, also known under an intriguing name of the “Vulture Stone”, which is incorporated along with other ‘T-‘-shaped pillars of a similar height into the stone wall on the north-west side of the Enclosure D (Burley 2013; Sweatman 2019:22). The latter, in turn, comes from the Layer III, which is not only the oldest, and hence the lowest in the ground, but also distinguished by a variety of mysterious thematic aspects and sophisticated artistic depictions (Fleckney 2020). Whereas the wall of the Enclosure D, made of rough stones, is radiocarbon dated back to over 9 500 BC., the pillars embedded in it definitely predate it (Sweatman 2019:22). It is also worth mentioning that again we are dealing here with the phenomenon where more ancient finds are more advanced in many respects than those dated as being more recent.

Göbekli Tepe. Photo by Zhengan (2012). CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: “Göbekli Tepe” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Since the Pillar 43 started to be regularly studied, it has become widely iconic for the site of Göbekli Tepe (Sweatman 2019:22). It is simultaneously one of the most mysterious and captivating human imagination objects yet found in situ. The pillar does not belong to the greatest of the site; it is three metres tall, one and a half metre wide, a half metre thick, and weighs around five tons (Ibid.:22). The key to its popularity, however, has turned out to be its outstanding iconography. Not only does it include a clearly defined group of various animals but also an ithyphallic and headless anthropomorphic figure (Sweatman 2019:22; Fleckney 2020). The whole imagery is further enriched and so complicated by a set of abstract symbols, which, moreover, seem reminiscent of so far undecipherable images appearing in different ancient cultures, including Ancient Egypt, Assyria (Iraq), the Olmecs (La Venta, Mexico), and even Pumapunku (Bolivia).

Zoo of the shaft

All the carvings covering the Pillar 43 are in low relief (Burley 2013). Starting from the bottom of the shaft, there is a bird head upon a long neck, possibly belonging to a goose (Sweatman 2019:22). Just behind the bird’s neck, on the right, a figure of a headless man appears (Ibid.:24). Right there, the bottom corner of the pillar is broken. Still on the shaft, above the bird’s head, there is a clearly defined, huge scorpion, crawling upwards, whereas on the left of the long-necked bird and the scorpion, one can discern the head and front legs of another animal, probably a quadruped of some type, like a wolf (Ibid.:22-23). Just above its head, there is either an animal tail or a snake, maybe a viper, with a triangular end, looking like an arrow.

The bird king with its scepter on the pillar head

Moving to the ‘T’-shaped pillar head, on the left, there is the largest image of all, which has eventually given the name to the pillar (Sweatman 2019:22). Precisely, it represents some kind of a bird of pray, probably and eagle or a vulture with its wings outstretched, which may suggest it was depicted in flight (Ibid.:22).

The Goddess Nekhbet, Temple of Hatshepsut, circa 1479 –1458 B.C. Wikimedia Commons as part of a project by the Metropolitan Museum of Art MET. By Charles K. Wilkinson. Uploaded by Pharos (2017). CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. Photo and caption source: Wikimedia Commons.

In its iconography, the bird looks like a strongly stylized representation of the ancient Egyptian vulture, personifying Nekhbet, “an early predynastic local goddess in Egyptian mythology, who was [originally] the patron of the city of Nekheb […]. Ultimately, she became the patron of Upper Egypt and one of the two patron deities for all of Ancient Egypt when it was unified. […] Nekhbet usually was depicted hovering, with her wings spread above the royal image, clutching a shen symbol, representing eternal encircling protection, frequently in her claws” (“Nekhbet” 2021). The said shen symbol additionally resembles a plain circle beside the vulture’s outstretched wing from the Pillar 43. The significant difference between these two images, however, is the placement of the disc in the both cases.

On the Pillar 43 at Göbekli Tepe, unlike in Egyptian images, the vulture’s left wing seems to hold or horizontally support the disc, which, hovering above it, is situated centrally on the pillar head and so in the middle of the visual context of the whole scene (Sweatman 2019:22; Burley 2013). By these means, the disc provides a sense of an order on the pillar’s surface, which at first sight, seems to be just filled in with randomly depicted elements (Burley 2013). In the right lower corner of the pillar head, another stylized figure of a bird is depicted, possibly of the same species as its larger companion, as they both feature the same hooked beak (Sweatman 2019:22-23). Or maybe, it is just the same individual but depicted in motion, as it is visible in other carved images on pillars?

Long-body creature with an arrow

The example of the believed image of a snake, represented in carving on the back of a stone human head from Nevalı Çori. Artifact photographed at Şanliurfa Museum, Turkey (early Neolithic period, 8400-8100 BC.). Photo by Vincent J. Musi. Originally published by National Geographic. Photo and caption source: Prata E. (2011). “The Mystery of Gobekli Tepe”. In: The End Time.

The most interesting of all, however, is the top part of the pillar head. To the upper-right of the title bird character, there is a bird with long legs, looking like a flamingo (Sweatman 2019:23). Between its beak and lifted thin legs, there is an undecipherable image, which Martin Sweatman (2019:23) compares to a “wriggling fish in [the flamingo’s] beak”. For myself, the element more resemble a snake with a tail or a head ending in an arrow, like in the fragmented image on the shaft of the same pillar or on other T-shaped pillars of Göbekli Tepe, featuring similar representations (Johannes 2005; Courtesy of the Göbekli Tepe Project, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut 2005). One creature of this kind is also present at the back of a sculpted human head from Nevalı Çori (Şanliurfa Museum, Turkey) (Prata 2011; see: The Oldest Temple in the World and its Mystery).

From letter symbols to handbags

To the very right of that duo of the flamingo and the snake, aka fish, there is an abstract symbol resembling a squat letter ‘H’ and, slightly above a letter ‘I’ or just the same letter ‘H’ but turned 90° right (Sweatman 2019:23). Above the flamingo’s back, in turn, there appears a frieze-like stretch, interrupted on the left by the vulture’s head and equally by additional components above, yet it stretches to the very top of the pillar head. It is composed of two rows of interlocked symbols in the shape of the letter ‘V’, which all appear on both sides of the narrow and horizontal belt of squares (Ibid.:23).

Finally, in the upper part of the ‘frieze’ and so of the pillar head itself, there is a row of the three mentioned elements, generally compared to ‘handbags’ (Sweatman 2019:23), though my eight-years old nephew claims these are padlocks …

Some of the so-called ‘H’-blocks which were interconnected (or intended to interconnect) with other andesite blocks forming blind miniature gateways. The shape of the blocks are sometimes compared to the ‘H’ symbol from the “Vulture Stone”. Photo by Janikorpi (2011). CC BY-SA 3.0. Photo and caption source: “Pumapunku” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Such strange components as the ‘handbags’, found among a zoomorphic gathering, become even stranger if one realizes that they also appear in other ancient cultures; namely, they are being carried by winged geniuses in Assyrian reliefs (between 2000-600 BC.) or by an Olmec from La Venta, travelling ‘inside’ a feathered serpent (between 1800 BC.-200 AD.). In the Pillar 43, each ‘handbag’ is additionally coupled with an animal character (Ibid.:23). Yet, all the three are difficult to be recognized as particular species (Ibid.:23). The left-most one resembles a minuscule version of the bent flamingo (Ibid.:23), depicted below, the middle one represents a quadruped, which Martin Sweatman (2019:23) interprets as a “standing or charging […] gazelle, goat or ibex, with large horns or ears bent backwards over the body”, whereas the animal on the most-right, seems to crawl downwards, like a lizard or a frog (Ibid.:23).

Constellations inscribed the outlines of the animals

Although the actual function of Göbekli Tepe is still a mystery, an author, Andrew Collins, proposes a theory, suggesting the site was erected for reflecting celestial phenomena (Burns 2017; see: The Oldest Temple in the World and its Mystery). Accordingly, the successive circles of the site with its elaborate stone ‘T’-shaped pillars and, finally, their complex iconography would have their astronomical meaning (Burley 2013; Sweatman 2019). In line with such assumptions are also theories related to the Pillar 43. Martin Sweatman (2019:24) studies a hypothesis proposed by Paul Burley (2013) and Graham Hancock (2016), according to which the title vulture occupying the pillar head represents the modern-day constellation of Sagittarius and the huge scorpion crawling on the shaft, the constellation of Scorpius. Additionally, the duo of a flamingo and a snake with an arrow would represent the so-called thirteenth sign of the zodiac, Ophiuchus (Sweatman 2019:24; see Hancock 2016). And the central disc supported by the vulture’s outstretched left wing would relate to the Sun, being close to the center of the galaxy, with the mentioned constellations nearby (Burley 2013; see Hancock 2016).

‘T’ – shaped pillars of the site. Photo by German Archaeological Institute (DAI). Source : Jens Notroff (2016). “Could we really called it a temple?” In: German Archaeological Institute (DAI) (2020). The Tepe Telegrams. News & Notes from the Göbekli Tepe Research Staff.

After noticing similarities between the patterns of the considered animal images and the range of studied constellations, along with their relative match in context of their positions on the pillar and in the sky respectively, Sweatman (2019:24-32) also tries to support the theory by justifying whether the selection of animals corresponding to the constellations among the thirteen zoomorphic symbols at Göbekli Tepe is adequate and not coincidental (Ibid.:27-32,41). The choice of a scorpion for the Scorpius seems obvious, in turn, the vulture would be the best choice for the Sagittarius among all the animals represented on site (Ibid.:30,32). Additionally, Martin Sweatman (2019:27) pays attention to another constellation, the Libra, which is just below the Scorpius, and finds that the goose represented below the scorpion can match the constellation as it is an animal associated with water. What is more, the fragmented quadruped depicted to the left of the goose can similarly correspond to the constellation of Lupus, the wolf, which is also to the left of Libra in the sky (Ibid.:27). Can it be then a pure coincidence?

Nevertheless, the main problem is that after the mainstream scholars, the knowledge of zodiacal constellations could only appear and develop the earliest with the civilization of Sumer, that is to say, between 3000 and 2000 BC., and it was much later passed down to the modern world by means of the ancient Greece, during the period of the last few centuries BC. (Sweatman 2019:25). For these reasons, the similar knowledge cannot be as old as the site of Göbekli Tepe, which is nearly 12 000 years old (Ibid.:25). But if one alternatively accepts such a possibility, it would mean that ancient Sumerians were not the first who invented zodiacal symbols but they would have learnt their skills in astronomy from much earlier but highly advanced civilizations, who, for some reasons, were erased from human history (Ibid.:31).

Precession of the equinoxes

In order to understand a message encoded on the Pillar 43, Martin Sweatman (2019:36) additionally uses the phenomenon of the so-called precession of the equinoxes (see: Through the Passageway of the Khmers’ Stargate of Angkor Tom).

Göbekli Tepe and a panoramic view of the southern excavation field. Photo by Rolfcosar (2010). CC BY-SA 3.0. Source: “Göbekli Tepe” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

According to the conventional teaching, the discovery of precession of the equinoxes should be ascribed to Hipparchus of the Greeks who would have come up with this idea in the second century BC. (Sweatman 2019:36). Yet, after alternative researchers outside of Academia, such knowledge had already been in use by the sculptors of the “Vulture Stone”, around 13 000 years ago (Ibid.:36). Providing that the disc over the vulture’s wing stands for the Sun, the researcher observes the phenomenon of precession in earlier epochs, with the summer solstice as the reference day (Ibid.:38). As a result, he finds out that the position of the constellations in relation to the Sun, represented on the Pillar 43, only correspond to the date anywhere between 11 200 and 10 700 BC. (Ibid.:38). It is because only within this range of time the Sun appears in such an arrangement between the constellations as it is represented on the pillar (Ibid.:38).

Handbags as sunsets

After Martin Sweatman and his wife, Alison (2019:39), the mysterious symbols at the very top of the Pillar 43 resemble semicircles of the Sun disc at the moment of sunset. Furthermore, if we assume the represented image reflects the summer solstice in 10 950 BC., when the Sun was in front of the constellation of Sagittarius (the vulture), the three handbags (sunsets) may signify the other three solar phenomena in the astronomical year, namely the winter solstice and the spring and vernal and autumn equinoxes (Ibid.:34,37-39). Accordingly, at the spring equinox in 10 950, the Sun moved to Virgo, at the winter solstice, it appeared in Gemini, and at the autumn equinox, it entered the constellation of Pisces (Ibid.:39).

By analogy with the zoomorphic figures symbolizing the constellations in the main part of the pillar, the miniature creatures beside the ‘handbags’ would stand for the constellations corresponding to the three astronomical days that the ‘handbags’ possibly represent (Sweatman 2019:39). Staring from the oldest date and so the upper-right ‘handbag’, the crawling downwards frog beside it would symbolize Virgo, the horned quadruped in the middle, Gemini, and finally the bent bird with long legs would stand for Pisces (Ibid.:39). Surprisingly, the outlines of all the three constellations perfectly correspond to the shape of miniature animal images depicted beside the respective ‘handbags’ (Ibid.:40; see Figure 10 in: Sweatman 2019:40).

Zoomorphic code language of hunter-gatherers

Martin Sweatman (2019:40-44) admits that the results of his studies may be just a coincidence, though it is rather improbable. On the other side, they heavily undermine the current scientific status quo in all its aspects, particularly concerning the acknowledged range of astronomical knowledge of the ancients and how far back in time it could be scientifically justified (Ibid.:40,44).

All in all, the Stone Age builders must have represented the animal symbols at the site for important reasons. Either the representations were religious or totemic, artistic or scientific, at least a few of them were definitely nested in astronomy. Did the builders of Göbekli Tepe encode more than one meaning behind the carved imagery of their Noah’s Ark? Was it done deliberately? And was it intended to be deciphered and read by contemporaries at all if the site had been eventually buried? Or maybe it was to immortalize in stone a turning point in their history, such as the Great Flood or another cataclysm and its further consequences.

Bison in the great hall of polychromes, at Altamira Cave, Cantabria. Photo (2008)by Rameessos. Public domain. Source: “Franco-Cantabrian region” (2019) In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Today, our insight into the zoomorphic world is guided by a set of fixed ideas, interpreting various animals in a strictly defined, though often ambiguous way, often by attributing to them human characteristics. We know this code from ancient myths, medieval bestiaries, fairy tales and legends. Did the builders of Göbekli Tepe used a similar key to the meaning of zoomorphic symbols before they eventually passed them on to later generations in the relief carvings on the ‘T’ shaped pillars? Or maybe their understanding of the menagerie was different from ours and it only survived to our times in distorted fragments over the span of thousands years.

Featured image: The so-called Vulture Stone in Gobekli Tepe, Turkey. Photo by Sue Fleckney (2013). CC BY-SA 2.0. Photo source: “Göbekli Tepe” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

By Joanna
Faculties of English Philology, History of Art and Archaeology.
University of Silesia in Katowice, Poland;
Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw, Poland;
University College Dublin, Ireland.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

“Göbekli Tepe” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/2Loo1id>. [Accessed on 11th May, 2020].

“Olmecs” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3woK0eN>. [Accessed on 14th June, 2021].

“Nekhbet” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3gnJxUH>. [Accessed on 14th June, 2021].

“Phallocentrism” (2019). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/2SUF53C>. [Accessed on 11th May, 2020].

“Pumapunku” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3cGkf1W>. [Accessed on 14th June, 2021].

“Winged genie” (2021). In: Wikipedia. Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3gxZfvl>. [Accessed on 14th June, 2021].

Belting H. (2011). An Anthropology of Images: Picture, Medium, Body. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Benz M. & Bauer J. (2013). Symbols of power – symbols of crisis? A psycho-social approach to Early Neolithic symbol systems. Neo-Lithics 2, pp. 11–24.

Benz M. & J. Bauer (2015). On scorpions, birds and snakes: evidence for shamanism in northern Mesopotamia during the Early Holocene. Pittsburgh: Journal of Ritual Studies 29, pp. 1–24.

Borić D. (2013). Theatre of Predation: Beneath the Skin of Göbekli Tepe Images, in Relational Archaeologies: Humans, Animals, Things, Watts. C. ed. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 42–64.

Burley P. D. (2013). “Gobekli Tepe – Temples Communicating Ancient Cosmic Geography”. In: Graham Hancock. Available at <https://bit.ly/2TtvBzp>. [Accessed on 13th June, 2021].

Burns K. (2010). “Unexplained Structures”. In: Ancient Aliens, Season 2, Episode 8. Prometheus Entertainment.

Burns K. (2017) “Return to Gobekli Tepe”. In: Ancient Aliens, Season 12, Episode 16. Prometheus Entertainment.

Busacca G. (2017) “Places of Encounter: Relational Ontologies, Animal Depiction and Ritual Performance at Göbekli Tepe”. In: Cambridge Archaeological Journal, v. 27, issue 2, pp. 313-330.

Carpenter E. (1973). Eskimo Realities. New York (NY): Holt, Rinehart &Winston.

Conrad T. (2012) Cradle of the Gods. Atlantic Productions LTD. for National Geographic Channels. Available at <https://bit.ly/3blMwas>. [Accessed on 11th May, 2020].

Courtesy of the Göbekli Tepe Project, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (2005). “Snakes shown on diff erent pillars at Göbekli Tepe”. In: Peters J., Driesch von Den A. and Helmer D. (2005) “The Upper Euphrates-Tigris Basin: Cradle of agro-pastoralism ?”. In: Vigne J. D., Peters J. and Helmer D. eds. New methods and the first steps of mammal domestication. Proceedings of the 9th International Council of Archeozoology. (Durham, 23rd-28th August 2002). Oxford: Oxbow Books, pp. 96-123. Available at <https://bit.ly/3zlwRoR>. [Accessed on 13th June, 2021].

Documentary shots: Burns K. (2017) “Return to Gobekli Tepe”. In: Ancient Aliens, Season 12, Episode 16. Prometheus Entertainment.

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. Durham: Journal Antiquity 86, pp. 674–95.

Fleckney S. (2020). Vulture Stone, Göbekli Tepe. World History Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/2RT6VAa>. [Accessed on 13th June, 2021].

German Archaeological Institute (DAI) (2020) “The Site” In: The Tepe Telegrams. News & Notes from the Göbekli Tepe Research Staff. Available at <https://bit.ly/2SZBily>. [Accessed on 13th May, 2020].

Hancock G. (2016). Magowie bogów. [Magicians of the Gods: The Forgotten Wisdom of Earth’s Lost Civilisation]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Amber.

Hodder I. & Meskell L. (2011). A ‘Curious and Sometimes a Trifle Macabre Artistry’. Chicago: Current Anthropology 52, pp. 235–63.

Johannes D. (photo) (2005). “Göbekli Tepe. T-shaped stone pillar with representations of snakes, probably viper”. Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (DAI), Berlin. In: Peters J., Driesch von Den A. and Helmer D. (2005) “The Upper Euphrates-Tigris Basin: Cradle of agro-pastoralism ?”. In: Vigne J. D., Peters J. and Helmer D. eds. New methods and the first steps of mammal domestication. Proceedings of the 9th International Council of Archeozoology. (Durham, 23rd-28th August 2002). Oxford: Oxbow Books, pp. 96-123. Available at <https://bit.ly/3gupCCp>. [Accessed on 13th June, 2021].

Notroff J. (2016). “Could we really called it a temple?” In: German Archaeological Institute (DAI) (2020). The Tepe Telegrams. News & Notes from the Göbekli Tepe Research Staff. Available at <https://bit.ly/2LoyKwq>. [Accessed on 13th May, 2020].

Photo “Bison in the great hall of polychromes, at Altamira Cave, Cantabria” In: “Franco-Cantabrian region” (2019) In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/2LosmlM>. [Accessed on 14th May, 2020].

Photo: “Göbekli Tepe” : Sumber: sci-news.com/mage credit: by Nico Becker, Göbekli Tepe Archive, German Archaeological Institute. In: Kompasiana (2018). Available at <https://bit.ly/2X6nk2T>. [Accessed on 13th May, 2020].

Photo: “The Goddess Nekhbet, Temple of Hatshepsut. By Charles K. Wilkinson. Photo and caption source: Wikimedia Commons. Available at <https://bit.ly/3vxBlWx>. [Accessed on 14th June, 2021].

Prata E. (2011). “The Mystery of Gobekli Tepe”. In: The End Time. Available at <https://bit.ly/3ghOo9P>. [Accessed on 13th June, 2021].

Scham S. (2008). The World’s First Temple. Archaeology, v. 61, no. 6, New York: Archaeological Institute of America, pp. 22-27.

Schmidt K. (2010). Göbekli Tepe—the Stone Age sanctuaries: new results of ongoing excavations with a special focus on sculptures and high reliefs. Documenta Praehistorica 37, pp. 239–56.

Schmidt K. (2012). Göbekli Tepe: A Stone Age Sanctuary in Southeastern Anatolia. Berlin: Ex Oriente.

Sweatman M. (2019). Prehistory Decoded.  UK: Troubador Publishing Ltd.

Verhoeven M. (2002). Ritual and Ideology in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B of the Levant and southeast Anatolia. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 12, pp. 233–58.

Yeşilyurt M. (2014). Die wissenschaftliche Interpretation von Göbeklitepe. Die Theorie und das Forschungsprogramm. Berlin: LIT.

Ancient Lycia in the Middle of Anatolian Traditions

When I now look back over ten years of my archaeological exploration of the world, I distinctly remember my summer travel to Lycian Turkey and its ancient rock-cut tombs encrusting high and steep cliffs. Such monuments of sepulchral architecture are scattered around the whole region of Lycia and partially the neighbouring Caria. They both are located on the south-western coast of Turkey, by the Aegean and Mediterranean Seas, and their mountainous scenery looking out the blue waters is truly breathtaking.

Beautiful view of Marina in Fethiye, Turkey. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Today, Lycia belongs to the Turkish province of Antalya, and the most frequently visited seaside resorts of the region are definitely tourist Kemer, turquoise Ölüdeniz and peaceful Fethiye, where I stayed in 2008 for over two weeks to explore the region (Miszczak 2009).

Location of Lycia

The area of Lycia occupies the major part of the Teke Peninsula; namely, it is located south of the imagined horizontal line drawn from the town of Köyceğiz to the city of Antalya, where the former is a district of Muğla Province in the Aegean region of Turkey, and the latter – a gateway to Turkey’s southern Mediterranean region (Bean 1989:19; Miszczak 2009). The terrain of Lycia is mountainous to the north, and towards the south, it gradually descends and becomes flat in places along the coast (Miszczak 2009). Much of the area is densely forested (Ibid.). The region of Lycia is geographically featured by two vast masses belonging to Akdağ Mountains; the ancient mountain range of Massicytus expanded to the west and the ancient Solyma, (modern Bey Daği) to the east (Bean 1989:19). Accordingly, Lycia’s borders have been delineated from the south by the Mediterranean Sea, and from the east, north and west by three mountain ranges (Miszczak 2009). Two of them are known today as Boncuk Dağları and Baba Daği – the part of the Taurus Mountains, and the third are the Bey Dağları Mountains (Ibid.). The latter reach even three thousand meters above sea level, and caps of snow lie on their highest peaks until the beginning of summer (Ibid.). The most famous peak of this range is Mount Tahtalı (Ibid.). Owing to these mountain ranges, Lycia was practically cut off from the rest of Anatolia (Bean 1989:19-20; Miszczak 2009). As such, it had won its advantageous strategic location and uniqueness of its culture (Bean 1989:20; Miszczak 2009).

Ölüdeniz Beach in Fethiye District. Photo by Dan Taylor (2004). CC BY 2.0. Photo and caption source: “Fethiye” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Central Lycia consists of many tiny valleys separated by mountains, with the two largest; to the west of Akdağ Mountains, there is the valley of Xanthus, which is a real heart of Lycia, and to the east of Bey Daği is the valley of Alakır (Bean 1989:19; Miszczak 2009). Two major rivers flow through them: Xanthos and Limyrus, the former of which, longer and larger, was called Sibros or Sirbis in ancient times and was the main source of drinking water for the inhabitants of Lycia (Bean 1989:19; Miszczak 2009).

People of Lycia

The region was itself unevenly populated due to its mountainous terrain and most people settled either in main cities along the coast, sometimes still interrupted by the mountains descending directly into the sea, or in the in the valley of Xanthos (Bean 1989:19; Miszczak 2009). In Antiquity, the whole population of the region has been estimated at no more than around two hundred thousand (Bean 1989:19).

Location of Lycia (in red) and Caria at its north-eastern border with the city of Caunus (Dalyan), which once belonged to Lycia. Anatolia/Asia Minor in the Greco-Roman period. The classical regions, including Lycia, and their main settlements. Image by Caliniuc (2018). CC BY-SA 4.0. Photo and caption source: “Lycia” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Ancient Lycians had always been very distinctive in the background of other Anatolian peoples (Bean 1989:19). In ancient times, Lycia was adjacent to Caria region with its ancient city of Caunus to the west and northwest, Pamphylia to the east, and Pisidia to the northeast (Miszczak 2009). Nevertheless, its geopolitical map had often changed throughout ages (Bean 1989:19-30; Miszczak 2009). Although the region is often studied as a whole, the ancient Lycia had never been a single state organism, but well-established federation of city-states (the Lycian League) that pursued a common foreign policy, dictated by their strong instinct for union (Bean 1989:20; Miszczak 2009). That, in turn, built up a sense of a Lycian nation, which differed with a nation understood by contemporary Greeks who saw it just as a unity within individual city-states, being constantly at enmity with each other (Bean 1989:20). Accordingly, locked in their mountainous country,

Lycia, from Travels in Lycia, Milyas, and the Cibyratis, in company with the late Rev. E. T. Daniell (1842). Showing the routes taken by T.A.B. Spratt, the naturalist Professor Edward Forbes and the Reverend E.T. Daniell during their exploration of the region in 1842. By Lieutenant T. Spratt, R.N., uploaded in 2012. Public domain. Photo and caption source: “Lycia” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Lycians diligently guarded their freedom independence, trying to resist an outside domination (Bean 1989:20; Miszczak 2009). The region was also the last in Asia Minor to have been incorporated into the Roman Empire, and even then it retained a partial independence in the form of the Lycian League (Miszczak 2009). As such, Lycians had their own language with its peculiar characters, though related to the Hittite and Luwian languages, their own culture, customs and an outstanding style of sepulchral architecture, for which Lycia is interesting today, especially to archaeologists, and tourists making breaks from pleasures offered them by the resorts (Bean 1989:20, 22-23; Miszczak 2009).

At the crossroads of different cultures

By a continuous development of its seaside settlements, ancient Lycia became a major naval power in the region and so it also fully benefited from marine trade (Miszczak 2009). Its coast for centuries had been of great strategic importance for the successive empires ruling over Anatolia, as an important section of the sea route leading from the Aegean Sea eastwards, to the Levant and Egypt (Ibid.). In addition to its military importance, this sea route also greatly contributed to the development of trade and the transmission of civilization achievements (Ibid.). It is worth mentioning that Saint Paul himself came from Greece to Lycia on a merchant ship to spread Christianity in the region (Ibid.). But the history of the Lycian country is much more ancient than the times of Christian apostles, and the land itself is soaked with various legends.

Origins shrouded in mystery

After a Greek tradition recorded by Herodotus (the fifth century BC.), Lycians as a people originated in Crete, where there was a quarrel or fight over the power between two noble brothers, Minos and Sarpedon (Bean 1989:20; Miszczak 2009). Finally, defeated Sarpedon was forced to leave his homeland and together with his supporters, he crossed the sea to Asia Minor and settled down in Lycia, at the time called Milyas, being occupied by Solymians (Bean 1989:20; Miszczak 2009).

SVG Map of ancient Lycia in Turkey. The map of Lycia showing significant ancient cities and some major mountains and rivers. Red dots are mountain peaks, white dots are ancient cities. Prepared by Erp at English Wikipedia (2009). CC BY-SA 3.0. Photo and caption source: “Lycia” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

The name Lycia itself, as Herodotus claims, comes from Lycus, son of Pandion the Second, the mythological king of Athens, after whose death, Lycus was driven from his domain by his own brother, Aegeus (the famous Theseus’ father) and eventually found the refuge by joining Sarpedon in Asia Minor, where people took from him the name and became called the Lycians (Bean 1989:20; Miszczak 2009). According to Greek myths, it was the time of the mysterious labyrinth at Knossos, its monstrous inhabitant, Minotaur devouring children, and a conflict of Athens with Crete.

Written tradition

More precise, though unreliable dates of these events are provided by the so-called Parian Chronicle (or Parian Marble), a Greek chronology table covering the years from 1582 to 299 BC., inscribed on a stele found on the island of Paros (the Cyclades) (Bean 1989:20). According to the Greek inscription, it was the early thirteenth century BC., when Lycus reached Asia Minor, whereas the fight between Minos and Sarpedon happened in the latter half of the fifteenth century (Ibid.:20). The given chronology is still confused by the fact there was another Minos at the time of Lycus and Aegeus, and another Sarpedon in the time of the Trojan War, that is to say, in the thirteenth century BC. (Ibid.:20). Yet, the dating from Paros cannot be simply rejected as the names could repeat in history. Moreover, ‘Minos’ may have actually stood not for a name but for a title, as much as ‘pharaoh’ in ancient Egypt (see: Castleden 2000).

Lycia coin, c. 520–470 BC. By Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. (2018). CC BY-SA 3.0. Photo and caption source: “Lycia” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

On the other hand, the Hittite records also mention a nation of the Lukka, which is their own name for Lycia (Ibid.:20). They say that Lukka became subject to the Hittite ruler, Suppiluliumas, in the mid-fourteenth century BC. but the lands were continuously rebellious against his domination (Ibid.:20). Nevertheless, it did not discourage Lycian forces to fight later on the side of the Hittites against Egypt in the Battle of Kadesh (1295 BC.) (Miszczak 2009). According to George E. Bean (1989:21), the Hittite records about ‘Lukka’ must have concerned the lands to the west or south-west of the Hittite capital of Hattusa. Also contemporary tablets found in Tell el-Amarna (the mid fourteenth century BC.) records some ‘Lukki’ among the sea riders plundering Cypriot settlements, which would locate them in the region of Caria and Lycia (Bean 1989:20-21; Miszczak 2009). As far as Greek literature is concerned, Homer (the eight century BC.) often mentions the Lycians in the Iliad as allies of Troy (Miszczak 2009; Bean 1989:24). According to the author, the Lycian military contingent was commanded by two famous Lycian warriors and heroes, Sarpedon and Glaucus, whose role in the famous war was not undistinguished. (Miszczak 2009; Bean 1989:24). And it is commonly accepted the Trojan war took place in the thirteenth century BC. (Miszczak 2009; Bean 1989:24).

More evidence provided

In the Hittite accounts, there also appear the names of the cities conquered by the king Suppiluliumas in Lukka in the fourteenth century, namely Dalawa and Hinduwa (Bean 1989:21). Whereas the latter may be identical with Lycian Candyba or Kandyba (district of Kaş), Dalawa may be the same as the Lycian Tlawa (Tlos), located in the valley of Xanthus (Ibid.:21). If such assumptions are correct, then it can be accepted that Lycia had already been established in the fourteenth century, which also acknowledges the information given by the stele of Paros that the Cretans under Sarpedon reached Asia Minor around 1400 BC. (Ibid.:20-21).

The Greek historian Ephorus of Cyme (the furth century BC.) adds that Sarpedon came first to Caria, the region to the west of actual Lycia, and founded the city of Miletus, renamed after a place in Crete (Bean 1989:21). Alternative sources assert that the first city of the future Lycians was actually Idrias (later Stratoniceia), still situated in Caria but further south-eastwards, towards the Peninsula of Tepe (Ibid.:21). If the provided records are reliable, such a settlement would mark the way of Sarpedon southward, from the Aegean Coast to the lands of Lycia (Ibid.:21).

Greek name for a foreign country

Speaking of the name itself, the terms ‘Lycia’ or ‘Lycians’ were used only by Greeks, as much as the Hittite described the same peoples the Lukka, and ancient Egyptians, the Lukki (Bean 1989:20-21; Miszczak 2009). The inhabitants of Lycia, however, called themselves Termilae or Trmmili, and their land, Trmmisa, which is confirmed by their native inscriptions (Bean 1989:22; Miszczak 2009). For this reason, Herodotus’ account that Lycia adopted the name of the Athenian Lycus should be debunked (Bean 1989:22). Possibly, the historian tried to explain the etymology of the name used by the Greeks to describe their neighbours, which was yet adopted, though, slightly modified, by other contemporary civilization. The Greeks had never used their proper name, which actually often has happened throughout history (Ibid.:22). It is enough to provide an example of the people commonly known as Minoans who had created a civilization on Crete; their name was, however, taken by Sir Arthur Evans from the Greek myth mentioning the king of Minos, and has nothing to do with their proper name. Yet, there exist ancient sources describing the same people as Keftiu (Egypt) or Caphtorites (the Hebrew Bible).

Back to legends

The origin of the word Lycia can be rather found in Greek myths, namely in the story of Leto, the goddess from the generation of giants (Titans), who also was the guardian of the entire Lycian people, their homes and tombs (Miszczak 2009).

Lycian dignitary in Achaemenid style, at the Karaburun tomb near Elmalı, Lycia, c. 475 BC. Unknown author (2018). Public domain. Photo and caption source: “Lycia” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

According to the legend, the Greek god Zeus fell in love with her but his jealous wife, Hera, chased her husband’s mistress to Asia Minor, exactly to Patara, where the goddess gave birth to the divine twins, Apollo and Artemis (Miszczak 2009). According to alternative story, however, the twins were born later on the island of Delos or Ortygia (near ancient Ephesus in ancient Turkey) (Cartwright 2019). However, yet before giving birth, the persecuted Leto was accompanied on her way through the country by wolves, who guided her across the Xanthos River (Miszczak 2009). To commemorate their help, the goddess called the whole region Lycia, because lycos stands for a wolf in Greek (Ibid.).

More Greek deities

The main deities worshiped in Lycia were therefore Leto and her children, Apollo and Artemis (Miszczak 2009). The most important religious sanctuary of Lycia, dedicated to Leto was located in the Xanthos valley (Ibid.). Some historians believe that the cult of Leto was one of the manifestations of the mother-goddess worship widespread throughout Anatolia, while others believe that the two cults developed in parallel and only later did Leton and the mother-goddess, known in Lycia as Eni Mahanahi, mingled into one divinity (Ibid.).

Dynasts of Lycia: Perikles. Circa 380-360 BC. Photo by Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. (2018). CC BY-SA 3.0. Photo and caption source: “Lycia” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Apollo and Artemis were also widely worshiped throughout the region; the ancient Carian Telmessus (another Telmessus was in Lycia, at modern Fethiye) was known in antiquity for soothsayers who referred to Apollo in their divinations (Miszczak 2009). On the other side, the main centre of the cult of Artemis was Myra, where the daughter of Leto was considered the next incarnation of the mother goddess (Ibid). In addition, the Lycians also worshiped other figures in the Greek pantheon, including Athena, Zeus, Hephaestus, and Ares (Ibid.). An interesting fact, however, are the traces of the cult of Mithras, a deity most likely from Persia, who was worshiped in Olympus by local pirates (Ibid.). Apparently, the Romans inherited the cult of Mithras just from them (Ibid.).

Rebellious nation who loved independence

The history of Lycia is to a large extent the history, mainly of struggles for maintaining independence, fought for with a fluctuating success (Miszczak 2009).

By the sixth century BC, almost the whole western Asia Minor had fallen under the rule of the kings of Lydia, except for the Cilicians and Lycians (Bean 1989:24). Yet in 546 BC., the kingdom of Lydia passed to Persia (Ibid.:24). The Persian invasion under the command of Harpagus, one of the generals of Cyrus the Great, is considered the first attempt at the conquest of Lycia (Bean 1989:24; Miszczak 2009). About 540 BC., the Persians attacked Xanthos, the inhabitants of which made a heroic attempt to resist (Miszczak 2009). Eventually, they committed mass suicide, setting their city on fire, including women and children gathered in the acropolis (Ibid.) Lycian men, on the other hand, fought to the last fighter (Ibid.). Archaeological excavations confirm this tragic story, as a thick layer of ash from this period of history has been unearthed in the city (Ibid.).

Rock-cut tomb at Telmessus (modern Fethiye). Encyclopædia Britannica, 1911 – Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, Vol. 2, Page 380. Uploaded in 2012. Public domain. Photo source: “Lycia” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

The Persian occupation of Lycia turned out to be quite mild and was reduced to the collection of tribute, leaving the management of the land to the Lycian hands (Bean 1989:24; Miszczak 2009). The period of relative calm was conducive to economic growth, as it is supported by the large number of Lycian coins minted at that time (Bean 1989:24; Miszczak 2009). It was also the time of the creation of the first monumental sepulchral art and the heyday of literature (Miszczak 2009).

Still feeling free, though under occupation

After the Persian wars (480-479 BC.), in which the Lycians contributed on the side of the defeated Persians, the Athenians formed the Delian Confederacy (the maritime league), together with the cities on the western coast of Asia Minor; about 468 BC., the Athenian general Cimon, with a fleet of three hundred ships, drove the Persians out of Lycia and Caria, who were, in turn, to join the Delian Confederacy and pay the tribute to the Athenian league (Bean 1989:24-25; Miszczak 2009). When the Lycians refused, their lands were plundered and the tribute possibly imposed (Bean 1989:25; Miszczak 2009). Nevertheless, when the Athenians became defeated by Sparta in the Peloponnesian War (404 BC.), the Delian Confederacy ended and Lycia again found itself under the Persian domination (Bean 1989:25; Miszczak 2009). Yet, the Lycians did not stop to issue their own coinage or fight for their freedom. Finally, in the early fourth century, they found themselves under the rule of a famous Persian satrap of Caria, Mausolus. Although Lycia resisted under its native dynast Pericles, it became an area under occupation, and military garrisons were located on its territory at strategic points (Bean 1989:25; Miszczak 2009). As a result, the rulers of Caria began to suppress the indigenous Lycian culture and impose in its place the Hellenic-Carian culture (Miszczak 2009).

Alexander the Great in Lycia

Any pretentions to Lycia made by Mausolus’s successors eventually was put to an end by the appearance of Alexander the Great in Asia Minor, who arrived there between 334 and 333 BC. (Bean 1989:25-26; Miszczak 2009). The Lycians had been already tired with the Carian domination and friendly welcomed the Macedonians, even including brave and rebellious Xanthus (Bean 1989:26; Miszczak 2009). After the death of Alexander the Great, in 309 BC., one of his generals and the Pharaoh of Egypt, Ptolemy, took control of Lycia (Bean 1989:26; Miszczak 2009). The Ptolemy dynasty that derived from him lasted in Lycia for over a hundred years (Bean 1989:26; Miszczak 2009).

Silver Drachm of Trajan from Lycia, 98–99 AD, minted during Roman rule. Photo by Ancientcoincollector (2017). CC BY-SA 4.0. Photo and caption source: “Lycia” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Unfortunately, it was the time when Lycia began to lose its linguistic and cultural identity, which was gradually replaced with the Greek one (Bean 1989:26; Miszczak 2009). Greek influences are also very evident in Lycian art from this period of history (Miszczak 2009). An example is the growing popularity of sarcophagi, which began to replace the typical Lycian tombs carved in the rocks (Ibid.). The Lycian League had its beginnings at that time as well (Ibid.).

From hands to hands

In 197 BC. Lycia was passed from the Ptolemies to Antiochus III the Great, a Greek Hellenistic king of the Seleucid Empire (Bean 1989:26; Miszczak 2009). After he was defeated by the Romans in 192 BC., at the battle of Magnesia, Lycia was handed over to the Rhodians, who were in favour of Rome (Bean 1989:26; Miszczak 2009). As a result, the Lycians, rebellious as always, spent the following years fighting for independence and writing petitions to the Roman Senate, which, exhausted by problems with Lycia, finally declared it and Caria free in 167 BC., after which they enjoyed a long time of freedom. Also the Lycian League became more prominent. In the second century BC., the Lycian League acted twice in defence of its independence against usurpers, first in the event of their attempt to gain control over the Xanthos, and then over Tlos (Bean 1989:26-27; Miszczak 2009). Facing such a fierce determination of the Lycians, the Roman Empire left the country untouched during the creation of its province of Asia (129 BC.) (Bean 1989:28; Miszczak 2009).

The growth of the Lycian League

The first century BC. was the period of the greatest splendour and power of the Lycian League, which at that time included as many as thirty-six Lycian city-states on democratic principles (Bean 1989:27-28; Miszczak 2009). During the invasion of the Pontic ruler, Mithridates, on the western part of Asia Minor, in 88 BC., Lycia, unlike other lands that welcomed him as a liberator from Roman occupation, persisted in favour of Rome (Bean 1989:28; Miszczak 2009). Eventually, the Pontic king was defeated in 84 BC. by the Romans, who renewed the guarantees of independence for Lycia as a reward for its loyalty (Bean 1989:28-29; Miszczak 2009). Nevertheless, during the Roman civil war (the first century BC.), Lycia suffered again from the hands of Brutus’ troops till the time it was liberated by the Roman army under Octavian and Mark Antony (Bean 1989:29; Miszczak 2009). The latter granted its independence in 42 BC. and Lycia was the only area of Asia Minor that was not included in the Roman Empire. It was again a time of prosperity and peace for the land (Bean 1989:29; Miszczak 2009).

Saint Nicholas of Myra. Painting by Jaroslav Čermák (1831 – 1878). Uploaded by Galerie Art Praha (2016). Public domain. Photo source: “Saint Nicholas” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

The independence of the Lycian Federation ended in 43 AD. during the reign of Emperor Claudius, who joined it to neighbouring Pamphylia as a Roman province (Bean 1989:29; Miszczak 2009). The Lycian freedom was granted back by Nero (54-68 AD.) and had lasted till the reign of Vespasian (69-79AD.) (Bean 1989:29). Moreover, even as a part of the Roman Empire, the Lycian League continued to exist, and the region itself was rich and prosperous (Bean 1989:29; Miszczak 2009). As the Greek geographer, Strabo (the first century AD.) notices, although Rome was still responsible for the matters of war or peace on the terrain of Lycia, its internal affairs were left in the hands of the League (Bean 1989:29; Miszczak 2009). Furthermore, when, in the early fourth century BC., the Emperor Diocletian divided the Lycia and Pamphylia province into two separate lands, the boundary of the former was extended north-westwards and so included Caunus in Caria (modern area of Daylan) and then also the Carian city of Calynda (Bean 1989:29-30; Miszczak 2009). During the Roman Empire, Lycia went through a far-reaching process of romanization, both in the area of its culture and art, and in everyday life (Miszczak 2009).

Santa Clause in Lycia

After two major earthquakes between the second and the third centuries AD, some Lycian cities were turned into ruins (Miszczak 2009). In the third century, Christianity came to the Lycian region and brought significant social and cultural changes (Ibid.). Until the fourth century AD., Christians were persecuted in Lycia, as much as in other parts of the Roman Empire; a few contemporary  Lycian martyrs have gone down into history, together with performed by them miracles (Ibid.). The most famous Christian figure from Lycia is undoubtedly the bishop of the city of Myra, called Nicholas (Ibid.). Yes! Santa Claus comes from Turkey! (Ibid.). He lived in the years 270 – 346 AD. and became well known as a miracle maker, a zealous preacher, converting to Christianity, and a patron of the local population (Ibid.).

And the ancient glory came to an end

The end of Lycian glory was the result of the Plague that blew out between 542 and 745 AD. and increasing acts of piracy in the waters of the Mediterranean Sea; flourishing cities and Lycian ports were abandoned or diminished to the size of villages, which were additionally surrounded by walls protecting them against continuous attacks (Miszczak 2009).

Abandoned Greek city of Kayaköy. Photo by the User Wmck (2011). CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain. Photo and caption source: “Lycia” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

The collapse of the region was also visible by the re-use of the stone from ancient tombs and columns to build city fortifications, as it can be observed in Tlos (Miszczak 2009). Lycia had remained almost uninhabited for several centuries, until the thirteenth century, when the Turks, led by the Teke dynasty, settled on its territory (Miszczak 2009). Hence the name of the Peninsula. The Turks yet stayed away from the coast, which was constantly tormented by pirates who had also established their own settlements there till the eighteenth century (Ibid.). In the early nineteenth century, the rulers of the Ottoman dynasty began to re-populate Lycia, settling in its area the Greek population of the Aegean islands (Ibid.). The few descendants of the ancient Lycians most likely mingled then with the Greek settlers by marriages. After all, they were connected with the Greeks by both, the religion, namely the Eastern Orthodox Church, and a common language, Greek. However, people of the Greek origins were displaced from Lycia again following the peace agreements following the Turkish-Greek war of 1919-1922 (Ibid.). Together with the Greeks, the descendants of Lycia were thus relocated to Greece; just abandoned villages remain after that time on the Tepe Peninsula (Ibid.). The most famous of them is Kayaköy, the so-called Stone Village, which is now a tourist attraction for holidaymakers visiting the region of Fethiye (Ibid.).

When we finally arrived to our hotel from the airport in Antalya, it turned out to be a real heaven, beautifully located in a pine forest, near a narrow path leading to the beach. At last we could take a refuge from insistent rays of the sun and rest from its heat in the shade of wide trees. In the hotel’s open courtyard, a few guests were sitting languidly by the swimming pool, while the waiters were making tables for the upcoming dinner. I sat nearby in the greenery and closed my eyes. Despite my tiredness after the trip, I was looking forward to travelling around the region and discovering monuments of ancient Lycia.

Featured image: Marine of Fethiye, the town situated on the coast of ancient land of Lycian Turkey. Photo by fikret kabay (2017). Photo source: Free images at Pixabay.

By Joanna
Faculties of English Philology, History of Art and Archaeology.
University of Silesia in Katowice, Poland;
Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw, Poland;
University College Dublin, Ireland.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

“Fethiye” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3bHABY4>. [Accessed on 13th March, 2021].

“Lycia” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3dQEJEV>. [Accessed on 10th April, 2021].

“Saint Nicholas” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3d7xc5G>. [Accessed on 10th April, 2021].

Bean G. E. (1989). Lycian Turkey. An Archaeological Guide, Vol. 4. London: John Murray Publishers.

Cartwright M. (2019). “Artemis”. In: World History Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/3kZVi4y>. [Accessed on 10th March, 2021].

Castleden R. (2000) The Knossos Labyrinth. A New View of the Palace of Minos’ at Knossos. London; New York: Routledge.

Free images at Pixabay. Available at <https://bit.ly/3fTQX0u >. [Accessed on 24th June, 2021].

Miszczak I. (2009). ”Dzieje Licyjczyków”. In: Miszczak I., Miszczak J. Turcja w sandałach. Available at <https://bit.ly/3kVybIh>. [Accessed on 8th March, 2021].

The Oldest Temple in the World and its Mystery

An ancient temple dated back to 10 000 BC. has been discovered in the Middle East (Conrad 2012). It was built when mankind was still in the Stone Age and before people discovered the so-called first signs of Neolithic human society: the pottery, writing, and the wheel (Ibid.). Consequently, its construction goes back long before the earliest great civilizations, like the Mesopotamians, the Egyptians, and the Minoans. Then who built it and why? (Ibid.).

Building archaeological recording underway in the southeast hollow (main excavation area) at Göbeklitepe (September 2018). The new permanent shelter provides visitors not only with unprecedented views of the excavated monumental buildings but also allows them to get close to the archaeologists working at the site. The membrane canopy was designed by kleyer.koblitz.letzel.freivogel Architekten (with structural engineering by EiSat GmbH), btw. (see Donna Sink (2020). In: Archinect News). Photo and caption source: German Archaeological Institute (DAI). In: Jens Notroff (2018) “Visitors back at the ruins again”. In: German Archaeological Institute (DAI) (2020). The Tepe Telegrams. News & Notes from the Göbekli Tepe Research Staff.

This is the story of Göbekli Tepe and its bewildering imagery.

From evolution to revolution

As it has been always taught, human species had evolved very slowly (Conrad 2012). For millennia, people had managed to survive by hunting and gathering their food till around 10 000 BC., when something extraordinary happened: their development strangely speeded up and in a comparatively short period of time people achieved the highlands of their development (Ibid.).

The location of Göbekli Tepe on the map, near the large nearby modern city of Şanlıurfa. Source : documentary shot from Kevin Burns (2017) “Return to Gobekli Tepe”. In: Ancient Aliens, Season 12, Episode 16. Prometheus Entertainment.

What was it that made humankind change so drastically? (Conrad 2012). After scholars, the turning point in human history was the Neolithic Revolution, namely having learnt how to farm and produce food instead of gathering or hunting (Ibid.). The theory is that farming allowed people to settle down, then develop religious systems and finally build temples to gods (Ibid.). Subsequently, simple settlements grew to cities and then into powerful civilisations, which developed around 3 000 BC (Ibid.). Without having to hunt or gather for every meal, people  had more time to evolve out of the Stone Age (Ibid.). According to the traditional thinking, such complex structures as Göbekli Tepe could hence be only planned and built by already well-established agricultural communities, according to the following scheme: the Neolithic farming and settlement encouraged religious practices, which in turn led to temples building and a successive development of cities (Ibid.). So much about the theory …

From the theory to archaeological evidence

With the appearance of Göbekli Tepe, the traditional thinking has been turned on its head (Conrad 2012). An American archaeologist, Dr Jeffrey I. Rose, an expert on early human history and stone age technology, admits that “what has been found in [the southern-east Anatolia is] incredible as it puts a whole new spin on human cultural evolution” (Ibid.). As shown by archaeological finds, the builders of the site were not farmers at all but they were still hunter-gatherers (Ibid.). This is why the site is so controversial, and for this reason it upends the conventional view of the growth of civilisation (Ibid.).

Hunter-gatherers. Photo cropped. Source: Archaeology Newsroom (2020) .In: Archaeology & Art.

According to well-established stereotypes, hunter-gatherers are usually seen as a kind of mumbling primitives. Slavishly devoted to their survival and basic instincts, devoid of higher skills, feelings or religion, these people were able to produce artistic, architectural and sacral masterpiece unknown in the academic world before the discovery of Göbekli Tepe. Dr Rose (Conrad 2012) admits his own surprise, saying: “It’s like discovering that a three-year-old child built the Empire State Building out of toy bricks” (Ibid.). The same opinion is shared by Hassan Karabulut, associate curator of the Urfa Museum: “They had barely emerged from the most basic way of life” (Scham 2008:23) he says,’ amazed that nomadic peoples were able to organize such a large labour force (Ibid.:23).  

Never-ending studies

The site was first mentioned in 1963, in a survey carried out by Istanbul University and the University of Chicago (Benedict 1980). American archaeologist, Peter Benedict identified lithics collected from the surface of the site as belonging to the Aceramic Neolithic (Schmidt 2011:917) but misidentified the upper parts of the ‘T’-shaped pillars for grave markers, postulating that the prehistoric phase was overlain by a Byzantine cemetery (Batuman 2011; Andrews 2016).

The upper part of the ‘T’ – shaped pillar protruding out of the ground. Source : documentary shot from Kevin Burns (2017) “Return to Gobekli Tepe”. In: Ancient Aliens, Season 12, Episode 16. Prometheus Entertainment.

“The hill had long been under agricultural cultivation, and generations of local inhabitants had frequently moved rocks and placed them in clearance piles, which may have disturbed the upper layers of the site” (“Göbekli Tepe” 2020). With time, attempts had been made to cut up some of the pillars, likely by farmers who thought they were ordinary large boulders (Curry 2008; see “Göbekli Tepe” 2020).

Sites with similar ‘T’-shaped pillars from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN). Photo by Arekrishna (2017). CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: “Göbekli Tepe” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Although archaeological research at Göbekli Tepe has been carried out since the early 1960s, only in 1994 the site emerged as the world’s first temple with an amazing discovery of  mysterious statues (Conrad 2012).

In 1994, on a nearby hill, a Kurdish shepherd had noticed a strange outline of a stone sticking out of the ground (Burns 2010). He turned out to be more interested in the find than his countrymen who discerned the protruding boulders before him, and began digging around the stone (Ibid.). Soon he discovered below a six-meter shaft (Ibid.). It had a regular structure and there was a relief showing an unknown animal (Ibid.) (see:). Thorough examinations confirmed that the stone was processed by a talented stonemason who used sophisticated tools (Ibid.). When the scholars found out about the accidental discovery, they were sure that the Shepherd had discovered one of the most important structures in the history of archaeology (Ibid.). In the same year, regular excavations began.

The team of archaeologists led by Professor Klaus Schmidt of the German Archaeological Institute started their regular work at Göbekli Tepe in 1995, in collaboration with the Şanlıurfa Museum, and soon unearthed the first of the huge ‘T’-shaped pillars (Curry 2008; Noren 2020; see “Göbekli Tepe” 2020). Schmidt writes that “as soon as [he] got there and saw the stones, [he] knew that if [he] didn’t walk away immediately [he] would be [tere] for the rest of [his] life” (Knox 2009), which eventually happened. Having found stone structures at Göbekli Tepe similar to those unearthed before at Nevalı Çori (Turkey), Schmidt recognized the possibility that the monuments are prehistoric and culturally related to other archaeological sites in the region (“Göbekli Tepe” 2020; see Noren 2020).

Photo (2016) of Klaus Schmidt (11 December 1953 – 20 July 2014); a German archaeologist who led the regular excavations at Göbekli Tepe from 1995 to 2014. Photo source: Oliver Dietrich (2016) “Göbekli Tepe – The first 20 Years of Research”. In: German Archaeological Institute (DAI) (2020). The Tepe Telegrams. News & Notes from the Göbekli Tepe Research Staff.

Since then, there have been multitude of various studies carried out at the archaeological site of Göbekli Tepe, which became extremely famous for its unique megalithic constructions. As such, it has attracted an international attention of scholars and researchers keen to discover its well-hidden secrets, especially by means of research on the iconography of the Neolithic in the Southeastern Anatolia. Yet before Göbekli Tepe was uncovered, scholars from around the world had become very attracted to the Neolithic period of the region, especially with broad excavations started at the site of Çatalhöyük in 1960s.

Hill of the Navel

The site of Göbekli Tepe is situated on top of a hill that is the highest point of the Urfa Plain in Turkey, with the Taurus Mountains to the north and east, and the Harrain Plain to the south. Turkey itself is an ancient land that bridges Europe and Asia (Conrad 2012). It is also a part of the Fertile Crescent – a swathe of the Middle East and Africa that includes modern Egypt, Israel, Syria and Iraq (Ibid.). In this green belt humans are believed to have first settled and the world’s earliest civilizations to have arisen around 3 000 BC.

Area of the Fertile Crescent, circa 7500 BCE, with main sites. Göbekli Tepe is one of the important sites of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period. The area of Mesopotamia proper at this time was not yet settled by humans. Photo by GFDL (2019). CC BY-SA 3.0. Source: “Göbekli Tepe” (2020). Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

In Turkish, the name Göbekli Tepe means ‘hill of the navel’ and to the anthropologists, such as Sandra Scham (2008:27), this is “the metaphor of a human birth to describe the creation of the world.” After her interpretation, the name of the site seems significant itself as by its name it refers to such sacred ‘navels’ as Cusco in Peru, Easter Island and Delphi in Greece (Ibid.:27). Local people believe the hill to be sacred as well (Conrad 2012).

Four stone circles

Ground penetrating radar has allowed to estimate the size of Göbekli Tepe to 300 by 300 metres (Conrad 2012). Professor Schmid and his team have so far excavated four huge stone circles, labelled as A, B, C, and D (Conrad 2012; Busacca 2017). They measure roughly from 10 to 30 metres in diameter (Ibid.). Each one is surrounded by a high stone wall, broken by intervals by large ‘T’-shaped pillars (Ibid.). In the middle of each, there are two massive monoliths up to five and a half metres tall (Ibid.). These enclosures are not analogous to any other existing archaeological structures in the world (Ibid.).

Göbekli Tepe. The main excavation area in the southeastern area of the mound in an aerial photograph by Erhan Kucuk and a schematic map with pillar numbering. Courtesy of the German Archaeological Institute, DAI. Source: Gesualdo Busacca (2017:317). “Places of Encounter: Relational Ontologies, Animal Depiction and Ritual Performance at Göbekli Tepe”. In: Cambridge Archaeological Journal, v. 27, issue 2, pp. 313-330.

Professor Schmid knew that the site has covered many more enclosures than just the unearthed four (Conrad 2012). The map generated from the ground penetrating radar survey reveals that there are at least other sixteen circular structures still buried beneath the hill, and some of them are situated much deeper than the uncovered four (Ibid.). These are hence the oldest enclosures of all, dated back to as far as 13 000 BC, which is the end of the last Ice Age (Ibid.).

Although only a small part of  Göbekli Tepe has been unearthed, it can be concluded that it was built in two successive stages (Busacca 2017:316). The first structures excavated there were erected as early as 10 000 B.C., that is to say in the early Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (Ibid.:316). Whereas the later remains are dated back to the later Pre-Pottery Neolithic B, and strangely they are much less sophisticated than the earliest structures which contain most of ‘T’ shaped pillars covered in zoomorphic sculpture (Ibid.:316). The earliest enclosures were built on the bedrock into slots only about ten centimetres deep (Conrad 2012). The builders set two central monoliths up to five and a half metres tall and carved from a single piece of stone, weighing up to fourteen and a half of tons (Ibid.).

Enclosure D of Göbekli Tepe. Photo by Nico Becker, DAI. Photo source: German Archaeological Institute (DAI) (2020). “The Site” In: The Tepe Telegrams. News & Notes from the Göbekli Tepe Research Staff.

Around the two monoliths, the masons then built a wall of stones and mortar, nearly two metres tall (Ibid.). Set into the wall, there are smaller ‘T’ – shaped pillars between three and five metres high and weighing up to ten tons (Ibid.). Now disintegrated, there is the portal stone and apparently it was an entrance to the enclosure (Ibid.). Once incorporated vertically into the wall, it was carved from a single piece of stone, like pillars, and weighs several tons (Ibid.). Carving these huge sown blocks would have required considerable skills and some knowledge of geology as well (Ibid.).

More advanced technically than later constructions …?

Göbekli Tepe is a much more elaborated structure than Stonehenge, even if it apparently predates the British megaliths by about 6 500 years (Scham 2008:23; Conrad 2012). To build a place like this, Stone Age people would have required a pretty sophisticated level of organization, especially a well-coordinated workforce of stonemasons, diggers, quarry-men, and hundreds of people to drag the stones up and set them in place (Conrad 2012). Together with his colleagues, Klaus Schmidt estimates “that at least 500 people were required to hew the ten to fifty ton stone pillars from local queries, move then from as far as a quarter-mile [over four hundred metres] away, and erect them” (Scham 2008:26). Moreover, according to the theory of the Neolithic Revolution, people had not yet domesticated packed animals at that time to make them assist and so speed up the construction of the stone circles (Conrad 2012). So how did they manage to build something so monumental before they even discovered how to make a clay pot? (Ibid.).

Göbekli Tepe. Main excavation area with monumental Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN) A enclosures. Photo by Nico Becker, DAI. Photo and caption source: German Archaeological Institute (DAI) (2020). “The Site” In: The Tepe Telegrams. News & Notes from the Göbekli Tepe Research Staff.

In the quarry from where the stone was acquired, there is apparently one unfinished monolith of seven metres long (Conrad 2012). It is believed that by using granite picks, the Stone Age masons roughly carved it out as it is still in the bedrock (Ibid.). To remove it, they were likely to use primitive levers and a fulcrum (the point against which a lever is placed, on which it turns or is supported) They may have positioned the fulcrum at the front, and then the levers went over it. By these means, the masons were prying the boulder up (Ibid.). A crack on the stone, which is visible today, would suggest the monolith was broken while being lifted up (Ibid.). Having separated the blocks of stone from the bedrock, the builders may have transported them up to the hill by the method described as “rowing on land”; one can imagine people, instead of sitting inside the boat, standing outside it, and pushing down on the leaver and then pulling back on it and so the boulder would be moved forward (Ibid.). Around fifty people would be possibly needed to complete the task (Ibid.). Has this method been ever tried out with a real fourteen-ton (or heavier) block of stone? Is the number of fifty men able to crowd at once around the boulder, which is 15 metres long?

What was the site used for?

The site does not have its counterpart elsewhere, which makes it the oldest man-made construction yet discovered in the world (Conrad 2012). As such it constitutes highly significant monument to be studied (Ibid.). Schmid claims that “the site could not definitely have served for a daily life” (Ibid.). He has worked on other prehistoric sites in Turkey and he says that the structures of Göbekli Tepe do not resemble any kind of clustered dwellings that Stone Age people built (Ibid.). The temple sits on the hill with no direct access to water so people had to carry their food and drink up there, which means they could not stay at the site very long (Ibid.). They had to live elsewhere, possibly on the place of the modern city of Şanlıurfa (ancient Edessa), around fifteen kilometres away (Ibid.).

Göbekli Tepe site during excaviations. Photo by Klaus-Peter Simon (2012). CC BY-SA 3.0. Source: “Göbekli Tepe” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Most archaeologists believe that if the monumental sculpted pillars of Göbekli Tepe show the representations of gods, it is likely to consider the site as some kind of a sanctuary (Ibid.). If so, it would have been the oldest temple in the world (Conrad 2012).

Shrinking temple

Despite various studies, Göbekli Tepe’s function and the meaning behind its imagery still remain unknown (Conrad 2012). The mystery deepens by the fact that after the huge effort to build this extraordinary structure, the people who used it, then subsequently buried it (Ibid.).

The downfall of the oldest temple in the world is as mysterious as the religion it once served (Conrad 2012). For over a thousand years, the temple had occupied the central place in the cultural life of the region (Ibid.). People from hundreds kilometres away may have gathered there and used it as a ritual space (Ibid.). However, as the importance of agriculture grew in time, the temple’s role must have diminished (Ibid.). Thousands years after the large circular spaces with the massive monoliths were built, they were filled in and covered over (Ibid.). Instead, smaller structures were built on top of it (Ibid.). Consequently, it looks like Göbekli Tepe was being downsized: the enclosures had got smaller, the pillars progressively shorter and their number in the surrounding wall had dwindled until there were none (Ibid.). Finally, Göbekli Tepe disappeared in around 8 000 BC, buried beneath man-made hill (Ibid.).

Following the star

Each built circle of stones had been used for several hundred years and then filled in to be replaced by another one (Burns 2017). In total, the builders of Göbekli Tepe constructed twenty such circles – temples, which were different in size (Ibid.). Schmid claims that “it was a part of the program to erect such a circle to use it for some time but later to backfill it completely” (Conrad 2012). Hence the modern appearance of the site, which looks like a mount (Ibid.). It was because eventually all these mounds with covered temples became one big hill (Ibid.).

Cygnus constellation with the brightest star Deneb. Photo by Star Walk (2017).“A Gorgeous Quarter Moon meets Saturn, and the Swan’s Wings bear its Best Features!”. In: Medium.

An author, Andrew Collins, proposes an alternative, yet controversial, theory, according to which the builders constructed the successive temples for astronomical purposes (Burns 2017). Namely, the reason of the multiple rebuilding of the site would be to follow a particular celestial body (Ibid.).

Göbekli Tepe. Photo by Zhengan (2012). CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: “Göbekli Tepe” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

Archaeoastronomy survey has shown that 11 500 years ago, the twin central pillars of the most impressive of so far unearthed circles, the Enclosure D, faced the Denab in the sky, which is the brightest star in the constellation of Cygnus (Burns 2017). When the alignments of other twin pillars of Göbekli Tepe were studied in reference to the same star, it turned out that the Stone Age builders apparently kept following the Denab by building successive enclosures as the star slowly moved along the local horizon (Ibid.). Hence the twin pillars within successive enclosures were deliberately aligned according to the star that the people of Göbekli Tepe were observing (Ibid.). As in the process of Precession, the position of stars change overtime in the sky, the builders also had to re-align their temple periodically, each several hundred years (Ibid.).

The downfall of the temple

Some scholars, including archaeologists and geologists, put forward a controversial thesis explaining why Göbekli Tepe eventually ceased to exist. Namely, the Stone Age site is believed to have been destroyed by the Great Flood, recorded not only by the Bible but also dozens of other ancient sources coming from different corners of the world (Burns 2014-2015). Robert Schoch, PhD. (Burns 2014-2015) believes that there is enough evidence supporting the thesis that a great disaster had taken place at the end of the period that marked the end of the Ice Age; as a result, the great pillars of Göbekli Tepe were overthrown and the damage to the temple must have been large and extensive. Attempts surely were made to rebuild it, but people eventually gave up and buried the whole place (Ibid.). Perhaps they wanted to return there one day or leave it for posterity (Ibid.). Or else the temple was naturally covered with earth yet during the Flood, the waters of which had carried huge amounts of soil and organic materials into and over the temple complex.

After Dr. Rose, the reason why the site ultimately disappeared may be possibly explained by the appearance of a sanctuary within the now flooded archaeological site of Nevalı Çori, which was situated around thirty kilometres away from Göbekli Tepe (Conrad 2012). It was a Stone-Age village with a small temple from around 8 000 BC. (Ibid.). A small square enclosure had similar architectural elements as Göbekli Tepe: thirteen stone pillars in its walls and two faceless monoliths in its centre, with arms and hands carved on (Ibid.). In this context, it is a smaller and localized version of the Stone Age cathedral at Göbekli Tepe, looking more like a village church (Ibid.). Dr. Rose says that sacred spaces showing up at that time coincided with the downfall of the Göbekli Tepe so local communities had started to build their own sacred spaces, when the central temple stared losing its importance (Ibid.).

Restoration of a typical interior of Catal Höyük dwelling. The Museum of Anatolian Civilizations, Ankara, Turkey. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Another explanation of the abandonment of the site is that the descendants of Göbekli Tepe builders were no longer hunter-gatherers (Conrad 2012). They were farmers and they did not follow the religion of their ancestors per se but rather the ideas it represented (Ibid.). Their traces can be found at the archaeological site of Çatalhöyük (Turkey) – which is said to be one of the oldest cities, developed between 8 000 and 7 000 BC. (Ibid.). In a restored house of Çatalhöyük, there are the bull heads sticking out of the wall as much as zoomorphic representations carved on the pillars of Göbekli Tepe (Ibid.). Bulls must have meant large, scary and killing beasts for the society of Çatalhöyük (Ibid.). Bringing that animal power and violence inside the house was probably an attempt to tam it and to domesticate (Ibid.). It could be also a celebration of the animal’s strength or the hunt and prowess of the individuals (Ibid.). On the other side, the respect the Stone Age people had for wild and powerful beasts also hid their desire to conquer them (Ibid.). Accordingly, it seems that spiritual and physical story of Göbekli Tepe was spread far and wide (Ibid.).

Whatever the meaning of its symbolism was, the visible links to its imagery can be found at later sites throughout the region (Ibid.), which signifies it was truly important.

Many myths and legends claim that sophisticated cultures already existed at the very beginning of human civilization (Burns 2010). Robert Schoch, PhD. claims that there are various signs from all over the world that advanced societies had developed much earlier than previously thought (Ibid.). The discovery of Göbekli Tepe is hence completely contradictory to the current view of the slow evolution of civilization (Ibid.). Interestingly, since the archaeological digs started on site, neither a single tool for stone processing nor human remains have been found (Burns 2010; 2017). The former lack contradicts the sophisticated carving created on site, whereas the latter excludes Professor Schmid’s theory of Göbekli Tepe as a burial complex (Burns 2017). It was not either a domestic settlement (Ibid.). An archaeologist, Paul Bahn, PhD., claims that when something in archaeology is incomprehensible, given finds are usually assigned ritual significance but these are pure speculations (Ibid.). Taking into account such facts, will the discovery of Göbekli Tepe radically change the world view of the beginning of human civilization? (Ibid.) Is the find of Göbekli Tepe the missing evidence that mankind’s strangest myths about lost civilizations can be based on facts? (Ibid.)

Featured image: “Göbekli Tepe, Şanlıurfa”. Photo by Teomancimit (2011). CC BY-SA 3.0. (Image cropped). Source: “Göbekli Tepe” (2020). Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia.

By Joanna
Faculties of English Philology, History of Art and Archaeology.
University of Silesia in Katowice, Poland;
Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw, Poland;
University College Dublin, Ireland.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

“Göbekli Tepe” (2020). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/2Loo1id>. [Accessed on 11th May, 2020].

Andrews E. (2016). “World’s Oldest Monument to Receive a Multi-Million Dollar Investment”. In: HISTORY.com. Available at <https://bit.ly/3bn8xWD>. [Accessed on 11th May, 2020].

Batuman E. (2011). “Turkey’s Ancient Sanctuary.” In: The New Yorker. Available at <https://bit.ly/3dCx9vI>. [Accessed on 11th May, 2020].

Benedict P. (1980). “Survey Work in Southeastern Anatolia”. In: Çambel H, Braidwood, R. J.  ed. Prehistoric Research in Southeastern Anatolia I. Edebiyat Fakültesi Basimevi, Istanbul, pp. 151–191.

Burns K. (2017). “Return to Gobekli Tepe”. In: Ancient Aliens, Season 12, Episode 16. Prometheus Entertainment.

Burns K. (2014-2015). “The Great Flood”. In: Ancient Aliens, Season 9, Episode 8. Prometheus Entertainment.

Burns K. (2010). “Unexplained Structures”. In: Ancient Aliens, Season 2, Episode 8. Prometheus Entertainment.

Busacca G. (2017). “Places of Encounter: Relational Ontologies, Animal Depiction and Ritual Performance at Göbekli Tepe”. In: Cambridge Archaeological Journal, v. 27, issue 2, pp. 313-330.

Conrad T. (2012) Cradle of the Gods. Atlantic Productions LTD. for National Geographic Channels. Available at <https://bit.ly/3blMwas>. [Accessed on 11th May, 2020].

Curry A. (2008). “Göbekli Tepe: The World’s First Temple?”. In: Smithsonian Institution. Available at <https://bit.ly/3dAM21E>. [Accessed on 11th May, 2020].

Dietrich O. (2016) “Göbekli Tepe – The first 20 Years of Research”. In: German Archaeological Institute (DAI) (2020) The Tepe Telegrams. News & Notes from the Göbekli Tepe Research Staff. Available at <https://bit.ly/2WKxRAr>. [Accessed on 11th May, 2020].

Documentary shots: Burns K. (2017) “Return to Gobekli Tepe”. In: Ancient Aliens, Season 12, Episode 16. Prometheus Entertainment.

German Archaeological Institute (DAI) (2020). “The Site” In: The Tepe Telegrams. News & Notes from the Göbekli Tepe Research Staff. Available at <https://bit.ly/2SZBily>. [Accessed on 13th May, 2020].

Knox T. (2009). “Do these mysterious stones mark the site of the Garden of Eden?”. In: Mail Online. Available at <http://dailym.ai/2xXjLmR>. [Accessed on 12th May, 2020].

Notroff J. (2018). “Visitors back at the ruins again”. In: German Archaeological Institute (DAI) (2020). The Tepe Telegrams. News & Notes from the Göbekli Tepe Research Staff. Available at <https://bit.ly/3miNaem>. [Accessed on 13th May, 2020].

Photo: “Hunter-gatherers” by Archaeology Newsroom (2020).  In: Archaeology & Art. Available at <https://bit.ly/3cs4qda>. [Accessed on 13th May, 2020].

Photo “Cygnus constellation” by Star Walk (2017) “A Gorgeous Quarter Moon meets Saturn, and the Swan’s Wings bear its Best Features!”. In: Medium. Available at <https://bit.ly/2WuI7h7>. [Accessed on 14th May, 2020].

Sink D. (2020). Comment on the article. In: Walter A. (2020). “Predating all known ancient civilizations, Göbekli Tepe may be world’s first architecture”. In: Archinect News. Available at <https://bit.ly/2Wb4ZSc>. [Accessed on 13th December, 2020].

Scham S. (2008). The World’s First Temple. Archaeology, v. 61, no. 6, New York: Archaeological Institute of America, pp. 22-27.

Schmidt, K. (2011) “Göbekli Tepe: A Neolithic Site in Southwestern Anatolia”. In: Steadman S. R., McMahon G. eds. The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Land of Fairy Chimneys in the Heartland of Anatolia

While working as a teacher I always used my summer holidays for study trips, and when my work colleagues went on holidays by the seaside or up to the mountains to relax with their families after the whole school year, I usually went digging, measuring churches or cataloging its inventory. Always non-profit. Anyway, it was my choice and the only chance I could entirely dedicate my time to my passion.

One trip after another

After one week trip to Tri-City (Pomerania, Poland) in July, organised by Wrocław University, some of my school mates prolonged their stay on Hel Peninsula to enjoy its long sandy beaches (see: Travelling from ‘Hel’ to the City of Saint Mary). Contrary to others, I decided to grasp another opportunity for getting closer to archaeology and I left for … Turkey.

… ruins of some great and ancient city … Copyright©Archaeotravel.

After travelling across the whole Poland, I finally reached my hometown, where I repacked my stuff from my backpack to a suitcase, and two days later I was already at the airport, waiting for my flight to Antalya.

Land full of archaeological treasures

Turkey is famous for its archaeological treasures. I joined there my friends who had chosen Anatolia for their holidays. After visiting together Istanbul and Ankara, “we found ourselves suddenly lost in a forest of cones and pillars of rock … like the ruins of some great and ancient city” (W.F. Ainsworth in Harpur, Westwood 1997:58). We had just reached Cappadocia …

Abstract art of Cappadocia

Lying southeast of Ankara, it is one of the most remarkable area in Turkey and most frequently visited places in the whole world.

Caves and corridors … Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Since the early eighteen century, its magical moonscape landscapes have astonished travellers and writers – so unusual are its rock patterns (Harpur, Westwood 1997:58). Cappadocia looks like “a phantasmagorical world where rocks shaped like stepped ziggurats, towers, spires, minarets and cones jut upward into the blue sky” (Ibid:58). Some of these formations grow out of the ground individually or in a few and are characterized by more erosion-resistant basalt caps in the upper part, which gives them the shape of cones imposed on slender like chimneys trunks of soft tufa. Some even compare the latter to penis heads (Pyrgies 2015:31). Clustered together, the rocks sometimes look like an army of crouching dwarfs wearing pointed hats, others – hill-like formations – resemble more “sandcastles melted by an incoming tide” (Harpur, Westwood 1997:58). Such a diversity of shapes became an inspiration for Bronze Age discs – an excellent exemplum of abstract forms of a human body in art (Pyrgies 2015:31; see Noble 2003:40-42).

Grotesquery of the region

Geologically, Cappadocia is millions years old. It was formed as a result of eruptions of the volcanoes: Hasan Dağı and Erciyes Dağı.

Their lava mixed with thick layers of ash changed with time into soft rock, called tufa (Harpur, Westwood 1997:58). Then an artist came and sculpted a grotesquery of the region. Its name was natural erosion. A painter – natural light – added the pink flush of dawn or dusk and magnified natural colours of stone valleys, vibrating under its subtle touch (Ibid:58). Then people appeared in the valleys, especially in the area of today towns of Göreme, Ürgüp, Nevşehir, Zelve and Avanos. They gauged and “hollowed out the tufa [formations] into honeycombs of rooms for everyday living […]” (Ibid:58), and with the fourth century, hermitages and monasteries for worship (Ibid:58).

Place for religious retreat

Greek Christians who chose Cappadocia for their retreat followed the monastic idea promoted by Basil, the Great (330-379 AD.), a hermit and the bishop of Caesarea (Kayseri) (Harpur, Westwood 1997:58).

Russet-coloured Christian symbols. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Considered the father of monasticism of the Byzantine Church, Saint Basil (Harpur, Westwood 1997:58), likewise the Fathers of the Egyptian desert, believed that a monk’s life should be filled with work and contemplation. Nevertheless, Cappadocian monasticism was based primarily on coenobitic life (community life), which Saint Basil considered the only proper monastic way, unlike the Egyptian anchoritism (recluse) (Telepneff 2001:24-26, 36; Rops 1968:606-607; Zarzeczny 2013:39-40).

Rock-cut Christian churches

With Christian communities’ grow in the Middle Ages, rock-cut Cappadocian churches developed out of early monastic dwellings and there had been over 300 of them by the end of the thirteenth century (Harpur, Westwood 1997:58-60).

The so-called Dark Church as very little light reaches its interior. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

The internal architecture of freestanding churches was copied by carving out all the features out of soft rock: “domes, apses, barrel-vault ceilings, and columns, arches and even tables and benches” (Harpur, Westwood 1997:58-60). Supporting functions of such elements as columns seem so realistic that it is still surprising to see a stalactite-like column hanging from the ceiling since its base “has been worn out completely away” (Ibid:60). The churches, especially their interiors, are also richly adorned with Byzantine wall paintings representing Christian symbols: from early russet-coloured various patterns drawn directly on the rock to more elaborated and colourful biblical depictions and portraits of saints (Ibid:60). The latter had appeared in Cappadocia since the tenth century onward and were made already on dry plaster (secco) (Ibid:60).

Open air museum

Most famous churches are still visible in Göreme, known for this reason as an “open air museum” (Harpur, Westwood 1997:60). Most famous are the Elmalı Kilise (Church of the Apple), the Yılanlı Kilise (Snake Church – because of the looking like a snake, dragon being killed by Saint George), and the Karanlık Kilise (Dark Church) (Ibid:60).

In the course of the fourteenth century, when Cappadocia was already under Turks, the range of Christianity began to shrink and eventually, in 1922, the Greek were expelled from the country (Harpur, Westwood 1997:60). Nevertheless, Cappadocian “houses” have continued to be used by local communities (Ibid:60).

Going underground

Apart from Christian dwellings, archaeologists encountered other earlier constructions but deep underground (Kosmiczne opowieści 2019). In total there are 36 known subterranean cities in central Anatolia but only four of them are open to the public, like Kaymakli and Derinkuyu (Chabińska-Ilchanka et al. 2015:253). The most extensive and intriguing of all is definitely Derinkuyu, which means in Turkish a deep well (Dunning, Ogun 2018).

The deeper you go down, the more uncomfortable you feel. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Likewise the Hypogeum in Malta, it was uncovered by accident in 1963, at the occasion of refurbishing one of local houses. A demolition of one wall opened the entrance to the tunnel going deep down to the underground, and branching into multiple corridors and chambers (Dunning, Ogun 2018; Kosmiczne … 2019). After wide excavations, it turned out it was just a part of a huge honeycomb city located on more than eight successive levels and reaching underground up to sixty metres down. Underground cities could once have been connected as one of the tunnels inside Derinkuyu (nine km long and extremely narrow) is said to lead to another underground complex (Dunning, Ogun 2018).

The deeper, the narrower the tunnels become. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Derinkuyu was inhabited in the past by thousands of people (possibly up to 20.000) and their livestock. They seemed to lead a typical life but underground. In their mysterious city, there were spaces of different everyday conveniences: dining rooms, wine presses, cellars, warehouses, animal enclosures, schools and places of worship (Dunning, Ogun 2018; Kosmiczne … 2019). For lighting, in some parts people are believed to have used olive lamps, which could have been placed in special niches (Kosmiczne … 2019). Still such niches are missing elsewhere, and on deeper levels torches or lamps would not work due to limited air sources and so the question of the lighting system inside the city has not been entirely answered. It Is obvious, however, that without any artificial light the underground would be just pitch-dark (Dunning, Ogun 2018). The access to fresh water was provided by the well built under the lowest level and taking water from the river flowing under the surface of the city. In order to prevent the water being poisoned, the river’s flow was checked at the level of the lower floors and in the event of danger, the access of water to the upper floors was cut off (Kosmiczne … 2019). Moreover, the city was constructed in such a way that it was impossible to force people to leave it either by means of fire or water (ibid). There were three main entrances to the underground, which in case of danger could be closed only from the inside with round basalt boulders (one meter in diameter, up to 500 kg in weight) (Ibid.). Such megalithic doors were placed on rollers and also led to subsequent levels, thanks to which each of them could be closed separately (Ibid).

Cappadocia is one of the most beautiful places in the world and a must-see for every explorer. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

City residents could also communicate with each other at a distance, using miniature shafts with a section of 10 cm (Kosmiczne … 2019). The entire ventilation system consisted of thousands of long vertical shafts (52 known in total) that supplied air to the deepest and most distant rooms (Ibid). What is quite interesting, the shaft chimneys sticking out on the ground resemble the shape of bull’s horns (Dunning, Ogun 2018). The builders (whoever they were) also took care of the air conditioning: in the summer, there was about 15 °C in the inside, and in the winter the temperature did not fall below 7 °C (Kosmiczne … 2019).

Nobody knows who built this intricate subterranean complex, why and how.

Who built it and and when?

This matter is still very controversial and there are many hypotheses about who was the author of Derinkuyu (Kosmiczne … 2019). As other stone structures, Derinkuyu cannot be dated, which is why archaeologists usually attribute similar structures to cultures having inhabited a given area (Ibid).

Derinkuyu was inhabited in the past by thousands of people (possibly up to 20.000) and their livestock (Photo posted by Jackson Groves, 2019)

Academics generally claim the construction of Derinkuyu was built either by the Phrygians (the twelfth – seventh century BC) or by an earlier culture – the Hittites (1600 BC – the twelfth century) (Ibid). Although the Phrygians are mostly considered as the authors of the city, and the construction itself dated back to the eighth century, the finds of Hittite artefacts (the thirteenth – twelfth century) in the city’s tunnels leave this question still open (Ibid).

Cappadocia’s honeycombs of chambers. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Moreover, there are also much older Palaeolith tools excavated that date back to around 10 000-12 000 (History 2018). Irrespective of these finds, some scholars suggest that some part of the complex was just started by one of these ancient cultures but then widely expanded only by Christians who were forced to protect themselves underground in great numbers (Dunning, Ogun 2018). Such an explanation is, however, less possible as the whole complex is architecturally consistent. And even if Christians had found there their long time refuge and adapted it to their use by creating (or just modifying) rock-cut spaces, such as the so-called “cathedral”, they could not expand the city to such a degree as it is known today (Ibid). The oldest identified account of underground cities in Cappadocia comes from 370 BC and was written by a Greek historian from Athens, Xenophon (Kosmiczne … 2019). His account comes from the work of Anabaza, where the author mentions people living in large, underground houses, along with their livestock (Ibid).

After historians, the city was already used during the Roman Empire, and then by Christians as a place of refuge during invasions of Mongols and Arabs (Kosmiczne … 2019). According to an alternative theory, the builders of Derinkuyu were representatives of a lost, highly developed civilization, which was destroyed about 12,000 years ago by a huge cataclysm (Dunning, Ogun 2018; Kosmiczne … 2019; see Hancock 2016).

Why was it built?

Derinkuyu, like other similar constructions in Cappadocia, is believed to have been built as a war shelter for thousands of people looking for a hide from Arab invaders (Kosmiczne … 2019; Chabińska-Ilchanka et al. 2015:253). However, these are only speculations, not facts.

The primary collection of religious texts of Zoroastrianism, the Avesta (in the Wendidad part), mentions the first king of mankind who was warned by the god Ahura Mazda of the coming catastrophe of long-time and evil winters (Kosmiczne … 2019; see: Hancock 2016).

Basalt caps on top of tufa cones. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Thus, the god recommends building a great Vara (in Persian mythology an underground shelter) and let in a pair of seeds from each animal and plant on earth, as well as a number of carefully selected people who would re-populate the land when winter passes away (Kosmiczne … 2019; see: Hancock 2016). With some exceptions, the story is remarkably similar to the biblical tale of Noah’s Ark, and other myths about a great cataclysm and a god saving the earthly life (Ibid; see Hancock 2016). Supporters of the theory of the lost ancient civilization relate the description of harsh winters to the last Ice Age (younger dryas lasting from around 10 850 B.C. to around 9700 B.C.) and associate Derinkuyu with the ancient Vara  (Ibid; see Hancock 2016). For these reasons Persians claim such multi-stored subterranean cities were built by their ancient ancestors (Dunning, Ogun 2018).

How?

First of all, Derinkuyu construction amazes with its craftsmanship and highly functional, architectural elements. Like other structures in Cappadocia, the city was made of soft volcanic rock – tuff (Kosmiczne … 2019).

Beauty of central Anatolia. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Therefore, builders had to be very careful while building the underground chambers and had to make sure they would carve out strong and well-balanced columns to maintain the pressure of the upper floors (Kosmiczne … 2019). One structural engineering mistake would be enough to cause a collapse of the entire city (Ibid). Secondly, it is noticed that to construct such functional elements as wells and ventilation shafts, the builders would need a special machinery or tooling to drill deeply and precisely in the rock (by the way, no tools have been there found there so far) (Dunning, Ogun 2018). Next, It is estimated that over million and half square metres of rock was removed to construct the whole complex (History 2018). However, there is no trace of the extracted material in the area (Ibid). Finally, in Turkey there are multiple fault lines (a line on a rock surface or the ground that traces a geological fault) generating earthquakes, except for one region, which is in central Anatolia, especially around Cappadocia (Dunning, Ogun 2018). It is not surprising then that such elaborate and deep subterranean complexes were carved out just in the area that has not posed a threat of earthquakes which can easily destroy the underground warrens of tunnels and chambers. The most important question is how their builders knew about that phenomenon (Ibid).

One of the creepiest places

Without doubt, Derinkuyu belongs to most fascinating but also creepiest sites I have ever been. The deeper you go down, the more uncomfortable you feel. It’s an amazing place to get in but it is not proper for asthmatics, people with heart deceases and claustrophobic issues or those with limited mobility (Dunning, Ogun 2018). While walking down to deeper levels, it is more difficult to breathe and passages getting more and more narrower (Ibid).

Homes, Christian dwellings and ancient underground complexes. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

The tunnels of the city measure approximately 160 cm high (Kosmiczne … 2019) and if you are taller you need to constantly bend over to pass through from one chamber to the other (Dunning, Ogun 2018). So far archaeologists have excavated the city reaching down to its eight floor but there are possibly even eighteen in total (Ibid). However, no archaeologist has explored it yet directly or indirectly by means of robotic probes (Ibid).

Here comes a fairy tale …

Now goes the part I like most: an oral tradition. Local people usually describe the region of Cappadocia as the land of fairy chimneys (Harpur, Westwood 1997:58; Dunning, Ogun 2018).

All around there are fairy like shapes of nature. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

Such a name may either refer to “fairy” natural formations of Cappadocia – according to travel guide books (Harpur, Westwood 1997:58) or, as villagers believe, to the underground constructions, which were actually built by fairies (Dunning, Ogun 2018). The latter are usually describe as very tiny people resembling Tolkien’s hobbits but with fiery red eyes (Ibid). Some local villagers claim they caught a glimpse of such a creature underground (Ibid). Still such beings could only work by night as they suffered from the daylight (Ibid). This is why, the fairies once lived (or still live) in the deepest and narrowest levels of the subterranean cities (Ibid). According to the same source, the complexes were actually built from the bottom upwards, first by the fairies from the Inner Earth and then, at the higher levels, by people who consecutively adapted them to their use and widely enlarged (Ibid).

The dead end

Is it a fairy tale? Most people in answer would shrug or call it an old wives’ tale. A more scientific theory than that states Derinkuyu was built from the top to bottom (Dunning, Ogun 2018).

The case is, however, the same theory goes to the dead end, while archaeologists are trying to localize the real “bottom” of the subterranean structure (Dunning, Ogun 2018). Bu it is known that the deeper the city goes down, the narrower its chambers and tunnels become but nobody yet has reached their final end, still hidden deep down …

Anatolian night

It was already late when we all were sitting in one of numerous pubs, filled with typical of Cappadocia atmosphere of small villages, being lost among tufa rocks and their multiple shapes. At that time I was not sure anymore if all of these stories I heard were just made-up or maybe I had enjoyed too much Turkish beer … Still I trusted a message coming from Lord Richard Croft’s words: “Well, all myths have foundation in reality” (Tomb Raider 2018).

It was a wonderful adventure …. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

The Anatolian night was flickering to me with its stars. Tomorrow was surely going to bring another mystery.

Featured image: Imaginative expressions of nature in Cappadocia. Copyright©Archaeotravel.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

“A Subterranean Network”. Fragment of “Ancient Aliens, Season 12, Episode 16” (2018). In: History. Available at <https://bit.ly/2S8GfYj>. [Accessed on 31st January, 2020].

“Derinkuyu underground city” (2021). In: Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Available at <https://bit.ly/37uwOu9>. [Accessed on 9th August, 2021].

“Tajemnica Starożytnego Podziemnego Miasta Derinkuyu” (2019). In: Kosmiczne opowieści. Available at <https://bit.ly/2tiHzzd>. [Accessed on 31st January, 2020].

Ainsworth, W.F. (1840s) in Harpur, J. Westwood, J. (1997) The Atlas of Legendary Places. New York: Marshal Editions.

Dunning, C., Ogun H. (2018) “The Lost Ancient Underground City of Derinkuyu in Turkey.” In:  Earth Ancients. Available at <https://bit.ly/31iK9Sh>. [Accessed on 31st January, 2020].

Groves, J. (2019) Derinkuyu Underground City in Cappadocia, Turkey. Available at <https://bit.ly/2RPnpqf>. [Accessed on 31st January, 2020].

Hancock, G. (2016) “The Zoroastrian Texts Of Ancient Persia, Underground Cities & What They Reveal About Advanced Ancient Civilizations”. In: Alternative News. Available at <https://bit.ly/3b1GfSh>. [Accessed on 31st January, 2020].

Harpur, J. Westwood, J. (1997) The Atlas of Legendary Places. New York: Marshal Editions.

Chabińska-Ilchanka, E., Dylewska K., Horecka K., Jaskulski M., Kastelik M. M., Łatka M., Ressel E., Willman A., Żywczak K. (2015) Niezwykłe miejsca świata. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo SBM Sp. zo.o.

Noble, V. (2003) The Double Goddess. Women Sharing Power. Rochester, Vermont: Bear & Company.

Pyrgies, J. (2015) Syjamskie bliźnięta minionych cywilizacji. Krótka historia o zakurzonych figurkach. Wydawnictwo Bezkres Wiedzy.

Rops, D. (1968) Kościół pierwszych wieków. Warszawa.