Neolithic Stone Pillar Tradition in Southeast Anatolia: A Comparative Assessment Using a Contextual Approach

The last 25 years witnessed an unprecedented increase in the theoretical and empirical research on the southeast Anatolian Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN) period, focusing on cult buildings and ritual symbolism. The cult structures, pillars, and relief motifs, which became the center of research in the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Erhan Bingöl
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Istanbul University Press 2021-12-01
Series:Anadolu Araştırmaları
Subjects:
Online Access:https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/AE1A06BC34984E85B134C1FED22F3A85
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The last 25 years witnessed an unprecedented increase in the theoretical and empirical research on the southeast Anatolian Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN) period, focusing on cult buildings and ritual symbolism. The cult structures, pillars, and relief motifs, which became the center of research in the region with the discovery of Nevali Çori and Göbeklitepe, engendered novel theoretical discussions within the archaeology of religion. The main subject of this study is the evaluation of the stone pillars—which became a tradition in the PPN period—in terms of their archaeological contexts. This paper discusses the pillars and details and depictions etched on them, while compiling numerical data on their assessed features. All the stone pillars unearthed so far in archaeological excavations and surveys have been re-evaluated and reinterpreted from a holistic approach by considering the archaeological contexts as well as their structural features and relief depictions. Stone pillars provide ample information on the symbolism and ritual practices of the communities when assessed with their archaeological contexts and symbolic features as a whole. The stone pillars identified in the Euphrates and Tigris regions represent two different traditions in terms of form, size, and depiction, which indicate that these two regions need to be viewed as two unique and separate yet connected entities. This difference is an indication of unique symbolic and ritual practices that refer to distinct ideological worlds. However, in both regions, the cult and special buildings were mostly located in a specially selected area of the settlements, separate from the domestic features and architecture. In addition, the practice of constant construction and re-construction, the secondary use of pillars as architectural elements, and the subsequent burial of buildings when their use-life was completed are common characteristics observed in both regions. Masculine and wild faunal symbols typically characterize the pillars from the Euphrates Basin sites. The gradual shrinkage of pillar size and their subsequent disappearance at the Euphrates Basin sites may suggest that ideological and economical transformations were underway in Neolithic society.
ISSN:2667-629X