TUBA-AR Tiirkiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Dergisi Turkish Academy of Sciences Journal of Archaeology Gdbekll Tepe and the Rock Art of the Near East Hattusa/Bofazkéy’tn Yerlesim Tarthine Yen! Katkilar: Baydkkaya Kazilanna Toplu bir Bakig Die Eisenzeit in Zentralanatolien im Lichte der keramischen Funde vom BiyUkkaya In Bogazkéy/Hattusa Systematic Survey in Alicante, Spain. First Results A Large-Scale Geophysical Prospection in the Acemhéyak the site of the Assyrian Trade Colony Period Frihchalkolitische Metallfunde von ‘Mersin - Yumuktepe: Begin der extraktiven Metallurgie? Bahann Mojdecist: Cigdem (Crocus) ya da AN.TAH.SUM.™ Hititler Devri Anadolu Florasina Kacik bir Kath, Kyrene Sikkeleri Uzerinde Betimlenen Silphion Bitkisi Isiginda Antik Cada Dogum Kontrolii:TOBA.AR I (2000) Gébekli Tepe and the Rock Art of the Near East Gobekli Tepe ve On Asya Kaya Resim Sanati Klaus SCHMIDT* Kenword: raison rock a, Har Kaiom, Jana 0, Ka Teg, Limo, Saran -2epeeion’ ‘Avatar sehr: Tehinces aya son, Har Kat, bans sa Kis Tose Lee, eaten “seg coman Iik Neolitik evreye ait Gébekli Tepe'nin yontular1 ve kabartmalarinn ikonogratileri Ya- Jan Dogu kaya resim sanat: ile karsilastirma olasiligim vermektedir. Bugtine kadar sade- ce birkag kaya resim sanati bulunduran yerlesme ciddi olarak tarihlenebilmis, ya da ar keolojik kiiltirlerle baglantilar: kurulabilmistir. Bu yazida, Qanak Gémleksiz Neolitik Bye ait Dhuweila yontularma dayanilarak, olastihkla Ganak Cémleksiz Neolitik Bye ait KilwaNegev! tarzi ve Akeramik Neolitik evresi gdsteren Gébekli Tepe ile baska bélec- Jerdeki, Jawa ve Juba gibi, kaya resim sanati kisaca incelenmigtir. Canak Cémleksia Neolitik Bye ait ikonograti bireok nedenlerie ispatlanmistir. Bu sanatin en olasi agikla- mast, gerisinde bir saman stilinin bulunmasidir. Latmos bélgesinde yenilerde bulunan resimler, [ran ve Mezopotamya'daki Obeyd mtihiir sanatindan bilinen "kegi-demon‘unu da” kapsamaktadir. Bu varhk gene saman tara: bir davrams géstergesidir ve ,dag kogisi tannis!" olarak degil ama Franko-Kantabrik bélgedeki Paleolitik Devir kaya resim sanatina kadar izleri geriye gitmektedir. Yiiksek kaliteli bu kaya resim sanatinin ortadan kalkmasi samaniarm ilk sehir devietlerindeki tapinaklarda is goren rahiplerlo yor dogis- tirdikleri seklinde agiklanabilir. The rock art of Northern Africa is famo- us since the 19th century. After the pione- ering works of e.g. Gerhard Rholfs or Hein- rich Barth' in the first half of the 20th cen- tury e.g. Leo Frobenius, Abbe Breuil and Henri Lhote developed a chronological se- quence of several styles, starting with the “Tost Ur Ur und Prgeshioht, Koahetr. 4 D 81064 Brangea Almanye Bubaline and round head period, the bovi- dian, the horse and the camel periods. The total number of known examples of Saha- ran rock art has increased drastically in re- cent decades. Recent studies, done e.g. by Alfred Muzzolini, caused some important change in the sequence. According to Muz- (emzolini, the Bubalus style is contemporary with the bovine phase’. He also rejected the early datings e.g. of Fabrizio Mori, who pla- ced the earliest paintings before the end of the pleistocene’. Today a wide number of scholars is involved in the exploration of North African rock art and the colourful szenario of saharanien rock pictures is divi- ded into a number of different styles or schools, but should not be dated before the early holocene. In the Middle East amongst several early travellers Sir Aurel Stein drew attention to tho significance of the rock art of the Upper Indus valley. It includes more than 30000 prehistoric and historic engravings. Recent research is done by the Joint Pakistan-Ger man Rock Art Project’. Near Eastern Rock art never found such an interest in the archaeological science. It was always in the shadow of the "arte mobi- lier" of Mesopotamian cultures. Research rarely was concentrated on rock art sites it- self, and the site of Kilwa e.g. was explored by the German African Rock Art Expedition by the way. Anati's chronological system of the rock art of Sinai and the Negev is still the base of any reseach in Near Eastern rock art’ With Har Karkom an important site was fo- und at the border between Negev and Si- nai’, which seems to be in the centre of the rock art distribution of this area. From Syria and Iran there is no publis- hed evidence of rock art until now. From Iraq again very few is known, but some eng- ravings are published from Qasr Muheiwir near Rutba near the Jordanian border’. Arabia, especially Saudi Arabia, is rich in rock art sites. After the pioneer work of H.Rhotert' in Kilwa (a site first noticed by G.Horsfield’) and E.Anati in central Arabi- a, a numbor of new provinces had been lo- cated and published by the Survey of Saudi Arabia, But Kilwa remained the main site for Anatis NegevIStyle, which is poorly represented in the Negev itself. As the "Riic- kenindustrie” of Kilwa today can be unders- tood as an PPNB flint mining area, and as, the site Kilwa 19, which is close to the eng- ravings, can be understood as an PPNB-sett- lement mound, the dating of Kilwa and the Nogevistyle most probably fals into the PPNB period. The engravings depict mainly caprovines, but also an erotic scene and an. tapered bovide with humans. ‘The engravings from Dhuweila and other sites in vicinity are recently published mo- nographicaly by A.Botts". The engravings, mainly gazelle like animals, include also a scene of several persons, probably dancing, hunters, Highly important is the stratificati- on of some of the engravings, giving an arc- haeological connection of the Dhuweila art with the PPNB. As the Dhuweila carvings are closely comparable with Kilwa and the Negev-Estyle, the question of dating Anati's Early Hunters style again is focused into the PPNB period. In contrast to the southern Levant our imowledge about rock art sites in the Aege- an even is completely lacking. D. Theocha- ris published some engravings on stone slabs from Sarakinos-cave near Makrinitza in Pelion in Thessaly, which had been fo- und 1964 during enlarging the entrance of the cave", The engravings included a hun- ter with bow and an ibex and dancing sce- nes. In front of the cave of Palaiokastro bet- ween Hagios Viachos and Ano Tsechania a stone artefact with an engraved horse was found. But G.Freund was able to proof, that the engravings had been of modern date and not pleistocene or early holocene, as, ‘Theocharis supposed. Prehistoric rock art was not found in Thessaly or any other regi- on of Greece. Some fresh evidence is reported from the republic of Macedonia. D.Aleksovski of the Rock Art Association of Macedonia was able to find engraved rocks in 1992". He attributed these figures to four different phases. The first three are ascribed to pre- and protohistoric ages, the last has been eee |Gobokii Tepe attributed to the historic and Christian Pe- riods. These engravings would be the first ones of the complete Balkan region, but it seems evident, that this area needs much more research. In Turkey Rock art is an important part of the cultural heritage of the Hittite, Urar tian, Assyrian and other historical period: but these monuments, mainly imperial rel efs, are not included in this survey". Prehis- toric rock art also was known from Turkey for a long time", but after the summary of E.Anati, including the engravings of Palan- land Beldibi” and the work of M.Uyamk in Hakkari and Tirigin* Turkish rock art research nearly stopped”. For a long time a few new sites could be added, and Uyamk’s important publication about "The Pet- roglyphs of South Eastern Anatolia" rema- ined unknown even to most rock art rese- archers (fig. 1). Some new evidence only came from the eastern part of Turkey. O.Belli reported pa- inted rock art from Put kéyii and the Baset dag near Van". Alok added some further si- tes, including examples of Medieval Age or later graffiti on buildings, but also some examples of doubtfull value (e.g. Cudi dain) 21. In the NEWS 95 World Rock Art Cong: ress in Turin and Pinerolo Anatolian Rook Art was included in the chapter "Arabian Pe- ninsula, Levant and Anatolia". The short, half page news regarding Anatolia had been restricted to Qatal Héyiik, where there is no true Rock Art, but wall paintings, the Van caves and, as the only real news, to the re- cently discovered Latmos paintings. Anneliese Peschlow-Bindokat's research in the region of ancient Herakleia brought Imowledge of an unexpected and spectacu- lar province of rock art in Western Turkey*. All the pictures in abris found around Te- kerlek Dag, the ancient Latmos mountain, aro painted and not engraved. They depict humans, some animals as snakes or other reptils, and geometric signs, but no hunting scenes. Many of the anthropomorphic figu- res have T-shaped or M-shaped heads. Up to now there is no archaeological culture in the region of Tekerlek Dag, which could be connected with the paintings, but Peschlow- Bindokat - based on the representations of female persons - is inclined to see iconog- raphical and chronological links with the Hacilar culture of the Lake District in Ana- tolia, Such a dating could be in fact a seri- ous base, but further analysis is needed. The situation of Rock Art research in Anatolia is far away from beeing satisying. So the excavations at Gébekli Tepe in Sout- heastern Turkey (fig. 1, 7) - which encove- red not rock art, but large scale sculptures and reliefs - offer, like Catal Héyiik, the possibility of a new approach in the study of Near Eastern Rock Art. ‘The site of Gébekli Tepe is known since 1963, but its monumental neolithic archi- tecture was not understood by the early sur veyers, Time was not ready to connect a scatter of flint tools with large worked li- mestone slaps, which can be seen all over the site. With the fresh knowledge of the Cayénii and Nevali Cori excavation results the real importance of this site was unders- tood easily during a short visit in 1994. In 1995, directed by the Museum of San- hurfa. and the German Archaeological Insti- tute excavations could be started at Gébek- i Tepe. After five seasons of work (1995- 99) we know still few about the layout of the monumental architecture (fig. 2), but we can understand, that Gébekli Tepe is a site mainly of megalithic ritual buildings of unexpected dimensions Today from Gobekli Tepe we have a large serie of monumental reliefs on pillars or on different groups of artifacts, which are da- ted to the PPN-Period. Partially they can be linked with Near Eastern rock art. On the ot- her hand there are also a few examples of true rock art at Gébekli Tepe. On bedrock of the southeastern plateau there are three more than life-size phalloi in relief (C15)”. From alittle cave at the western slope of the natural rigde of Gébekli Tepe there is the re- rlllief of a little bovid (C16), but up to now it is of uncertain date. So these examples are not in the focus of the following attempt to eva- luate the position of Gébekli Tepe regar- ding the rock art research of the Near East. One main structure uncovered so far at Gébekli Tepe is the so called "“Schlangenp- feilergebude" at the southern slope of the mound. The dimensions of the building are not clear yet, but it includes a serie of huge pillars made of limestone. All of the pillars have the characteristic Tshape of the Neva- li Gori-Type*. Some pillars are without any ornamentation, but the existing relief decor of several pillars is quite different from Ne- vali Gori. At Pillar 1 snakes, an object of un- certain meaning, may be a net of 17 snakes, and a quadruped, probably a ram, are depic- ted. Pillar 2 is ornamented with the reliefs of a bucranium and the row of a bull, a fox and a crane. At Pillar 5 there is a single snake, similar to the snakes of Pillar 1, and at Pillar 6 (fig. 3) there is a reptile similar to surface finds of 1995 (A 12; A13). And both, at Pillar 9 (fig. 4) and 10 (fig. 5)., not comp- letely excavated up to now, again a fox is vi sible, At Pillar 10 there are also graffiti like engravings of a boar and two dogs. ‘The most spectaculaire relief was found in 1999 at Pillar 12 (fig 6). Below several dug like birds there are a boar and again a fox, which is partially covered by a terrazzo-floor belonging to a renewal of that building complex. Later within the PPN-Period, the complex of the "Schlangenpfeilergebaude" was completly filled up with earth - it was"buried". From the filling debris there are several sculptures (fig. 8) and fragmen- ted reliefs - and two radiocarbon dates aro- und 9000 calBC, which are in good accor dance with the archaeological dating, which includes EPPNB and PPNA-elements. A second structure is the so called "Lo- wenpteilergebaude", It was built on top of the southeastern peak of the mound and should represent the youngest building la- yer. As a pillar of the Nevali Goritype is re- used in the southern wall, its date should be KLAUS SCHMIDT not far away of Novali Gori layer Il, which is dated to MPPNB. From the lithics and the other small finds it is clear that LPPNB or PN-Layers are missing at Gdbekli Tepe. Two of the four pillars wear similar reliefs of ma- Je, jumping lions. Again, several fragments are sculptured or wear reliefs. What kind of connections to rock art are observable? First, it is common to most of the early rock art styles, that animals are depicted, humans only occasionally. The same at Gdbekdi Tepe, within the reliefs bet- ween 28 animals in reliefs there is only one fragment with a human (C1). Within the sculptures animals again are dominant (A11-25), but humans are quit common (A3, A4, AS, A9, A10, A24), Some rock pictures in the surrounding of Jawa in the black desert of Jordan are pub- lished by the Jawa excavation team™, The so called "Animal's Farm" depictes a num- ber of bovids in exactly the same style as the bovide of pillar 2 from Gébekli Tepe is made. The engravings of Jawa are not exact- ly dated up to now, but the close similarity between the bovides of the animal farm and the bovid of pillar 2 at Gébekli Tepe seems to offer a serious chronological setting of this example of Jawa's rock art. A spectacular but widely unknown pro- vince of Saudi Arabian rock art is Subba”. Hunters, ofton with a head like a goat or ibex and bovides, equides or caprovides, are depicted in the rocks around a playa, a former lake in the desert. The bovides of Jubba and of several rock art sites in the Hi- Jaz in Saudi Arabia” follow similar iconog- raphical lines - and they can be closely com- pared with the bovids of Jawa's "Animal's Farm", So, the hunter style of Anati is filled with new evidence. It seems to be connec- ted with the PPN-Period and is including Kilwa and the Negev-IStyle, Dhuweila, Ja- wa and Juba. At the bench between the two lion-pillars at the Lowenpfeilergebéiude of Gébekli Tepe an engraving of a nacked and sitting femaleGévex Tepe was found (C18). It seems obvious that this picture should not be connected with the original ornamentation of the room but re- garded as a lator addition. The position of the female with pronounced sex has some similarities with the so called "Djenouns" of the rock pictures of the Sahara". An impor. tant difference is, that the animals head of the Djenouns usually clearly shows a kyno- morphic head. The head of the female per son of Gébekdi Tepe at first will be understo- od as some kind of hair dressing, but there are also similarities to the snake heads of the reliefs, Surely further investigations will provide a better base for the understanding of this engraving from Gébekli Tepe. The form of the heads of the persons de- picted in rock art are of special interest. Of ten they are presented quite strange and clearly not anthropomorphic. Goat- or dog- headed people are quite common. So, an iconographical link seems to exist between the goatheaded hunters of Jubba, the T- and M-headed anthropomorphs of the Lat- mos area and the "Ziegen-Damon" of Obeid- culture. Von der Osten-Sacken argues that this anthropomorphic figure is the first de- ity of Mesopotamian Pantheon”. But one can not agree without some reserve. Von der Osten-Sacken cites Vivelio with his de- mand for an supernatural beeing, beeing a god”, It should have an identity and a name of its own, people should pray to it and pre- sent offerings, and the beeing should be al- ways present for the human community to full fill its tasks for the community. On a tabloid from Tepe Giyan two "Ziegen-Damo- nen are depicted around an turtle like be- eing. All three figures seem to be in dan- cing scene”. At Tekerlek Dag T- and Msha- ped anthropomorphs are depicted in gro- ups. It seems to be obvious, that there are no specific identities, but something like demons or gosts - or, as Shamans. The Sha- manic explanation of the Bushmen rock art in Southern Africa®, which is successfully transfered to palaeolithic cave paintings of the Franco-Cantabrian region®, offers a worthful possibility to explain also post-ple- istocen rock art of the Near East. The spectacular join of hundreds frag- ments of an ivory sculpture from Hohleste- inStadel in the Lonetal in Southwestern Germany - "Der Léwenmensch"™ - brought new light to the anthropo-zoomorphic figu- res of the palaeolithic art. All the anthropo- morphs of the European Palasolithic have @ human body and an animal's head, eg. the head of a lion Hohlestein Stadel), a bi- son (Trois Fréres, Chauvet) or a goat (Gabil- lou)”. The opposite, an animal body with a human head, like a sphinx or a kentaur, se- ems to be not existing in prehistoric art”. Carefully one could say that the human is getting an animal, not the animal a human. In Shamanic rituals the trance produces such processes, in which the shaman is transfered gradually to an animal. Now he is able, to act in a transcedental sphere to full fill the duties he has to do. Clottes and Louis-Williams argue, that the experience of trance and the mental products are simi- lar with all species of homo sapiens - diffe- rencies exist only at the level of the expec- ted. An Eskimo expects a whale or a seal, a Bushman e.g. an antelope. This approach surely has to be tested in several further examples, but at the mo- ment it offers a suitable tool to understand the theriomorphs of palaeolithic and post- palaeolithic rock art. It seems that the the- riomorph from Gabillou is the first repre- sentation of the "Ziegenddmon', a kind of presence of shamans in action. Both, the theriomorph of Gabillou and the Ziegenda- mon, seem to be the product of shamanistic rituals. These persons are trained and they have the background and the idea, to form sculptures or rock pictures, whose main in- tention is not to depict the existing environ- ment, but some supranatural sphere (who- se pictures, necessarilly, are borrowed from the experiences of the shamans present world). In the Uruk period the "Ziegendiimon" di- sappears. This disappearance can be con- nected with a further observation. It is a common phenomenon that rock pictures of later periods, mainly of the Bronze Age, beeusually are of less quality. Simple stick-fi- gures without specific stylistic dominate. Isn't it, that the trained artists had been di- sappeared? This lack of good quality rock art in lator periods seems to be connected with the dissappearance of the shaman, who was transformed in Bronze Age societi- es to the "priest", now acting in the temples and not in the canyons or abris of the mo- untains. Some rock engravings had still be- en made at the old holy places, but made by the untrained visitors. This model also exp- lains, why "good" rock art is existing in so- me regions in quite late periods. Here the Shamans had been survived, in some regi- ons, like Stbiria or Southern Afrika, nearly till today. Gébekli Tope clearly is not the key site to understand Near Eatern Rock art. But it can help to push forward a branch of archa- eological research, which is - in contrary to Northern Africa - not very popular between Near Eastern Archaeologists. In the next fu- ture, the main focus of interest of Near Eas- Notes + Ge tte Egan 8, Anatt 1988; 1896; Anatt,Cottineli, Mailland 1996 43. Freund 1968, 418; Freund 1971 doesn’t mention the ,art mo- ae i ease Se EP sn rok oc 0407 He Pear Eppa a 21. Alok 1988. or BE non im: ts; 0 0: aaa ALOK. B, 1988 ‘Anadstaraa Kaya Cetus Resimters. stant, Akan Survey VeVi, 78,( 1881985, 2190, $580." “Ancient Rook Drawings in the Cental Negev, Palestine ixpioration Quartery: 48-57, ‘SAatoli’s Easioat Are’, Archeology. 91, 22-5. ‘Rocket fo Contral Arabia 1, fhe ‘Oval Headed ‘Boople of Arabia Leuven, Iniitut Ontontaliato Rockeast in Contral Arabia 2.1 Pet Tailed Sheep ia ‘Arabia, 22 Tho Healsto‘Dynainle Style of Rocke At {fm the lobel Gare-Leaven, instirae Onentallet> "Rite preistorioe in Anasoit’, Sed Camuni 4 ieee 19680 stro do la Ropublique Macédosne", tern Rock art will be the Latmos area. The- re we have to proof, if the shamanistic Mo- del is suffient to explain the paintings wit- hin a landscape, which later became the place of a god like "Zeus Akraios" But how Gébekli Tepe fits in this model? It seems very probable, that the shamans of Gébekli Tepe had been “at the edge". The edge to cross the border from the animistic shaman to the established priest. Some mo- tives of the reliefs and of the sculptures are still the old ones, but they seem to be mixed with the dawn of representations of a new world, a world of temples with powerful ru- lers, a world of a classified society. Follo- wing this way, the end of Gébekli Tepe wit- hin the PPNB could be understood as some defense reaction of the society to newly es- tablished classes - as "Neolithic Revoluti- on", a revolution not fully in the sense of Gordon Childe's ones. With the newly deve- loped equipment of agriculture people had not to follow the rules of the old shamans of the age of the hunters. 34 este ob ctl 198; Schmlat 198; 1907, 1098 oo Beh ope ts publiehed in Sohmict 1900; theos catalogue numbers fre used without fartner comment fora short reetesce ofthe cee, which mosly had been published in soveral periodicals 25"Hiaupimane 1009" 9090 27 Comp. OadofanAt-A. Ondogan 1008 Hine 8 a i870 50. Big: Howe i050 32: Vomder Goren adba Sage 58 "Book Lloyd 1011: LowieWitiams 1981; 1990; 1991 36, Closes, Lowe Willtame 1006, 1997 39. Two possible exceptions fom the Hasty Noolthic of Upper Dubtahed supe rom the sgios of Atay need Meter Enauyis of thotr loonographical meaning: 1072 RookeArt in Contral Arabia 3, Compus of the Rocke ‘Bngravings. Leuven, lastitay Onontaliste [PuRune it Nogov wad auf Sioa Prahe Spuren Har Markor. The Mountain of God {Har Karkom, Survey ~ 1000/1098 Bxoavations and ‘Survey in Tarae! 39, 136-116, ANAT B.~ L, COPTINELU- F, MAILLAND, 1906 ‘A eantuavio piu antico del Mondo", Archeolagta Viv 56, 26-39. BANDINIMONIG, D, M. BEMMANN, H, HAUPEMANN, 1997 "Hoo Artin the Upper Indu Valle" The Jndus Cradle and Crossroads of Cidations 1 HAUPTMANN (ea), felamnabad, ‘Pauistan Gorman Arohasological Rosoareh institut, 20°70 [BEILE. ROHN, M.- CHGERBER - M.MORSCH - K.SCHMIDT. 1008" “Reollthlsche Forsehungen in Obermesopotarsies”. Intanbuler Mitteuagent S73a Gobet Tepe BELL, 0.. 178” Boga anacot'de Yon! Asko ogi. Van, Tacih Dergst 20-29. 1-a0e Ment Rest 1978 New Light on the Barlast Ast of Anatolia: Kialarin Magara Cie Gayo ofthe Maidens), Pura 1979 “Kirlarin Magaras. Van B6lgeeinds Boysls Magara esimion’, Arkovioy ve Sane, 19-27 BETTS, a, 1908 {The Haves and the Hamad, Becavations and Surveys in Bas {atm Fordan , Shottiola Arohasologioal Monograph 8 BITTEI, K., 1953, ‘Bomeriupigon zu einigen Folsbildera in Mesopotamien wna Apatolion” Bollote 67, 914-390 BUBEK, WILL. - l.CLLOYD, 1014 ‘Specimons of Bushman Folidare. GHOPPY, 5, B. CHOPPY, 1996 “Le"Djenowi, Definition at Aire de Répartition’, Shara8, 8690 horns, 3 - pasewiswniaMs, 1900 onge agli Bre Ar Hh at Bout Ao Gta Bet. 'Sohamanon trance und Nagle i der Hohtonkunst FRUH, K. - M. UYANIK, 1954-59 ‘Nous’ Felazoichnungen in Stidostanatolion’, Jahrbuch Air Prahtctorische und ethnographisohe Kunst 19, 0-71, Bors Polomichiningen a Bidostansiaion, Bellet 24/84 FREUND, G. 1908 Reviow: B THEOCHARIS, ‘Dio Anfinge dor thessalischen Vor. eschichte. Ursprung und otste Hutwicidung des Necliti ima" (1967. traction front Greek), Quartar i, 419-498, “Zuni Balacstnseum Thovealons™ Prihistorioche Zoltsenit 4, 181-198 AAS. S: f co aio) 2. © senos 1s! . alien peony ° "pier pesqy igo OY pensry @ gst ; circles: ly neolithic sites in Upper Mesopotamia; dots: excavation: survey; triangles: rock art Figure 1: Epipalaeolithic and earlGabekti Tepe Figure 2: Gébekti Tepe, "Schlangenpteilergebaude (eeKLAUS SCHMIDT Figure 3: Gébekli Tepe, pillar 6Gobet Tepe 1 Figure 4: Gébekli Tepe, pillar 9 ‘(Eee areFigure 5: Gébekli Tepe, pillar 9 esGobel Tepe 8 Figure 6: Gébekli Tepe, pillar 12“ KLAUS SCHMIDT Figure 8: Gobekli Tepe, sculpture of a boar (L= 48,5 cm) mmm rn