The article is devoted to the analysis of the public (extraordinary) architecture of Southeastern Anatolia of the pre-ceramic Neolithic era. The work is based on recent discoveries in the Urfa region of the Republic of Turkey. The evolution of types and functions is considered. New variants of interpretation of archaeological material are proposed. The research is based on chronological and territorial principles.

Keywords: Southeast Anatolia, Greater Mesopotamia, pre-ceramic Neolithic, prehistoric architecture.

Southeastern Anatolia is one of the most important cultural centers in Greater Mesopotamia (an area roughly corresponding to the Euphrates, Tigris, and Karun basins [Wright and Johnson, 1975, p. 268]). Over the past two decades, this area has been essentially rediscovered by archaeologists, turning from a " white spot "into one of the"cradles of civilization".

Pre-Ceramic Neolithic (PPN) settlements were known here in the middle of the last century. However, until the 1990s, the bulk of our knowledge about this part of Greater Mesopotamia was based only on the material of the Chayenyu Tepesi monument, which was studied by R. Braidwood and H. Chembel. Since the 1960s, excavations of Chayenyu have revealed a new type of material culture that has both some similarities with the traditions of the Mesopotamian region and a certain originality. The former was partially manifested in the structural features of residential architecture and the funeral rite, on the basis of which archaeologists repeatedly turned to local parallels [Bader, 1989, pp. 219-225]. As for the originality, it is most clearly embodied in the specifics of public buildings. Chayenyu Tepesi has long remained one of the key monuments of the northern part of Greater Mesopotamia. In addition to the brightness of the material, this was also due to the continuous change of phases over a long period of time, which made it possible to clearly trace the cultural sequence and make appropriate chronological references in neighboring settlements. At the same time, despite the elements of similarity with other monuments, the Chayenyu culture showed some isolation, remained only one of the "special cases" in line with the general trends in the development of the Mesopotamian region.

The situation changed dramatically in the last decade of the 20th century, when the authorities of the Republic of Turkey authorized large-scale archaeological surveys related to the construction of hydraulic structures. As a rule, these activities were of a protective nature, but, despite this, material was obtained that significantly changed the previous ideas about the settlements of both South-Eastern Anatolia and the Caucasus.

and the entire Middle East. In particular, the excavations of Hallan Chemi, Nevala Chori, and Gobekli Tepe revealed a material culture whose character had obvious similarities, and sometimes turned out to be identical to that of Chayenyu. The remains of a fairly developed architecture for that time were discovered, high reliefs, steles, sculptural images of animals and anthropomorphic and mixomorphic creatures, stone bowls with carvings, possible status objects and much more. Special "sacred sites", "squares", craft zones-all testified to the existence of a rather complex society with specific forms of management, where the basic appropriating economy was adjacent to stable experiments in domestication. The peculiar funeral rite, the construction of sometimes entire village crypts, and the complex semantic load of images indicated a significant development of the cult ideas of their creators. A special finishing touch to this painting was the material obtained during the excavations of Gobekli tepe. The researchers were presented with complex buildings, monumental columns with massive sculptures crowning them, and colossal megalithic steles with bas-reliefs. These discoveries made Southeastern Anatolia an important region in the study of the Neolithic foundations of Mesopotamian civilization.

Studies of recent decades allow us to take a different look at many aspects of the development of Middle Eastern cultures, make new attempts to interpret the material and build paradigms for the development of the region.

The first such interpretations were made by the archaeologists who excavated the settlements themselves, but, as a rule, they concerned a particular monument (Braidwood and Chembel, 1984; Hauptmann, 1993; Rosenberg et al., 1995; Schmidt, 1998). There have been studies of certain aspects, such as the symbolism of animal images [Peters and Schmidt, 2004], domestication issues [Rosenberg et al., 1998], paleobotanical findings [Neef, 2003], and a number of others.

The information on the Turkish Neolithic is summarized in a collective monograph written with the participation of archaeologists who excavated the sites under consideration [Neolithic in Turkey..., 1999]; it also provides concise theoretical generalizations. A cursory review of the material from Southeastern Anatolia was carried out by K. Schmidt in the light of his interpretation of the "temples" of Gobekli Tepe (Schmidt, 2006). A similar study was carried out by T. V. Kornienko, but with an expanded use of analogies and tracing the further evolution of the Mesopotamian culture in the Late Neolithic and Eneolithic (Kornienko, 2006). P. Akkermans also raises some theoretical questions, drawing on the material of the Taurus foothills based on the monuments of the Syrian region (Akkermans and Schwartz, 2003, p. 86-87). This article is also devoted to interpretations, but the course of reasoning here is built up from a slightly different point of view than that of the mentioned authors.

The first point. The author is inclined to consider Chayenya, Nevaly Chori, Gobekli Tepe as a special community within the framework of Greater Mesopotamia, a peculiar region that in the pre-ceramic Neolithic era was characterized by certain features of cultural uniformity and continuity in development.

The construction techniques of Chayenyu, Nevala Chori, Gobekli tepe, as well as the sculptural material, the manner of making tools and the economic structure, show significant similarities. This statement seems reasonable even if there are some cultural differences here. The latter can be attributed to local variations. This approach helps to build a more complete picture, as well as the ability to use the material of these three monuments for the intended mutual interpretation.

The second point is continuity. The ideas that existed among the inhabitants of these settlements show a tendency to develop, which can be traced in the architecture of the city.-

tour, sculpture, reliefs, etc. Due to the lack of any satisfactory information about the Epipaleolithic and the transition to the PPN epoch in the territory of Southeastern Anatolia, the conditional starting point of this process should probably be found in the material of Hallan Chemi, since this settlement most claims to be the predecessor of these cultures (see: [Rosenberg, 1999, p. 26]). The most complete implementation of the idea is found in the Gobekli-Tepe complex, after which the "decline" begins.

On the basis of these two principles - community and continuity-the author builds his research, focusing mainly on public architecture. It is supposed to focus on the functional features and evolution of forms of public architecture.

The earliest Neolithic monument here is Khallan Chemi, whose cultural origins are often attributed to Zagros (Rosenberg, 1999, p. 29). Dating from C14 links the functioning of the settlement to the end of the 9th millennium BC (Rosenberg and Davis, 1992).

At the initial stage (3rd layer) of its existence, Hallan Chemi did not stand out much from other Middle Eastern settlements: the same rounded buildings, farm plots, and hearths. However, the subsequent 2nd horizon indicates a number of changes in the life of the settlers; in particular, the floors of some houses are now laid out with sandstone slabs.

An interesting building dates back to this time. It was a dwelling that stood out for its size, as well as a special detail of the interior - a small plaster pool in the center. Despite the absence of any other signs confirming or refuting its special status, the subsequent development of the settlement's architecture allows us to see this building as a forerunner of future public buildings.

This is indirectly supported by the discovery in the subsequent 1st layer of two structures with sufficiently pronounced signs of originality. They were large (5-6 m in diameter), round in plan buildings, the floors and walls of which, unlike simple houses, were completely constructed of sandstone. The walls bifurcated in plan and diverged, resembling "claws" in shape, pointing their ends towards the entrance, where a kind of "lobby"was thus created. Inside each building, along its wall, was a long semicircular stone bench, with a hearth in the center. The floors were often repaired. In one of the structures, on the northern side, that is, immediately opposite the entrance, a Turian skull was found, apparently originally fixed on the wall. In another, several fragments of sheep skulls were found, as well as deer antlers, the original location of which is unclear. In addition, imported materials were found in the area of these buildings: obsidian and copper ore, traces of their processing (Rosenberg, 1999, p. 9-27), as well as stone (limestone and chlorite) bowls. The buildings were not residential.

Obviously, the idea of erecting public buildings did not arise immediately and should have had some prehistory - a sufficiently long period during which it would have matured in the public consciousness. In this regard, a building with a "swimming pool"is of particular interest. Perhaps its distant prototype was one of the pits discovered in Karim Shahir. Filled with various remnants of the life of this settlement, it was somewhat deeper than the rest and had an oval-rounded bottom. It is characteristic that the pit was daubed with ochre and that the only two figurines (clay) found at the site were found here; the authors of the excavations attribute this to ritual activity [Howe, 1983, p. 102]. If the analogy is appropriate, then we are looking at a construction, one of the functional aspects of which was a cult activity.

The second aspect comes from the size of the building. According to M. Rosenberg, it is noticeably larger than ordinary/residential buildings (its diameter was about 4 m [Rosenberg,

1999, p. 27]), from which we can conclude that the building was supposed to accommodate not only its inhabitants, but also other people, i.e. it served as a meeting place.

These functions are fully realized in the subsequent phase (1st layer), when a bench appears along the perimeter of the wall, and the central hearth, turium, sheep skulls, and frequent renovation of floors (several layers of plaster were found [Rosenberg, 1999, p. 27]) can be linked to cult activities. Attention is also drawn to the scrupulous attitude to the cleanliness of the premises: any traces of domestic activity were carefully removed [ibid.]. Bifurcating walls - "claws" were supposedly associated with the idea of a special reality, which fell into entering the building. Initially, it could go back to the opposition of the ideas of the home and the "street", favorable and hostile to man worlds. In this building, the "lobby" gave solemnity and mystique to the very fact of visiting this place.

Along with this, there is another point: a public building becomes a concentration of imported materials and labor-intensive things, likely prestige items. This includes the mentioned bowls made of limestone and chlorite, copper ore, obsidian and traces of their processing. Apparently, this is due to the fact that the building became the embodiment of the idea of the house, and the attitude of the collective to it was partly similar to the attitude of the family to their home. Ritual actions were aimed at affirming the well-being of this "common home", which was directly related to the well-being of the society embodied in it. This special significance can be explained by such a careful attitude to the cleanliness of such buildings, their interior decoration and finding objects here that personified the prestige and wealth of the team.

For a clearer picture of the process of the emergence and purpose of extraordinary architecture, we can refer to analogies from other regions, such as Central Asia. In particular, on the Eneolithic settlement of Ilgynly-depe, special "ceremonial rooms" were found that simultaneously combined the functions of "sanctuaries", places for meetings, processing various (including prestigious) materials, and at the same time - dwellings (Solovyova, 2005). Benches, labor-intensive elements of interior decoration, skulls of horned animals, traces of paint and regular repairs, figurines, imported materials, etc. were found here. Ilgynly's "state rooms" were subjected to a kind of "funeral rite": before leaving the structure, they were thoroughly cleaned, all items were taken out, except for specially intended "gifts", after which the building was set on fire, and then covered with earth [Solovyova, 2005, p. 19].

Almost all of these features are fully or partially found on each of the considered monuments - Hallan Chemi, Nevaly Chori, Chayenyu and Gobekli tepe. There are two unusual buildings in Hallan Chemi, which may indicate the existence of several related groups. Since the main type of organization of archaic societies was the tribal community, it is natural to assume that the buildings symbolized the well-being and cohesion of some specific clans, and there were at least two of them in Hallan Chemi.

Further evolution of non-ordinary architecture is presented in two versions: on partially synchronous monuments of Chayenyu Tepesi (8-7 th millennium BC [Özdoğan, 1999, p.41]) and Nevaly Chori (the second half of the 7th millennium BC [Hauptmann, 1999, p. 78]). In both cases, public buildings are characterized by an archaic appearance, a rounded plan, while ordinary houses in these settlements were already rectangular. However, the further development of extraordinary architecture demonstrates a significant discrepancy between the traditions of social construction of these two settlements, however, the commonality of their origins is beyond doubt.

If we proceed from the criterion of proximity of architectural samples to later Mesopotamian forms, Chayenyu looks more progressive. This settlement was characterized by a greater desire to search for forms. As for the Neva River-

If you look at Chori, then traditionalism is more pronounced here, architectural forms have evolved slowly, and there is a deliberate archaization, when a new one with rounded corners is built on the site of a rectangular building. However, this more pronounced traditionalism of Nevala Chori coexisted with the rapid development of sculpture and reliefs, bold search for new visual techniques. These trends are even more pronounced in the Gobekli-tepe material.

The oldest extraordinary building of Chayenyu - "House of Skulls" (Skull Building) -initially or very early began to be used as a place of general burial of settlers. If before the dead were buried under the floors of their homes, now a common house was built, apparently symbolizing the unity of the dead. Among the design features of the early phase of the "House of Skulls", its buried character, oval contours, double wall, pilasters and"stelae" are of interest. The buried nature of the structure is a characteristic feature of many structures of this kind. On the one hand, this may be a consequence of the archaization of the building, since the early rounded houses of Chayenyu were of a semi-rural type. On the other hand, perhaps this technique was used to express the idea of proximity to the underworld of the dead, since in the partially synchronous settlement of Nevala Chori, the depth of unusual buildings reached 3 m.Probably, similar goals were pursued by preserving the oval contours of the building against the background of the transition of ordinary houses to a rectangular plan.

In the northern part of the "House of Skulls" the wall was double. An analog of this technique has already been considered on the example of Hallan Chemi, where the" forceps " supposedly symbolized a certain border between two worlds. Perhaps the same function is carried out here by a double wall, protecting the "House of Skulls" just on the side of the settlement.

The interior of the "House of Skulls" has changed throughout its operation; it is quite complex. Little remains of the early circular structure, with the exception of a fragment of the wall and stelae built into the later structure. The wall had rectangular projections in cross-section-pilasters, the original purpose of which is unclear; perhaps they were a support for the roof and only later acquired decorative significance. It is worth noting that in Nevali Chori, the place of pilasters was occupied by anthropomorphic stelae / columns. The Chayenyu stelae were stone slabs placed vertically inside the room. In Nevali Chori, these elements have the appearance of rectangular columns with anthropomorphic features; it is assumed that the Chayenyu stelae also contain at least some anthropomorphic semantics.

In the subsequent time, the "House of Skulls" has changed somewhat. It acquired a rectangular shape, the interior space was divided into a large and three small rooms, special elevations appeared, on which the bones of the deceased, most often skulls, were cleaned of soft tissues. The small sections (about 1.8 x 2.3 m each) were connected by three doorways to the main room (Schirmer, 1983, S. 469, Abb. 1, 5-7, 11b). The remains of a stone bench (according to V. Schirmer) were found near the eastern wall (Schirmer, 1983, p. 470). On the west side is a slab of pinkish stone, measuring 2.6 x 1.65 m, with traces of human and animal blood [Özbeck, 1988, p. 127-138; Cauvin, 1994, p. 120]. On one wall of the large room was the skull of Tur. The entrance was to the south and was decorated on both sides with painted pilasters. It is difficult to determine the purpose of the rooms; perhaps they were peculiar cult niches, similar to those found in the "cult buildings" of Nevala Chori.

In addition to the Skull House, there were two other public buildings in Chayenyu — the Flagstone Building and the Mosaic Floor Building located in the same area. During their construction, such techniques were used as deepening into the ground, thickening the wall on the side of the settlement, the presence of symmetrical internal pilasters, benches on one of the sides. Stone stelae/slabs were placed in the center and northeast corner of the "Slab Building". In the "Building with a mosaic floor", a fragment of a stone slab 70 cm long with traces of human blood and a schematic image of a human face on one of the narrow sides was found, as well as a large limestone slab.-

a block shaped like the head of an anthropomorphic creature (Cauvin, 1994, p. 120). In addition, the floor here was decorated with a special mosaic in the form of two parallel white stripes. If the "House of Skulls" has a "cult" appearance, then the same cannot be said about the other two structures. They were probably typical public buildings with a characteristic lack of division of functions.

In the "Cell Buildings" phase, the area of public buildings is supplemented with a new element - "Plaza". Initially, the "square" was a territory paved with uneven cobblestones. Its distant prototype can be considered "paving stones", which went back to those found, for example, in Karim Shahir (Howe, 1983, p.102). These were places where hunters butchered carcasses and carried out related work: leather dressing, bone processing, making tools. "Paving" in this case was dictated by considerations of convenience, but due to the lack of fragmentation of the archaic worldview, it should also have acquired a cult meaning. Later, such areas began to change. For example, in the Nemrik 9 monument located near the south-east Anatolian hearth, these are already neatly decorated "courtyards" with traces of regular repairs (Kozlowski, 1989, p.26). In Chayenyu, this new concept is being further developed. The area of 60 x 20 m is carefully laid out in clay blocks. Its surface is updated at least three times; in the early stages, two rows of stelae of various heights (approximately 1 to 2 m) and two large slabs are installed here. Many tools and animal bones have been found here, showing evidence of everyday economic activity.

The" square " of Chayenyu can be considered as a kind of public building. If buildings were the result of the development of the "idea of home", then the "square" could come from the "idea of joint work".

It is worth noting that most, if not all, public buildings had a certain "life span", after which they were deliberately broken down, and new ones were built in their place. This custom was widespread in the Middle East at that time. The demolition of the building resembled a ritual murder and was accompanied by special actions. The latter included first of all sacrifices, sometimes human, as may have been the case in Jerf el-Ahmar (Stordeur, Brenet, Der Aprahamian, Roux, 2001). In Chayenyu, the "square" did not escape this fate, the details of which (stelae) were once broken and buried under a new layer. In the above - mentioned settlement of the Anau culture-Ilgynly - depe-the "front rooms" were also deliberately demolished. However, if in the latter case the public buildings could be associated with a particular genus (as in Hallan Chemi, Mureibet and Jerf el-Ahmar), then in Chayenyu the situation is different. A special "sacred site" is formed here, which is common for the entire settlement. Its main elements were a "square" with installed stelae and three public buildings, and one of them had a certain cult bias. The public buildings of Chayenyu most likely embodied a community of a higher order: it was no longer the unity of individual clans, but of the entire settlement. Most vividly, these ideas were embodied in the "House of Skulls"and " square". At the same time, there were still two synchronous structures: the "Building with a mosaic floor" and the "Building with Slabs", which could be associated with the division of societies into even smaller parts, if not by gender, then at least within the framework of a binary organization (by phratries).

Let us now turn to another model.

At first glance, there is a different trend in Nevaly Chori: the architectural tradition here is more restrained, while the sculptural material seems to be more expressive than in Chayenyu. It is characteristic that the construction of ordinary houses and the specifics of the funeral rite in these two settlements are almost identical. As for the unusual architecture, there are some differences. Without repeating yourself, the following should be noted.

Thus, in Nevaly Chori there is also a general settlement "sacred site", but it is represented only by one typical public building with undivided functions, which was consistently rebuilt. The latter is indicated by the coexistence of a bench along the inner perimeter and a special niche, possibly for religious purposes. The building was significantly (up to 3 m) deepened into the ground and also had a double wall that protected it from three sides, including from the settlement. The entrance was decorated with a vestibule with stone thresholds. Of the three phases of the building's existence, only the second and third can be confidently judged. The design plan was changed in the direction of archaization, rounded, as mentioned above.

The main detail of the interior - stelae / columns, sometimes bearing, located in the same places as the stelae and pilasters in the Avenue. When rounding up buildings, they are already arranged in a circle. The stelae had an anthropomorphic appearance: they often depicted schematic hands, and on top of them they were crowned with a T - or L-shaped capital, symbolizing, according to archaeologists, the head (Hauptmann, 1993, p. 51). Sometimes the stelae were decorated with high reliefs in the form of a human head (often female) and images of animals, sometimes acting as capitals.

It can be concluded that here, as in Chayenyu, the buildings expressed unity on the scale of the entire settlement, and not just individual clans. Thus, the first steps could be taken towards the cult formation of the association of societies on a territorial basis. This point of view is indirectly confirmed by the material of Gobekli Tepe (late 8th millennium BC); the similarity of its architecture with Nevala Chori has been repeatedly mentioned by researchers (see, for example: [Haptmann, 1999, p. 80; Akkermans and Schwartz, 2003, p. 87]).

The architecture of Gobekli tepe demonstrates the development of rounded plans, extensive use of sculptural images, including capitals and T-shaped stelae, approaching megaliths in size, the construction of double walls, lobbies, and rich ornamentation with reliefs. As you can see, most of these features are present to one degree or another in Nevaly Chori. At the same time, Gobekli tepe is a unique case, which has no analogues in the Neolithic history of Greater Mesopotamia. The variety of forms is striking; in addition, there are many ambiguities about the functional purpose of local architecture samples. The researcher of the monument, K. Schmidt, tends to refer to the main type of local unusual buildings as a" temple / sanctuary " (Tempel) [Schmidt, 2006]. This designation goes beyond the concept of a public building and demonstrates a new trend of specialization, otherwise - the first steps in creating what is usually called a "temple" in relation to Mesopotamia [Kornienko, 2006, p.53].

The scale of buildings and megaliths, the complexity and skill of making sculptural materials, the multiplicity of finds, the existence of entire architectural complexes, and finally, the very location of the monument (on the top of a high hill, the dominant detail of the relief) allow us to consider Gobekli Tepe as a special complex that goes beyond the boundaries of one settlement. The fact that the main hill was surrounded by others, on which there were also public buildings, means that this area was one large "sacred site", symbolizing the community of several settlements, i.e. territorial association. Public buildings here still retained their undifferentiated functions, being at the same time a sanctuary, a place of meetings, performing ritual actions, they were considered as a symbol of the collective.

Thus, the architectural traditions of a number of monuments in Southeastern Anatolia have a number of common features that allow us to consider their cultures as quite close to each other. At the same time, they all seem to be quite an organic part of the culture of Greater Mesopotamia, revealing a number of similarities with the material of other monuments in this region.

The main type of extraordinary architecture here is the so-called public building. These multifunctional structures are unique structures that have no analogues in the historical era. They cannot simply be classified as "meeting halls", but their designation as "sanctuaries"is not sufficiently justified. Undifferentiated functions and their symbolic nature are the main features of such constructions. Public buildings represented the unity and well-being of the collective. Over time, they developed from supposedly " ceremonial rooms "and ancestral buildings, as in Hallan Chemi, to the village-wide" sacred sites " of Chayenyu, Nevala Chori and a complex on the scale of a territorial association in Gobekli Tepe.

list of literature

Bader N. O. Ancient farmers of Northern Mesopotamia, Moscow, 1989.

Brsydwood R., Chsmbsl X. At the origins of the producing society in Southeastern Anatolia / / Science and Humanity, Moscow, 1984.

Kornienko T. V. The First temples of Mesopotamia, Moscow, 2006.

Solov'eva N. F. Anthropomorphic images and cult complexes of Southern Turkmenistan during the Middle Eneolithic period (based on the Ilgynly-depe excavations). Authorsf. kand. dis. SPb., 2005.

Akkermans P.M.M.G., Schwartz G.M. The Archaeology of Syria. From Complex Hunter-Gatherers to Early Urban Societies. Cambridge, UK, 2003.

Cauvin J. Naissance des divinités. Naissance de l'agriculture. La Révolution des symbols au Néolithique. P., 1994.

Hauptmann H. Kin Kultgebäude in Ncvali Çori // Between the rivers and over the mountains / Frangipane M. et al. Roma, 1993.

Hauptmann H. The Urfa Region // Neolithic in Turkey. The Cradle of Civilization / New Discoveries / Ed. by M. Özdoğan, N. Başgelen. Istanbul, 1999.

Howe B. Karim Shahir // Prehistoric Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks (OIP. 1983. Vol. 105). Chicago, 1983.

Kozlowsky S.K. Nemrik 9, a PPN Neolithic Site in Northern Iraq // Paléorient. 1989. Vol. 15. No. 1.

Neef R. Overlooking the Steppe-Forest: A Preliminary Report on the Botanical Remains from Early Neolithic Göbekli Tepe (Southeastern Turkey) // Neo-Lithics. 2003. № 2/03.

Neolithic in Turkey. The Cradle of Civilization // New Discoveries / Ed. by M. Özdoğan, N. Başgelen. Istanbul, 1999.

Özdoğan M. Çayönü // Neolithic in Turkey. The Cradle of Civilization / New Discoveries / Ed. by M. Özdoğan, N. Başgelen. Istanbul, 1999.

Özbeek M. Culte des cranes humains a Çayönü // Anatolica. 1988. № 15.

Peters J., Schmidt K. Animals in the Symbolic World of Pre-Pottery Neolithic Göbekli Tepe, South-Eastern Turkey: a Preliminary Assessment // Anthropozoologica. 2004. № 39(1).

Rosenberg M. Hallan Çemi // Neolithic in Turkey. The Cradle of Civilization / New Discoveries / Ed. by M. Özdoğan, N. Başgelen. Istanbul, 1999.

Rosenberg M., Davis M. Hallan Çemi Tepesi, an Early Aeremic Neolithic Site in Eastern Anatolia: Some Preliminary Observations Concerning Material Culture II Anatolica. 1992. № 18.

Rosenberg M., Nesbitt R.M.A., Redding R.W., Strasser T.F. Hallan Çemi Tepesi: Some Preliminary Observations Concerning Early Neolithic Subsistence Behaviors in Eastern Anatolia // Anatolica. 1995. № 21.

Rosenberg M., Nesbitt R., Redding R.W., Peasnall B.L. Hallan Çemi, Pig Husbandry and Post Pleistocene Adaptations Along the Taurus-Zagros Arc/Turkey // Paléorient. 1998. № 24/1.

Schirmer W. Drci Bauten des Çayönü Tepesi / Ed. by R.M. Bochmer and H. Hauptmann // Beiträge zur Altertumskunde Kleinasiens, Festschrift fur Kurt Bittel. Mainz, 1983.

Schmidt K. Frühncolithischer Tempel. Ein Forschungsbericht zum präkcramichen Neolithikum Obermcsopotamiens // Milteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft. Bd. 130. 1998.

Schmidt K. Sie bauten die ersten Tempel. Das rätselhafte Heiligtum der Steinzeitjäger. Die archäologische Entdeckung am Göbekli Tepe. München, 2006.

Stordeur D., Brenct M., Der Aprahamian G., Roux J.-C. Les bâtiments communautaires de Jerf el Ahmar et Mureybet horisont PPNA (Syria) // Paléorient. 2000. Vol. 26/1.

Wright H., Johnson G. Population, Exchange, and Early State Formation in Southwestern Iran // American Anthropologist. Vol. 77. Issue 2. June 1975.

Permanent link to this publication: