Tartaria tablets, advanced research. (Latest). Answers to allmost possible questions.

October 31, 2019

Tartaria tablets, latest advanced research. Answers to allmost possible questions.

Picture,from https://www.descopera.ro/stiinta/3343280-misterele-tablitelor-de-la-tartaria

Map from https://cersipamantromanesc.wordpress.com/2014/07/30/adevarata-istorie-a-descendentei-noastre/

Image result for tartaria alba harta Tartaria village, Alba County

Only three important, crucial issues have been  in the attention of researchers, during decades since discovery of the tablets in ’61, until today.

N.Vlassa , chief in charge at the archaeological diggings. supposed discoverer .               His picture from https://actualdecluj.ro/semnificatia-tablitelor-de-la-tartaria-muzeul-de-istorie-din-cluj-detine-cele-mai-vechi-scrieri-din-istoria-civilizatiei/

Image result for nicolae vlassa arheologul

Image result for tartaria tablets arheologie.ulbsibiu.ro Tartaria groapa Luncii from arheologie.ulbsibiu.ro

But also the same questions still surrounded by mistery, and interesting the audience at the highest level:                                                                                                                            1.real age  2. Genuine?  3. Whether or not carry a form of writing.                                       The answers to these questions will be, each of them detailed and almost dissected, and  have been the result of more than 10 years of dedicated research. Into the field of birth and followed by the evolution of writing in the world, various world writing systems, and then the comparative study customized and applied to Tartaria tablets (Tartaria tablets=TT)

1. Are TT as old as spoken/rumors ?

Various researchers have advanced different ages.There is no convergence of opinions. Their discoverer, N.Vlassa told of about 2.700 B.C. Then others went up to 5.300 B.C. (e.g. M.Merlini).                                                                                                                                             The age of 5.300 BC after me is completely out of  question, and the 2.400-2.700 BC is the maximum extreme theoretical! limit from which I can discuss after my humble opinion. I Will explain the reasons why even this latter age is not possible.

2.What are the arguments of most researchers for these TT ages (after me unrealistic)?

For 5,300 BC :                                                                                                                                          – the alleged finding of the tablets in the layer corresponding to the civilization of Vinca and the age same as of the bones (5,300 BC/C14) assumed to be found in the immediate vicinity. Image, from https://www.thelivingmoon.com/46ats_members/Lisa2012/03files/Tartaria_Tablets.html

Image result for tartaria bones Tartaria Groapa Luncii, female bones dated 5.300 B.C.

At present, very few researchers are still claiming such an old age.                                     For 2400-2700 BC :                                                                                                                               – possible fallen down from above strata, so origin from newer layers (and hence the membership of artefacts to crops such as Cotofeni? Baden? Petresti?) and                          – related assessments of some artifacts found in the immediate proximity of TT, as pertaining to later cultures than Vinca A-C, as well as                                                                   – judgments and comparisons generally related to the time of appearance, and the evolution of writing in the world.

From https://alba24.ro/autenticitatea-tablitelor-cu-semne-pictografice-de-la-tartaria-enigma-pentru-unii-istorici-ce-spune-arheologul-horia-ciugudean-care-in-1989-a-participat-la-sapaturi-400800.html  :

Image result for tartaria groapa luncii Artefacts found alegedly with the tablets,

Image, from  https://fashiondocbox.com/90885882-Jewelry/Tartaria-and-the-sacred-tablets.html

Image result for  tartaria groapa luncii Tartaria-Groapa Luncii (the very site where tablets were found)

3.Were TT in that layer (VINCA) ? Were the tablets near the bones?

It is not known for sure;
“there are no photos or sketches, blueprints of the exact location of each artifact, and much more,

  • – Not known who were present/ all the persons close to the moment of discovery,        – where exactly were every of them, or walked in the ritual complex, when and how much time some missed (eg. Vlassa some hours)                                                           – Who was the very person who first saw or found TT                                                      – In fact who first touched them is not known.                                                                   – When, who gathered, packed the artefacts and transported to museum , when and to whom were given, where in the museum were put ?

In conclusion, there are no witnesses and no hard evidence of where exactly where every artefact/item including TT were placed or were found in the entire religious complex.                                                                                                                                               AS A RESULT, I HAVE ANY ASSISTANCE AND CANNOT RELY ON ANY EVIDENCE REGARDING THE PLACE AND MOMENT OF DISCOVERY, AND THE SAME ON ESTIMATED AGE, REMAINING FOR ME THE SINGLE OPTION, THAT OF ANALISING THE SIGNS !

4.  There is available a scientific method of measuring their age exactly?

Their Age cannot be determined with any of the current methods. Worse not anymore, as the tablets have been baked in an owen (who has decided at an unknown temperature is not known) apparent, immediately after discovery, because they seemed to be friable.                                                                                                                                       (Not to be enough, before  chemical structure was changed , as were impregnated with nitrolack !)

5.Could be TT genuine  sumerian or how much could be related to the early stage of the sumerian handwriting?

There are not a sumerian, it is absolutely certain.                                                                          Top researchers in the proto-writing field said that although the signs are similar to the sumerian proto-cuneiform (proto-writing stage), the signs and writing are not authentic/genuine sumerian.                                                                                                              These researchers only mentioned these similarities and differencies in the passage and in a superficial way.                                                                                                                              I went into more detail and explained that the signs are similar in shape reflected only as blueprints, schematic way/sketch the proto-sumerian signs, but they have no their counterpart concrete shape.                                                                                                       Researchers shows shortcomings, they have                                                                                 – not identified all the signs, and they have                                                                                      – misidentified others. (Ex A. Vaiman, R.Kolev and others).                                                                                                                                                                                                                              The resemblance is due to the filogenesis of the writing in general. That is, the connection and the ultimate sumerian origin and transmission of the signs and in fact of many writing systems used in the Near East and in the Aegean area. Such a filiation, apart from the one noted by researchers I.Papakitsos and G. Kenanidis (relative to the Aegean proto-linear writing) is supported and explained by me and in addition and sometimes more detailed. However, I did not think of some assyrologists and specialists in sumerian proto-writing/proto-cuneiform (e.g. Falkenstein, A. Vaiman, R.Kolev) to approach a sumerian interpretation as long as they claim that signs are not proper/really sumerian?

From The Origins of Writing as a Problem of Historical Epistemology                 Peter Damerow https://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdlj/2006/cdlj2006_001.html


<<…. early writing systems seems to indicate, as Ignaz Gelb has pointed out in his famous Study of Writing (Gelb 1952: 212-220), that the idea spread in various directions at the beginning of the 3rd millennium BC from centers in Mesopotamia and Egypt. Proto-Elamite writing occurs only a short time after proto-cuneiform. It was used for a short period in vast areas of the Iranian plateau. In the second half of the 3rd millennium BC, writing is attested as far to the north as Ebla in Syria and to the east as the Indus culture in modern Pakistan. Minoan writing starts at Crete around the turn of the 3rd to the 2nd millennium BC. At that time, cuneiform writing is also attested further north in the regions of Anatolia.>>

                                                                                                                                                                   6. What examples could be given  to support the fact that TT are not genuine sumerian ones ?

  • Always the sumerian signs/marks for numbers (with the apparent  D-letter shape) in the Sumer were made by imprinting, but ours are made by tracing/scratching.
  • Sumerian numbers : from https://sites.utexas.edu/dsb/tokens/the-evolution-of-writing/
  • Image result for sumerian 3.200 proto writing numbers (Fig. 2) Impressed tablet featuring an account of grain, from Godin Tepe, Iran (Courtesy Dr. T. Cuyler Young, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto)
  • Image result for proto-cuneiform Proto-cuneiform tablet (W 9578,g) from Uruk IV, 3350-3200 BC …
  • Only D-shaped proto-cuneiform sumerian NINDA/”bread” sign was traced/scraped. (on the right).                                                                                          Image from https://ro.pinterest.com/pin/488640628318570008/?lp=true
  • Image result for proto-cuneiform school tabletImage result for borger ud.unug proto-cuneiform
  •                                                                                                                                                     (We have on TT first D-sign on round TT very close to it, but not the same.            Image from http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html&nbsp;                        
  • Image result for living moon tartaria)
  • Very many signs though reflecting by general way the shape of the sumerian proto-cuneiform ones, in fact their concrete and exact shape is much more like those that were later used in the Anatolian, Aegean (and even many in the Mediterranean) writings. As well as in the Near East (canaanite, phoenician).                 
  • IT IS A FACT THAT WAS NOT NOTICED NOt A WORD, BY ANY SCIENTIST, (ONLY BY ME) THAT:                                                                                                                                      – MANY SIGNS ON THE ROUND TABLET IS REFLECTING AN EVOLUTION, (CHANGED SHAPES THAN PROTO-CUNEIFORM), REFLECTING A LATER PERIOD OF TIME                                                                                                                                      One example:    Image result for moonlight tartaria     picture from  http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html&nbsp;                                                                                                                       The H-like sign (on the round tablet with 3 horizontal bars) looks much more like, and even is exactly the same as the folowing:                                                                          – the Heth sign from canaanite writing/1.500-1.200 BC,                                                    – the Pa3 sign from the Aegean/2.000-1.500 BC,                                                                     – the archaic ETA/Heta sign from the archaic Greek/ 800-500BC (apparent crooked-looking due of offset vertical bars). But the sign is actually further present throughout  Mediterranean. Only one sign is identical to that of proto-cuneiform, the sign +++++++, the sumerian ‘As’ and another is approaching (the 1-st D), the sumeria sign “Sur“.

The Sumerians, during any period, used a uniform writing corresponding to the time during which the scribe was living. They did not use pictograms and ideographic signs on separate tablets at/in a given time.

7. The shape of clay TT is very important?

I don’t think it is. Image from https://www2.uned.es/geo-1-historia-antigua-universal/ESCRITURAS_ANTIGUA/Escrituras_3__antiguas_BALKAN_DANUBE-SCRIPT.htm

 Clay disc from Vinca, Serbia

Otherwise I know more examples  round tablets.                                                                  Sumerian star map, from                                                                                 https://curiosmos.com/this-5500-year-old-sumerian-star-map-recorded-the-impact-of-a-massive-asteroid/

Image result for sumerian star chart

and none sumerian ones with a hole. Then the Cretan tablets with the hole, but not perfectly round-shaped.

 Linear Script A/ http://arthistoryresources.net/greek-art-archaeology-2016/minoan-outline.html , and round ball:

 Cypro-Minoan clay ball in Louvre, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypro-Minoan_syllabary

Folowing Karanovo tablet http://institutet-science.com/sakralna-plochica-karanovo/?lang=en

Image result for karanovo tablet

Another round tablet & holes, from Tartaria : https://adevarul.ro/locale/alba-iulia/tablita-secreta-tartaria-contine-obiectul-arheologic-descoperit-2014-semnele-erau-ascunse-privitorilor-1_57fcfa425ab6550cb876646f/index.html

Image result for tartaria tablet

Then the discussion about how flat or swelling/bulged are some or others do not see to be much productive.

 8. Are the TT genuine ?

YES. (More so yes than no! )                                                                                                                ( partly No, because it does not seem to be the result of a one’s intention to communicate by writing something connected with a particular economic or religious necessity.)

Yes, because the one who wrote them didn’t intended to fool somebody and whatever intented (we do not know what), the scribe was fair intended. It seems he wanted rather to practice the evolution of  writing or to show someone the same evolution and basic principles of writing.                                                                                                                     Maybe at the best succeded to write a short ritualic formula or short written economical token.

9. If the “writer” intended to show the evolution and writing principles, could be like/kind ofsumerian-like school scribal tablets ?

Definitely no. Because school scribal tablets:                                                                                  – put youngsters to copy teacher’s texts,                                                                                         – to divide tablets in writing sectors, and                                                                                    – were quite repetitive in content, as containing lexical lists, eg. of things, ocupations, etc.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         From The tablet House: a scribal school in old Babylonian Nippur Eleanor Robson https://www.cairn.info/revue-d-assyriologie-2001-1-page-39.htm#

  • Types of school scribe, writing-learning tablets:

Table 1

Table 3 The order of the elementary curriculum in House F[20]
Table 3
tableau im13

10. What is the point, or why there are 3 tablets together?

The question can be asked because if you have something to say, you write everything on a tablet and  not spreading the message in three different places. Or at least write using the same writing system.                                                                                                 The answer is that he wanted to show the evolution of the writing from icons to ideograms, and even to some extent to syllables and letters.                                          We have                                                                                                                                                   – a rectangular (without hole) tablet with icons.                                                                            – another rectangular tablet (with hole) with ideograms.(These ideograms/logograms may have in the extreme the function of syllabograms)                                                         – a Round tablet (with hole) to all appearances shows the Aegean syllabograms, or even letters (Anatolian/archaic Greek).                                                                                              (except for 2 complex rituallic? marks/ideograms present in the right-hand lower quarter).

11. Are there any cases in the world of using by the same scribe of two or three writing systems?

Only exceptionally, two, e.g. the Roseta stone written with Egyptian hierogliphs and Greek letters, but there is no known case in which 3 writing systems appear (as in our case) and not with systems whose temporal spread  covers 2000-3000 years!      (Sumerian proto-cuneiform 3.300BC, Cretan  Hierogliphic 2,000 BC, linear A/B 1500 BC, Greek archaic writing 800-300BC) >> time span 3.000 years !

12. Is it claimed that the (by somewhat majority) the assumption  that the signs were used at religious ceremonies?

Although researchers make reference some for economic use and others for religious, none of them fully supports or demonstrate any of the alternatives. In other words, leave open the way for any interpretation (including a mixed one !?)
The scales is serious inclining for yes.                                                                                      (only slightly Not, since                                                                                                                        – the tablets contain only 2 complex ideograms (in the round of the right-bottom quarter) that could play a role in religious ceremonies,  otherwise all signs were used in different areas by different civilizations for true writing !                                                                           – many researchers noticed possible number marks, so economical purpose)                                Mainly Yes, since the round plate contains in the right-hand-bottom quarter 2 complex ideograms and in addition the rectangular one with the hole contains many ideograms/logograms, all of which are applicable to religious rites.                               And again, yes, as  it is possible that ONLY the upper half of the round tablet  contain a written/verbal/ritualic formula for use in such ceremonies. This may be, or sure it is the explanation, that this portion was usually hidden from the direct view of the passers-by, being covered by the rectangular one.

13. What about  scribe’s training on writing?

Most researchers claim that he was almost illiterated. I support the same idea. It seems that in general the tablets were covered with many signs from different writing systems and the only section where the scribe has managed to write is the upper half of the round tablet. Probably he was aware of this fact from the very beginning!                       (!…iliterated, but how happened he had the ability and the science to display signs used in large spatial and temporal expansion !)                                                                                          Having access to a large sign library, and an ordered, organized character of the signs on 3 different tablets,                                                                                                                                – Now, I am seeing the scribe different as in the past time, not as a person close to illiterate but maybe a priest(ess) ?, or rather kind of Berossus of his time !

14.How much new in extreme, could be the tablets ?

Theoretically and practically it could reach the very period of  archaic Greek writing 800-300 BC or that of the etheocretan wich goes/rich to our era/AC. 

From Wikimedia Commons,File:CretanEpichoricAlphabets.png

File:CretanEpichoricAlphabets.pngBut it is excluded to be newer from the early Middle Ages due to certain aging traces. The possibility of a inscription of recent date does not exceed that of being written, by a catholic teacher-priest !!!, (… who had access to old writings and documents.)                          The tablets are shown as a collection of signs, apparently scattered from different areas and periods of time, but nevertheless ordered and somehow divided into three major  evolution of writing categories.                                                                                                  Who could have done this? It is all easier when we are approaching modern times ? where the possibility of access to signs used in the past is increasing.

15. The signs on the tablets belong to or are placed in a specific, particular writing in the world?

No! In fact my entire work mainly includes the testing of the various writing systems. Unfortunately no tablet is matching entirely with one writing. But no chance for all 3 tablets simultaneously ! The greatest closeness, that is, the largest number of signs can be found in the Sumerian proto-cuneiform and almost equal to the letters of the Anatolian writings.(the signs are found in the various Anatolian writings, the top being the carian writing/alphabets).

From Alphabets of Asia Minor https://tied.verbix.com/project/script/asiam.html

Then follows a series of Mediteranean writings, in the top  being Aegean  writings.               For these reasons, the writing and of course the tablets seem to have a subsequent age newer  of 2.400 BC. (See also Cretan hierogglyphic 2200-2000 BC ,linear A, 1800-1500 BC). None of the tablets can be read using a specific writing for each/no match. Much impossible to read/read using a single  writing system for all three !

16. Strictly on sign appreciation What age could be given to the  the signs ?

Although many signs and to a large extent only “look-like” the sumerian ones reflecting only by far their shape, in the general signs show to be much more recent (new). Unfortunately, a few (really few)  have not been used in the concrete form present on tablets absolutely no in the world before 1,200-1,500 BC !(e.g. sign D ; …oops present in Indus/Harappa writing)

From https://sites.google.com/site/collesseum/qeiyafa-ostracon-2

                                                              Khirbet Qeiyafa ostracon (1.000 B.C. ?)

17. The tablets belong to  Danube, Old Europe, or a Daco-Thracian civilisations ?

No, the Danube civilization/The Old Europe has come close, but it hasn’t even reached the stage of the proto-writing. cause was not a highly socially stratified society in this area, and there were no mach attraction or dedication to writing. In fact, the  tablets are singletones,  absolute unique. The tablets of Gradeshnita, Karanovo, Dispilio belong to other cultures and other phases of writing evolution (proto-writing).                     Regarding Cris-starcevo and Vinca Civilisations:

From Ancient DNA from South-East Europe Reveals Different Events during Early and Middle Neolithic Influencing the European Genetic Heritage https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0128810

“Firstly, archaeological data show that the Neolithic expansion from Anatolia was not a single event but was represented by several waves of migrants [24]. In this respect the Proto-Sesklo culture in Greece, from which directly Starčevo-Criş in the North Balkans and indirectly LBK in Central Europe originate [2526] represents only the first great wave of Neolithisation of Europe [27]. A later great wave of migration from North-West Anatolia led to important cultures of South-Eastern Europe such as Vinča and Boian cultures [28].                                                                                                                               …………..The first Neolithic inhabitants of Europe are described archeologically as belonging to the Aegean Early Neolithic cultures [27], from which the bearers of both the Starčevo-Criş-Körös complex in Serbia, Romania and Hungary [2837] and the Linear Pottery culture in Central Europe (LBK) [21] emerged.                                                          …………These data are in line with the idea of a common origin of the LBK and Starčevo-Criş cultures from the Aegean Neolithic cultures of Northern Greece/Thessaly, the first Neolithic complex in Europe [24].                                                                                     ……………..Fernandez E, Perez-Perez A, Gamba C, Prats E, Cuesta P, Anfruns J, et al. (2014) Ancient DNA Analysis of 8000 B.C Near Eastern Farmers supports an Early Neolithic Pioneer Maritime colonization of Mainland Europe through Cyprus and the Aegean Islans. “

18. Was the scribe a native of Tartaria ?

Definitely not ! The local community did not know the writing. The tablets were inscribed by an individual of different origin. From Anatolia and possibly from the Egeana area (Crete ?), or if you want of proto-Greek origin. Note that Anatolia is close, bordering  the Aegean, Syrian and Danube areas; (there are also indications of the presence of Anatolian craftsmen in the area of Vinca). TT could, however, be effectively inscribed by that person in his home-place or in extreme even in Tartaria.

19. What made for living the scribe; what could be his occupation/profession  ?

Others opinion is the same as mine, could be an prospector, craftsmen but much sure tradesman.

20.From the perspective of the evolution and existence of all writing systems in the world, which is the location occupied by TT signs ?

Here I have to say that because of the great similarity of the signs with the sumerian proto-cuneiform shapes, as well as the written signs used in the Aegean and Anatolia, to a large extent, it was possible and relatively easy interpretation of TT using each or any of these above writings This shows on the one hand the origin of the writing, but also the spread of the writing in space and time. The scribe and signs were coming  from somewhere in the space delimited by these civilizations.

From Writing in Neolithic Europe; an Aegean origin?  https://novoscriptorium.com/2019/09/28/writing-in-neolithic-europe-an-aegean-origin/

“For many years the earliest writing was assumed to have originated in Uruk, in Sumeria, Mesopotamia c. 3100 BC. Evidence from Egypt has now dated writing to c. 3400-3200 BC, while evidence from the Indus Valley suggests a date of 3500 BC for the development of writing there.  In the 1980s, a system of writing was noticed in the Balkans of the Final Neolithic period. This was identified as “pre-writing” by Shan Winn (1981) and Emilia Masson (1984) who considered whether this constituted a Vinča “script.” They each concluded that the Vinča signs represented a “precursor” to writing.


…   The Neolithic expansion, as is generally accepted in our time, started from the Aegean towards the North and not the opposite (of course, there also exists the controversial issue of some supposed initial migrations from Anatolia-Near East which, as we have presented with the help of officially published material, do not seem to be the case. It is more likely that domesticated seeds and animals were adopted by the Aegeans, through Trade, from the East rather than that the Aegeans were…substituted by some ‘ghost’ Eastern population that does not at all culturally-archaeologically appear in the Aegean or Southeastern Europe during the Neolithic). Therefore we must derive that Writing expanded from the Aegean to the North and not the opposite as some researchers have suggested in the past.”


21. The tablets could carry real script /true writing ?

 General opinion of scientists and scholars specialised in proto-writing is pointing for NO. Cause they realised that the signs are similar to those used in proto-writing, namely the proto-cuneiform signs. The use of proto-cuneiform signs is conducting only and unique to proto-writing ! And because almost all the signs are similar to those proto-sumerian it is about sumerian proto-writing.

Scientists also noticed that part of the signs are not identical in shape with those sumerian-ones, but probably thought that are a kind of variant, local adaptation, without explaining or detailing where or how this could happened. Thus begining with a basically “sumerian interpretation” their’s are in general close one to another and also close to mine.  Some told of economical tablets, seeing on the upper-right part of the round tablet only cereals and numbers.                                                                                                  But if taking as true that this section had ezoteric content and was intentionally hidden, it is cristal-clear that nobody was hiding numbers ! So numbers or ezoteric content, only one out of twoo !                                                                                                       But others, were pointing to an religious content, and not few saw ideograms wich not only could be used in religious rituals but in fact were practically used as such on a larger scale. In reality, the signs could be used for both purposes. In and describing an offering ritual ( cereals/bread and animals/goats). What I noticed myself that those ideograms are somehow similar to those used in ancient Aegean writings, (Cretan hierogliphic and Linear A), with the  result close interpretation. (even if  the signs are much close to those sumerian ones. )                                                                                    Exemple of closeness/similarities of Aegean signs to those sumerian ones:                                                              

Semn sumerian    Semn Egeean          Semnificatie                                                                             As,Se                          Te                          Cereale                                                                                  Gu,Gud                      Mu                           taur                                                                               Amar                        (a)Ma                     vitel/zeita-Mama                                                                 An                              ?                          zeu,cer                                                                                       Bad                            Da(Sa?)                        sacrificat,mort/                                                                 Ab /Zag/Ga’ar             Labrys               templu,stralucire/divin                                                      Ud                              capra,ied                         capra,ied                                                           Dara                                -”                                    -“-                                                               Ararma                      Asasara                          zeitate astrala?                                                         Gar                                   D                              masura volum cereale

From  https://enigmatica.ro/placutele-de-la-tartaria/

Image result for tablitele tartaria

From https://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdlj/2015/cdlj2015_001.html&nbsp;                                                          BAD: …it bears the meaning “sacrificed,” or in the case of humans, simply “dead.”

Image result for damerow proto-cuneiform

From https://brill.com/view/book/9789004352223/BP000008.xml (see no.7, UD/goat)

Image result for goat proto-cuneiform

Folowing signs, from  https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html

Ab Amar An Ararma As Sze/Se Ud5 Zag~a Zag~c Dara~3d Ga’ar~b1 Sur  Gar


All interpretations, of scientists and mine are sending to, are in close touch with an -religious ritual !  !

22. But if you ask me of an possible true writing ?

I say, I hope yes, on the round table, the top half, although we have there a kind of “impossible” combination of signs (“Doo/DDoc” sequence) and apparently no way out. However, in that half of the round tablet, we could have the archaic Greek letters:

Image result for tablitele tartaria pic from http://www.ziare.com/cultura/documentar/tablitele-de-la-tartaria-cea-mai-veche-scriere-a-lumii-descoperita-in-romania-1090967

To the left: Eta/Heta Rho/D?                                                                                                            And to the right:    Doo, DDoc?/ Dtwo?/RRoo, Roc?

What could be written, what possible texts?

It seems that we will never be able to have absolute certainty anymore, of any message or text. By one side                                                                                                              – we don’t know the language used, and by the other side                                                           – because there can be more possibilities of letters and not know for sure whether the P/D signs actually are for D or R letters ; and also,                                                                      – a concrete number of letters (even they are few !) may lead to a relatively large number of combinations of n as many as m)

Can one make suppositions at least?

Yes, there would be a set of proposals to be considered, for example:

Here Roc Roc Albanian here Rrok= time grab, understand

HeRos DiBoc=DiVos Greek Lord/master Zeu (use in religious ritual?)

EDE DiDou Greek “now give!”/”give to eat!” (This proposal is of some interest, since the root of the ED is present in both food-related words (e.g. EDTA) and in that of kid Ed.educs. We have one or more kids on the pictGraphics? So through the icon of the iedului can suggest the word Ed,Ede !: Mananca!/kid, iedule)

HeDe Didou Greek now,already give! (do you give it?; religious ritual?)

! Caution, *hed is the root Proto Indo-Europeana for ‘mananca’!

HRist(s) DDoc Latin “of the doctrine of christiana”

Hero, ERO DDoc (Decreto Doctor) Latin will be a doctor (Lat.”Professor”) in the theological doctrine)


23. Again. Why 3 tablets, each with different “writing”, and how to explain this (only the appearance !) are there signs?

In fact, it is not a pile of signs. It Is the fruit of a conscious and deliberate effort. Remember, as for me, who have come to keep in mind hundreds of signs from each writing system, it would not necessarily be easy for me. If I intend to show to a student or any reader the main steps in the appearance and evolution of  writing, maybe I would do much the same.

On a tablet I would show pure icons/pictographs, as the ones on the pictographic tablet. I would choose about the same kind of basic signs, which almost identical meaning in the Sumerian proto-cuneiform as with those of cretan hyierogliphic  and Linear A.               Cereal and goat icons. There is also an absolute unclear sign , possible ghost, man, gods !?                                                                                                                                                            On the second (like rectangular tablet with hole), I would figure sumerian ideograms that are almost entirely and close shape found in the Aegean syllabograms .                                                           Signs: Cereals, Gods, labriys, Gods, Taurus).

 picture from https://www.descopera.org/tablitele-de-la-tartaria/

On the third (round tablet) I would figure the pure phonetic writing (but not necessarily alphabetic!).Those signs have corespondence in sounds . As summerian ideograms , Aegeene syllabograms, and even  to Greek and Anatolian letter wich has every of them coresponding phonemes/sounds.


On the pictographic tablet:                                                                                                                  the grain/cereal Sumerian icon, similar to the Cretan sign for cereals. And then the common icon for the goat.

On rectangular tablet with hole, 3 examples:                                                                                  1. The sumerian sign “Se” <> the linear A sign  “Te“, cereal, grain.                                                2. Then the sign ‘Animal head with long ears’:                                                                                 the “AMAR” sumerian /calf and Cretan Hierogliphic /linear A “Mu”/Bull , linear B “Ma“/sign of Mother Goddess.                                                                                                                         3. And the sign of the Orion constellation, the “Zag“/ the shine of metal, linear “Labrys” sign of the linear A divine power.

-On the round plate, only 2 examples:                                                                                                 1. The H-sign with 3 bars is the sumerian “Ku“, linear A “Pa3″,canaanit “Heth” and archaic Greek  “Heta/Eta“, old Latin “H“.
2. Sign (as with # but only with 1 vertical bar):sumerian “Pa” and linear A “Pa” (later “Z” in many writings)

I don’t know why, also on the round plate, the right-bottom quarter, two complex ideograms appear, Picture from http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html

e.g. one (on the right) is like the temple of solar gods Shamash/ 

Proto-cuneiform sign UD.UNUG:”sun -inner temple”

Image result for borger ud.unug proto-cuneiform

the sign of the punic Goddess Tanit, astral Goddess as Ishtar=the sign of the minoan astral Goddess Asasara.

From https://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-places-africa/baal-hammon-and-tanit-0012136&nbsp;                                                                                                                      Symbol of Tanit, the consort to the king of the Punic pantheon. (mrholle / CC BY-SA 2.0) Punic Goddess Tanit

WHEN THE TOPIC IS THE DEVELOPEMENT OF WRITING, WIKIPEDIA COMES ALSO (as TT scribe have done and I also would do) WITH 3 MAIN STAGES:                                                                                                                       Din https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_writing

A conventional “proto-writing to true writing” system follows a general series of developmental stages:

  • Picture writing system: glyphs (simplified pictures) directly represent objects and concepts. In connection with this, the following substages may be distinguished:
    • Mnemonic: glyphs primarily as a reminder;
    • Pictographic: glyphs directly represent an object or a concept
    • Ideographic: graphemes are abstract symbols that directly represent an idea or concept.
  • Transitional system: graphemes refer not only to the object or idea that it represents but to its name as well.
  • Phonetic system: graphemes refer to sounds or spoken symbols, and the form of the grapheme is not related to its meanings.                                                                         ———————————————————-

24. What was aiming at, or real purpose of the tablets ?

If, after a sustained and tenacious effort, I managed, succeed to have in my little finger or mind, (… where you want), thousands of signs grouped into different writing systems; (not discuss my ability or expertise compared with others, though I want such a challenge). If I could make a collection of signs in this way, that is grouped on the main types of writing folowing the course of time, with all the possibilities of 20th century documentaries at my disposal, probably the result will be close to those tablets.

Who, for God’s sake, from where and how long, does not discuss with what purpose, made a collection of ordered signs and divided into three major groups of historical evolution ? Note, signs with an extension of their use on a 2.500- years  time-span ( ~2.500-500 ECB)?


25.I put under scrutiny an important question and subject to follow; I am looking forward to your opinions with great interest.

Remember, the tablets are real an material and  not coming from somewhere from the virtual reality, and therefore do not hold as copies of others, so there are original, they were made by someone, though, and in this way original and not counterfeit, fakes. 

 Although they have taken note of the similarities between the signs on the TT and those in the sumerian, they have limited themselves to referring quickly and perhaps somewhat superficial only to a few aspects.                                                                             

What completely escaped my understanding is that none of them noticed and did not refer to the fact that the somewhat grouped signs, as if somebody divided them into three categories of historical evolution ??.

For example, a researcher with dozens of publications and books, who has literally exhausted attacking the topic TT from the perspective of all interdisciplinary branches (archeology, history, culture, seminary, etc.) starting from the Neolithic, (if not near the mesolithic) these essential aspects escaped him. Namely the similarities with the Levantine, Aegean, Anatolian and Mediterranean civilizations writings, and maybe worse, not noticed this kind of display of seemingly arranged signs in historical, in temporal evolution, and I am referring here to Mr Marco Merlini                                                                                                                            Image result for tartaria tablets                                                                  Mr. Marco Merlini, from http://www.prehistory.it&nbsp;                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            (and mentioning his master, Prof. Gheorghe Lazarovici)

26. Possible explanation  ?

This spark-idea is mine, but not a recent-one, and could explain TT purpose and who wrote and/or used them . As to be brought at an unknown time and unknown religion by kind of missionary. The round tablet could have written on upper half,                                                                                                                                                                                               Pics from http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html

an ritualic formula, as out of the signs HP Di b o c , some could be:


latin:   HeRus  DeiVOS =    -“-      -“-

Note.                                                                                                                                                         “If” word God  is written, then like kind of Tetragrammaton m not to be pronounced, hidden like the name of YHWEH.(also have here 4 letters !)                                                   Was natural to be hidden from the view of passers-by, especially at the begining of christianism when followers were chased, ??

or a religious christian-like one ( “Our Father” pray: give us our daily bread

greek: HeDe/EDE !  DiDOS/DIDOU ! :Allready,this here,now/GIVE EAT !

latin:  ED/EDE   DeDou(i)=/DeDUI    : Kid-goat/EAT     GIVE!

From ETRUSCANS, VENETI and SLOVENIANS: A Genetic … http://www.korenine.si › zborniki › zbornik05 › belchevsky_rea                                                                                                           The barbarians were the ancient Europeans, non-Greeks, whose speech was not understood by the Greeks. ….. divos > dibos > qibos > qeios > qeos.

From https://www.etymonline.com › word
deva | Origin and meaning of deva by Online Etymology Dictionary
… cognate with Greek dios “divine” and Zeus, and Latin deus “god” (Old Latin deivos), from PIE root *dyeu- “to shine,” in derivatives “sky,

From https://linearbknossosmycenae.com/tag/ionic-greek/&nbsp; by Richard Vallance Janke


(in pictographic tablet we have an kid-goat and something totally unclear, as a human silhuette with hands forward as giving)

…. or you will wonder what other possible formula.                                                                   The presence of the other signs on TT, which apparently do not contain writing, explain it to me by the intention of creating a framework, appearance, but also the feeling and atmosphere of continuity and the transmission of knowledge and religious concepts of a eternal nature, originating in the very distant past.                                                                 The fact that all the signs on TT were used in a place, time or another for writing, raises my suspicions to me. As if that person had access to sources such as the library from Alexandria or the Vatican?.In fact, I shouldn’t be so much, as the priests really had access to such sources and were among the main propagators of culture in general.






Gobekli tepe’s star gate=pole star ?

May 13, 2021


https://echoesinthemist.com › tag › history-of-the-zodiac history of the zodiac | Echoes in the Mist

  1. <<Collins points out what seem to be a number of celestial correspondences between the stone pillars and the stars, and he mentions that the Sabaeans, who were star worshippers living in the city of Harran, right near Gobekli Tepe, are known to have held an annual celebration, the Mystery of the North, during which they revered the northern direction as the source of life. These people, living around 8,000 BC were most likely the direct descendants of the people of Gobekli Tepe, who may have passed on to them their worship of the direction North.>>

From http://www.andrewcollins.com/page/articles/Gobekli_Mandaean.htm <<The City of Harran

… The Bronze Age city at Harran almost certainly superseded a much earlier Neolithic settlement located on the same site. Excavations since 2005 at a nearby mound named Tell Idris (the Hill of Idris, the Arab name for both the Greek god Hermes and the patriarch Enoch) have revealed a series of occupational layers going back to the Neolithic age, c. 8000-6000 BC (Yardimci, 2008, 362-364). These are overlaid by occupational levels belonging to the Halaf culture, c. 6000-5000 BC, and the Ubaid culture, c. 5000-4100 BC, showing a continuous occupation of nearly 4,000 years. Tell Idris was the first place inhabited in the Harran district. Yet following its abandonment, the population shifted their attentions to Harran itself, which now became the main occupation site, even though it had existed in its own right since the Halaf period.2

Sabaean Star-worshippers

It is extremely possible that aspects of the beliefs and practices expressed by the Göbekli builders persisted in the region and eventually found their way into the religion of the Harranites, who from the ninth century onwards were known as Sabaeans, from the Arabic saba’a, meaning “to change, to come out, to convert, to return”. Various medieval Arab writers visited Harran and wrote about the strange and highly exotic religion of the Sabaean star-worshippers, which revolved around a personification of the sun, moon and planets as angels or spirit intelligences. Their chosen qibla, or direction of prayer, was said to have been the north,3 the direction of the Pole Star, and every year the “Mystery of the North” was celebrated with a grand festival. The Harranites’ obsession with the north as the direction of the Primal Cause was something inherited by their latter day descendants the Mandaeans, who, like the Harranites, are referred to as both Sabaeans and star-worshippers. ….The Mandaeans practice a complex blend of Magian angelology, Gnostic Christianity, and Babylonian astrology involving the seven planets and the twelve signs of the zodiac. Like their forerunners the Harranites, the Mandaeans venerate the Pole Star, which they see as a visible manifestation of the Supreme Being, as well as the access point to the abode of the righteous, and the destination of the pious in death. Offerings are made to the north, while the dead are buried with their feet in the north and their heads in the south, so “that the north star (i.e. the Pole Star) may be in front of the eyes”, since the north is “the abode of Avather (the angel of the scales, judge of the dead and guardian of paradise) and there, too, is Olmi-Danhuro (paradise)”. That a link existed between the Harranites’ and Mandaeans’ veneration of the Pole Star and the beliefs and practices associated with the sanctuaries at Göbekli Tepe is tantalizing. This seems especially so in the knowledge that other religious groups that once thrived in the region also saw the north as the principal direction of prayer. They include the angel-worshipping Yezidi, who once thrived in SE Turkey, and the Shi’ite sect known as the Isma’ili Brethren of Purity (Ikhwan al-Safa’), whose centre was at Bosra in Syria (Collins, 2006). Yet can we take the matter further?

Festival of the Pole Star

The answer is yes, for I have come across a remarkable account of a new year festival conducted by the Mandaeans on the banks of the Euphrates river in the late nineteenth century that throws considerable new light on the subject. It highlights the sect’s absolute veneration of the Pole Star, which is described as “Olma d’nhoora, ‘the world of light’, Dayan-samê, ‘The Judge-of-heaven'”, and also as the “primitive sun of the Star-worshippers’ theogony, the paradise of the elect, and the abode of the pious hereafter’. Significantly, the account-published in the London Standard of 19th October, 1894 under the headline “A Prayer Meeting of the Star Worshippers”, and later included in Robert Brown’s Researches into the Origin of the Primitive Constellations of the Greeks, Phoenicians and Babylonians (Brown, 1900, 177-179)-provides a vivid picture of the construction and use of a cult hut called the “Mishkna”, referred to also as the bit manda or bit mashkna. This, as we shall see, bears striking similarities to the layout of early Neolithic cult buildings, including those at Göbekli Tepe and Çayönü, located around 160km (100 miles) north-northeast of Harran.

The location of the new year festival is given as Sook-es-Shookh (modern Suq al-Shuyukh), a small township near the city of Basra in what is today southern Iraq. The date is presumably 1894, with the time of year being “late September”. I will let the narrator take up the story (with some paraphrasing from Robert Brown):‘The stars are beginning to twinkle overhead, but there is still sufficient light to note the strange white-robed figures moving stealthily about in the semi-gloom down by the river side … “Their fathers were burned,” cries our Persian guide in disgust . . . thus delicately hinting that they are not followers of Islam; and a Jew who accompanies our party, on his way to the tomb of Ezekiel, spits upon the ground, and exclaims in pure Hebrew, Obde kokhabim umazaloth’ [‘Servants of the stars and Signs of the Zodiac’].

When we first meet them the white-robed Mandaeans are in the process of completing the Mishkna, or ‘tabernacle’, which will play a crucial role in the upcoming “grand annual festival”:An oblong space is marked out, about 16 feet long and 12 feet broad by stouter reeds, which are driven firmly into the ground close together, and then tied with strong cord. To these the squares of woven reeds and wattles are securely attached forming the outer containing walls of the tabernacle. The side walls run from north to south, and are not more than 7 feet high. Two windows, or rather openings for windows, are left east and west, and space for a door is made on the southern side, so that the priest when entering the edifice has the North Star, the great object of their adoration, immediately facing him. An altar of beaten earth is raised in the centre of the reed-encircled enclosure, and the interstices of the walls well daubed with clay and soft earth, which speedily hardens. Although not made clear, the Mishkna’s two longest sides are aligned east-west (see Figs. 1, 2, 3 & 5). The windows are placed in the two narrow walls, aligned north-south. White curtains are placed over the windows, although the structure itself remains open to the sky. The Mishkna’s entrance is created midway along the southern wall, exactly like the Pre-Pottery Neolithic cult buildings. Indeed, the shape, layout and orientation of the Mishkna greatly resembles the cult buildings at Çayönü, two of which (the Terrazzo Building and Flagstone Building) also have wider east-west aligned walls with south-facing doorways (see Fig. 4). As we shall see, the express purpose of the Mishkna’s southerly placed entrance is in order for the Ganzivro, the spiritual head of the sect, to fix his gaze on the Pole Star as he enters the tabernacle. Two smaller cubicles, just big enough to hold a single person, are then constructed of reeds immediately beyond the cult hut’s south wall. One cubicle is reserved for the use of the Ganzivro, and once completed no one other than him is allowed to even touch its walls. A circular baptismal pool is also created close to the southern entrance. This is filled with water channeled directly from the river (see Fig. 1). Mandaeans arriving for the festival use the second cubicle to disrobe before plunging themselves into the baptismal pool, an act presided over by a tarmido priest who pronounces a blessing as the immersion takes place. Thereafter each person covers themselves in clean white garments, which reach almost to the ground.
As the night progresses around twenty rows of white-robed figures, all ranked in an orderly array, gather on the riverside. They sit patiently facing the Mishkna awaiting the arrival of the priests who will conduct the much anticipated ceremony. Two guards stand by the entrance:… (they) keep their eyes fixed upon the pointers of the Great Bear. As soon as these attain the position indicating midnight.’ a signal is given, and a procession of priests, including … the Ganzivro moves to the Mishkna. One ‘deacon’ ‘holds aloft the large wooden tau-cross.’ A second bears ‘the sacred scriptures of the Star-worshippers.’ A third ‘carries two live pigeons in a cage,’ and a fourth has ‘a measure of barley and of sesame seeds.’ So not only does the Pole Star feature in the ceremony, but the stars making up the Big Dipper or Plough in the constellation of Ursa Major, the Great Bear, are watched in order to mark the moment of midnight. In many ancient cultures, the seven main stars of Ursa Major were seen as the turning mechanism of the heavens, as well as time-keeping devices for those engaged in nocturnal activities.
Returning to the account of the Mandaean new year festival, we read that:The ecclesiastics file into the Mishkna, and stand ‘to right and left, leaving the Ganzivro standing alone in the centre, in front of the earthen altar facing the North Star, Polaris. The sacred book Sidra Rabba is laid upon the altar folded back where the liturgy of the living is divided from the ritual of the dead. The high priest takes a live pigeon, ‘extends his hands towards the Polar Star, upon which he fixes his eyes, and lets the bird fly, calling aloud, “In the name of the living one, blessed be the primitive light, the ancient light, the Divinity self-created.”‘ Here the Ganzivro approaches the Mishkna’s earthen altar after entering the structure from the south. Once again this brings to mind the layout of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic structures of southeast Turkey, whose own southerly placed entrances perhaps played a similar role, enabling the priest or shaman to face an object of veneration in the northern night sky. The centrally positioned altar in the Mishkna takes the place of the twin central pillars seen in the principal enclosures at Göbekli Tepe, and the twin standing stones erected side-by-side at the centre of two of the cult buildings at Çayönü (the Flagstone Building and Skull Building). The Mishkna has no roof and remains open to the sky in order for the Ganzivro to gaze upon the Pole Star. Yet whether or not the early Neolithic sanctuaries at places like Göbekli Tepe and Çayönü possessed roofs remains a matter of debate. From the marks, cuts and grooves on the top of certain pillars in Göbekli’s Enclosure C (See Fig. 6) this does seem likely, although perhaps a roof was used either partially or at certain times of the year.

Soul Birds and Excarnation ….

Excarnation is known to have been important to early Neolithic communities in central and eastern Anatolia, and is even depicted on the walls at Çatal Höyük, the 9,000-year-old Neolithic city on the Konya plain in southern central Turkey. In this manner, the vulture, and thus the bird in general, became the primary symbol of the soul’s journey to the spirit world. In the knowledge that the Mandaeans themselves once exposed their dead to carrion birds (Drower, 1937, 184-5, 200), could the pigeon or dove have replaced more unsightly birds such as the vulture and raven as symbols of the soul’s flight into the next world? Continuing the account, we read next that:The worshippers without, on hearing these words, ‘rise and prostrate themselves upon the ground towards the North Star, on which they have silently been gazing.’ ‘The Ganzivro, who has made a complete renunciation of the world, and is regarded as one dead and in the realms of the blessed.’ after the celebration of a kind of communion in which small cakes, sprinkled with the blood of the second pigeon are partaken of, recites a further service, ‘ever directing his prayers towards the North Star, on which the gaze of the worshippers outside continues fixed throughout the whole of the ceremonial observances.’>>

From https://earthsky.org/?p=3297&fbclid=IwAR10LQoareSQTK-uw8ho22DxwQtoQEmDX2Nbr5uE1evdJUHljQxIukh4aFc <<Tonight, if you have a dark sky, you’ll be able to pick out the constellation Draco the Dragon winding around the North Star, Polaris. The image at the top of this post shows Draco as depicted in an old star atlas by Johannes Hevelius in 1690. See the circle? That circle indicates the changing position of the north celestial pole over a cycle of 26,000 years.

Circle around north, with locations marked for 0 B.C., 9000 B.C., 2000 A.D., and 8000 A.D.
The 26,000-year precession cycle causes the north celestial pole to move counter-clockwise relative to the backdrop stars. Whichever star is closest to the north celestial pole is the Pole Star. Thuban reigned as the North Star some 5,000 years ago.

From Tau Herculis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tau_Herculis <<Tau Herculis is located within 1° of the precessional path traced across the celestial sphere by the Earth’s North pole.

Tau Herculis - Wikipedia

It could have served the northern pole star around the year 7400 BCE, a phenomenon which is expected to reoccur in the year 18,400 due to precession.

Small white disks representing the northern stars on a black background, overlaid by a circle showing the position of the north pole over time

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/pole-star-help.130807/ I was stuck on Vega, because I can find references to it being the Pole Star between 13,000 BC and 11,000 BC.

Pole Star - Help! | Physics Forums

What symbol for divinity is expected, or express better divinity sphere ?

May 11, 2021

THE DIVINITY ICON IS NOT DIVINITY ITSELF ! It is only a reminder, a mnemonic sign. Exemple, nowday christian cross not represent god, it is only a sacred sign. We know our nowdays divinities wich must be antropomorphic, and expect the same for the civilisations of the past. But things not always worked so. Hunter-gatherers had no a very high complex and stratified society, to need an human-like ruller or superviser. They not needed a divinity wich regulate social life as much as divinities wich regulate natural enviroment.Their life passed largely in nature and depended on nature elements. They rely on rather on mountain, wood an animal spirits.

Largely and far away, the sign for divinity is a matter of convention. In greatest measure, all processus happens in our minds. Much important is what we feel and think than what is the real picture or the sharp reality, because the spiritual reality is at human beeings one level above, “1-st degree reality”. Divinity is in fact cosmic powers and order. Image from Magura cave, Bulgaria (~10.000-8.000 B.C. ?)


Tau cross is not but a cross, one even much simplified. If try to simplify further cannot, cause obtei an turn, turning (L-shape). As divinity is allways right, the cross sign has vertical lane and right angles. Pillars are Orthostates – Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Orthostates , upright stones. Thousend years lasting and directed toward sky. If horizontal part of + or T is the earth or sky, no matter, cause we have the vertikal line wich realise the connection. Tau shape/icon is related to: – Bucrania – human torso/body – hammer, ! all symbols of power !

From https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns/ME~a.jpg

From https://www.sumerian.org/prot-sum.htm <<me, mì; gtildee: n., function, office, responsibility; ideal norm; the phenomenal area of a deity’s power; divine decree, oracle; cult. ; v., to be; the Sumerian copula; to say, tell. ; poss. suffix, our. ; me3,6,7,9: battle. >>

Sumerian me, has also many other meanings :” ritual, to be, beeing, will to live..”

From https://www.ancient-origins.net/opinion-guest-authors/cosmic-power-shaman-and-symbols-g-bekli-tepe-part-ii-005194

<< One of the highly disputed symbols is the H-like symbol (and also “( H )” symbol) which is seen carved on  Enclosure D pillars. Some say this symbol emblematizes the Orion constellation. I think this is not true. Because, besides the “H “symbol, there is an “I-like” symbol, which can define as slanted “H”. Both of them are not related to Orion. To provide some intriguing and factual meanings based on cultural and archaeological datas: “H” symbol is not only a monolith symbol itself. It consists of two parts, which we can define as Tau. We encounter the same “H” symbol in Utah petroglyphs which are made by Anasazis. Indeed, we see the complete “( H )” symbol. Here the “H” symbol is not alone. On both sides there are other symbols.>>

See chinese characters “above” and “down”:


From The Fundamental Principles of Old and New World Civilizationshttps://books.google.ro › books Zelia Nuttall

<<The preceding data, which could be amplified, seem to show that the natives associated the tau-shape not merely with the idea of the Male and Female principles, but also with the Above and the Below, or Heaven (air and water) and Earth (earth and fire). ….. As I shall have occasion to demonstrate further on, the double tau signifies the Above and the Below and their union forming an integral whole. …. I venture to point out how obviously Thor’s hammer symbolizes the union of the Above and Below, the heaven represented by the horizontal line resting on the perpendicular support, symbolizing the sacred pole, column, mountain and tree intimately associated with Polaris, the world axis.>>

Now see at Göbekli Tepe, double tau:

Cosmic Power of the Shaman and Symbols at Göbekli Tepe - Part II | Ancient  Origins

Circassian (adyghe) “god Tha cross”:


In a quite restraint area, (allmost the same that of haplogroup G2a) were used in the course of the history at least 3 “T” signs: Gobekli, Caucasus and Sumeria.


I searched and knocked the sumerian “me” sign all-around in order to find the mistery around it, and the resul was that represented esence of “LIFE“. Very interesting, the egyptian sign for life, “ankh” is very close, beeeng an T-sign and wich has attached an circle or drop-shape.

Originea Gherga: 44. Gherga în N Africii

So the meaning of the sign Ankh, really is “ETERNAL LIFE”, not simply life.

Ankh – Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Ankh The ankh or key of life is an ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic symbol that was most commonly … For this reason, the gods were often depicted in tombs giving ankh signs to humans, usually the pharaoh


Now see a little surprise: From Old European culture Breath http://oldeuropeanculture.blogspot.com/2018/03/breath.html <<Now have a look at this: Ancient Greek: ζάω (záō) – I live. This word is actually derived from Linear B “za” symbol which is in the shape of the Egyptian ANKH which means “life”.

oldeuropeanculture בטוויטר: "And it looks like Egyptian Ankh could have  come from Sumerian An+Ki = Sky+Earth = Sky Father+Earth Mother = Life.  From: https://t.co/VM6XSserM1… https://t.co/9l8VlRtt4f"

This symbol is traditionally transliterated as “za”, but some people suggest that the sign should be transliterated as “ka”.This is very interesting as it shows the antiquity of the “z” root for the word for life. .. So we could say that “breathing”, or “breath” is at the root of life.But I believe that we have even more proof that the “ži”, “dji” root is indeed the original root for the above cluster of words meaning life, living. Let me ask you this question: What does it mean to be alive? Some would say that to be alive means to have a soul still inhabiting your body. Interestingly, Hittite word “zi” meant “soul, spirit, seat of life, person“…At the same time in Sumerian language we find this word: “zi” (ži?) – breathing, breath (of life), life, throat, soul…>>

https://www.academia.edu › HELLE… (PDF) HELLENIC ORIGIN OF EUROPE: Formation of the … The hieroglyphic sign No 18 = Egypt. ankh ‘life, to live’ = Lin. A, B za < Greek ζάω ‘to live’ < Indo –

https://hellas.bab2min.pe.kr/hk/za?l=en << ζά? ; Transliteration: za Principal Part: ζά Etym.: aeolic for διά>>

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CE%B6%CE%AC%CF%89?fbclid=IwAR1QCEsJ5gniJQukLgZW-d3JD2RJ7PtUpRbD09yogb8sEDcs4lwEBdm8OmM << ζάω  (záō): ” I live”>>

https://books.google.ro › books Schrevelius’ Greek Lexicon translated into English … Third … Cornelis Schrevel — 1841 <<Zñlos , envy ; ZA ‘ , , to live , flourish , revive >>

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dia_(mythology)?fbclid=IwAR28E53ZkAHghqnWnV5RaDRiMw0sHuXvoevcdxo5drrCOkPvRDIByz5kpd4 Dia (Ancient Greek: Δία or Δῖα, “heavenly”, “divine

Genetica populatiei Göbekli Tepe, 9.600 I.E.N.

May 7, 2021

Genetica relevă faptul că populația neolitică Göbekli Tepe a avut originile cele mai indepartate între Levant (civilizația natufiană?) Și Caucaz (vezi haplogrupul G-M201). Nordul Mesopotamiei și Caucazul a fost originea oamenilor din Anatolia de Sud-Est (Sanliurfa-Göbekli Tepe). (a se vedea haplogrupul G2a) Au dat viață culturilor agricole neolitice centrale anatoliene. Așa cum în zilele noastre se poate observa că în Caucaz nu există religie și zei ca în societățile complexe stratificate dezvoltate, ci un singur „mod Habza” – înțelegere, de un tip mult apropiat naturii decât viața societății interioare. Din Neopaganismul caucazian https://wikizero.com/en/Caucasian_neopaganism?fbclid=IwAR2XBry6IFzM3cF6dK99kXZ2PPUgrmv6_oto2BAUQw5CQPNMgReJUL6AqQU << importanta strămoșilor, care au capacitatea de a observa și evalua treburile descendenților lor. …… Sufletele strămoșilor necesită comemorare: se organizează sărbători funerare și se practică și se distribuie preparatele de sacrificiu sau de masă memorială (zheryme) pentru amintirea sufletelor moarte. Teologia habzistă este monistă, cu cea mai mare proeminența acordată zeului Tha … „spiritul său este împrăștiat în tot spațiul”. … Lumea manifestată material se află într-o perpetuă schimbare, dar în același timp există o bază care rămâne mereu nezdruncinată. Acesta este principiul originar al lumii și al Legii sale. Adepții acestei viziuni asupra lumii, uneori și islamizați, se găsesc în Turcia modernă. Credințele Xabze și credințele sufismo-islamice sunt văzute ca filozofii complementare de către circasieni. Zeii și zeițele sunt împărțite în două grupuri fundamental diferite:

Zei fără imagine, cosmogonii (Tha, Uashkhue, Psetha, Schyble).
Zei antropomorfi (umanoizi) (Mezytha, Tlepsh, Thagaledj etc.). >>
De la Adyghe / Circassian Habzehttps: //aratta.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/adyghe-circassian-habze/

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is tory_tau_cross3.jpg
Crucea-ciocan adighe reprezentand zeul Tha
Habzist wheel.png
Roata Habze reprezentand articularea Universului din centru, Tha
This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 4c7f7-blue2b25262bwhite2bmap.jpg

Ceva asemanator a fost în 9.600 î.Hr. acolo, la Gobekli Tepe: nu existau zei propriu-zis, așa cum suntem obișnuiți să vedem, ci mai degrabă entități animiste /demoni și animale totem care erau apropiate atat de animalele sălbatice cat și de modul de viață al vanator-culegatorilor.Așadar, aș putea emite: IPOTEZA CONTINUITATII GEOGRAFICE, GENETICE ȘI CULTURAL-RELIGIOASE ÎN MESOPOTAMIA DE NORD (ANATOLIA DE SUD-EST ȘI CAUCAZ). UNELE TRĂSĂTURI COMUNE CAUCAZULUI-GOBEKLI (partial Sumerului) sunt: – Originea religiei animiste (un suflet locuia în fiecare obiect, animat sau neînsuflețit, funcționând ca forță motrice și gardian >> stâlpi T, vii! Fantome, demoni și zeități locuiau aproape toate obiectele!) Totemism (prezent la Gobekli și Caucaz) – Zei fără imagine (duhuri,demoni) – pictograma T (Tau) = pictograma Zeului Tha Semnul sumerian T = “ME” = “puterile divine, esența, ritul, ființa, voința de a trăi etc. etc” – Același fond genetic (haplogrupul G2a) – Spițele roții Habze <12> Pilonii circulari Gobekli Tepe ==================================== Din From Origin & Evolution of a Family :The Y-DNA Story http://shissem.com/Hissem_DNA.html?fbclid=IwAR35Zlsuax0sbMk6h-hjWvt1xe-uUXyH3lPFHWW05XSW8lkJetUoHyo_-us

<< În următorii 20-30.000 de ani, descendenții haplogrupului haplogrupului F au apărut în Orientul Apropiat, Semiluna Fertilă a istoriei, apoi s-au extins pentru a popula globul. Acestea includ toți membrii Haplogroups G până la T, sau 90% din populația lumii. Originea Haplogroup G .. haplogroup G, este definită de o mutație la locusului M201 pe cromozom și este un tip răspândit, dar relativ neobișnuit. Membrii haplogrupului împărtășesc un strămoș comun care a dezvoltat o mutație din haplogrupul F anterior acum aproximativ 45.000 de ani. Paleoliticul superior, perioada de acum 50.000 până la 10.000 de ani a fost numită Epoca de piatră târzie sau Paleoliticul Superior și este înaintea descoperirii agriculturii. În această perioadă, antropoliștii cred că omenirea a început să demonstreze mai întâi abilitatea de a folosi gândirea simbolică complexă și de a exprima creativitatea culturală, văzută în picturile rupestre și sculptarea figurilor voluptuoase de fertilitate. Exact acolo unde în Orientul Mijlociu ar fi putut să apară inițial haplogrupul G a fost dezbătut pe scară largă și acerbă. Un grup susține că a fost undeva în regiunea munților Caucaz. Aceasta este zona cu cea mai mare concentrație de haplotipuri G. astăzi. Haplogroup G este cel mai frecvent în Osetia de Nord și, în mod specific, în orașul Digora, cu o frecvență medie de 74%. 29% dintre popoarele kabardine și balcanice din nord-vestul Caucazului sunt de tip G, iar Azerbaidjanul și Armenia au, de asemenea, concentrații mari de haplogrup.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Gfrequency.jpg

Cealaltă tabără susține că este o greșeală să ia această concentrație de probe moderne de haplogrup G ca dovadă a originii. Ei susțin că haplogrupul a apărut sau, cel puțin, a izbucnit populația sa, în Levantul din Siria modernă, Libanul și Israelul.”Observați că, deși G-M201 atinge o frecvență ridicată (de aproximativ 50%) numai în unele zone din Caucazul de Vest și Central, varianța G pentru 8 (?!) STR este cea mai mare în Levantul de Sud.” – de pe pagina web Facebook G-M201.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Gvariance.jpg

Deci, pe scurt, originea haplogrupului G a fost în nord sau sud sau între ele. . . Până în ultimii ani, astfel de teorii s-au bazat pe utilizarea ADN-ului extras de la subiecții moderni și pe presupuneri bazate pe densitățile actuale ale populației. De atunci au fost dezvoltate noi tehnici care permit utilizarea ADN-ului din vechile locuri de înmormântare și acestea arată o corelație redusă cu tiparele actuale de dispersie. Unul dintre principalii cercetători din domeniul ADN a spus: „… patria acestui haplogrup [G] a fost estimată a fi undeva în apropiere de estul Anatoliei, Armenia sau vestul Iranului, singurele zone caracterizate prin co-prezența ramurilor bazale profunde, precum și apariția sub-haplogrupului ridicat diversitate.” Deci, poate putem fi de acord să spunem că locusul apariției haplogrupului G a fost undeva în Semiluna Fertilă din Orientul Mijlociu, dar cel mai probabil la vârful său extrem de nord, în sud-estul Turciei sau în Anatolia. …. ….. Haplogroup G a avut un început lent, evoluând izolat de zeci de mii de ani, cu o populație mică. O populație mai mică a însemnat mai puține mutații totale și un grup mai omogen. …. ….. Primii noștri strămoși de tip G ar fi fost totuși vânătorii-culegători ai epocii de piatră, organizați în grupuri mici de oameni semi-nomazi care trăiesc în afara țării. Cercetătorii genetici se referă la aceștia ca vânători-culegători anatolieni (AHG). Acest grup alcătuiește unul dintre cele trei tipuri ancestrale care populează Europa. Ceilalți erau vânătorii de vânătoare occidentali (WHG) care au intrat în Europa în timpul paleoliticului și vechilor nord-eurasiatici (ANE) care au intrat la începutul epocii bronzului. Dispersarea Haplogroup G Clada părinte de tip G, G-M201, s-a ramificat în cele din urmă în tipurile G1 și G2 acum aproximativ 23.000 de ani. Populația care deține mutația G1 va migra spre est, din Semiluna Fertilă, în Iran, trecând peste munții Zagros. Mai târziu, de asemenea, s-au mutat la nord în Kazahstan și mai la est în vestul Indiei. Haplogroup G2, o mutație la P287 [L89], s-ar deplasa spre vest în Anatolia și Cipru, iar spre nord-est în Munții Caucaz. După cum veți citi, mai jos, strămoșii noștri făceau parte din grupul care s-a mutat spre vest. Cu toate acestea, urmașii acestor două ramuri principale vor migra și niciuna dintre aceste mișcări nu va începe până când nu s-a făcut cea mai mare invenție din istoria omului, cea a agriculturii.Această inspirație a dat naștere epocii neolitice sau a epocii noii pietre, dar nu va începe până nu vor mai trece încă 10.000 de ani.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is fertile2.jpg

Fermierii timpurii și răspândirea neolitică a Haplogroup G2a Am spus deja că haplogrupul nostru a apărut probabil la capătul nordic al Semilunii Ferile. Asta sună ca izvoarele râurilor Eufrat și Tigru de pe sau în apropierea platoului armean din estul Anatoliei. Orașul antic Cayonu Tepesi, datează înainte de 10.000 î.Hr., este situat acolo; vezi harta din stânga. Se crede că oamenii care locuiesc în Cayonu sunt primii fermieri din Anatolia. Din câte știu, nu a fost recuperat ADN utilizabil de pe acest site.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is euphrates.gif

Această sursă singulară este fermierii G2a din Anatolia. Așezările neolitice identificate în Anatolia includ Catalhoyuk, Cayonu Tepesi, Nevali Cori, Asikli hoyuk, Boncuklu hoyuk, Hacilar, Gobekli Tepe, Norsuntepe, Kosk și Mersin. Catalhoyuk, în centrul Turciei, este considerat cel mai avansat dintre acestea, iar Cayonu Tepesi în est, la capătul nordic al Semilunei Fertile, cel mai vechi. Hacilar, în vestul Turciei, a urmat Cayonu Tepesi și a fost datat la 7.040 î.Hr. – bazat pe Wikipedia. Acești fermieri anatolieni au fost descendenții vânătorilor-culegători de anatolani (AHG) menționați anterior. …… Cine au fost strămoșii acestor fermieri anatolieni? „Când a venit să analizeze efectiv defalcarea ancestrală a anatolienilor, Lazaridis și colab. (2016) au venit cu un model foarte solid în care anatolienii erau un amestec de linii legate de Ganj Dareh [munții Zagros din Iran], neoliticul Levantului și WHG [Western Hunter Gatherer], cu proporții de amestec de 0,387, 0,339 și respectiv 0,274. ” – din „Primii fermieri, cu accent pe Anatolia” la populationgenomics.blog Deci, în timp ce populația de fermieri a fost puțin amestecată la capetele extreme de est și de vest ale Semilunii Fertile, cele din nordul său, care și-au găsit mai târziu drumul în Anatolia, au fost un amestec atât de vânători-culegători locali. Comerțul a fost probabil motorul acestui act sexual.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is einkorngrowth.jpg

…. În perioada neolitică strămoșii noștri, haplogrupul G2a, au intrat în Europa din Anatolia, trecând prin Grecia și Balcani în Europa centrală. Au găsit o zonă rurală foarte ușor așezată.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is neolithicmap.jpg

================= Am gasit in Haplogroup G2a (in Y-DNA) https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_G2a_Y-DNA.shtml?fbclid=IwAR1hTVjGBWK6Wnd-7yPSBvGSwd6c1v_qdZGnzrXEz3yxxovvC-jci3MZiAs <<Distributia haplogrupului G in Europa, Africa de Nord si Orientul Apropiat https://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_G2a.gif

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image.jpeg

ORIGINEA La sfârșitul anului 2016, au existat 303 mutații (SNP) care definesc haplogrupul G, confirmând că această descendență paternă a experimentat un blocaj sever înainte de a se împărți în haplogrupurile G1 și G2. G1 s-ar fi putut naște în jurul Iranului modern la începutul Ultimului Maxim Glacial (LGM), cu aproximativ 26.000 de ani în urmă. G2 s-ar fi dezvoltat cam în aceeași perioadă în Asia de Vest. În acea perioadă, oamenii ar fi fost toți vânători-culegători și, în majoritatea cazurilor, trăiau în triburi mici nomade sau semi-nomade. Membrii haplogrupului G2 par să fi fost strâns legați de dezvoltarea agriculturii timpurii în partea Semilună Fertilă, începând cu 11.500 de ani înainte de prezent. Ramura G2a s-a extins în Anatolia, Caucaz și Europa, în timp ce G2b s-a difuzat din Iran de-a lungul Semilunei Fertile și din est spre Pakistan. Acum se găsește mai ales în rândul libanezilor și evreilor, dar și la o frecvență redusă în peninsula arabă, Siria, Irak, Iran, Afganistan și Pakistan. …… …. Cea mai mare diversitate genetică din cadrul haplogrupului G se găsește în partea de nord a Semilunii Fertile, între Levant și Caucaz, care este un bun indicator al regiunii sale de origine. Istoria fermierilor neolitici haplogrup G2a și a păstorilor de munte Testarea rămășițelor neolitice în diferite părți ale Europei a confirmat că haplogrupul G2a a fost descendența dominantă a fermierilor și păstorilor neolitici care au migrat din Anatolia în Europa între 9.000 și 6.000 de ani în urmă. Cultivarea cerealelor și leguminoaselor s-a dezvoltat pentru prima dată acum 11.500 de ani în Semiluna Fertilă, în ceea ce este acum Israel / Palestina, Iordania, Liban, Siria și Irak, dar nu s-a extins mult dincolo de această regiune în primele două milenii și jumătate. Motivul acestei întârzieri a fost că agricultura timpurie a fost prea rudimentară pentru a permite o subzistență independentă și a fost doar un mod de a completa dieta vânătorilor-culegători. Cultivarea a început cu grâu, smochine și leguminoase. Domesticirea grâului și a orzului a fost un proces îndelungat care a necesitat selectarea soiurilor care posedă mutații pentru vârfuri mai mari, mai puțin fragile și care nu se sfărâmă. Câmpiile inundabile din Mesopotamia erau ideale pentru cultivarea primitivă a cerealelor, deoarece nu necesitau irigare. Ceramica apare prima dată în Orientul Apropiat în urmă cu aproximativ 9.000 de ani în nordul Mesopotamiei. Dezvoltarea ceramicii pare să coincidă cu expansiunea bruscă a agricultorilor G2a către vestul Anatoliei și Europa. Ceramica a permis depozitarea ușoară a cerealelor și a leguminoaselor și ar fi putut facilita comerțul cu ovicapridele și păstorii de bovine și crescătorii de porci. Caprele și oile fuseseră domesticite pentru prima oară în urmă cu aproximativ 11.000 de ani în munții Zagros și Taur de la marginea de nord a Semilunei Fertile, dar nu au fost introduse în Levant decât cu aproximativ 8.500 de ani în urmă (vezi Dezvoltarea păstorilor de capre și oi în timpul Levantinului Neolitic, A. Wasse, pp. 26-27), imediat după apariția ceramicii. …….. Se presupune că patria R1b1a1a2 (M269) și a vorbitorilor pre-proto-indo-europeni a fost situată în estul Anatoliei și / sau în Caucazul de Nord. Caucazul în sine este un punct fierbinte al haplogrupului G. Prin urmare, este în întregime de conceput ca o minoritate de bărbați caucazieni care aparțin haplogrupului G (și poate și J2b) să fi integrat comunitatea R1b care a traversat Caucazul și s-a stabilit pe țărmurile nordice și estice ale Marea Neagră, între 7.000 și 4.500 î.Hr.

Din Circassians Religion and beliefs https://circassianidentity.blogspot.com/p/circassian-religoin-and-belief.html?m=1&fbclid=IwAR0vyEnjvmZlwNdXHDJXJjts7z8lIAAT4Y20sAk6ffit3jdSmze88ft6jDs

<< DE LA leagăn până la mormânt, crezul nativ circasian, împletit cu codul de conduită, Adige Xabze. Cu toate acestea, religia, obiceiurile și tradițiile erau două entități diferite. Considerarea Adige Xabze ca fiind religia tradițională a circasienilor este o greșeală obișnuită făcută chiar și de circasieni. În timp ce religia antică reglementa domeniile spirituale și rituale, Xabze reglementa aspectele de zi cu zi ale vieții circasiene. Linia de timp a credinței
Pentru a aprecia dimensiunea cronologică a manifestărilor credințelor și practicilor religioase în rândul circasienilor, este prezentat un liniu de timp de bază pentru progresul sistemelor religioase din Circassia. Animismul Animismul este probabil cea mai veche religie a circasienilor și a fost răspândită în rândul tuturor popoarelor din Caucazul de Nord. Originea sa datează probabil din epoca paleolitică sau vechea epocă a pietrei, cu mai mult de 10.000 de ani în urmă. Principiul de bază al animismului era credința că un suflet locuia în fiecare obiect, animat sau neînsuflețit, funcționând ca forță motrice și gardian. În gândirea animistă, natura era în viață. Într-o stare viitoare, spiritul ar exista ca parte a unui suflet imaterial. Prin urmare, se credea că spiritul este universal. Fantomele, demonii și zeitățile locuiau aproape toate obiectele, făcându-le supuse închinării.
Totemismul, definit ca relația intimă presupusă a exista între un individ sau un grup de indivizi și o clasă de obiecte naturale, i. e. totemul, stă la baza religiei primitive și este intim legat de animism.
Paganismul Directia s-a mutat de la animism și totemismul asociat, la păgânism, credința în posesia unor obiecte din natură a puterilor supranaturale și o concepție primitivă in zeități și a zeitati tutelare. Poate că păgânismul și-a găsit originea în epoca neolitică, în urmă cu mai bine de șapte milenii.
Politeismul Se crede că la ceva timp după mileniul al V-lea î.Hr., circasienii au început pe calea tranziției către politeism. >>

9.000 B.C. Göbekli Tepe people’s genetics

May 5, 2021

Genetics reveal that Göbekli Tepe neolithic population had deepest origin between Levant (Natufian civilization?) and Caucasus (see G-M201haplogroup) . Northern Mesopotamia and Caucasus was the origin of Eastern Anatolia (Sanliurfa-Göbekli Tepe) people. (see G2a haplogroup) They gave life to central Anatolian neolithic agricultural cultures.(see spread of G2a haplogroup) From that ones agriculture spread in Europe. As nowdays one can see that in Caucasus there is no religion and gods as in developed stratified complex societies, but one “Habza-way”- understanding, of a type much close to nature than inner society life.

From Caucasian neopaganism https://wikizero.com/en/Caucasian_neopaganism?fbclid=IwAR2XBry6IFzM3cF6dK99kXZ2PPUgrmv6_oto2BAUQw5CQPNMgReJUL6AqQU <<Circassian paganism, also called Khabzeism, is a pagan faith and one of the abandoned parts of Adyghe Xabze.An important element is the belief in the soul (psa) of the ancestors, who have the ability to observe and evaluate the affairs of their offspring. ……The souls of the ancestors require commemoration: funeral feasts are arranged (hedeus) and sacrifice or memorial meal preparations (zheryme) are practiced and distributed for the remembrance of the dead souls.The Habzist theology is monistic, with utmost prominence given to the god Tha …”his spirit is scattered throughout space”. …The material-manifested world is in perpetual change, but at the same time there is a foundation that always remains unshaken. That is the originating principle of the world and its Law.  Followers of this worldview, sometimes also Islamised, are found in modern day Turkey. The Xabze beliefs and Sufi-Islamic beliefs are seen as complementary philosophies by Circassians.The gods and goddesses are divided into two fundamentally different groups:

  1. Gods without image, cosmogonic (Tha, Uashkhue, Psetha, Schyble).
  2. Anthropomorphic (humanoid) gods (Mezytha, Tlepsh, Thagaledj, etc.). >>
  3. From Adyghe / Circassian Habzehttps://aratta.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/adyghe-circassian-habze/
The Adyghe “hammer cross” representing god Tha
Habzist wheel.png
A Xabze wheel, representing the articulation of the universe from the center, Tha

The same was in 9.600 B.C. there, at Gobekli Tepe were no proper gods as we are accustomed to see, but rather animistic entities/demons and totem animals wich were close to wild animals and people way of life.


  • – Animist religion origin (a soul resided in every object, animate or inanimate, functioning as the motive force and guardian >> T pillars, alive ! Ghosts, demons, and deities inhabited allmost all objects !) Totemism (present at gobekli and Caucasus) – Gods without image – T(Tau) icon=God Tha icon Sumerian sign T=”ME”=”divine powers, essence, rite,beeing,will to live, etc etc” – Same genetic pool (haplogroup G2a) – Habze wheel spokes<12>Gobekli pillars

=============================== From Origin & Evolution of a Family :The Y-DNA Story http://shissem.com/Hissem_DNA.html?fbclid=IwAR35Zlsuax0sbMk6h-hjWvt1xe-uUXyH3lPFHWW05XSW8lkJetUoHyo_-us

<< Over the next 20-30,000 years haplogroup descendants of haplogroup F arose in the Near East, history’s Fertile Crescent, then fanned out to populate the globe. These include all members of Haplogroups G through T, or 90% of the world’s population. The Origin of Haplogroup G ..haplogroup G, is defined by a mutation at the M201 site on the chromosome and is a widespread, but relatively uncommon type. Members of the haplogroup share a common ancestor who developed a mutation from the earlier haplogroup F about 45,000 years ago. The Upper Paleolithic The period from 50,000 to 10,000 years ago has been called the Late Stone Age or Uppler Paleolithic, and pre-dates the discovery of agriculture. It was in this period that anthropoligists believe mankind first began to demonstrate the ability to use complex symbolic thought and express cultural creativity, seen in cave paintings and the carving of voluptuous fertility figures.Exactly where in the Middle East haplogroup G may have originally emerged has been widely and fiercely debated. One group argues that it was somewhere in the region of the Caucasus mountains. This is the area of the greatest concentration of G haplotypes today. Haplogroup G is most common in North Ossetia and specifically, the town of Digora, with an average frequency of 74%. 29% of the Kabardinian and Balkarian peoples of the northwestern Caucasus are G types, and Azerbaijan and Armenia also have high concentrations of the haplogroup.

The other camp argues that it is a mistake to take this concentration of modern haplogroup G samples as proof of origin. They hold that the haplogroup arose, or at least had its population break-out, in the Levant of modern day Syria, Lebanon and Israel.

“Notice that while G-M201 reaches a high frequency (of about 50%) only in some areas of the Western and Central Caucasus, the variance of G for 8 (?!) STRs is highest in the Southern Levant.” – from the Facebook G-M201 webpage

So, in sum, haplogroup G’s origin was in the north or the south or in-between . . . Up until the last few years such theories were based on the use of DNA extracted from modern subjects and making assumptions based on current population densities. New techniques have since been developed that allow the use of DNA from ancient burial sites and these show little correlation with current dispersal patterns. One of the DNA field’s main researchers has said,

“. . . the homeland of this haplogroup [G] has been estimated to be somewhere nearby eastern Anatolia, Armenia or western Iran, the only areas characterized by the co-presence of deep basal branches as well as the occurrence of high sub-haplogroup diversity.”

So, perhaps we can agree to say that the locus of haplogroup G’s emergence was somewhere in the Fertile Crescent of the Middle East, but most likely at its extreme northern tip in south-eastern Turkey, or Anatolia. …. ….. Haplogroup G had a slow start, evolving in isolation for tens of thousands of years, with a small population. A smaller population meant fewer total mutations and a more homogeneous group. …. ….. Our earliest G-type ancestors would still have been Stone Age Hunter-Gatherers, organized into small bands of semi-nomadic people living off the land. Genetic researchers refer to them as Anatolian Hunter-Gatherers (AHG). That group makes up one of the three ancestral types to populate Europe. The others were Western Hunter Gatherers (WHG) who entered Europe during the Paleolithic and Ancient North Eurasians (ANE) who entered in the early Bronze Age. The Dispersal of Haplogroup G The G-type parent clade, G-M201, finally branched into G1 and G2 types about 23,000 years ago. The population holding the G1 mutation would migrate east, out of the Fertile Crescent, into Iran, crossing over the Zagros mountains. Later they also moved north into Kazakhstan and further east into western India. Haplogroup G2, a mutation at P287 [L89], would move west into Anatolia and Cyprus, and northeast into the Caucasus Mountains. As you’ll read, below, our ancestors were part of the group that moved west. However, it was the descendants of these two main branches that would migrate and none of these movements would begin until the greatest invention in man’s history had been made, that of agriculture. This inspiration ushered in the era of the Neolithic, or New Stone Age, but it wouldn’t begin until another 10,000 years had passed.

Early Farmers and the Neolithic Spread of Haplogroup G2a We’ve already said that our haplogroup probably arose at the northern end of the Ferile Crescent. That sounds like the headwaters of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers on or near the Armenian plateau in eastern Anatolia. The ancient city of Cayonu Tepesi, it dates to before 10,000 BC, is located there; see the map to the left. The people living in Cayonu are believed to be the first farmers of Anatolia. As far as I know, no usable DNA has been recovered from this site.

That singular source being the G2a farmers of Anatolia. Neolithic settlements identified in Anatolia include Catalhoyuk, Cayonu Tepesi, Nevali Cori, Asikli hoyuk, Boncuklu hoyuk, Hacilar, Gobekli Tepe, Norsuntepe, Kosk, and Mersin. Catalhoyuk, in Central Turkey, is considered the most advanced of these, and Cayonu Tepesi in the east, at the northern end of the Fertile Crescent, the oldest. Hacilar, in Western Turkey, followed Cayonu Tepesi and has been dated to 7,040 BC. – based on Wikipedia. These Anatolian farmers were the descendants of the Anatolan Hunter-Gatherers (AHG) mentioned earlier. …… Who were the ancestors of these Anatolian farmers?

“When it came to actually looking at the ancestral breakdown of Anatolians, Lazaridis et al. (2016) came up with a very solid model where Anatolians were a mix of lineages related to Ganj Dareh [Zagros mountains of Iran], Levant Neolithic, and WHG [Western Hunter Gatherer], with mixture proportions of 0.387, 0.339, and 0.274, respectively.” – from “The First Farmers, with a Focus on Anatolia” at populationgenomics.blog

So, while there had been little mixing of farmer populations at the extreme eastern and western ends of the Fertile Crescent, those to its north, who later found their way into Anatolia, were a mixture of both and of local hunter-gatherers. Trade was probably the driver of this intercourse.

…. It was during the Neolithic period that our ancestors, haplogroup G2a, entered Europe from Anatolia, moving up through Greece and the Balkans into central Europe. They found a countryside that was very lightly settled

======================== I found in Haplogroup G2a (in Y-DNA) https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_G2a_Y-DNA.shtml?fbclid=IwAR1hTVjGBWK6Wnd-7yPSBvGSwd6c1v_qdZGnzrXEz3yxxovvC-jci3MZiAs

<<Distribution of haplogroup G in Europe, North Africa and the Middle East https://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_G2a.gif

Distribution of haplogroup G in Europe, North Africa and the Middle East
Phylogenetic tree of haplogroup G2a (Y-DNA) - Eupedia

ORIGINS As of late 2016, there were 303 mutations (SNPs) defining haplogroup G, confirming that this paternal lineage experienced a severe bottleneck before splitting into haplogroups G1 and G2. G1 might have originated around modern Iran at the start of the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), some 26,000 years ago. G2 would have developed around the same time in West Asia. At that time humans would all have been hunter-gatherers, and in most cases living in small nomadic or semi-nomadic tribes. Members of haplogroup G2 appear to have been closely linked to the development of early agriculture in the Fertile Crescent part, starting 11,500 years before present. The G2a branch expanded to Anatolia, the Caucasus and Europe, while G2b diffused from Iran across the Fertile Crescent and east to Pakistan. It is now found mostly among Lebanese and Jewish people, but also at low frequency in the Arabian peninsula, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. …… ….The highest genetic diversity within haplogroup G is found in the northern part of the Fertile Crescent, between the Levant and the Caucasus, which is a good indicator of its region of origin. History of haplogroup G2a Neolithic farmers and mountain herders The testing of Neolithic remains in various parts of Europe has confirmed that haplogroup G2a was the dominant lineages of Neolithic farmers and herders who migrated from Anatolia to Europe between 9,000 and 6,000 years ago. Cereal and legume farming first developed 11,500 years ago in the Fertile Crescent, in what is now Israel/Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, but did not expand much beyond this region for the first two and a half millennia. The reason for this delay was that early agriculture was too rudimentary to allow an independent subsistence and was merely a way of supplementing the diet of hunter-gatherers. Cultivation started with wheat, figs and legumes. The domestication of wheat and barley was a lengthy process that necessitated the selection of cultivars that possess mutations for larger, less brittle and nonshattering spikes. The flood plains of Mesopotamia were ideal for primitive cereal farming as they did not require irrigation. Pottery first appears in the Near East approximately 9,000 years ago in northern Mesopotamia. The development of pottery seems to coincide with the sudden expansion of G2a agriculturalists toward western Anatolia and Europe. Pottery allowed easy storing of cereals and legumes and could have facilitated trade with neighbouring ovicaprid and cattle herders, and pig farmers. Goats and sheep had first been domesticated some 11,000 years ago in the Zagros and Taurus mountains on the northern edge of the Fertile Crescent, but were not introduced to the Levant until approximately 8,500 years ago (see The development of goat and sheep herding during the Levantine Neolithic, A. Wasse, pp. 26-27), just after the appearance pottery. …….. The homeland of R1b1a1a2 (M269) and Pre-Proto-Indo-European speakers is presumed to have been situated in eastern Anatolia and/or the North Caucasus. The Caucasus itself is a hotspot of haplogroup G. Therefore, it is entirely conceivable that a minority of Caucasian men belonging to haplogroup G (and perhaps also J2b) integrated the R1b community that crossed the Caucasus and established themselves on the northern and eastern shores of the Black Sea sometime between 7,000 and 4,500 BCE.

From Circassians Religion and beliefs https://circassianidentity.blogspot.com/p/circassian-religoin-and-belief.html?m=1&fbclid=IwAR0vyEnjvmZlwNdXHDJXJjts7z8lIAAT4Y20sAk6ffit3jdSmze88ft6jDs

<<FROM the cradle to the grave, the Circassian native creed, intertwined with the code of conduct, Adige Xabze.Nevertheless, religion and customs and traditions were two different entities. Considering the Adige Xabze as the traditional religion of the Circassians is a common mistake made even by the Circassians themselves. Whereas ancient religion regulated the spiritual and ritual domains, the Xabze regulated the day-to-day aspects of a Circassian’s life. Time-line of Faith
In order to appreciate the chronological dimension of the manifestations of religious beliefs and practices amongst the Circassians, a basic time-line of the progression of religious systems in Circassia is presented. Animism  Animism is probably the most ancient religion of the Circassians, and it was prevalent among all peoples of the North Caucasus. Its origin probably dates back to the Palaeolithic Age, or the Old Stone Age, more than 10,000 years ago. The basic tenet of animism was the belief that a soul resided in every object, animate or inanimate, functioning as the motive force and guardian. In animistic thought nature was all alive. In a future state the spirit would exist as part of an immaterial soul. The spirit, therefore, was thought to be universal. Ghosts, demons, and deities inhabited almost all objects, rendering them subject to worship.
Totemism, defined as the intimate relation supposed to exist between an individual or a group of individuals and a class of natural objects, i. e. the totem, is at the root of primitive religion and is intimately related with animism.
Paganism The path moved from animism and the associated totemism to paganism, the belief in the possession of some objects of nature of supernatural powers, and a primitive conception of deities and patrons. Perhaps paganism found origin in the Neolithic Age, more than seven millennia ago.
Polytheism It is thought that some time after the fifth millennium BC, the Circassians started on the path of transition to polytheism. >>

De ce piloni in forma de “T” !?

April 29, 2021

Evident, ma refer la pilonii din siturile religioase ale Estului Turciei, zona Sanliurfa/langa campia Harran .

Göbekli Tepe 12,000 years old T-shaped Pillars are not Alone (not Ancient  Aliens) | Damien Marie AtHope | Ancient aliens, Göbekli tepe,  Archaeological discoveries

Reprezentarile naturalistice de tip fotografic, ale lucrurilor care ne inconojara ne sunt foarte familiare si nu necesita vre-un efort de intelegere. Fie ca e vorba de imaginea mamei, a unui pom sau orice altceva. Insa cand este vorba de reprezentarea unor notiuni abstracte, atunci lucrurile nu mai sunt la fel de simple. Pentru ca in mod ideal imaginea trebuie sa fie atat sugestiva cat si sa reprezinte cat mai sintetic acel concept. Dificultatea devine evidenta si numai daca revenim la exemplul pe care l-am avut mai inainte ,mama. Nu cred ca sumerienii atunci cand au avut nevoie de un semn sa reprezinte puterile divine atunci, pe loc au imaginat unul. Cred ca au avut de unde alege, din infinitatea de semne preexistente in natura. Am observat ca semnele pictografice sumeriene (adica proto-cuneiforme) nu reflecta totdeauna cu fidelitate forma obiectului descris. Apoi poate ca sumerienii au preluat semnul de la civilizatiile precedente sau poate nu. Insa cu siguranta si culegatorii-vanatorii s-au confruntat cu o dilema asemanatoare: ce semn sa foloseasca pentru a exprima sentimentul de admiratie, evlavie si divinizare ? Nu o sa stim niciodata daca alegerea semnului a avut partial un caracter aleator sau a fost indelung gandita. Noi facem acum apropierea cu craniul de taur si silueta umana. Cumva ca o ironia a sortii, a siluetei umane fara cap ! Sigur ca silueta umana si taurul inspira forta si putere, dar cred ca exista inca multe alte simboluri care ar putea sugera la fel de bine forta si putere.Dar sa nu uitam ca noi interpretam din perspectiva omului modern care are o cu totul alta viziune asupra lumii. Inceputurile religiei in lume ca si populatia culturii neolitice pre-ceramice (PPN/ pre-pottery neolithic) nu a inceput cu divinizarea unor entitati antropomorfe.Parerea mea este ca spre exemplu in cazul Gobekli Tepe populatia a inceput cu divinizarea unor demoni si spirite. Asa cum eu sustin ca posibil primele monumente in T au reprezentat spiritul vietii. Posibil impreuna cu al stramosilor. Savantul rus Emelianov sustine ca sensul original al notiunii sumeriene “Me” care are forma literei tau, a fost “vointa de a trai”. Probabil va intrebati ce legatura poate fi intre doua civilizatii aflate la distanta de 5.000 de ani una de alta. Si eu m-am mirat observand unele legaturi. Este posibil vorba de un gen de continuitate in spatiu si timp a unor locuitori localnici. Din fericire mai exista si alti cercetatori care au remarcat asemenea similaritati:

From the Treasures of Syria – NINO Leidenhttps://www.nino-leiden.nl › publication › from-the-tre…

Localnicii culegatori-vanatori ai zonei Sanliurfa (campia Harran) traind si fiind total legati si dependenti de natura, au fost suficient de practici, modesti si lipsiti de orgoliu antropocentric ca sa nu-si gaseasca si sa se sprijine pe divinitati asemanatoare lor. Evolutia incepand de la divinizarea unor entitati spirit se poate observa in cea a aspectului pilonilor din stratul III de la Gobekli Tepe, trecand apoi la stalpii in T de la Adiyaman/Kilisik


si terminand cu omul din Urfa. Desi as fi vrut sa gasesc urme si resorturile ultime al semnului T in faza pre-ceramica sau inainte, nu am gasit. Am gasit cate ceva pe teritoriul Armeniei, insa semnele par nu a fi destul de vechi (adica inainte de 9.600 IEN) si interpretarea lor se abate de la cea a expertilor sumerieni.

https://www.academia.edu › The_La… Rezultate de pe web (PDF) The Land of the Celestial Gates | Hamlet Martirosyan … In future writings we will try to show that it is necessary to use the “passage, fissure, aperture, door, gate, way” meaning of the ME cuneiform . Din https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adyghe_Xabze

The Adyghe “hammer cross” representing Xabze

A se vedea si religii autohtone ale popoarelor indigene din Caucaz: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Caucasian_neopaganism <<Un element important este credința în sufletul strămoșilor, care au capacitatea de a observa și evalua treburile descendenților lor. Conceptul de durere fizică sau plăcere în (viata de) apoi este absent…. >>

Nu am gasit semne T mai vechi decat cele de la Gobekli Tepe in arta si semnele rupestre ori cele ale epocii de piatra. Si chiar daca as fi gasit, este mai degraba imposibil de a extrage vre-o semnificatie clara a lor. Parerea mea este ca semnul fiind din categoria crucilor are legatura cu impactul, intersectia si traversarea, incrucisarea. Poate reprezenta legatura pamantenilor cu cerul si divinitatea, devreme ce semnul T in scrierea veche chineza reprezinta notiunea de JOS. Cumva este naturalistic, pentru ca cerul era imaginat de antici ca o sfera ce inconjoara Pamantul, deci oarecum tangibila. este reprezentat de partea de sus a T-ului.

kids chinese | Magikid - Apps for Kids. Discover the Magikid in every kid.

Oare doua T-uri alaturate:”H” Universul ??

Daca semnificatia semnului T=Me a ajuns sa fie atat de bogata si complexa, ma gandesc ca are o origine veche intr-o societate mai simpla si cu timpul, pe masura dezvoltarii a ajuns sa castige noi si noi semnificatii. Societatea si populatia ariei Sanliurfa de la 9.600 IEN a fost cel putin la fel de avansata si complexa pentru timpul sau ca si societatea ulterioara care ia urmat dupa mii de ani, cea sumeriana !

Göbekli Tepe. Time-spaced cultural connections.

April 22, 2021

I found many such traces, clues and elements and I was not particularly concerned with finding explanations. Because the distance in time is so great (5.000 years!), plausible explanations can hardly be sustained. The elements I found refer mainly to symbols (icons) and their meaning. We found many symbols that have a pair and therefore a graphic equivalent in the Sumerian proto-cuneiform signs. Further starting from these pairs generates different assumptions and interpretations.I was also very surprised and pleased that other researchers noticed such similarities. A paper that deals with this kind of “cultural continuity” with the civilizations of the ancient Syrian area, is:

From the Treasures of Syria. Essays on Art and Archaeology in Honour of Stefania Mazzoni.
Edited by P. Ciafardoni and D. Giannessi. https://www.vorderas-archaeologie.uni-muenchen.de › …PDF Rezultate de pe web www.nino-leiden.nl This pdf is a digital offprint of your contribution … de EON ART 9.000 YEARS OF CULTIC TRADITIONS IN NORTHERN MESOPOTAMIA AND SYRIA? THOUGHTS ABOUT THE CRESCENT, THE BULL AND THE POLE WITH HUMAN HEADS Adelheid Otto aotto@lmu.de

alpha-Forum: Adelheid Otto, Vorderasiatische Archäologin | Video |  BR-KLASSIK | Bayerischer Rundfunk

<< … Indeed, there seems to be evidence of both the sun disc in a crescent and the moon disc in a crescent in ancient Near Eastern depictions (Collon 1993-1997). A good example of the crescent and disc as a symbol of the moon is given by votive stone discs resembling the full moon, which name the two Akkadian princesses Enheduana and Enmena as the high-priestesses of the Moon-God at Ur.

In view of this state of knowledge, we can imagine what a shock it was when the monumental pillars in Nevalı Çori, Göbekli Tepe and other sites at the northern end of Upper Mesopotamia came to light (Figs. 2-3). Some of the so-called T-shaped pillars exhibit bent arms with hands, girdles, and necklaces in shallow relief, which indicate that they were supposed to represent anthropomorphic beings. The wide upper end of the pillars had apparently been modelled on an oversized head, as is substantiated by an only 80 cm high, but morphologically very similar statuette from Adyaman-Kilisik (Fig. 4a)10, or on two juxtaposed heads, as is shown by a Janus-faced sculpture in the Gaziantep Museum (Fig. 4b)11. The concept on which these T- shaped pillars are based, is thus indeed the strongly stylized and monumentally oversized representation of anthropomorphic beings.There are always two especially large anthropomorphic beings in the center of the round or rectangular buildings. They are much taller than the other pillars, which were integrated in the wall and decorated in a different way. Ever since these T-shaped pillars came to light, there has been a lively discussion whether these pillars represented supernatural powers or deities (Becker et al. 2012), or whether they were “images of ancestors and demons” and “refer to a shamanistic background for the ceremonies… not… to the worship of a distinct deity or of different deities” (Hauptmann 2011, 96, 98).The two largest pillars excavated so far, Pillars 18 and 31 in the center of circle D at Göbekli (Figs. 2 and 3), are – in my opinion – crucial in the discussion about ancient beliefs. The two T-shaped pillars are located in the center of the circular room and with their height of 5.5 m tower over the other pillars, which form an integral part of the circular wall. Especially remarkable is in which detail pillars 18 and 31 are distinguished as anthropomorphic beings (Schmidt 2011, Figs. 32-34): the long arms reach diagonally over the sides of the pillars and the hands are placed on the waists so that the fingers almost
touch themselves. They wear a decorated belt with a fur-loincloth hanging from it. Especially important is the fact that the pillar figures wear a necklace on their front sides, directly below the T-shaped widening, i.e. below their heads. This is rendered as two parallel bands, hanging down from the neck in a V-shape – similar to the necklace of the anthropomorphic statue from Urfa (Fig. 5a), and to the T-shaped pillar 2 from Nevalı Çori (Fig. 5b). But in marked contrast to these, pillars 18 and 31 are distinguished by pendants attached to the necklaces, which were obviously meant to identify these colosses.The pendant of pillar 18 (Fig. 3b) consists of two oppositely arranged oblong motives
with diagonal extensions, and a semicircular band and a donut-like disc with a central cavity below (Schmidt 2011, 81, Fig. 32). The upper pair of motives is difficult to interpret, the one below can easily be recognized as crescent and disc. The pendant of pillar 31 has rightly been identified by Schmidt as a bucranium, since the bulls on pillar 2 (Schmidt 2011, 68, Fig. 14) and pillar 20 (Schmidt 2011, 73, Fig. 22) exhibit a similar head.12 However, the motives of these “pendants” differ distinctly from other images found on the T-pillars. The numerous depicted animals so far known from Göbekli Tepe – Schmidt (2007, 165) vividly talks of a “stone age zoo” – used to be rendered as complete animals and shown in side view. The isolated bull’s head or bucranium,depicted frontally and perfectly symmetrically, clearly was an abbreviated rendering, and served as a sign or symbol. The crescent and disc are also exceptional, since they seem to have been the earliest renderings of celestial bodies so far. In view of the monumental dimensions of the anthropomorphic pillars 18 and 31 –they are more than three times human live size – it is difficult not to imagine the concept of supernatural powers behind these earliest “colossal statues”. And – since the symbolic value of the bucranium and the crescent with the disc seems evident to all people dealing with the Near Eastern Bronze and Iron Age cultures, where these motives were distinct symbols of certain deities, it is equally difficult not to associate them with these gods. This is all the more so, because the region where the “communal buildings” of the PPN period
were prevalent, corresponds almost exactly to the region where the moon god and the storm god had been venerated in their main sanctuaries at Halab, Harran, Doliche and others for millennia (map Fig. 10). PPN POLES, ADORNED WITH A HUMAN HEAD AND A BIRD
A slightly different pole (Fig. 6) has come to light in the PPNB settlement at Nevalı Çori, in the extraordinary terrazzo building, which is rightly interpreted as a “Sondergebäude”. Three fragments were separately integrated in the eastern bench of the medium phase of the building, which allows the conclusion that in the previous phase the pole had been standing in the terrazzo building. This pole shows two anthropomorphic beings back to back. They embrace each other in a way that the arms of each person embrace the other person from the back. Their hands with the five fingers rest on the narrow sides of the pole (Hauptmann 2011, 99, 134, Fig. 24a/b). One face shows elaborate features with almond-shaped eyes, nose, mouth and ears. The face of the second figure has almost completely dropped off. Both wear a head garment or long hair, which has been engraved in the soft clay as a meshed structure. One figure’s hair reaches down to its back. The hair of the other figure seems to be somewhat shorter, which could be also due to its
hair ending at the beginning of the hair line of the other figure. A bird is sitting on top of the upper head. Its legs and body with flight feathers and tail have been preserved, whereas its head has broken off. Nevertheless, it is certain that the bird formed the upper ending of the pole, for the small place of fracture does not allow to carry heavy weight.
Such as it is, the stone pole with two human heads and topped by a bird is 1 m high, with the heads being live-sized. Adding the broken-off bird’s head and assuming that the pole extended below the figures, it must have measured at least 1.20 m, but may also have been much taller. Another stone pole with a human head and topped by a bird was found at Nevalı Çori (Fig. 7ab).14 The human face is rendered in a similar elaborate way, with almond-shaped eyes, a strong nose and a mouth. At 29 cm height, the head is slightly over live-sized. The head is crowned with a kind of cap with vertically engraved lines, which is supposed to be either the scalp hair or a head garment. Above and behind the head, the remains of a bird’s convex breast and its acute wings, pointing back downwards, have been preserved. In contrast to the other one, this pole has a clear exhibition side. The existence of a second figure on the other side of the pole can be excluded, but the pole might have extended below the head. A fragmentary sculpture of a bird, which presumably was holding a human head between its claws, was found reused in a wall at Göbekli Tepe (Schmidt 2007 100, Fig. 30). So far, no standards with human heads and birds have come to light further south in the Euphrates valley, but two decorated stone poles, each ending in a bird’s head, were found in situ in the large communal building
EA 100 in Jerf al-Ahmar (Fig. 8). The only furniture of this round, semi-subterranean building was a bench along the inner side, which was elaborately adorned with decorated stone slabs. Therefore, the excavators interpret this building as “bâtiment collectif” for reunions (Stordeur, Abbès 2002, 586). The two poles with bird’s heads were placed to the right and left of the largest vertical stone slab in such a way that the heads projected above the bench. The embellishment of the slabs not only consisted of a zigzag decor on the front side, but also of two engraved human headless corpses (Stordeur/ Abbès 2002, 587, Fig. 15): another proof of the association of birds with headless humans.15 Many more stick-like objects ending in a bird’s head are attested from PPN sites in Northern Mesopotamia and Syria, from Qaramel in the West to Nemrik in the East (Kozlowski, Aurenche 2005, 206). In all these cases, the meaning of the human-headed pole topped by a bird, and the pole ending in a bird’s head, escapes us. Since headless bodies and birds are frequently depicted together in the Neolithic period (e.g. on wall paintings at Çatal Höyük or on
pillar 43 from Göbekli Tepe), and since the skull cult is a striking phenomenon of the Early Neolithic period in many Near Eastern sites,16 the association of the remarkable pole with human heads and a bird (Fig. 6) with the skull cult is tempting at first sight. However, the open eyes and the hair or head garment as well as the arms speak against it. Without understanding the meaning, we have to agree to Hauptmann and Schmidt, who recognized “bird and human head” as one of the main themes of PPN monumental art (Hauptmann,Schmidt 2007).Having assembled these examples of a pole topped by human heads and/or birds, it is impossible not to think of a very peculiar object that was to be venerated in precisely the same region, but some 6000 years later. THE POLE TOPPED BY TWO HUMAN HEADS AND A BIRD ON OLD SYRIAN SEALS
Old Syrian cylinder seals of the early second millennium BC show a strange motive: a vertical pole which is topped by two human heads or – less frequently – by only one head (Figs. 9 a-h). A bird is often, but not always, depicted sitting on top of the upper head. The pole is always depicted socketed, either emerging from a rectangular base, or
standing on a quadruped, most often a lion, but sometimes a gazelle.This strange object is unparalleled in the whole Near Eastern imagery. Nevertheless, it must have been an important object, since it received veneration. Many seals show a female person standing in front of it, lifting one hand. Already in 1960, Henry Seyrig proposed to identify this object as the famous semeion, which in the 2nd century AD had been described by Lukian of Samosate as an age-old ritual object that was venerated in the famous sanctuary at Hierapolis, modern Menbij in Northern Syria. According to
Lukian, the semeion had no body of its own, but bore the images of other gods and a golden dove on top. Paolo Matthiae has recently collected all the hitherto known depictions of the ‘standard with heads’ and summarized the state of knowledge. Matthiae (in press) stated that the motif was especially common on Syrian seals between 1900 and 1750 BC. Dated and provenienced examples are attested on tablets from Kültepe kārum II, from MB I and MB II contexts at Ebla, Hammam et-Turkman, Ugarit and Alalakh (Matthiae in press; Marchetti 2003). The iconography and style of the more than 40 seals known so far vary considerably (Fig. 9 a-h). Therefore it is reasonable to conclude, that these seals were not cut at one place only, but at several places, and that the pole was a frequently used motif on seals in the Syrian and North Mesopotamian area roughly between the Mediterranean coast and the Balih valley. The varying number of heads, the fact, that the bird is sometimes missing, and the different shapes of the pole’s socle (rectangular or theriomorphic as lion or gazelle) do – in my opinion – strongly speak in favor of different ‘real’ poles with human heads, which served as models for these renderings. There may even be added a few later seals of the late 18th century, which depict the pole with the heads in a slightly different manner, e.g. en face or with a pointed headgear
(Figs. 9 g, h). These seals indicate that the pole itself did not cease to exist, but slowly became a less popular motive on seals. A similar disappearance of motifs can be observed throughout Near Eastern imagery. It does not indicate, that the objects themselves disappeared, but that the intention of the seal images changed over time. As concerns the semeion, the much later account by Lukian is a strong argument that the pole itself continued to exist, but was no longer depicted on seals. CONCLUSIONS
Definite representations of deities in the Syrian and Northern Mesopotamian region are testified for the first time around the mid 3rd millennium. At least this was the state of knowledge before the monumental T-shaped pillars in Göbekli Tepe, Nevalı Çori and other sites had come to light. They date back to the 10th millennium and already represent anthropomorphic beings. On account of their enormous size, it is obvious that they embody supernatural beings. The largest two pillars excavated so far, placed in the center of circle D at Göbekli Tepe, wear necklaces with a bucranium and a disc- and crescent pendant respectively – motifs, which in much later times were to become the symbols of the storm god and the moon god. This is especially striking, as these two are known to have been
major gods in exactly the same region with important cult centers in Halab, Kumme, Harran and others, which are attested at least from the 3rd millennium onwards. Another striking cult object, in Greek texts called the semeion, was presumably venerated mainly in Northern Syria, approximately from the coast until the Balih region.
It is tempting to trace its origin back to the PPN poles, which were adorned with human heads and a bird ontop. Already the ingenious idea of Seyrig to relate the ‘head standard’ on Old Syrian seals to the semeion described by Lukian, received disapproval at first, but meanwhile seems to be widely accepted. The major obstacle is, of course, that there seems to be no evidence for the period from 1750 BC to 150 AD. However, this could have several reasons: perhaps the pole and perhaps even the heads were of perishable material. Alternatively, the evidence could have escaped the attention of most scholars19. Another explication, which also Matthiae offers, would be that the heads were images of gods, who in subsequent periods mostly were represented as complete figures. Much more challenging is, of course, to postulate a continuity of the venerated beings over 8000 years without the missing link. But it is really necessary to bridge the gap? Holy places have been in use over millennia in all cultures, especially those located in prominent places, and those associated with abundant water, natural springs or caves. In the region examined here, there are several examples of such holy places. Urfa has remained a place of pilgrimage until today, both the area around the so-called sacred spring and a grotto, which is considered as Abraham’s birth place, thus referring to one of the prime fathers of all religions present in this area until today. But already at PPN times, Urfa apparently not only represented a settlement but rather a holy place: the live-sized statue of a male being (Fig. 5a) is reported to originate from there, and a T-shaped pillar was discovered nearby during construction works. A sacred spring, where holy fishes were kept, was also the center of the sanctuary at Hierapolis, where the semeion was kept at the time of Lukian. According to Lukian’s account, the semeion travelled twice a year to the sea. Some sea water was taken back to Hierapolis, where it was poured into the same opening, where the deluge had disappeared. Indeed, the pole on a rectangular socle is often associated with water (rendered as guilloche; e.g. Fig. 9d), the water god (e.g. Fig. 9g), the rain goddess, or fishes. Harran, situated 44 kilometers southeast of Urfa (or Şanlıurfa), has been famous as
the city of the moon god for at least 2,500 years. As well the association of Harran with Abraham and Arabic legends, which localize the grave of Tammuz there (Green 1992), suggest the ancient tradition of a holy place there. Also other forms of the people’s religiousness, which surely trace back to pre-Islamic ideas, can still be found in the region examined: e.g. people seeking for help pilgrimage to “wish-trees”, where they hang up stripes of cloth. One of these wish-trees is located on Göbekli Tepe (Schönberger 2007). Since the upper ends of many PPN pillars are still visible on the surface of several PPN sites, it is possible, that some of them have been always perceivable. Generally, conclusions by analogy over millennia are one of the capital sins of interpretation. If they are drawn nevertheless, the continuity of phenomena is usually explained with the help of the “cultural memory”. For the examples examined here, another model of explanation seems to suggest itself: the continuity of “Holy Places”, which survived in Syria and North West Mesopotamia for millennia.>>


In the first time, the author noticed the presence on Gobekli Tepe monuments of ancient, long-lastin already common symbols : the crescent and moon/sun disc and in addition bucranium. Related to T-shaped pillars, the author preferred extremely intelligently not to decide whether they represent supernatural powers or anthropomorphic entities. Then, although he repeatedly refers to the fact that anthropomorphic entities began to appear massively only after 3,000 IEN, he still flirts with the idea of ​​anthropomorphic entities. In my opinion, the T-shaped pillars represent the divine powers, particularly life, obviously of divine essence. So something abstract rather than concrete anthropomorphic deities. The human features and animals present on the pillars only show that it is about life and beings.


The PPN era and the previous one constrain us but also offer us evidence of other early and previous phases of religion, namely the animist, shamanistic and totemistic ones.

From damienmarieathope.com https://damienmarieathope.com/2019/04/12000-year-old-gobekli-tepe-first-human-made-pagan-temple/?v=32aec8db952d&fbclid=IwAR0K1aOiPde9CGGKjv2BNSdltyWbBbNVbyIVp3gU2lYrNuGFd7g1a-DOU94 << Understanding Religion Evolution: Animism (Africa: 100,000 years ago), Totemism (Europe: 50,000 years ago), Shamanism (Siberia: 30,000 years ago), Paganism (Turkey:12,000 years ago)

* “paganist” Believe in spirit-filled life and/or afterlife can be attached to or beexpressed in things or objects and these objects can be used by special persons orin special rituals can connect to spirit-filled life and/or afterlife who are guided/supported by a goddess/god or goddesses/gods (you are a hiddenpaganist/Paganism: an approximately 12,000-year-old belief system) And GobekliTepe: “first human made temple” as well as Catal Huyuk “first religious designed city”are both evidence of some kind of early paganism.

“Göbekli Tepe is one of the world’s most significant, yet mysterious, archaeological sites, where ancient people erected a series of massive stone circles where groups gathered for religious and social purposes. Analysis of bone fragments found at the site suggests that human skulls may once have hung there on prominent display. The fragments belong to three partially preserved skulls that were carved and altered after death. This is the first indication of how Göbekli Tepe’s inhabitants may have treated their dead, and archaeologists believe it may provide evidence of an Early Neolithic “skull cult” (a veneration of human skulls, usually those of ancestors). …. A development of the same process of images making that started with skulls separated burials. Both phenomena can be set into the long duration panorama of the transition from foraging to farming. A synthesis of finds seem to show the development of this custom ranging from between Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) around 11,500-10,000 years ago and Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) around 9,600–8,000 years ago early Levantine, Anatolian Neolithic culture and ranging to Upper Mesopotamian region of the Fertile Crescent focusing on separated skulls. .>>

For example, see the statuette in shape of a totemic pole Image, from Gobekli Tepe Pillar 43 – Vulture Stone https://www.facebook.com/Gobeklitepepillar43/posts/35-this-is-a-totem-and-pillar-57-found-at-gobekli-tepe-there-was-a-discussion-on/1359385220779899/

Gobekli tepe Totem & Hakasya -Abakan Totem Okunev Turkish inscription  Stones with Okunev's culture petroglyph | Ancient knowledge, Ancient  aliens, Göbekli tepe

The pillars may tend to represent concrete deities https://www.dainst.blog/the-tepe-telegrams/tag/nevali-cori/

Nevali Cori – Tepe Telegrams
The so-called Kilisik Sculpture from Adıyaman, Turkey

Pillars show signs toward concrete deities (see the crescent, disc, bucranium signs present on the belt but also in general on the surface of the pillars), but they are definitely not yet. The worship and veneration of the stone(s) have extremely ancient origins being the first things revered and deified by man. The stone pillars themselves can in no way represent deities, but can only be the seat of divine powers or incipient deities. The worship of the stone leads so far to stone altars and temples or to the notion of the sacred stone Bet-El / Betuli or the stone from Kaba.

Baetylus – Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Baetylus Baetylus (also Baetyl, Bethel, or Betyl, from Semitic bet el “house of god”) are sacred stones that were supposedly endowed with life, or gave access to a deity.

Full developed antropomorpphic deities, apeeared a little later, Urfa-man From https://www.facebook.com/bronzeagecollapse/posts/the-urfa-manworlds-oldest-statue-of-a-humana-neolithic-narrativeurfa-man-carved-/859111487609255/


Miss Adelheid Otto,
I read your paper “The treasures from Syria”. Independently and before reading the paper, I’ve found that Gobekli Tepe (not ease explainable), is distant related with later sumerian culture.Especially in icons.Some G.T. signs are paired in proto-cuneiform signs. It seems that this is only the top of the iceberg, cause further many other aspects are intertwined.My “golden finding” and discovery is the astounding long life of the Tau sign and shape present later in sumerian as proto-cuneiform sign “Me”.Not probably, but sure there are some signs on Earth wich had an extensive spreading in time and space (e.g. cross/ celtic cross, swastica or ancient greek letter eta /Heta, etc.).One will find that “Me” is virtually intraductible,because has many/complex meanings.From divine powers, oracle through being, till essence and will to live.
Yours, engineer (retired/72) Eugen Rau Timisoara Romania eugenrau@gmail.com
I’m inviting you to take a look on some of related issues at tartariatablets.com

Göbekli Tepe alignments to Sirius !?

April 18, 2021

  1. Sumerian proto-cuneiform sign Me has the shape “T”

2. twoo signs “T”s= Me-Me

3. Sumerian goddess Gula=Bau=Meme From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mesopotamian_deities <<Gula, also known as Nintinugga, Ninkarrak, Meme, Bau, and Ninisina, is the Mesopotamian goddess of healing and the divine patroness of doctors and medicine-workers.Dogs were considered sacred to her[137] and she is often shown in art with a dog sitting beside her.

eugenrau: dog<>Canis Major, canicula<> Sirius !?

4. Sign H= sign “T” + sign “T” …..? possible meme ?


Many researchers almost stubbornly claim that the people who came on pilgrimage to the monuments at Gobekli Tepe had minimal knowledge of the sky and the stars. I agree. Thus the monuments would have an orientation according to the position of the different stars in the sky at the time of construction. I do not necessarily want to make them great astronomers.Some align pillars with the constellation Cygnus, and others find them aligned with Sirius and the constellation Orion.

From Göbekli Tepe and the Rebirth of Sirius http://www.andrewcollins.com/page/articles/Gobekli_Sirius.htm

Fig. 4. The path across the southern horizon of Sirius on the dates 9400 BC and 8950 BC showing its brightness relative to other key stars of the southern sky (Credit: Rodney Hale/Stellarium)


From Gobekli Tepe alignments to Sirius. http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1045729/pg1

An interesting suggestion by Giulio Magli is that the monuments of Gobekli tepe were aligned to the rising point of Sirius, particularly so because at that latitude Sirius had only just began to be visible above the Southern horizon after a prolonged absence due to precessional effect.The megalithic enclosures of Gobekli Tepe are the most ancient stone-built sacred structures known so far, dating back to the 10th millennium BC. The possible presence of astronomical targets for these structures is analysed, and it turns out that they may have been oriented – or even originally constructed – to “celebrate” and successively follow the appearance of a “new”, extremely brilliant star in the southern skies: Sirius. So this would be Sirius as herald of a new age as it were, and over the millenia it would continue to rise ever higher into the skies of the Northern hemisphere, achieving maximum elevation at the present thereabouts. In fact, simulating the sky in the 10th millennium BC, it is possible to see that a quite spectacular phenomenon occurred at Gobekli Tepe in that period: the “birth” of a “new” star, and certainly not of an ordinary one, as it is the brightest star and the 4th most brilliant object of the sky: Sirius. Indeed precession, at the latitude of Gobekli Tepe, brought Sirius under the horizon in the years around 15000 BC. After reaching the minimum, Sirius started to come closer to the horizon and it became visible again, very low and close to due south, towards 9300 BC.

..the extrapolated mean azimuths of the structures (taken as the mid-lines between the two central monoliths) are estimated
as follows:

Structure D 172°
Structure C 165°
Structure B 159°

As Sirius is a negative magnitude star, it is in principle visible just above the horizon; I will however allow in what follows an altitude of ½ ° (actually the horizon at the site estimated via satellite images looks flat towards the south-east). Then, it can be seen that the above azimuths match the rising azimuths of Sirius in the following approximate dates:

Structure D 172° 9100 BC
Structure C 165° 8750 BC
Structure B 159° 8300 BC

So what he is saying is that enclosures were added in accordance with the shifting rising point of Sirius according to precession, but it can also be seen that the former alignment to Sirius has become an alignment to Orions belt, others have considered alignment to that and to some degree the monument can be considered to both at the same time, and not necessarily one or the other. He looks toward other alignments such as toward the Summer Solstice, and the origins of an interest in the helical rise of Sirius;

As a final observation, it should be noted that a further structure uncovered at Gobekli Tepe has an estimated azimuth of 59° (if it was open to the north-east, as it seems) which is pretty close to that of the rising sun at the summer solstice. On the pillar 43 of enclosure D a suggestive, unique scene is represented: a sort of vulture with human traits delicately “rises up” with a wing what seems to be a sphere, or a disk. May this be a representation of the Heliacal rising of the newly born star we today call Sirius, which – as can be easily verified – occurred just a few days before the summer solstice at the end of the 10th millennium BC at the latitude of Gobekli Tepe?

a reply to: Kantzveldt The question to ask of what value is that alignment to a person of that time? Well its an engaging theory but I would tend to believe if the sites are oriented anywhere it would be to the rising sun that shows seasons which would have been of value to them.The problem with associating stars to be alignment points is that there are lots of points in the sky and they shift around (highly simplified) a lot so you can find an alignment virtually anywhere.Great stuff as always Kantzveldt.

originally posted by: Hanslune
The problem with associating stars to be alignment points is that there are lots of points in the sky and they shift around (highly simplified) a lot so you can find an alignment virtually anywhere.

Exactly. Because of the constant shifting and rotation of the Earth, alignments never really point at specific stars, but rather draw arcs that cross the entire sky. And looking at the positions of the stones at the site, it looks like most of them are more likely aligned to support a roof structure. Besides, why only align some of the larger stones, and not all of them? This is one of those cases where “fudging” becomes a significant factor in proving associations.

a reply to: Hanslune <<The potential significance and my own interest here develops from observing that the Sumerian Goddess Bau had a Post-Diluvian role in the mythology, the restoration to life and provisions in abundance and a general raising of the spirits, as well as the generation of mankind from seed, she also strongly identifies with the star Sirius.

Now in looking for an historical premise for a mass extermination event the last ice age and subsequent localized flooding is really the only candidate, the Aryan tradition of Yima and his Vara buried under the ice and snow, in which was preserved the seed of all living things is a Northerly version of such catastrophe, and probably the closest to the mark, so survival was passed down in folklore. Now of course for any Goddess to have had Post-Diluvian origins and relating to Sirius the star itself would have to have been visible, and so the date when this would have been possible emerges as around 11,500 years ago for the latitude of Turkey and that corresponds to the radical changes seen at Gobekli Tepe, thus Sirius could well have been associated with Post-Diluvian re-establishment of populations in the Northern hemisphere, indeed as the very Goddess of such.>>

a reply to: Kantzveldt However we have no idea if those later Sumerian ideas even existed then or that the people of GT knew of them if other did (language barrier). What is the oldest attribution do we have for this god? Does it show up fully formed or does it evolve?

a reply to: Hanslune Of course the Sumerian ideas as such couldn’t have existed back then, there is a 6,000 year differential in dates, but in identifying the God Ninurta with Sirius and the causation of the Deluge and his consort Bau with the Post-Deluge mopping up operation they at least suggest that star was in some way associated. So if we say take the disappearance of Sirius circa 15,000 years ago with the onset of the period of catastrophe and the return of the stars visibility some 11,500 years ago as new beginings under it’s auspicious blessings we can perhaps perceive how that star came to be associated with those epochs, and all of it’s later mythological associations must find first context when it returned to visibility, and the events that were taking place at that time with which it became synonymous. Of course it would be a thing of wonder if such associations did survive into the historic period and were remembered in the mythology, but i think there is every chance that is the case.

a reply to: Hanslune Yes i think it’s very likely because of the mythological associations Sirius retained, death and rebirth, and association with inundation, Ninurta apart from being the God of the Deluge also was responsible for the creation of dams and levees and irrigation systems, his wife monitored the levees, again in Egypt one finds those corresponding traditions of flood and irrigation in connection with Sirius. Once it was determined what the star related to it was unlikely to lose it’s significance without good reason, particularly given the enormous importance attached to those events in regions affected.

a reply to: Rosinitiate It is a truly epic tale and of course it was an ongoing one as the star continued to gain elevation in the skies from those early new beginings and the re-population and development of the Northern hemisphere, so a success story, a Goddess that works

a reply to: Kantzveldt I would suppose that some posters here are familiar with the book The Sirius Mystery by Robert K.G. Temple? It tells of how ETs from Sirius visited African tribes thousands of years ago as passed down from oral stories. Having a history with UFOs, I’m always distrustful of any science that tends to insist that human activity (including honored gods seemingly created in human minds) is the sole answer to every mystery we attempt to explain. I think the cosmos always allows a wider perspective if one choses to disallow man’s omnipotence over all.

Another hunter gather folk did mark Sirius at about the same time although not anywhere nearly as grand as G.T they also pointed to that bright star ,these off-course were the people at Nabta Playa their Goddess figure would have been Hathor but according to some views floating around the net there may have been some connection with G.T in an earlier thread I touched up on the possibility of a Saharan connection with G.T without referencing N.P

Cosmic Birth

Almost exactly what we see represented in abstract form on the sighting stone in Göbekli Tepe’s Enclosure D is found also on the Venus and Sorcerer panel inside France’s Chauvet cave, created by a Paleolithic artist some 32,000-30,000 years ago. Here too the abstract legs of the “Venus” seem to signify the twin streams of the Milky Way either side of the Dark Rift, with the head of a young bovine overlaid upon the position of the womb. This bucranium is likely to represent the Cygnus constellation in its role as the head of a bull calf, which in prehistoric times was seen as an abstract representation of the female womb or uterus complete with its horn-like fallopian tubes. The uncanny likeness between the two is something that our distant ancestors would appear to have realized at a very early stage in human development.(23) We are reminded also of the 3D frescoes from Çatal Höyük showing bulls being born from between the legs of divine females (often with the heads of leopards), and the ancient Egyptian belief that the goddess Hathor, in her role as the Milky Way, gave birth each morning to the sun-god in the form of a bull calf, which was seen to emerge from between twin sycamore trees perhaps signifying the twin streams created by the Dark Rift.


posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 04:17 AMlink   a reply to: Aliensun

His research on the Sumerian angle for that book was surprisingly good given the difficulties in putting a cohesive picture together at that time;

Since An is connected with Sirius, we should thus not be surprised that he has a dog-goddess for a daughter in Sumer. Sirius as the Dog Star was a tradition which was not thought to have existed in Sumer, however, before now.

Since the fifty Anunnaki were children of An, and Bau is a daughter of An, it is not far-fetched to see in Bau a survival (for she is an old goddess who faded into obscurity in later times) of the concept of a dog-star goddess equivalent to Sothis.

Enlil, whose command is far-reaching, whose word is holy, The lord whose pronouncement is unchangeable, who forever decrees destinies, Whose lifted eye scans the lands, Whose lifted light searches the heart of all the lands,

Sirius Mystery

a reply to: 3n19m470

It’s not a coincidence, the Free Masons got the motif from Jewish Kabbalists who in turn had got it from familiarity with the Assyrian and Babylonian tree of life representations.

The Starway to Sirius

a reply to: Spider879 It’s interesting because Andrew Collins having wrote books on a Cygnus correlation to the Gizamids has not unsurprisingly counter claimed that the Gobekli Tepe alignments point to Cygnus in the North West, that is unlikely because the enclosures open up to the South East and there is a hill behind them blocking any such alignment, however the Celestial axis of the Sumerians according to my own research was an enormous affair with Sirius at it’s pinnacle and the constellations Pegasus (and Cygnus) at it’s base, covering the entire extent of the sky the base is always opposite to the summit, so the positioning of Cygnus is relevant though that is not what is aligned toward.

Andrew Collins on Gobekli Tepe

The Celestial Tree
edit on Kam1231342vAmerica/ChicagoTuesday0931 by Kantzveldt because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 09:49 AMlink   I’ll take the NorthbyNorthwest alignment

First writing signs in history, Göbekli Tepe.

April 18, 2021

In human history there are some signs as cross and swastica wich are present in rock-art lasted millenia. So it seem that the tau cross is much older than tau, stauros the pillar to which the bulls were tied. From First pictorial representation of Göbekli Tepe T-pillars found on tiny bone plaque Andrew Collins* http://www.andrewcollins.com/page/articles/plaque.htm

<< It was found during routine excavations at the 11,500-year-old site of Göbekli Tepe in southeast Turkey, but no one had recognised exactly what the carved lines on the small bone plaque showed. This was until Matthew Smith, a British telecommunications consultant living in Qatar, visited Sanliurfa Museum, which houses a large collection of portable objects found at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN) site of Göbekli Tepe, located around 8 miles (13 kilometres) away to the northeast. Smith recognised something that everyone else appears to have missed, this being that the little plaque – just 6 cm in length, 2.5 cm in width and 3-4 mm in thickness – bears on its upper surface two T-shaped features positioned side by side (see fig. 1). The context of the plaque’s discovery, i.e. at Göbekli Tepe, makes it clear these T-like etchings are pictorial representations of the familiar T-shaped pillars found in all the key enclosures uncovered at the site. >>

NOT MATTHEW SMITH, NOR ANDREW COLLINS SHOWED HOW THOSE SIGNS ARE RELATED TO WRITING ! So you are talking about the first pictorial signs of writing found in Gobekli Tepe without realizing, supporting or trying to prove that the “pictograms” as you call them, are related to writing. Because it is not just a single resemblance of signs, but multiple resemblances to later signs used in writing, this is an argument and support for the direct connection with writing.

I will not enter in what Collins say “debate over the axial orientation of the site’s main enclosures and any potential astronomical targets” because is highly risky, I enter a swampy ground . 

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Euphratean_languageProto-Euphratean is a hypothetical unclassified language or languages which was considered by some Assyriologists (for example Samuel Noah Kramer), to be the substratum language of the people that introduced farming into Southern Iraq in the Early Ubaid period (5300-4700 BC).”

We have later sumerian proto-writing=proto-cuneiform signs Me and Urudu wich has the T shape. It is possible that this icon were known much more earlier and signified something (had attached an meaning). If the shape remained unchanged throughout the time we are not 100% sure about significance.

From https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html Sign Me


And sign urudu


Both sumerian signs has meanings related to divinity and power

From https://is.muni.cz/el/1421/jaro2013/PAPVB_13/um/40794229/Halloran_version_3.pdf me, mì; ñe: n., function, office, responsibility; ideal norm; the phenomenal area of a deity’s power; divine
decree, oracle; cult
[ME archaic frequency: 363; concatenates 2 sign variants].
v., to be; the Sumerian copula; to say, tell

From https://www.angelfire.com/tx/tintirbabylon/ME.html << ME(1) is a Sumerian word (perhaps pronounced “may”) that has no single exact English equivalent. Samuel Kramer explained Me as the “fundamental, unalterable, comprehensive assortment of powers and duties, norms and standards, rules and regulations, relating to the cosmos and its components, to gods and humans, to cities and countries, and to the varied components of civilized life.” The usual Akkadian translation is parsu, “rite, ordinance, office.” Although the Me in general are referred to frequently in hymns, prayers, and stories, few specific Me are mentioned. We are told that there are 7, 50, or 3600 Me. These numbers are collective numbers symbolizing completeness and totality. Me was obviously a fluid concept that could apply to any type of power, Above or Below.>>

From ON ТНЕ ORIGINAL МEANING OF SUМERIAN МЕ (lmages of Weltanschauung and the Methods of Тheir Study) V.V. Yemelyanov <<The article discusses the problem of translating and interpreting Sumerian МЕ bу means of the Old Babylonian cuneiform vocabularies and the Neo-Sumerian Gudea texts. The main supposition is that the word was derived from the verb МЕ «to bе apparent, visible» and its original meaning was «will to live». >>

From oldeuropeanculture on Twitter: “Sumerian word for copper is …https://twitter.com › serbiaireland › status https://www.academia.edu › Sumerian urudu and Kartvelian Metallurgy.pdf | Anna … Thus, the ultimate meaning of the Sumerian urudu is uro ‘a big hammer+ du ‘head, chief’, i.e. ‘the chief big hammer’, ‘the leading big hammer’...

One must agree that T shape is the shape of a hammer wich indeed is inspiring power, does not matter, of metal or stone.

From ANCIENT METAL NAMES AND THE FIRST USE OF METAL Janos Makkay https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=wm#inbox?projector=1

<< …. On the other hand, Mallory believes that there was a contact relation of Sumerian with PIE and the classic example is Sumerian urud and PIE *reudh-. In the opinion of Gamkrelidze and Ivanov the stem *reudh- is of interest confirming the connection between metallurgy in the PIE period with that of the ancient East. (As it is well-known, they locate the PIE homeland to the area of eastern Turkey, i. e. near to the supposed – primordial – source of the stem urudu). According to Diakonov (who also locates a very early, common PIE – -Prot-Kartvelian homeland to the east Anatolian area) a meaning of ‘red ore’ would be more correct, but in his opinion Sumerian urudu probably comes from a pre-Sumerian substratum. These opinions adequetely reflect the uncertainties surrounding the “ethnic” origins of urudu. E. Risen, for example, did not deal with the origin of the borrowed IE root *reudh-. E. Meyer argued that urud/u was borrowed from an – unidentified – Mediterranean language both into Sumerian and also Indo-European dialects. G. Devoto’s opinion stands close to Meyer’s for he suggested that the counterinfluence of non-IndoEuropean peoples could be felt on the peripheries of Indo-European seats, in cluding also the Balkans. In the Balkans these counterinfluences probably oc curred during the Neolithic revolution and are reflected in the distribution of cereal names as well as in the adoption of – – Mediterranean or Sumerian – -urud/u among the Indo-Europeans.
There is at present only one possibility for solving these contradictions, especially in view of the fact that evidence for the oldest copper metallurgy is at present known from the Euphrates region, namely from Cayönü Tepesi.
In 1944 B. Landsberger pub lished two important studies in the scholarly journal of the Ankara University. On the basis of the old city names of Mesopotamia such as Urim, Uruk, Larsam, Adab, LagaS and Zimbir he
reconstructed a substrate language which he called Proto-Euphratic. In northern Babilonia, on the other hand, on the evidence of divine names such asDagan, Zambomba, Amba, as well as Шаг and Adad he concluded that before the arrival of the earliest Semites the area was settled by another original population that differed from the Proto-Euphratians. These people he held to be identical with the original population of Assyria, northern Mesopotamia, and possibly also Syria, whom he called Proto-Tigridians. This probably coincides with the sug gestion of I. J. Gelb in 1961: “… the protopopulation of North Syria was of un known lingustic affiliation (that is, non-Semitic and non-Hurrian)…”.24
Landsberger made an attempt to isolate within the Sumerian vocabulary. …..

… Only in the Turkish variant of Landsberger’s study is the possible origin of the word URUDU discussed which according to Landsberger is neither Sumerian, nor Proto-Euphratic, but was borrowed to the PIE. Theese contradictory hypotheses (to which further confusion was added by P. Kretschmer who assumed a Bell Beaker /¡/contribution to the history of the stem *reudh- , *roudhom ‘red metal)26 can be resolved if we assume that the expression URUDU ‘metal, red ore, copper’ can only have originated from an area where extensive copper metallurgy can be documented already prior to the fifth mill. В. С. and from an area which presumably was not the prehistoric seat of Protosumerians and/or early Semites. Since an IE and Semitic etymology for the word can be rejected out of hand, and a Sumerian etymology is most unlikely, a substrate similar to the Proto-Euphratic or Proto-Tigridian is to be easily assumed. It is the latter which for geographical reasons corresponds best to the presently known location of very early (or earliest) copper metallurgy,Cayönü Tepesi. The geographical position and very early (i. e. 8-7. mill. B. C.) dating of the copper industry in Cayönü opens up new possibilities to review the origins of IE and other stocks relating metal names from pre-Sumerian and Protosemitic sources. >>

Image, from Gobekli Tepe, The First Megalith http://antiquatedantiquarian.blogspot.com/2014/08/humanitys-first-megaliths.html?m=1

Farmers have been here for as long as anyone can remember, thousands of  years in fact. As a local farme… | Ancient writing, Ancient artifacts,  Ancient civilizations
Called the “Snake, Tree, and Eagle” stone, the true meaning of these markings are completely unknown

From https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html Sign Ban

sign Bir

sign Gal

Sign Zatu 644~b

Gobekli Tepe “porthole” slab =?= seelenloch/ soul hole

April 7, 2021

https://en.linkfang.org/wiki/Port-hole_slab#Port-hole_slab In megalithic archaeology a port-hole slab is the name of an orthostat with a hole in it sometimes found forming the entrance to a chamber tomb. The hole is usually circular but square examples or those made from two adjoining slabs each with a notch cut in it are known. They are common in the gallery graves of the Seine-Oise-Marne culture.

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seelenloch&prev=search&pto=aue Soul hole ( French dalle hublot ) is, after Abraham Lissauer, a name for an “entry and exit opening for the soul of the deceased”. [1]Heine-Geldern defines the term more narrowly as “… the opening made in the locking stones of so many megalithic graves .” [2] For Otto Höver , megalithic graves were “heavy spell housings against the demonic power of the living corpse and at the same time seats of the separated souls, for which a small opening – the so-called soul hole – was left in the stone structure as a precaution, where the anima could secretly slip in and out. ” [3]The term was used in archeology and ethnology , but is considered out of date. The German word “Seelenloch” is also used in English-language publications >> see also: https://www.wikiwand.com/nl/Seelenloch


https://www.amazon.fr/Cygnus-Key-Denisovan-G%C3%B6bekli-English-ebook/dp/B075CN38NB << Soul Holes

Professor Klaus Schmidt, who headed excavations at Göbekli Tepe between 1995 and his untimely death in 2014, never passed comment on the site’s porthole stones, which appear in the two most accomplished enclosures discovered to date. He did, however, have something to say about the fragments of stone rings his team found scattered about the site–one of which has been pieced together and is on display at Sanliurfa’s archaeological museum. These are around half a meter (18.5 inches) in diameter and were positioned originally either in the ringwalls of now lost enclosures or in overhead ceilings. As to their function, Schmidt proposed they were seelenloch, a word in his native German language meaning “soul hole.” So what exactly are soul holes?

Form and Function

A large number of megalithic (that is, large stone) chambered tombs, or dolmens, from Ireland in the west to India in the east, have circular apertures cut into their entrance facades. Like the porthole stones at Göbekli Tepe, these bored holes are usually between 25 and 40 centimeters (10 to 16 inches) in diameter: too small for a grown person to pass through bodily. The porthole stones seen in Neolithic and later Bronze Age dolmens, which generally date to circa 3000–2000 BCE, could have functioned as a means of offering food and gifts to the spirits of human remains interred within the structures. Alternately, the apertures might have enabled further burials to be added, or, indeed, original interments to be removed.

Such ideas, however, are inadequate to fully explain the widespread use of circular apertures in a funerary context. For example, in India circular apertures appear in stone slabs used as entrances to cist burials, which were generally sealed beneath the earth following construction. Deliberately bored holes are seen also in ceramic urn jars found in cemeteries across Europe and Southwest Asia. These date to the Iron Age and later Roman times. The purpose of these holes was to provide a means for the release of the soul, the presence of dirt, or any other constrictions not being seen as a hindrance to the soul’s ability to leave its place of interment.

In a like manner, small doors or windows known as armen seelenloch, “poor soul holes,” were once incorporated into the walls of houses in the Austrian Tyrol. A number survive today, and there seems little question that their primary function was to allow the exit of a soul following death since these miniature doors were opened only when a death occurred in the household. The function of armen seelenloch has been linked with the porthole stones of megalithic monuments located in the same region, suggesting a continuity of ideas from the Neolithic age through to the present day. Almost certainly connected to the function of armen seelenloch is the fact that members of the Ojibway tribe, indigenous peoples of Canada and the northern United States, would bore a hole in a coffin so as “to let the soul go out and in at pleasure.” In a similar manner, hospital nurses in southern England upon the death of a patient would open the window nearest to the feet of a body so that the soul might escape. Very likely at least some of the porthole stones at Göbekli Tepe served a similar function, although instead of the exiting souls being used by the deceased, it was the soul or spirit of the shaman or entrant that was thought to exit this world using these circular apertures.

Shamanistic Practices

Shamanistic practices in various parts of the world incorporate the use of a symbolic hole, either in a rock, in the ground, in a tree, or in the roof of a yurt or tent. Their presence enables the spirit of the shaman to leave its physical environment and enter invisible realms described in terms as the Upper and Lower World. The Upper World was thought to exist in the sky; the Lower World beneath the earth. In addition to this, Siberian shamans are known to have employed the use of bones with holes at their center to begin to “see all, and to know all” and that this “is when one becomes a shaman.” In other words, pierced bones were used in ritual practices that involved the participant achieving an ecstatic or altered state of consciousness and then projecting his or her mind through the hole to enter unseen realms. Here they would attain otherworldly knowledge and enlightenment not normally accessible to those inhabiting the land of the living. So the presence of the pecked hole between the twin pillars seen on the carved bone plaque found at Göbekli Tepe indicates that during rites and ceremonies a person entering the site’s enclosures approached between the twin central monoliths and focused their eyes on the porthole stone. Very likely these holed stones formed a bridge, portal, or point of connection between the liminal realm created by the enclosure’s circular interiors and otherworldly environments thought to exist beyond the physical plane of existence.This was an important realization for it helped confirm the axial orientation of Enclosures C and D, which in both cases was toward the north-northwest, where both portholes stones are to be found. Yet why were both the twin central pillars and the holed stones oriented toward the north-northwests. >>

From First pictorial representation of Göbekli Tepe T-pillars found on tiny bone plaque Andrew Collins* http://http://www.andrewcollins.com/page/articles/plaque.htm

SOUL HOLES Although the late Professor Klaus Schmidt, the head of excavations at Göbekli Tepe between 1995 and his untimely death in 2014, never commented on these holed stones seen in the two most accomplished enclosures uncovered to date, he did have something to say about the fragments of stone rings found at the site (one of which has been pieced together and is now on display at Sanliurfa Museum – see fig. 7).

Fig. 7. Stone ring found at Göbekli Tepe and now in Sanliurfa museum (picture credit: Andrew Collins).

These, he suspected, had been placed in the walls of now lost enclosures and might have acted as seelenloch, a word in his native German language meaning “soul hole” (Schmidt, 2012, 99).

A large number of megalithic dolmens of Neolithic and later Bronze Age manufacture, from Ireland in the West across to India in the East, have circular apertures cut into their entrance stones (see fig. 8). Like the examples at Göbekli Tepe, these bored holes are usually between 25 and 40 centimetres in diameter, too small to allow a normal sized person to pass through bodily. Portholes in megalithic dolmens could have functioned as a means of offering food to the internee. Alternately, they might have enabled further human remains to be added, or, indeed, original interments to be removed. Such ideas, however, are inadequate to fully explain the widespread use of holes in funerary situation. For example, in India circular portholes appear in stone slabs used as entrances to cist burials (Thapar, 2004, 95). Deliberately bored holes are seen also in ceramic urn jars found in cemeteries across Europe and Southwest Asia. These date to the Iron Age and later Roman times (Koster, 1983; Avetisian, 1999/2000). Apparently, the purpose of these holes was to provide a means for the release of the soul from its place of containment. In a similar manner, small doors or windows known as armen seelenloch, “poor soul holes,” were once incorporated into the walls of houses in Austria. A number survive to this day, and there is no question that their primary function was to allow the exit of the soul following death, each one being opened only when there was a death in the household (Schwierz, 2011). Their existence has been linked with portholes identified as seelenloch in megalithic monuments located in the same region (Lukan, 1979, 55). ………………….. ………………….. Some researchers of the ancient mysteries field have chosen to ignore this data and announce that the twin central pillars of key enclosures at Göbekli Tepe are aligned south, their twin central monoliths turned to face the rising of either the belt stars of Orion (Schoch, 2014, 54-55) or the bright star Sirius, (? CMa) (Magli, 2014). Both of these stellar targets have, however, been shown to be flawed (Collins, 2014, 77-80; Collins and Hale, 2014). What is more, the evidence available offers more compelling reasons for us to conclude that the key enclosures at Göbekli Tepe are oriented north, and not south. Chartered engineer Rodney Hale, working with the present author, determined that the mean azimuth bearings of the twin central pillars in Enclosures B, C, D & E targeted the bright star Deneb (? Cyg) as it set on the NNW horizon during the epoch of their construction (Collins, 2014, 80-82, and see fig. 10). That the setting of Deneb helped determine the axial orientation of these enclosures is verified in a new study of Göbekli Tepe’s astronomical alignments by Alessandro De Lorenzis and Vincenzo Orofino (2015)>>

Image, from https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/arqueologia/gobekli_tepe08.htm

Göbekli Tepe - Who Built It, When, and Why? - A Preview to Genesis of the  Gods
Fig. 5.
Left, plan of Enclosure D showing position of holed stone
and mean azimuth of the twin central pillars.
Right, the holed stone in Enclosure D.
(Pic Credits: Rodney Hale/Andrew Collins
  • Pointing to Deneb (Cygnus) is consistent with sky-burial religion, Andrew Collins: ” The purpose of targeting a near-circumpolar star such as Deneb, located in the constellation of Cygnus, the celestial bird, was almost certainly to connect with the Milky Way, on which the asterism is prominently placed. In Eurasian folklore the Milky Way has long been seen as a road or river along which souls, often in the form of birds, journeyed to reach the afterlife (see fig. 11). For a full treatment of this subject see the author’s work elsewhere (Collins, 2006)”

Sky Burial’ theory and its possible origins at least – Damien …https://damienmarieathope.com › 2018/07 › sky-burial-…  According to most accounts of the Sky burial practice, vultures are given the whole body. Then, when only the … *Around 12,000 years ago Gobekli Tepe (Turkey)

  1. Pointing to Orion is consistent with faith in afterlife where soul rise to most monumental constellation visible on night sky, Orion. Out of this is for many ages and cultures, not only for hunter-gatherers it is “the hero/hunter” Following image, from

Göbekli Tepe: Turkey’s Stonehenge, But At Least 7000 Years Older 

  1. https://ro.pinterest.com/pin/383650461991428519/
Göbekli Tepe: Turkey's Stonehenge, But At Least 7000 Years Older | Göbekli  tepe, Ancient aliens, Ancient civilizations


From Gobekli Tepe – my uninformed ramblings by knotmagick https://knotmagick101.wordpress.com/2019/10/20/gobekli-tepe-my-uninformed-ramblings/amp/?fbclid=IwAR1OLR5rIcQihkd6agPjXOnzIN2kLhzw2jqRWyLi1YQxgb6nah0LBO3emkA

<<The presence of birds in this context would have been very important to some societies, because of the links drawn between birds and the human soul. There is evidence around the globe, from the Middle East to North America, of the association between the souls of the dead and birds; everything from buzzards and eagles to the crane and ibis. We can see the same associations extending into Christianity, with the dove being the representation of the soul. For this reason, in conjunction with the supposition that sky burial was practised by the builders of Gobekli Tepe and the high number of crane and bird depictions found in enclosure D, Andrew Collins suggests that the worshippers of Navel Hill saw the spirits of their beloved dead in the form (or in the company) of birds and that their religious activities at the temple were intended to ensure a smooth transition from earth into heaven.

But where did the spirits go? based on the apparent orientation of the temples to view the southern sky the answer of “the stars” seems clear but which stars? And what did the worshippers see when they looked to those stars? If we accept that the surrounding pillars are human intercessors, who’s spirits had already flown to the stars, who enable us to connect with to the more than human beings represented by the t-pillars a question still remains; who are they?

Archaeologists, historians and conspiracy theorists alike consistently look to the southern stars for the answer, though the answers that they give you can vary quite a bit.

Star Gods

Cygnus – The Soul Bird

Andrew Colin’s, in his various books, notable the Cygnus Key and Cygnus Mysteries, argues that the temples focus is the stars of the Constellation of Cygnus, also known as the Northern Cross. Located just above the junction of the dark rift of the Milky Way Collins contends that the Constellation, the Latin name of which refers to a swan, has always been associated with birds of one form or another and that many ancient cultures around the world saw the Constellation as a point of transmigration for the soul. Collins draws evidence from cultures as far afield as North America and Ancient Egypt, claiming that Cygnus is the focal point for multiple ancient stone monuments across the globe.

Whilst Collins makes a very strong case for the motif of the bird as soul, going as far to link it to the early hominids known as the Denisovans, the connections that he makes in respect of Gobekli Tepe being aligned to the constellation do not stand up to scrutiny. For starters his dates do not match the archaeological evidence. The sighting stones do not align with the constellation when compared against the dates of construction as provided by radio carbon 14 dates. In fact there is quite a substantial margin of error to the extent that it really cannot be ignored. Collins would argue that his thesis with regard to Gobekli Tepe has been independently verified in 2017 by two researcher from the University of Edinburgh. This might sound like vindication for the Cygnus connection however when read the paper reads as though the two started from the premises posited in Collins 2014 publication and sought to evidence it themselves. Unfortunately this means that the two Engineers make the same errors in oversight that Collins does, completely ignoring the archaeological evidence available, which in 2016/7 more securely dated the construction of Enclosure D to a time when Cygnus could not have been in the sight of the portal stone.

This is not to say we should throw the baby out with the bath water. The concept of the flight of the soul in the form of a bird both as as an ancient motif and one which is repeated at Gobekli Tepe has strong merit, even if the stars proposed don’t quite align.

Orion – The Headless Hunter

A better fit, though not perfect, is the suggestion that monuments are aligned to the rising of the starts of Orion’s belt. That a hunter gatherer society would focus on Orion, chasing Taurus across the sky in an endless hunt, makes a great deal of sense, though it does assume that the builders looked to the constellation and also saw a hunter.

Whilst A and B do have some level of alignment to Orion the sighting is not consistent across all the excavated monuments. Perhaps as more enclosures are excavated and their alignments plotted a connection to Orion’s belt will be strengthened but for the time being it is possibly safer to assume that whilst Orion was important he was only part of the night sky show that the builders were attempting to capture.

Sirius – The Companion and Star Goddess

Just below the heel of Orion sits the star Sirius, known as the Dog Star by modern sky watchers it’s summer time rising in the southern sky heralds the so-called “dog days of summer”. The birth of a new star in the night sky, particularly one which proves predictable as it emerges over the horizon, is generally something of note which is why many archaeoastrononical alignments settle on the helical rising of one star of another. Though procession does, over time, move the point in the sky where the rising will occur it would appear to our ancestors that it rose and set in the same place consistently and only the observations of a dedicated few over many generations would notice that this was not the case.

orion_1_lg (1)

Megalithic alignments with Sirius are as common as with Orion and Cygnus when such things are plotted, the most famous being the Orion alignment found in the Great Pyramid of Giza where the southern shaft exiting the Queen’s Chamber aligns with Sirius. Robert Bauval, Graham Hancock and Andrew Collins (to name just a few) maintain that this is a deliberate alignment of the “soul ascension” machine to enable the souls of royal women to ascend to the next world. Of course, this alignment is paired with a similar shaft in the King’s Chamber, aligned to the belt of Orion, and two northward shafts which would allow the descent of the souls in the northern walls aligned with major stars in the constellation of Ursa Major. The Sirius association between the Great Pyramid and the southern sky of Ancient Egypt in 2500 BCE can be debated long and hard, and a lot seems to depend on what star simulation program you chose to use, but if we accept it as a clear and proven fact what does this mean for Gobekli Tepe? Were the Egyptians echoing a much more ancient association between Sirius and the Soul laid down into a collective memory by the Hunter Gatherers of 9600 BCE? The archaeology does seem to indicate that this is the case. Of the sites excavated so far enclosures B, C and D all have port hole alignments which match the helical rising of Sirius at a time depth consistent with the secure radio carbon 14 dates associated with the construction deposits at the site. This would indicate that each of these enclosures were build with the rising star in mind as an important feature and that it continued to be factored in to even after temples were closed, back filled and then reconstructed in a different location on the Tell. Whether or not all of the un-excavated enclosures will show the same alignments and associations remain to be seen but as work continues we will surely find out.

This theory does have its detractors however, most notably Andrew Collins and Robert Hale. They maintain that Sirius, despite its rising status, would not be visible to its declination at the dates proposed and would therefore not be available to sight the construction of the monument but that it would be of little interest to the builders, so attention should be paid to the north. Whilst a valid argument it assumes two things. One – that little to no process of observation occurred in advance of the construction of Gobekli Tepe and that construction was spontaneous. This is consistent with Collins belief that the builders of Gobekli Tepe were influenced to build as they did by the Denisovans human species based on their savant like knowledge which far exceeded that of any other human race and the alignments were “downloaded” into the builders culture from elsewhere. We known from later cultures that sky watching was the main night time activity and there is every evidence that the same was true in this case. Even if the rising is not visible initially there is no reason to assume that the sky watchers were not capable or observing the angle of rising and reverse plot it to its rising point on the horizon. Then we come to the second issue – the assumption that the rising would not be visible. In our modern experience we see very little of the night sky, particular on the horizon, due to light pollution. There are very few places where it is possible for us to get a true sense of the majesty of the Milky Way or the brightness of the stars at night without the horizon being blurred by some degree of light pollution. The same would not have been true in Mesolithic Turkey and it is likely that the rising of Sirius would have been visible, if faint, and expected by those who have spent many generations observing the movements of the star.

It is important to keep in mind that Sirius is consistently considered a companion star, with Orion featuring along side it as is the case in the Pyramid of Giza. There are echos of twin deities being associated with the evolution from a nomadic way of life to one associated with agriculture and animal husbandry as far back as the Sumerian. In the story ‘Debate between Sheep and Grain’ two sky beings (god’s) located on a hill discuss whether or not to share with mankind the knowledge of grain and domestication of animals.>>



From Temple of Sumer https://www.facebook.com/TempleofSumer/posts/blessed-du-ku-from-temple-of-sumer-the-month-of-the-sacred-moundholy-hills-and-s/833633270129967/ << Blessed Du-ku from Temple of Sumer! “The Month of the Sacred Mound” Holy Hills and Sacred Mountains – The Foundations of the Duku Festival Holy hills and sacred mountains permeate much of Ancient Near Eastern Literature, from the earliest cuneiform tablets, all the way to their central place in Biblical scripture. From the image of Moses, standing on top of Mount Sinai, receiving sacred cuneiform tablets from God, giving deified Hammurbian laws to mankind; to the image of the Prophet Elijah, standing on Mount Carmel, asking his God to prove himself more powerful than Baal; and all the way on to the image of Jesus giving the sermon on the Mount. Mountains have always had great significance in both Jewish and Christian literature, since they are seen as being “closer to God” who dwells where the Heavens meet the sky. As a result of this idea, we often see God bestowing his divine wisdom from a mountaintop in scripture. These are concepts and central motifs which stretch back to the earliest times, to long before the Bible was set to parchment, and long before the Patriarch Abraham first began his journey from the Sumerian City of Ur, all the way back to a time when civilization was just beginning. For it was said that upon this Sacred Mound, “the ḫursag̃” (hill) of Heaven and Earth, that the ancestral Gods were created. In the earliest literature, the Sumerian poem ‘The Debate between the sheep and the Grain’, dated to the 3rd millennium BC, we are given the creation myth telling of the Sumerian ‘Edin’, meaning ‘steppe’, the place where the Anunna Gods were first created. This hill was situated at the point where the Heavens rested upon the Earth, and where mankind were given their first habitat. This sixty one line myth was set to stone over two thousand years before the Bible was even written, and before the “Garden of Eden” was even a concept. Later in time, from Third dynasty of Ur period (2200BC) onwards, we would find the term ‘Edin’ rephrased to ‘Hursag’ meaning ‘hill’, or in some cases ‘tillu’ in Akkadian, a term that was widely used to describe pre-historic tell mounds. In ‘Riches Hidden in Secret Places’ the acclaimed Assyriologist Jeremy Black noted that the Sumerians, unlike the scholars of today, had no interest in where their people had come from, and rarely wrote about it in their literature. Their Gods were Gods of civilisation, intent on bringing order to the universe, and civilisation to the society in which they served. Because of this, the Sumerians themselves were an incredibly forward looking people, focused on ingenuity and invention, and working towards a better tomorrow, rather than looking back to their past. On the other hand, the Sumerians knew they had not inhabited the earth since the very beginning of time, and that there had been a time before civilisation, when the very first men had lived in an uncivilised state like the animals, which was possibly the inspiration for Gilgamesh’s Enkidu. The Sumerians understood that civilisation had been a much later development, and it fascinated them to speculate on how the world had come into being, and how things has been at the beginning of time. In ‘The Debate between the sheep and the Grain” we see the Holy Mound take centre stage, as it was set as the birthplace Of the Anuna Gods at the time before sky and earth were separated. The Anuna Gods were ancient Gods from a time before recorded history. They were Gods that during the Sumerian period, and into the late Akkadian period were portrayed as seven judges who sit before the throne of Ereshkigal in the Underworld, their primary function is to decree the fates of humanity. During the Old Babylonian period, the Anuna were believed to be the chthonic deities of the Netherworld. In the ‘Curse of Akkad’ the Sacred Mound is also described as the resting place where the great ancestors of the Great God Enlil, En-duku-ga the Lord of the Sacred Mound and Nin-duku-ga the Lady of the Sacred Mound. These primordial gods even predated Enlil himself, and Enlil is the first born son of An and Ki. They may be the parents of one of Enlil’s parents, or they may go even further back. Jeremy Black theorised that at the time of writing this myth, the Sumerians lived in a land surrounded by these tell mounds, and knew they were the ruined habitation of their most ancient ancestors, and possibly even the Gods themselves ancestors, which fuelled their mythic imaginations. Although Sumer emerged as a complex civilisation between 5500BC to 4500BC, it is clear that there had been inhabitants in the land between the rivers long before that point back to Neolithic times. We call these early inhabitants the proto-Euphrateans, or Ubaidians, and they had left many markers behind. Many of these early inhabitants were probably very ancient ancestors of the Sumerians themselves, although before that point in time they were not classed as ‘civilisations’. The term ‘civilisation’ only comes into play with ‘recorded history’, and when characterized by a series of set markers, of which include urban development, social stratification imposed by a cultural elite, a perceived separation from and domination over the natural environment, and symbolic systems of communication such as complex writing systems. So, while the Sumerians were the first true civilisation to fit all of those criteria, their ancestors had probably already lived in this area, and its surrounding areas, for millennia before this point. Jeremy Black went on to state that: “The imagination stimulus for the idea of a single Holy Mound -a dul or tell- must have been the numerous ruin mounds that dot the surface of the Mesopotamian plain, with evidence of ancient habitation. Nobody lived on them, but you only have to investigate them cursorily- if your village is next to one and you stroll up there of an evening- to realize, from the ceramic remains and the occasional skull and bone, that they had been inhabited in the past. But by whom? The mythic imagination tells us that this is where the gods lived in the most distant past, with their feet on the ground but close to the sky. A mythic image or metaphor such as the Holy Mound, then, is a single cosmic location derivable from generalized elements of the landscape, such as uninhabited ruin mounds, that are multiple and ubiquitous.The acclaimed German archaeologist and pre and proto-historian Klaus Schmidt firmly believed the original ‘Duku’ that was written of in ‘The Debate between the sheep and the Grain’ was none other than Göbekli Tepe, the ancient Neolithic mountain sanctuary dating back to around 9130BCE. He believed that the poem itself was a cultural memory of ancient site, and a mythohistorical narrative from the time when mankind moved from being predominantly hunter gatherers to a time of permanent settlement. It’s worth considering that the site of Göbekli Tepe is situated in what would one day be classed as Northern Mesopotamia, and the site itself was only seven days walk on foot from what would one day become the Sumerian City of Ur in Southern Mesopotamia, and even closer than that when travelling by donkey, or by boat down the River Euphrates. It’s probably no coincidence that this buried and abandoned “ancient city” was situated in a hilly and mountainous environment just like in the Sumerian myth, and being what many believe to be birthplace of animal husbandry from the archaeological evidence at the site, fits the myth perfectly too. What is even more compelling however is the creation of grain that takes place in the myth, especially when you consider the ancient einkorn wheat, found in the hills surrounding the Göbekli Tepe, just happens to be the single genetic ancestor of every strain of wheat grown and eaten across the earth today. During the Third Dynasty of Ur period, and over seven millennia later, the Sacred Mound had taken on a symbolic representation during the Duku Festival, as a likeness of it was built in harvested grain in the lead up to the religious holiday. This new meaning for the term ‘Duku’ seems to have caused confusion among scholars, as while most academics held to the Sacred Mound as a historic locality, others such as Thorkild Jacobsen, who read texts detailing the construction of this symbolic depiction saw its origin as a “plastered-over pile of harvested grain”, and concluded that the Duku must have been some sort of underground storage. However as practitioners of the Sumerian religion we sometimes have the luxury of seeing hidden meanings where perhaps the academics are too focused on literal depictions in the text, and as any who are well versed in the concepts of sympathetic magic will attest, in this case the laws of similarity are obvious in their apparency. We can see from the method of construction of the walls of this grain ‘Duku’ are incredibly similar to the construction of ancestral tells, together with the harvest it contains, the offerings of milk it is given, and offerings of dozens of lambs prepared, all tie in intimately with the myth ‘Debate between Sheep and Grain’ and it’s links to the mythic Sacred Mound, on which the Gods were given life. Because of this I would say this grain Duku came later, and was the development of a symbolic construction originally created to be as part of the cultic activities, which then later developed from there to the idea of grain silos…… …… Although the Festival of the Sacred Mound was generally seen as a great time of celebration and feasting, we must also be mindful that is had sombre undertones, as it was also a time when the Gods of the underworld were paid homage, and the ancestors were remembered, so we should also remember to pay our respects to those we have lost in the past, and in doing so pay tribute to their achievements. Though those memories, those we have lost will never leave us.


1.Porthole slab

Göbekli Tepe: Turkey's Stonehenge, But At Least 7000 Years Older | Göbekli  tepe, Ancient aliens, Ancient civilizations

has the shape of proto-cuneiform signs GA2 :”basket,box”


and of the proto-cuneiform and cuneiform sign Ku


from Du-Ku “Holy Mound” where proto-cuneiform sign Du is exactly a mound


2. Meaning of Ku is “pure, holy

Ancient Near Eastern Temple Assemblies: A Survey … – COREhttps://core.ac.uk › download › pdfPDFby JA Bloom · Cited by 2 · 254 pages · 26 MB — The bulk of this thesis consists of a compilation of Akkadian and Sumerian primary source material which … Note the adjective ku (“pure“, “sacred”, “holy“),

Sumerian Lexicon – IS MUNIhttps://is.muni.cz › PAPVB_13 › Halloran_version_3
PDFby JA Halloran most important words in Sumerian had their own cuneiform signs, … kug, : n., silver; precious metal; money; noble (ku, ‘to base, build

3.The same shape are the chinese ideograms for Sun and Moon

Chinese Symbols for Words: the Chinese Characters.

https://www.thoughtco.com/chinese-character-profile-ri-sun-2278366 The character 日 is a pictograph depicting the sun. Its earliest form was a circle with a dot in the center, and four rays extending from the circle.

Oracle bone script: Ri (sun) https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/44/%E6%97%A5-oracle.svg/60px-%E6%97%A5-oracle.svg.png

4. Possible sumerian proto-cuneiform sign Ku and chinese Ri (sun) had at the origin the Orion constellation shape ?.

Using a Star Chart
April | 2018 | Tartaria tablets
The Cross, the Cup, and Orion - Gary Osborn

5.The minoan sign for bronze and archaic greek He(ta) from Helios have the same shape.

======= From damienmarieathope.com ===================

Sky Burial” and its possible origins at least 12,000 years ago to likely  30,000 years ago or older. | Damien Marie AtHope
'Sky Burial' theory and its possible origins at least 12,000 years ago to  likely 30,000 years ago or older. | Damien Marie AtHope
Sky Burials: Animism, Totemism, Shamanism, and Paganism | Damien Marie  AtHope

ANOTHER BOGUS PALEOLITHIC STAR MAP – THE ACH VALLEY TUSK https://rockartblog.blogspot.com/2018/11/another-bogus-paleolithic-star-map-ach.html

The Ach Valley Tusk is a piece of mammoth ivory, recovered from Geißenklösterle Cave near Ulm, Germany, that has a human figure carved into one side and a series of 86 pits or notches cut into the other. Rappengluek identified the human figure as a star map representing the constellation Orion. ……. All in all, this Orion figurine is the most egregious of Rappenglueck’s claimed identifications of Paleolithic star maps, and I find it totally unbelievable.

Peter Faris https://rockartblog.blogspot.com/search?q=Gobekli+Tepe

Gobekli, Karahan Tepe cupules

April 5, 2021

See Cupules Definition, Description & History of Cupule Rock Art. http://www.visual-arts-cork.com/prehistoric/cupules.htm (PDF) Cupules – ResearchGate https://www.researchgate.net › 281317650_Cupules

From Cupules—- the oldest surviving rock art ROBERT G. BEDNARIK https://originsnet.org/Bednarik%20cupules%202002.pdf

<< Cupules (Fig. 1) are the earliest surviving rock art we know about in the world, but this does not necessarily make them the first rock art produced.The oldest rock art we know about in every continent are linear grooves and cupules, especially the latter. It can date from Middle and even Lower Palaeolithic times in the three Old World three continents, so it is very considerably older than the celebrated Upper Palaeolithic art of south-western Europe. This has become evident despite the considerable bias against such forms of rock art, which have often been ignored by researchers, misunderstood or explained as utilitarian rock markings.However, cupules are such a ubiquitous feature in world rock art that they were made in many periods, and considerable experience is required to estimate their age (Bednarik 1997a, 2000). Numerically they are probably the most common forms of surviving rock art in the world, and they can be found not only in very early and archaic traditions, but also in very recent ones. In India, for example, cupules occur in the Pleistocene, but most are from the Holocene, and they were made from Acheulian to Historic times. In many parts of Europe, cupules are particularly numerous in the Metal Ages. It is therefore false to assume that cupules are always an indication of archaic traditions.
It is also very doubtful that all cupules were made for similar purposes, and it is even possible that some of those found on horizontal surfaces were used for some utilitarian process. However, there are distinct differences between cupules and grinding hollows. The latter occur on near-horizontal surfaces only and are well over 10 cm in size, whereas cupules are frequently found on vertical walls and rarely exceed 10 cm diameter.

================== From Resonance at Göbekli Tepe, Turkey Göbekli Tepe Hieroglyphs by Alex Putney 

and images:

Göbeklitepe için 230 fikir | arkeoloji, tarih öncesi, antik tarih
Gobekli Tepe Post Holes | Göbekli tepe, Ancient near east, Ancient  civilizations
Göbekli Tepe'ye beton döküldü” paylaşımına Bakanlıktan açıklama - Yeşil  Gazete

The function of large cupules has eluded researchers for many years, and cannot simply be grinding holes since they are found in great numbers marking vertical wall surfaces as well as horizontal surfaces. >>

Eugen Rau: If large diameters ,larger than 10 cm could indicate as possible grinding purposes, they are too many, one beside another and vicinity of large basins are indicating fertility-increase rituals and rain related ?

https://books.google.ro › books Theory in Africa, Africa in Theory: Locating Meaning in Archaeology Stephanie Wynne-Jones, Jeffrey Fleisher — 2015 · Social Science << But when normal rituals and medicines consistently failed and droughts … There are often many cupules because the rainmakers had to start again each time and make new ones.>>

Increase Ritual – Australia: The Land Where Time Beganhttps://austhrutime.com › ritual_increase

Karahan Tepe: Göbekli Tepe’s Sister Site – Another Temple of the Stars? https://www.academia.edu/8030198/Karahan_Tepe_G%C3%B6bekli_Tepes_Sister_Site_Another_Temple_of_the_Stars <<Karahan Tepe Northern Knoll
The exposed surface of this knoll marks the beginning of an extensive area of bedrock covered with groupings of deeply bored cupules, or cup marks, usually 15 to 20 centimetres (6 to 8 inches) in diameter and easily as much in depth (see fig. 5). Similar cupules are found on exposed bedrock at Göbekli Tepe, close to Enclosure E, the so-called Felsentempel (“Rock Temple”), and also at other Pre-Pottery Neolithic sites such as Başaran Höyük (Güler,Çelik & Güler, 2013, 295, fig. 11) and Hamzan Tepe(Çelik, 2010, 262, fig. 6), both located in the Sanlıurfa province. ……

Other, much larger holes, ranging in diameter from between 40 to 50 centimetres (15 to 20 inches),are also present within the exposed bedrock. At least three sets are placed together in pairs, giving them the eerie resemblance of dark eyes gazing up at the beholder, a fact that, regardless of their true function, seems deliberate (see fig. 6). In addition to this, we find a large basin cut into the bedrock, which is oval in shape and approximately 3 metres (9.85 feet) across its widest part. It probably functioned as a water cistern, although this is simply conjecture at this time (two similar rock-cut basins are to be seen close to cupule clusters at Göbekli Tepe, and another three exist at Hamzan Tepe, again near groupings of cupules, see Çelik, 2010, 262-3, Figs. 7/8).>>

From Rita Robert’s Blog Göbekli Tepe, Mother of Myths? https://spredtetanker.wordpress.com/2012/03/30/gobekli-tepe-mother-of-myths/

The shepherd and his family live in a small schack at the bottom of the excavation area, near the “parkinglot”. Just inside the stone-fencing there are several carvings in the bedrock. Two enormous holes, big enough to be used as pools, and along these houndreds of small circular holes of different sizes and placements dug directly in the rock.

Cupules are found at Gobekli Tepe also on portholes Image from https://ro.pinterest.com/pin/383650461991428519/

Göbekli Tepe: Turkey's Stonehenge, But At Least 7000 Years Older | Göbekli  tepe, Ancient aliens, Ancient civilizations


Handbook of Rock Art Research – Page 371 – Google Books Resulthttps://books.google.ro › booksDavid S. Whitley · 2001 · ‎ScienceFound on every continent except perhaps Antarctica, cupules have been attributed to efforts to entice rain, promote fertility, and symbolize the transition to adult .

PDF) Cupules—- the oldest surviving rock art Cupules—- the …https://www.researchgate.net › publication › 251250562_…May 14, 2015 — rallel grooves into selected ‘rain rocks’ to increase. or decrease snowfall, and they pounded cupules to. induce rainfall and wind (Heizer 1953).

Research Issues in San Diego Prehistory – Cupuleshttps://www.sandiegoarchaeology.org › funct.cupule.htm

  1. Heizer (1953) noted that some northern California groups, including the Shasta, made cupules as “rain rocks” to control weather. — E. Breck Parkman (1992, 1993) 

A SHORT ETHNOGRAPHY OF CUPULEShttp://www.ifrao.com › uploads › 2018/01

Twyfelfontein Namibia – Conclusion 2 – Bradshaw Foundationhttps://bradshawfoundation.com › cupules_engravings

https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au › …PDF ORIGINS OF SEDENTISM – ANU Open Research de RD Wickham · 2019 — attired shaman figures engaged in rain- bringing ceremony

Imagining Rain-Places: Rain-Control and Changing … – JSTORhttps://www.jstor.org › stable

CUPULES ON TOP OF T-PILLARS LEAVE THE ONLY POSSIBILITY to be RAIN & FERTILITY RELATED Image, from SHRINE STONE PRESS https://shrinestonepress.com/cupules/ <<Cupules are an enigmatic style of rock art that is found universally throughout the entire archaeological world. Here in California they are known as “bedrock mortars,” a central part of the acorn grinding indigenous cultures that are well known here. Throughout the world cupules are commonly attributed to the work of ancient peoples and their “primitive” methods of food production, but there are currently no known methods to date them and they have been passed over for generations as little more than “curiousities,” barely worth a mention. It can be readily seen, though, that many of the cupules could possibly have some other unknown function, or perhaps even some other unknown age, that is yet to be revealed. For example, in a brief survey of a very few sites here in California one can observe that many of them would appear to be too small for any sort of food production and they can also be seen in groupings or arrangements that would seem to suggest something more. Many of the arrangements can also be found on the vertical sides of boulders where, once again, any efficient means of food production would would have to be questioned, if not ruled out. But what stands out again and again even more is that this form of rock art shows up at the most ancient, most enigmatic and the most sacred sites found all over the world. They appear in the most highly-ritualized and sacred ceremonial settings on every continent (and many islands) from the famous stone Moai of Easter Island, to the megalithic, Olmec heads of Mesoamerica, to the giant stone pillars of Göbekli Tepe, in Turkey, even possibly to the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. There are tens of thousands of other sites known to exist all around the world. Here in the following photos are a few sites that are found here in Sonoma County, California, as well as a few from my own travels abroad where I have been somewhat surprised to find them. And finally, I’ve included a few other photos of cupules from other important sites to be found around the world.>>

At Gobekli Tepe there is no water source in the vicinity !

From Cliff Richey 19. November 2017 at 2:17 https://www.dainst.blog/the-tepe-telegrams/2016/10/14/of-animals-and-a-headless-man-gobekli-tepe-pillar-43/

<<The Sun played an important role in the ascension of the deceased warriors. After death the warrior’s spirits descended into the great underworld (the sign made by the Large “T” shaped pillars) and were carried by currents or “the crisscrossing streams of water” (the Net of crisscrossing Serpents depicted by one pillar). Ultimately the spirits arrived back at the earth’s surface at a spring site or a pool of water (perhaps the cistern at Gobekli Tepe that is surround by the Triangular three cupules that indicate, female-spirits. especially when the cupules, female-water-spirits, are filled with rain water or water taken from the cistern) where the spirits wait for the Sun to take the water (evaporation) and the spirit up to the sky and Venus. The evaporation of the water from the cupules demonstrated the validity of the cosmology.>>

From Gobekli Tepe’s Pillar 18 Dissected Cliff Richey https://www.academia.edu › Gobekli_Tepes_Pillar_18_… <<The Tops of the Gobekli Tepe Pillars are covered with Cupules that are the sign for, moisture or wetness. It is composed of many (red) Triangular, female-spirit, signs. When it rained this combination of signs would become, the Horizontal Rectangle, the horizontal-place, positional, on the surface, holding, the female-water-spirits, as in bowls. The utility of these signs would be lost if the Pillars had been roofed over. The tops of the smaller “T” shaped Pillars are almost level with the surrounding surface of the ground. The meaning of the “T” as a gesture sign for the Large, the great, “T”, below, the great underworld.

……On the horizontal -place or surface are the (red) Cupules that in their overall Form indicate the sign for, moisture, and it is filled with the Triangular signs for, female-moisture-spirits.5 It seems that the concept is one where after a rain the Cupules are filled with water and become, female-waterspirits. At Gobekli Tepe Cupules and a Cistern are in close proximity to each other, There may have been some ritual that during dry periods, involved transfer of water from the Cistern to the Cupules in order to demonstrate evaporation (the ascension of the spirits in the water that was part of the ancient cosmology).>>

From Göbekli Tepe – the Stone Age Sanctuaries. New results of ongoing excavations with a special focus on sculptures and high reliefs Klaus Schmidt https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/294839319.pdf

Göbekli Tepe – the Stone Age Sanctuaries. New results of ongoing  excavations with a special focus on sculptures and high reli
Fig. 23. Enclosure B and its portholestone in centre (foto Irmgard Wagner, DAI).

https://www.facebook.com/983492441702514/posts/3671326896252375/ Also, I also believe from my research these cupules found at Gobekli Tepe and Karahan Tepe are a Natufian attribute, which hopefully I will be able to write about one day. …… #158 Here is my latest paper called ‘Gobekli Tepe’s Vulture Stone: Deciphering the Mysteries of the Vulture Stone by tracing the Zarzian and Natufian’s connection that effectuated the construction and demise of Gobekli Tepe.‘ In this document I will outline a connection between the elite Zarzian shamanic priests and their subjects the Natufians as those who built Gobekli Tepe. By mapping the origins of an ancient obsidian trade in the Anatolians and the Levant.


Out of tens posibilities for purposes (see R.G. Bednarik list of all potential interpretations of cupules at the end of the page)…. we have at Gobekli and Karahan Tepe, two category/kinds of cupules: 1) not proper cupules, (“tacitas“) because diameter is larger than 2-10 cm (10-20-40cm…+ blarge basin 3m) To see the difference betwen cupules and tacitas, TACITAS OR CUPULES – Rupestrewebhttps://www.rupestreweb.info › tacitas Tacitas or cupules? an attempt at distinguishing cultural depressions at two rock art sites near Ovalle, Chile. Maarten van Hoek vanhoekrockart@parelnet.nl.

The significance of the morphometric and contextual variation in stone hewn mortars during the Natufian-PPNA transition in the southern Levant https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314164064_The_significance_of_the_morphometric_and_contextual_variation_in_stone_hewn_mortars_during_the_Natufian-PPNA_transition_in_the_southern_Levant <<Numerous explanations have been advanced regarding the use of ancient and recent bedrock features. However, while it is clear that bedrock features were indeed used for many functions including the processing of various substances, it seems that the most common utilization was pounding and pulveraizing food. In the Levant the bedrock features appear for the first time in Early Natufian sites around 15,000 years Cal BP, within the context of the transition to sedentary lifeways. The communities that adopted greater dependency on local resources brought about changes in various practices and aspects of both mundane and ritual behaviors.>>

The Function and Context of Natufian Stone Mortars: A Reply to …https://www.x-mol.com › paperRedirectAre the numbered specimens Natufian mortars, cup marks, or cupules? What do the “complexes” mean, and how were they defined? <<…’most of the Natufian bedrock features and boulder mortars as related, in a way or another, to food processing in its broader sense’ …..’some may have had a more ceremonial role than a mundane function’ >> In my opinion: THESE SHALLOWS/DIMPLES/BUCKETS HAD RATHER UTILITARIAN THAN CULTIC PURPOSES ( Possible rain-bringing rituals but rather for grinding purposes )

2) cupules proper ; under 10cm (2-10 cm). – on top of T-pillars – on portholes rims

Those were used in cultic rituals possible performed by shamans, with known (by them) purposes, e.g. increase/fertility rituals or unknown, forgotten even by them purpose but of high sacred value/importance. -cupules had a history of hundred of thousend years & purposes , meanings changed fergotten new one apperead then lost, forgotten, so could be e.g. : – for holy water, ancestor-funerary context, magical charms , symbolisms that are no longer recoverable , rain bringing=life sustenance=fertility, welfare/wellness/wellbeing ========================

The interpretation of cupules https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322343171_The_interpretation_of_cupules Robert G. Bednarik << A list of potential interpretations of cupules
The most commonly mentioned interpretations of cupules found in the literature could be grouped into a number of
classes, based on their purported uses.

  1. Unspecified or specified cultic or magic rituals
    1.1: Components of sacrificial altars.
    1.2: Human or animal blood sacrifices.
    1.3: Meeting places of witch covens.
    1.4: Magical charms protecting dwellings against witchcraft.
    1.5: Fertility rituals related to rockslides, which are thought
    to occur widely in Europe, Africa and South America.
    1.6: Ritual boring relating to the preparation of stone axes.
    1.7: Snake symbolism.
  2. Utilitarian preparation of substances
    2.1: Preparation of paints.
    2.2: Production of medicines of mineral or organic origins.
    2.3: Pounding of pigments of mineral or plant substances.
    2.4: Preparation of spices or foods.
  3. Mnemonic or record-keeping devices
    3.1: Measurement of time or as calendars. 3.2: Commemoration of major events, such as earthquakes. 3.3: Genealogical markers. 3.4: Recording of pregnancy months. 3.5: Records of stock animals. 3.6: Records of administrators or warriors. 3.7: Records of oaths, e.g. concerning land ownership.
  1. Elements of belief systems
    4.1: Impressions of hands, feet or knees.
    4.2: Use of cupules as receptacles of holy water.
    4.3: Use of the resulting mineral powder in amulets or talismans.
    4.4: Use of cupules in funerary contexts.
    4.5: Release of a life essence in the form of the resulting mineral powder.
    4.6: Use of the resulting mineral powder to induce pregnancy.
    4.7: To influence wind and weather.
    4.8: To attract or replace thunder.
    4.9: Use in reported supplication rituals in recent years. 5.Depiction of heavenly bodies 5.1: Depiction of star constellations. 5.2: Depiction of the Moon or moon phases. 5.3: Depiction of the Sun. 5.4 : Depiction of observations of supernovae. 6.Depiction of topographic elements 6.1: Elements of pre-Historic maps. 6.2: Referents to nearby topographic features, including springs, peaks, rivers and mines. 6.3: Aids in orientation. 6.4: Markers of land property boundaries . 6.5: Purported markers of deposited or hidden goods or treasures.
  1. Board games
    7.1: Use in mancala games.
    7.2: Use in boa games.
    7.3: Games involving the use of marbles or coins.
    7.4: Use in the board game huwais in Arabia.
    7.5: Use in the pursuit game mangura in the Congo. 8.Symbolisms that are no longer recoverable 8.1: Indeterminable cabalistic meaning. 8.2: Writing symbols or messages. 9.Receptacles for offerings 9.1: For offerings to deities or priests. 9.2: For offerings to goblins or lost souls. 9.3: For elves or spirits of nature. 9.4: For offerings by the sick. 9.5: To deposit supplication coins. 9.6: For offerings to flocks of birds to entreat them to spare the fields. 9.7: To place food tokens on the thresholds of churches. 9.8: For depositing coins or jewellery in cupules on stone crosses. 10.Specific symbolisms 10.1Depiction of vulvae, occurring with or without anthropomorphs. 10.2: To commemorate visit of a location. 10.3: Production of cupules with coins to convert these into luck charms.
  1. Other purely utilitarian purposes
    11.1: Use as mortars.
    11.2: Use as recess to keep door hinges in place.
    11.3: Cooking of food. 11.4 Use as recess for salt for animals, such as cattle or deer. 11.5: Receptacles for bird food or to allow butter to melt. 11.6: Illumination or marking of paths with the aid of oil and a wick placed in cupules. 11.7: Receptacles of the first berries of the season. 11.8: Receptacles for smoke or fire signals. 11.9: Use as lamps. 11.10: Production of rock powder for ingestion (geophagy)by humans or animals for medicinal purposes. 11.11: Receptacles for food and water for chickens. 11.12: Receptacles for pointed vertical posts in the construction of buildings. 11.13: Supports for the legs of beehives to prevent entry of specific insects. 11.14: Preparation for splitting of rocks. 11.15: Use to measure quantity of grain. 11.16: Use as lithophones. 11.17: Use to indicate local hydrology >>