Ancient pagan sites in modern-day Turkey, especially Gobekli Tepe and Karahan Tepe, are hailed as one of the most significant archaeological discoveries of recent times and have sparked controversy across multiple disciplines, including history, archaeology, and anthropology. This 12,000-year-old site challenges everything we thought we knew about early human societies. It is not just another dig – it is a mind-bending puzzle that forces us to rethink human capabilities, social organization, and the origins of complex religious practices in the once-pagan Middle East long before the advent of agriculture. These excavations seem to have raised contentious questions about the site’s purpose, the capabilities of its builders, and its broader cultural and historical implications. The controversy pertains to fear that the site is associated with ancient India, particularly Vedic and Yogic narratives and symbology.

The findings have led to a halt in excavations at these (and other) sites. Excavations at Gobekli Tepe have faced controversy due to allegations of mismanagement and a shift in focus towards tourism, which some critics argue compromises the site’s archaeological integrity. However, the head of the excavation team has refuted claims that work has halted, emphasizing ongoing efforts in collaboration with the Culture and Tourism Ministry while prioritizing conservation measures to protect the site.

Challenges to Traditional Models of Civilization

One major point of the controversy revolves around Gobekli Tepe’s timeline and undermining the capabilities of the people who built it. Conventional archaeological theories believe that large-scale architecture emerged only after the development of agriculture. Gobekli Tepe, however, seems to have been constructed by those who were more evolved than hunter-gatherers. This raises whether the desire for communal religious or social structures might have spurred the agricultural revolution, flipping the established sequence of events. Historical evidence points to a spiritually advanced civilization, which consisted of various folks, more advanced than the typical hunter-gatherer communes (Schmidt, 2010; Dietrich et al., 2013; Clare & Kinzel, 2020).

Religious versus Secular Interpretations

Another debate centers on the purpose of Gobekli Tepe. Klaus Schmidt, the lead archaeologist who brought the site to global attention, argued that it was primarily a religious or ceremonial site—a “cathedral on a hill” for prehistoric worship (2010). However, some researchers question this interpretation, proposing that the site could have served as a communal gathering place or an early form of urban settlement. Though the site has not been fully excavated, academics cite the absence of evidence for domestic activities, such as cooking or habitation, deliberately complicating the issue and leaving its function open to speculation despite preliminary proofs pointing to yogic practices and symbols.

For example, the carvings at Gobekli Tepe have generated heated debates. Some researchers interpret the animal motifs as purely symbolic or as representations of shamanistic rituals. Others, however, draw connections between the carvings and broader mythological frameworks, such as Vedic traditions or Proto-Indo-European myths. The T-shaped pillars at the site are often interpreted as having connections to Vedic stories through their carvings and symbolic representations. One explanation suggests that the anthropomorphic design of the pillars, with their T-shape representing a head and body, aligns with Vedic deities like Varaha, a half-man, half-boar deity. For instance, Pillar 12 features a wild boar carving that is reminiscent of Varaha lifting the Earth from a primordial ocean, accompanied by five bird-like figures that could symbolize the Pancha Bhootas, or the five elements of creation in Vedic tradition (Reddy, 2021).

Additionally, Reddy argues that Pillar 43 at Gobekli Tepe is thought to depict a bird-like deity similar to Garuda, a Vedic figure known for its association with the sun and enmity towards serpents. The pillar’s carvings include a vulture-like figure carrying a circular object, possibly representing the sun, and a snake below it, echoing Garuda’s iconography as a solar deity and adversary of snakes (2021). For example, the boar carving has been likened to the Hindu deity Varaha, while bird figures evoke Garuda (Sidharth, 2016; Reddy, 2021; Sweatman, 2024). Similarly, Karahan Tepe, a Neolithic site in Turkey (Karul, 2024), features significant elliptical and phallic symbolism, including eleven giant phalluses cut from bedrock in a cult room, overseen by a stern masculine face carved into the rock. This could be a Shiva Lingam, marking the presence of Adi Yogi or the first Yogi, guessing from the other symbolic and astronomical evidence on the site.

Additionally, the site’s iconic T-shaped pillars, similar to those found at Gobekli Tepe, are sometimes interpreted as having Lingam or yogic connotations. At Gobekli Tepe, snakes are among the most frequently depicted animals, appearing in intricate reliefs on the above-mentioned T-shaped pillars. They are often shown in dynamic poses, such as coiling or slithering, and are sometimes featured alongside other animals or symbols, common to yogic symbolism. The symbolism of snakes at the site is debated. However, their prevalence suggests an advanced yogic society familiar with the mechanics of Kundalini energy and the human connection to the cosmos.

Similarly, snake imagery is prominent at Nevali Cori and Karahan Tepe, where snakes appear in detailed carvings and temple sculptures. This evidence also reflects a cultural connection to the Gobekli Tepe site, indicating the region’s continuity of yogic culture. One such feature is the “snake cave,” a potential ritual space highlighting the creature’s symbolic importance (Karul, 2024; Collins, N.D.). The artistic focus on snakes, often in dynamic motion, depicts spiritual yogic practices.

Critics vehemently argue that such interpretations risk overreaching by imposing later cultural meanings onto prehistoric artifacts without direct evidence despite evidence etched in stone. These interpretations propose that the symbolic art of Gobekli Tepe most probably shares roots with Proto-Indo-European traditions, emanating from and influenced by Vedic mythology following migrations out of India.

Astronomical Alignments and Calendrical Systems

The suggestion that Göbekli Tepe functioned as an astronomical observatory has fueled further controversy. Proponents of this idea point to alignments with celestial events, such as solstices, and the evidence of a lunisolar calendar system encoded in carvings on Pillar 43 (Sweatman & Tsikritsis, 2017; Sweatman, 2023). Skeptics, however, caution against attributing such precise astronomical knowledge to a hunter-gatherer society, arguing that these alignments may be coincidental or exaggerated by modern interpretations. This is ironic as these rich pagan sites should not be mislabeled as primitive hunter-gatherer communes, as advanced spiritual knowledge is the obvious explanation for the scientific precisions about solstices and equinoxes demonstrated at the temple sites during seasonal changes.

The Role of Gobekli Tepe in Human Migration and Culture

Gobekli Tepe’s location in the Fertile Crescent—often called the “Cradle of Civilization”—raises questions about its origins and influence on subsequent cultures. Some researchers speculate that the site was pivotal in shaping early human migration patterns, religious practices, and the out-of-India theory, including establishing Proto-Indo-European culture. Similar patterns and archeological evidence are seen at Stonehenge and sites in Egypt (Sidharth, 2016). Others caution against viewing Gobekli Tepe in isolation, emphasizing the need to contextualize it alongside other contemporary sites, such as Karahan Tepe, which may offer complementary insights – given they would be fully excavated.

Pseudoscience and Speculative Theories

These ancient sites in Turkey are similar to those in the region – Italy and Greece in particular. Academics seem to fear that further excavations will solidify the proof of ancient yogic culture outside the Greater Indian Subcontinent. Despite evidence around the globe of yogic presences – Africa, Central Asia, South East Asia, East Asia, and North and South America, there is an active effort to suppress Indigenous culture, archeology, and historical evidence from the academic and religious communities. Gobekli Tepe has probably been framed to become a magnet for pseudoscientific theories, ranging from claims that aliens built it to assertions that it holds secret knowledge of advanced prehistoric civilizations. While these theories often capture the public imagination, scholars widely dismiss them, and the India-Hindu connect for lacking credible evidence. However, the fear, scale, and complexity of the Hindu/Vedic worldview on the site have created room for blocks and alternative narratives, undermining scientific and archaeological research.

Summary

The controversies surrounding Gobekli Tepe reflect profound implications for our understanding of human history and out-of-India migration. By challenging traditional narratives about the origins of civilization, the site raises questions and interpretations for which the answers are being suppressed – for now. The symbology etched in stone at Gobekli Tepe and Karahan Tepe continues to inspire digging deeper, reminding us of the complexity and ingenuity of our ancient ancestors, which probably revolved around the spread of the Great Indian Civilization. This profound system existed centuries before the advent of Abrahamic belief systems, and many efforts have been put into suppressing further digs.

References

Clare, L., & Kinzel, M. (2020). Response to Sweatman and Tsikritsis: “More than a vulture: A response to Sweatman and Tsikritsis.” Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, 20(1), 57–73.

Collins, A. (n.d.). Karahan Tepe—Its three interconnected, rock-cut structures examined.

Dietrich, O., Heun, M., Notroff, J., Schmidt, K., & Zarnkow, M. (2012). The role of cult and feasting in the emergence of Neolithic communities: New evidence from Göbekli Tepe, south-eastern Turkey. Antiquity, 86(333), 674–695.

Karul, N. (2024). A note on the symbolism of structure AB in the Karahan Tepe site. SSRN. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4809875

Reddy, G. V. (2021, March 29). Göbekli Tepe and its potential connection to the Vedic culture. Medium. https://medium.com/@gauthamvreddy/gobekli-tepe-and-its-potential-connection-to-the-vedic-culture-c36af1ead657

Schmidt, K. (2010). Göbekli Tepe – the Stone Age sanctuaries: New results of ongoing excavations focusing on sculptures and high reliefs. Documenta Praehistorica, pp. 37, 239–256.

Sidharth, B. G. (cited in Ancient Origins, 2016). Göbekli Tepe Shamans and their cosmic symbols – Part I.

Sweatman, M. B. (2023). Origin of the ancient Greek constellations via analysis of Pillar 43 at Göbekli Tepe. Time and Mind: The Journal of Archaeology, Consciousness and Culture.

Sweatman, M. B. (2024). Representations of calendars and time at Göbekli Tepe and Karahan Tepe support an astronomical interpretation of their symbolism. Time and Mind. https://doi.org/10.1080/1751696X.2024.2373876

Sweatman, M. B., & Tsikritsis, D. (2017). Decoding Göbekli Tepe with archaeoastronomy: What does the fox say? Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, 17(1), 233–250.

Image: ResearchGate