Exodus Israelites at Avaris

 

 

“Between Stratum G/1 and F there is a definite break between two distinct phases of settlement. Both Rohl and Bietak believe this line of demarcation between Stratum G/1 and F at Tel ed-Daba likely marks the break that resulted from the biblical Exodus of the Israelites from Tell ed-Daba”.

 

Nugget

  

This appears to be the true line of demarcation. Nugget writes:

The Discoveries at Avaris - Berean Insights

 

The Discoveries at Avaris

 

For more than two centuries archaeologists have sought evidence for the Israelites in Egypt. No Israelite settlement has ever been found in the 19th Dynasty where the Orthodox Chronology predicted it would be. I told you in the last Nugget about the Austrian team of archaeologists, led by Manfred Bietak, who have been excavating at Tel ed-Daba since 1960, more commonly called Avaris in ancient times. Bietak and his team have made many astounding discoveries.

 

Manfred Bietak and his team have found evidence of a long period of Asiatic settlement in Avaris. Between Stratum G/1 and F there is a definite break between two distinct phases of settlement. Both Rohl and Bietak believe this line of demarcation between Stratum G/1 and F at Tel ed-Daba likely marks the break that resulted from the biblical Exodus of the Israelites from Tell ed-Daba.

 

Around Goshen in the Second Intermediate Period there is incontrovertible evidence for a large Asiatic population. In just the time frame and place where the New Chronology predicts the Israelite sojourn in Egypt would be.

 

The majority of the tombs in the earlier strata are of Asiatic people from Palestine and Syria. Bietak says the early Asiatics were heavily Egyptianized. These people have spent considerable time in Egypt and have taken on many of the cultural practices of the Egyptians themselves. Under the New Chronology these people have to be Israelites. The fit for the time period perfectly matches the other indications that this indeed is the correct time period for the Exodus. These earlier Asiatics are more likely to be Joseph’s relatives. The later Asiatics were very different and were not Egyptianized at all and appear to be of Hyksos descent.

 

In the Brooklyn Papyrus there is a list of 95 names of slaves, over 50% of which are Semitic names. There are several Biblical names in the list, e.g. Menahem, Issachar, Asher and Shiphrah. The term Apiru (the equivalent of Hebrew) appears first in the Brooklyn Papyrus. William Albright recognized the language belongs to the northwest Semitic language family which includes Biblical Hebrew. There is a high proportion of female slaves. More adult women are buried here than men. 65% of all burials are children under the age of 18 months with girls out numbering boys by a ratio of 3:1. This could be explained by the massacre of Israelite boys whose bodies were then disposed of in mass unmarked burial pits.

 

All over the city of Avaris are shallow burial pits with multiple victims. There were no careful interments as was required under Egyptian customs. The bodies were thrown one on top of another in mass graves. There is no evidence of grave goods being placed with the corpses as was the Egyptian custom. Bietak is convinced this is direct evidence of a plague or catastrophe. The large part of the remaining population abandoned their homes and left en masse. Bietak says the site was then reoccupied after an unknown interval of time by Asiatics who were not Egyptianised. Hence the break between stratum G/1 and F. There is a strange anomaly where the Asiatic folk who inhabited Stratum F lived in poor conditions yet their graves were richly endowed with precious metals and jewellery .

 

The sources are unconnected and yet intriguingly consistent. Putting all the pieces together one can build up a consistent story which supports the Biblical account. The break in archeological stratum between G/1 and F marks the intervening years following the exodus of the Hebrew slaves from Egypt.

 

The repopulation of Avaris sometime afterward by the Hyksos people who moved into Egypt matches the beginning of the Second Intermediate Period of the Egyptian Pharoahs [sic]. They were Asiatic people from the same region as the Israelites but not Egyptianized as Joseph and his family had been.

 

The facts fit the period before the Exodus well. Given the disruption at the time of plagues and the magnitude of the deaths which occurred there would have been no time to bury the dead according to Egyptian customs. The predominance of females, especially among children would have been a result of the deliberate murder of the male children by the Pharoah. Where did such poor people (slaves no less) get such riches? Simple: read Ex 11:2 which says, “Tell all the Israelite men and women to ask their Egyptian neighbours for articles of silver and gold.”

 

 

What if Haman, the Hitler of the Book of Esther, was not of Amalek, but was a Jew?

 

by

Damien F. Mackey

 

“It is of interest to note that from this point in Israel’s history as the scriptures record it, Amalek is on the scene more consistently than any other nation in attack against Israel for the next 300 years, first assisting Eglon, then in association with Midian (Judges 6:3), and then in the days of

King Saul and David (1 Samuel 15 and 1 Samuel 30)”.

 

Dr. John Osgood

  

Introduction

 

That there is real uncertainty regarding the ethnicity of the conspiratorial Haman in the Book of Esther is apparent from the fact that he is designated amongst the various versions of the story, now as an Agagite, now as an Amalekite, now as a Macedonian, and, finally, as a Bougaean.

 

It is not inappropriate that the LXX should describe him as “a Bougaean” (Βουγαîος) because that word, Boogey-an, with one consonantal addition, becomes Boogeyman.

And, not only is Haman like a Boogeyman for the Jews, but apparently they relish Boo-ing him during the Feast of Purim.

 

Moreover, the Amalekite (Agagite) race from which most think that Haman could trace his descent, was thought to hover, like a dark Boogeyman, over the history of Israel.

 

And, indeed, some of this is true.

 

Amalek was Israel’s first enemy after they had escaped from Egypt.

This formidable foe had looked to deprive Israel of access to drinking water.

For this, the race was condemned by God to annihilation (Exodus 127:8-16):

 

The Amalekites came and attacked the Israelites at Rephidim. Moses said to Joshua, ‘Choose some of our men and go out to fight the Amalekites. Tomorrow I will stand on top of the hill with the staff of God in my hands’.

So Joshua fought the Amalekites as Moses had ordered, and Moses, Aaron and Hur went to the top of the hill. As long as Moses held up his hands, the Israelites were winning, but whenever he lowered his hands, the Amalekites were winning. When Moses’ hands grew tired, they took a stone and put it under him and he sat on it. Aaron and Hur held his hands up—one on one side, one on the other—so that his hands remained steady till sunset. So Joshua overcame the Amalekite army with the sword.

Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘Write this on a scroll as something to be remembered and make sure that Joshua hears it, because I will completely blot out the name of Amalek from under heaven’.

Moses built an altar and called it The Lord is my Banner. He said, ‘Because hands were lifted up against the throne of the Lord, the Lord will be at war against the Amalekites from generation to generation’.

 

And Amalek will continue to be Israel’s most persistent enemy for centuries, as noted by Dr. John Osgood writing of the Judges period (emphasis added):

http://creation.com/the-time-of-the-judges-the-archaeology-b-settlement-and-apostasy

 

It is of interest to note that from this point in Israel’s history as the scriptures record it, Amalek is on the scene more consistently than any other nation in attack against Israel for the next 300 years, first assisting Eglon, then in association with Midian (Judges 6:3), and then in the days of King Saul and David (1 Samuel 15 and 1 Samuel 30).

 

Amalek and Benjamin

 

Most famous is the war between Amalek and the Benjaminite king, Saul, meant to be that war of total annihilation (I Samuel 15:2-3), the dreadful haram (חֲרַמְ):

 

The Lord All-Powerful says: ‘When the Israelites came out of Egypt, the Amalekites tried to stop them from going to Canaan. I saw what the Amalekites did. Now go fight against the Amalekites. You must completely destroy the Amalekites and everything that belongs to them. Don’t let anything live; you must kill all the men and women and all of their children and little babies. You must kill all of their cattle and sheep and all of their camels and donkeys’.  

 

Consequently, King Saul destroyed the Amalekites, but not entirely, famously sparing their king, Agag, as well as seizing everything else worth keeping (vv. 7-9).

 

The completion of the unfinished work, so the story goes, would be left to the Jewish hero of the Book of Esther, Mordecai – a Benjaminite descendant of Saul’s father, Kish, (Esther 2:5).

 

Thus we read:

Mordechai, Esther, and her Father’s House

….

The contemporary scholar Yitzhak Berger sees in Mordechai’s words not an emotional flourish but a political argument. Haman, we are told was an Agagite, and Mordechai and Esther were from the tribe of Benjamin.

 

Six centuries earlier the Benjaminite King Saul spared Agag, king of Amalek, against the express direction of God and the prophet Samuel, and was stripped of his kingdom for this misplaced mercy.

 

So Mordechai wasn’t just making an odd rhetorical flourish, he was, Berger writes, “redeeming the Benjaminite line from its association with the inadequacies of Saul—particularly in fighting Amalek.” Moreover, Esther and Mordechai’s ancestor Saul had been replaced by the more worthy David; now Esther, who herself had replaced the unworthy Vashti, could flip the script of her father’s Benjaminite house. Mordechai was reminding her that this was an opportunity not only to save herself and her people but to salvage their ancestor’s political legacy. ….

[End of quote]

 

There is a nice symmetry in a view such as this, and it makes for a terrific story.

 

Mordecai and Haman are described in Mordecai’s dream as like two great dragons (Esther 10:4-9, RSV Catholic Edition):

 

And Mor′decai said, ‘These things have come from God. For I remember the dream that I had concerning these matters, and none of them has failed to be fulfilled. The tiny spring which became a river, and there was light and the sun and abundant water—the river is Esther, whom the king married and made queen. The two dragons are Haman and myself. The nations are those that gathered to destroy the name of the Jews. And my nation, this is Israel, who cried out to God and were saved. The Lord has saved his people; the Lord has delivered us from all these evils; God has done great signs and wonders, which have not occurred among the nations’.

 

The trouble is, the hopeful parallel is not really there – and Haman, once again, is the problem, the obstructive Boogeyman.

 

Why?

 

Because, as even Jewish legends tell, Haman was a Jew, known to Mordecai. “Ginzberg furnishes substantial evidence that Mordecai and Haman were both Jews who knew each other well …”: Eugene Kaellis:

Welcome to the Jewish Independent

 

And I firmly believe this to have been the case, and I hope to have proven it in articles such as:

Haman un-masked

 

(1) Haman un-masked

 

On this shattering piece of traditional information the whole wonderful tale of Haman and Mordecai perpetuating the feud between Amalek and Benjamin falls flat on its face.

 

The fact is that David, after King Saul’s abysmal failure, went on campaign against the Amalekites (I Samuel 30:1-20).

They cease to be a factor in the Bible after that.

 

A new Benjamin (Netanyahu), however, ‘tilting at windmills’, is trying to perpetuate the ancient feud with Amalek:

 

Netanyahu likes to recall Amalek

 

(2) Netanyahu likes to recall Amalek

 

But is Iran really “the same ancestral land of Haman”?

 

(2) But is Iran really "the same ancestral land of Haman"?

But is Iran really “the same ancestral land of Haman”?

 

by

 Damien F. Mackey

  

“Twenty-five hundred years ago, in ancient Persia, a tyrant rose against us with the very same goal, to utterly destroy our people,” Netanyahu said. “Today as well, on Purim, the lot has fallen, and in the end this evil regime will fall too”.

 Benjamin Netanyahu

 

It seemed inevitable that such a comparison would be made.

Had I not recently written that:

 

Netanyahu likes to recall Amalek

 

(9) Netanyahu likes to recall Amalek

 

With an enormous following of Christian Zionists the Jewish nationalists must consider it to be most beneficial to their cause to ‘justify’ their war with Iran from the Bible, just as they appear to be doing in the case of their genocide of the Palestinians.

 

Just call Iran, the Palestinians, “Amalek”, as, indeed, they are doing, and away we go.

 

For was not he, Haman, who had tried to destroy the Jewish race an Amalekite?

And did he not dwell “in ancient Persia”, in modern Iran?

 

Consequently, a host of articles have arisen such as the one that follows, generally celebrating the demise of the modern-day Haman, Ayatollah ali Khamenei.

 

Death of Iranian leader just before Purim revives Book of Esther parallels - Jewish Telegraphic Agency

 

Death of Iranian leader just before Purim revives Book of Esther parallels

 

By Andrew Silow-Carroll March 2, 2026

 

The timing of Israel’s strike, days before the holiday, prompted religious and political figures to invoke themes from the biblical story set in ancient Persia.

 

 

In Jewish time, history often has a way of rhyming with the calendar. So when Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei was killed in an Israeli air strike on the Shabbat before Purim — the holiday that commemorates the downfall of Haman, a Persian tyrant who sought to annihilate the Jews — it was perhaps inevitable that rabbis, politicians and social media commentators would reach for the Book of Esther.

 

Some did so reverently, others triumphantly, and a few with a wink. But as Jews prepared to don costumes and drown out Haman’s name with noisemakers, the ancient story of survival in Persia collided with a very modern war in what is now known as Iran.

 

Damien Mackey’s comment: The suggested “rhyming with the calendar” here may jar, however, if (i) the Israeli leaders had deliberately planned the assassination for Purim; if (ii) ancient Persia was nowhere near modern Iran; and if (iii) Haman was actually, as according to Jewish legend, himself - shock, horror - a Jew.

On (iii), see e.g. my article:

 

Although Haman in the Book of Esther had an Egyptian name, he was not Egyptian but was a Jewish king

 

(11) Although Haman in the Book of Esther had an Egyptian name, he was not Egyptian but was a Jewish king

 

Andrew Silow-Carroll’s article continues:

 

The Orthodox Union, the Modern Orthodox umbrella group, put out a statement titled “Purim in Our Time: Standing Up to Iranian Tyranny.” “We will read the Bible story of Esther and Mordecai overcoming the genocidal plans of Haman, who sought to destroy the Jewish people. Today, in coordination with Prime Minister Netanyahu and the IDF, President Trump and the U.S. armed forces took defensive action to silence a modern threat from the same ancestral land of Haman,” the statement read.

 

Such comparisons have proliferated since the killing of Khamenei.

 

Damien Mackey’s comment: Further on, though, I shall be considering my (ii) “ancient Persia was nowhere near modern Iran”.

Actually, we should already have known this from the Book of Tobit, according to which, going westwards, Haran (Charan) was equidistant from Nineveh, on the one hand, and from Ecbatana, on the other:

 

Geography of the Book of Tobit presents a fascinating challenge

 

(12) Geography of the Book of Tobit presents a fascinating challenge

 

Andrew Silow-Carroll’s article continues:

 

In his first statement after the beginning of the war, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made the connection to Purim explicit.

“Twenty-five hundred years ago, in ancient Persia, a tyrant rose against us with the very same goal, to utterly destroy our people,” Netanyahu said. “Today as well, on Purim, the lot has fallen, and in the end this evil regime will fall too.”

 

Known as Persia until 1935, Iran has been belligerent toward Israel at least since the Islamic Revolution of 1978-79, which brought clerics like Khamenei, with their frequent chant of “Death to Israel,” to power. 

The holiday takes its cue from the Book of Esther, which describes how the Jewish queen to the Persian king Ahasuerus engineers the downfall of Haman, an advisor to the king who was plotting the murder of the kingdom’s Jews. Although Jewish tradition treats the book as historical — and Ahasuerus is often associated with the historical ruler Xerxes I — biblical scholars and historians tend to regard the story as what scholar Adele Berlin, author of “The JPS Bible Commentary: Esther,” called a “historical novella.”

 

Damien Mackey’s comment: The Book of Esther is a pure history:

 

Real historical characters in the Book of Esther

 

(12) Real historical characters in the Book of Esther

 

Andrew Silow-Carroll’s article continues:

 

Jews across the religious spectrum noted the comparison, often to different ends. Agudath Israel of America, the haredi Orthodox umbrella group, talked about prayer and salvation in its statement about the war.

 

“The upcoming Jewish holiday of Purim celebrates the downfall of those who rose up against the Jewish People in ancient Persia nearly 2,400 years ago,” it read (the events described in Esther are thought to have taken place in the fifth or fourth century BCE). “We are reminded how the key to the miraculous salvation was the heartfelt prayers of men, women, and children. While prayer is always powerful, our sages have taught that it carries special power during the Purim holiday season. We call upon the Jewish community to unite in prayer and beseech the Almighty to protect all those on the front lines and in harm’s way in Israel and across the Middle East.”

 

Rabbi Nicole Guzik, senior rabbi at Sinai Temple, a Conservative congregation in Los Angeles, spoke about human agency in her hastily rewritten Saturday sermon.

“Right now we stand at a critical stage where the story shifts, where the final paragraph in the Megillah that we are reading right now, in real time, has yet to be written,” she said, using the Hebrew name for a scroll like the Book of Esther. “The U.S., Israel, our beloved nations are holding the pen, and they are declaring, with courage and conviction, that we will be the authors of our future in the same manner as Esther.”

 

Some of the comparisons have been offhanded, even flippant. The novelist Dara Horn, speaking Sunday night at a forum on combating antisemitism at the 92nd Street Y in Manhattan, said, “Tomorrow night is Purim, and I think it’s clear to all of us now that the best way to fight antisemitism is to take out Haman with an F-15.”

 

Comedian Yohay Sponder, an Israeli who often performs in North America, posted a video of a routine commenting on the death of Khamenei. Like the Purim hamantaschen cookies named after Haman, he predicted a time when Jews will eat a food named after the slain Iranian leader. He suggested khamin, the Shabbat stew also known as cholent.

 

Others have already adapted hamantaschen for the moment. Some have joked about baking “Khamentaschen,” combining the new nemesis’ name with the treat named for an ancient one. At least one bakery in Israel produced “Ayatollah-taschens” with a chocolate center resembling Khamenei’s trademark turban.

 

Evangelical Christians and Messianic Jews, for whom the Esther story has had increasing significance in recent years, also seized on the parallels. “It all made an amazing story back then, and we are praying for an equally miraculous outcome in our days that will lead to the salvation of many in Israel, Iran, and throughout the whole Middle East,” the One For Israel Ministry, a U.S.-based Messianic group, posted on Facebook..

 

Meanwhile, some suggested that the timing of the attacks appeared to be more than a coincidence. Digital creator Evan Pickus noted in a Facebook post that, according to the Book of Esther, Haman was hanged on the gallows just days before the calendar date that became Purim. “The evil Persian Prime Minister [sic], who issued a promise to kill all the Jews, destroyed on the same day as his ancestor,” wrote Pickus. “I honestly believe our leaders planned it this way, and I love that.”

 

Although no Israeli or U.S. official has said they planned the attack with Purim in mind, the idea became a talking point over the weekend, especially after CNN posted a report by Israel correspondent Tal Shalev saying the comparisons had been widely shared in Israel.

Shalev also wrote of the significance of the attacks on the Iranian leaders’ compound falling on Shabbat Zachor, the “Sabbath of Remembrance” that precedes Purim on the Hebrew calendar. The day takes its name from a special Torah reading (Deuteronomy 25:17-19) commanding Jews never to forget how Amalek — said to be the ancestral nation of Haman — attacked the vulnerable Israelites after they left Egypt. The Israelites are given a somewhat contradictory command: “Blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven. Do not forget!” ….

[End of quotes]

 

But ancient Persia was nowhere near modern Iran

 

Though I grew up with the firm view that Media and Persia were ancient lands well to the east, in and around modern Iran, a bombshell (2022) article by Royce Erickson has turned that all around for me.

I refer to his groundbreaking (to say the least):

 

PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY

 

(12) A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY

 

I wrote about this, and other geographical shocks that I had begun to experience. in my article:

 

More geographical ‘tsunamis’: lands of Elam and Chaldea

 

(12) More geographical ‘tsunamis’: lands of Elam and Chaldea

 

Persia, and related countries, Media, Elam, were actually in Anatolia (Cilicia).

 

As already alluded to above, we could have known this much earlier, from the geographical information provided by the Book of Tobit.

 

See on this:

 

Search for the Median empire

 

(3) Search for the Median empire

 

Ecbatana and Rages in Media

 

(12) Ecbatana and Rages in Media

 

 

Turkey the land of human history’s new beginnings?

 

by

 Damien F. Mackey

  

So, about a millennium and a half after humanity

had first emerged upon the earth, from the dust,

humanity again emerged thereupon,

this time from the Ark.

  

“Is Turkey’s Göbekli Tepe the Beginning of Human History?”, asks Jacqueline Swartz (2025):

Is Turkey’s Göbekli Tepe the Beginning of Human History? - Travel & Cultural Analysis From Around the World | East-West News Service

 

Well, yes and no, would be my answer.

 

Let me explain.

 

About a millennium and a half after humankind had appeared on the face of the earth, beginning in Eden, which was not in what we now call Turkey, but in what we now call Old Jerusalem:  

 

Where Paradise was located

 

(2) Where Paradise was located

 

there occurred a massive Flood – the Genesis (Noachic) Flood.

 

The Flood’s only survivors were the “eight persons” (I Peter 3:20), or ancestral progenitors (Noah and his wife, and Noah’s three sons and their wives), and however many others had been enclosed with them within the Ark.

 

Humankind’s second chance

 

So, about a millennium and a half after humanity had first emerged upon the earth, from the dust, humanity again emerged thereupon, this time from the Ark.

 

The location of the Ark’s landing has best been identified (so I think) as Karaca Dağ in SE Turkey:

 

Noah’s Ark Mountain

 

(7) Noah's Ark Mountain | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu

 

It is not very far to the NE of the now famous site of Göbekli Tepe.

 

Thus it is not surprising that Jacqueline Swartz might ask: “Is Turkey’s Göbekli Tepe the Beginning of Human History?”

 

Göbekli Tepe must be, assuredly, one of the very earliest sites after the Flood and humanity’s departure from the mountain (Karaca Dağ).

 

But, unlike in the article by Jacqueline Swartz, according to which Göbekli Tepe is 12,000 years old, I think that we could immediately lop off half or more of this number.

 

By Jacqueline Swartz

 

From a hilltop vantage point with a sweeping view, visitors gaze down at a 12,000-year-old Turkish archeological site located in the foothills of the Taurus Mountains. In the past few decades, as new discoveries have been unearthed, archaeologists have been changing their views about the significance of the site. Among non-archaeologists, it’s another story: speculation about what the location represents has triggered both Netflix shows and New Age fantasies.

 

How were humans, five thousand years [sic] before Stonehenge, able to build such a massive communal site, with engraved pillars and semi-realistic carvings of the wild animals of the time – lions, snakes, gazelles and foxes?

 

Why are these finds, discovered only a few decades ago, considered to be so crucial to the history of humanity?  For one thing, they show the origins of human history in the Neolithic age, thousands of years before [sic] the invention of pottery and writing. And they continue to raise questions about long-held assumptions.  For instance, it was once thought that only settled agricultural societies could create culture, that only such communities could come together to build temples.

 

“Before we thought the people who built Göbekli Tepe were hunter-gatherers who began farming,” explained Turkish archaeologist Ahmet Yavuzkir, speaking to a group at the site. “We thought everything began with farming. This concept – that farming created modern civilization – was the basis for our historical assumptions. Now everything is reversed,” he said. “Hunter-gatherers built this site.”

 

With no farms or animal husbandry, what did these people eat? Wild animals like antelopes, wild boar, foxes, and aurochs—a now-extinct ancestor of the cow—were staples.  So were wild grains – barley and wild oats, chickpeas and lentils. There could even have been beer, given the wild barley.  But there is no evidence of planting.

 

Hunter-Gatherers or Settled Communities?

 

The either/or idea of settled communities versus hunter-foragers always on the move is now disputed. The site’s coordinating archaeologist, Lee Clare, believes that Göbekli Tepe was a place where hunter-gatherers spent time, benefitting from the seasonal abundance of a place on a migratory route for gazelles and surrounded by acres of wild grain.

 

The project, now a cooperative venture between the Sanliurfa Archeological Museum and the German Archeological Society, began in 1994 when German archaeologist Klaus Schmidt started unearthing megaliths and stone pillars. The project is relatively recent, compared to major discoveries like the Pyramids of Giza (c. 1830) or Ephesus (c. 1869).

 

Since Klaus Schmidt’s findings, there has been much speculation and some far-out theories. One claims the area was the biblical Garden of Eden.  No serious archaeologist agrees, but the internet is full of videos on this and other fantasies about Göbekli Tepe. Still, a Garden of Eden is easy to imagine. 

 

For in a kind of climate boomerang from the mini-ice age, this area, part of the Fertile Crescent, produced lush woodlands and grasslands, rivers, and fruit and nut trees.

 

World’s First Temple?

 

A more common notion is that it was the site of the world’s first temple. Klaus Schmidt believed this until he died in 2014. However, according to the project’s current coordinator, archeologist Lee Clare, the more recent discoveries of domestic tools and settings suggest that these hunter-gatherers did live there, most likely part-time. This was a domestic, not a sacred space. Still, the “first temple” theory gained traction, gaining publicity when Göbekli Tepe was designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2018. The following year, the government of Türkiye declared “The Year of Göbekli Tepe.”  This attracted tourists, and a visitor center was opened.

 

On-Site Visitor Center

 

Göbekli Tepe, now considered one of the world’s most significant Neolithic discoveries, demonstrates how tourism can coexist with archaeology. The visitor center, opened in 2019, includes a gift shop and café. But what is most striking – and valuable – is the round-shaped animation center. It explains some of the complex and controversial notions about the work of our prehistoric ancestors.

 

There are interactive screens and stools for sitting.

 

Exiting the visitor center, you walk up a long ramp and gaze down at the site, which is protected by the dramatic flying saucer-shaped canopy. In the distance, there are the beige distant hills; far below, limestone enclosures surround the famous T-shaped megaliths, some as high as 18 feet.  These are likely among the first such sites built by humans. It’s incredible, and inscrutable. Adding to this is the fact that different levels of Göbekli Tepe were buried and rebuilt, and the entire site was buried around 8,000 BC [sic]. Why?  Archaeologists assumed that this was a practice of the time. Today, they point to the possibility of natural landslides, given the artificial hill on which the site stands and the heavy pillars it supports.

 

There are now about a dozen similar sites in the region, all smaller than Göbekli Tepe, none of which have a visitor center. The major one, Karahan Tepe, located about an hour east, has drawn attention to its room, which features what are now identified as phallic pillars, with a scowling stone face emerging from a surrounding wall.

 

Sanliurfa Archaeological Museum

 

For anyone visiting Göbekli Tepe, the Sanliurfa Archaeology Museum is a must-see. Located about eight miles from the site, the museum is the largest in Türkiye. Spanning multiple periods up to the Ottoman era, it features an entire area dedicated to Goblekli Tepe. You can marvel at discoveries such as the megaliths, or pillars, and the carved wild animals that decorate them.

 

There’s a full-scale reproduction of what is called Special Building D, carbon-dated to around 9525 BC.  Special Building D, unlike the other structures, has no items related to daily life – no grinding stones, for instance. Could this be a religious site?

 

Archaeologist Lee Clare, who worked on the discovery of Building D, refuses to call it a temple. In a witty and informative video interview, he explains that the word is too close to contemporary notions of a religious site.

 

According to the German Archaeological Institute, the pillars, which are engraved with animals and what appear to be arms and handbags, could have been an abstract representation of men congregating.  Women don’t seem to be represented anywhere – even the animals are male.

 

The site was likely used for communal activities, even rituals. 

 

According to Ahmet Yavuzkir, the archaeologist and deputy director of the museum, human deities weren’t worshipped, but perhaps animals or nature were. “This is where animistic and totemistic tendencies began [sic],” he says.

….

 

 

Sadly, however, we find that the:

 

World Economic Forum puts lid on Gobekli Tepe

 

(13) World Economic Forum puts lid on Gobekli Tepe

 

Read also:

 

Klaus Schmidt’s archaeologist wife decries poor work at Göbelki Tepe

 

(13) Klaus Schmidt's archaeologist wife decries poor work at Göbelki Tepe