Update: Early Developments in Astronomy, Arithmetic and Proto-writing at Göbekli Tepe

 The following paper will be submitted to the meeting, "Second MULTIDISCIPLINARY STUDY DAYS geo-archaeological on Mediterranean megalithism" (Palermo, Sicily, November, 2025).

Early Developments in Astronomy, Arithmetic and Proto-Writing at Göbekli Tepe

Martin B. Sweatman

School of Engineering, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.

Abstract

Göbekli Tepe, a megalithic site in southern Anatolia, consists of many sub-circular enclosures formed by megalithic T-shaped pillars and a large number of other rectangular buildings. The pillars of this very early settlement, some standing over 5 m tall, are adorned with a complex system of symbols, including animal symbols and other geometric symbols. It is believed to date to ~ 9,500 BCE, although an older origin date within the Epi-palaeolithic period is likely. Recent analyses of Göbekli Tepe’s iconography suggest that its builders possessed conceptual understanding in astronomy, arithmetic, and proto-writing far earlier than previously recognized. Especially, Pillar 43 of Enclosure D appears to encode both a solar calendar and specific date using a mutually supporting system of geometric and zoomorphic motifs (Sweatman & Tsikritsis, 2017; Sweatman, 2024). The arrangement of geometric symbols, particularly sequences of V-shapes and squares that count lunar and solar cycles, reveals the earliest evidence of arithmetic abstraction in the archaeological record. The recorded date, moreover, indicates knowledge of precession around 10,000 years earlier than Hipparchus.  Together with symbolism on other pillars in Enclosure D, these features portray Göbekli Tepe not merely as a ritual site but as an early centre of scientific knowledge, where astronomy, mathematical reasoning, and symbolic notation coalesced millennia before the rise of Bronze Age civilizations. They also provide insight into events at the dawn of civilisation, when people began to transition to an agricultural lifestyle in the Fertile Crescent.

Keywords: Göbekli Tepe, solar calendar, proto-writing, early arithmetic, precession, archaeoastronomy

Introduction

Göbekli Tepe, situated in southeastern Turkey overlooking the Harran Plain, dates to approximately 9500 BCE and is widely regarded as the earliest monumental architectural complex known. Excavations have revealed multiple circular stone enclosures containing T-shaped pillars carved with animal figures and geometric symbols (Schmidt, 2011; Dietrich et al., 2013; Kinzel & Clare, 2020). While the site was long interpreted as a ceremonial or ritual centre built by pre-agricultural hunter-gatherers, more recent analyses have emphasized its role as a locus of astronomical and mathematical knowledge (Sweatman & Tsikritsis, 2017; Sweatman, 2024).

Among Göbekli Tepe’s many decorated monoliths, Pillar 43 in Enclosure D stands out for its combination of astronomical, numerical, and symbolic features (see Fig.1). Earlier work (Sweatman & Tsikritsis, 2017) proposed that its carved animals represent constellations, similar to our familiar Greek ones, arranged to depict the configuration of the sky around 10,950 BCE, a date consistent with the Younger Dryas impact event. Subsequent research (Sweatman, 2024) revealed that the same pillar encodes a solar calendar through a series of geometric marks that reflect lunar and solar periodicities.

Figure 1. Left: Plan of Enclosures A to D at Göbekli Tepe. Right: Pillar 43 at Göbekli Tepe, Enclosure D (image courtesy of Alistair Coombs).

This synthesis of celestial observation, arithmetic structure, and symbolic representation indicates a profound cognitive development and suggests that long before writing, humans were recording natural cycles and major historical events in ways that anticipate later scientific traditions.

This paper interprets the evidence from Göbekli Tepe as an integrated record of early developments in astronomy, arithmetic, and proto-writing. It examines how celestial, numerical and narrative symbolism reveal the intellectual sophistication of the world’s first monumental builders.

1. Early Developments in Astronomy

1.1 Celestial Symbolism and Constellations

Göbekli Tepe’s location, high on the edge of a limestone ridge with broad horizons, would have made it ideal for naked-eye sky observation. Its almost circular architecture (see Fig. 1) and repeated rebuilding over centuries (Kinzel & Clare, 2020) suggest long-term continuity of observation, perhaps to track recurring celestial patterns.

The carved reliefs on Pillar 43 appear to represent a deliberate map of the sky. A central disk, likely symbolizing the sun, is surrounded by animal figures positioned in a sequence corresponding to known constellations (see Fig. 2). Comparative analysis reveals a compelling pattern (Sweatman & Tsikritsis, 2017):

• The disk is balanced on the wing of a bird-of-prey whose outline and position resembles the “teapot” asterism of Sagittarius.
• Below it, a scorpion corresponds closely to Scorpius.
• A canid figure to the left of the scorpion perfectly aligns with Lupus.
• A tall bird grasping a snake on the right resembles Ophiuchus, who in later iconography is shown wrestling with a serpent.
• An obscured goose-like figure below may represent Libra.
• A bending bird next to the top left semi-circle matches the shape of Pisces.
• A horizontal quadruped next to the middle semi-circle resembles Gemini.
• A splayed quadruped next to the top-right semi-circle is a close fit to Virgo.

It is worth noting that Sagittarius, Pisces, Gemini and Virgo are the cardinal constellations at the onset of the Younger Dryas period, and each of the corresponding animal symbols on Pillar 43 is positioned next to a circular or semi-circular symbol. 

Figure 2. Left: a scene around Scorpius from Stellarium. The teapot asterism of the Sagittarius constellation is drawn in yellow. Right: a sketch of Pillar 43.

By themselves, each of these correspondences could be coincidental. But when taken together, they suggest a coherent astronomical system for recording the date of an important event. Sweatman and Tsikritsis (2017) showed that when this configuration is reconstructed using the Stellarium software, the positions of these constellations correspond to the sky around 10,950 BCE (see Fig. 2), supporting the interpretation that Pillar 43 records the celestial alignment on a specific date.

Such symbolism would not have emerged in isolation. Comparable motifs occur in other early Neolithic sites: at Kortik Tepe, a chlorite vessel depicts a bird-man with a serpent and a sun-disk next to a bird-of-prey (See Fig. 3 and Benz & Bauer, 2015); at Çatalhöyük, wall reliefs and figurines feature animal and potential solar imagery, including the “Mistress of Animals” statuette with circular markings (see Fig. 3 and Hodder, 2011). These parallels indicate a shared iconographic language connecting animals and celestial observations across early Anatolia.

Figure 3. Left: Chlorite vessel from Kortik Tepe with similar designs to Pillar 43 (from Benz and Bauer, 2015). Right: Mistress-of-Animals, or Potnia Theron, from Catalhoyuk, 7th millennium BC (from Wikipedia).

1.2 Solstices, Equinoxes, and Precession

The association of the disk symbol with the sun implies that the accompanying semicircular shapes on Pillar 43 mark solstices and equinoxes. The central disk likely corresponds to the summer solstice, while three semicircular forms above may denote the winter solstice and the two equinoxes.

As Hughes (2005) argued, any culture that carefully tracks the solstices and equinoxes over centuries would eventually perceive precession of the equinoxes—the gradual shift in the position of the sun relative to the constellations. Gurshtein (2005) predicted that Neolithic peoples might have codified time using constellations marking these four seasonal points, a system he called writing “world ages.” Göbekli Tepe’s carvings appear to realize this concept in practice far earlier than he imagined. Indeed, by positioning the sun relative to a specific zodiacal constellation, Pillar 43 appears to display an even more advanced concept which allows to write a date with more accuracy than simply by recording a world age.

If the animal symbols of Pillar 43 indeed mark the four solstitial and equinoctial constellations—Virgo, Gemini, Sagittarius, and Pisces—then Göbekli Tepe can provide a route  towards the interpretation of much earlier European Palaeolithic cave art (Sweatman and Coombs, 2019; Sweatman, 2019) and later artistic traditions of the eastern Mediterranean (Sweatman, 2020).

1.3 Astronomical Parallels and Cultural Transmission

Comparative iconography suggests that Göbekli Tepe’s symbolic system may have influenced later Near Eastern and Mediterranean astronomy. Rogers (1998a,b) proposed that Greek zodiacal constellations were derived from Babylonian prototypes, but textual evidence from Pseudo-Eratosthenes (Condos, 1997) and the mythological correlations between Anatolia and Greece (Petropoulos, 2018) suggest instead to a common source in Upper Mesopotamia—the region that includes Göbekli Tepe. Klaus Schmidt (2011), Göbekli Tepe’s first lead excavator, himself speculated that the site’s symbolism might be ancestral to later Greek and Egyptian iconography.

Additional support for early astronomical sophistication comes from Pillar 18, which features sun and moon symbols beneath an H-shaped figure and a cluster of seven small birds, potentially representing the Pleiades. Its composition closely parallels the Nebra Sky Disk of Bronze Age Europe, which also depicts the sun, moon, and Pleiades (see Fig. 4). This continuity reinforces the interpretation of Göbekli Tepe as an observatory of celestial cycles.

Figure 4. Symbols on Pillar 18 compared with the Nebra sky disk (from wikipedia).

2. Early Developments in Arithmetic

2.1 The Lunar-Solar Calendar on Pillar 43

Above the disk symbol of Pillar 43 lies an intricate arrangement of V-shaped and square symbols, interpreted as a lunar-solar counting system (See Fig. 5 and Sweatman, 2024). The top row of fourteen double Vs with alternating orientation, plus one single V, yield a total of either 29 or 30—corresponding precisely to the alternating length of lunar months. Beneath this row, eleven small squares likely indicate repetition of the lunar cycle over eleven more months, producing 354 days. Below these squares ten additional V-marks complete the count at 364 days, just one short of the solar year.

Figure 5. The proposed solar calendar on Pillar 43, Enclosure D at Göbekli Tepe. The 365th day in the count is taken to be the summer solstice, symbolised by the disk.

The missing day is symbolically represented by the central solar disk, completing the year at 365 days. Thus, the pillar integrates astronomical constants—the lunar and solar cycles—into a single coherent arithmetic model. It also uses simple geometric notation to encode complex natural periodicities, demonstrating a remarkably abstract understanding of numerical relationships. Arithmetically, we would represent this model as,

((29 + 30))/2 × (1+11) + 10 + 1 = 365

This arithmetic sophistication has deep roots. Marshack (1972) documented tally systems on Upper Palaeolithic antler and bone artifacts used to track lunar cycles. The Göbekli Tepe design refines this system into a compact symbolic notation used to track both lunar and solar cycles. Moreover, the downward convergence of geometric symbols toward the sun disk visually indicates summation, suggesting intentional design to convey the culmination of the solar year.

The purpose of this design appears to be to reinforce the idea that the disk symbol represents the sun on a special day in the year – presumably the summer solstice. It is a clever device that leads the reader to this inescapable conclusion. Anyone with a basic knowledge of astronomy can then decode the Pillar’s meaning.

2.2 Symbolic Arithmetic across Göbekli Tepe

The use of the V-symbol recurs on other monuments. On the narrow face of Pillar 33, two columns of upturned Vs (14 on one side, 13 on the other) accompany depictions of a bird and a fox on the broad sides of the pillar (see Fig. 6). Sweatman (2024) interprets these as records of the Taurid meteor stream, whose radiant could have emanated for roughly 13 days from the constellation of Aquarius and then 14 more days from the direction of Pisces. The combination of numeric counts and celestial motifs indicates a structured awareness of time and annual recurrence, marking Göbekli Tepe as one of the first sites to apply quantitative recording to natural celestial phenomena.

Figure 6. Sketch of part of the inner face of Pillar 33, Enclosure D, showing the V-symbols.

The V-mark at the neck of the bird of prey on Pillar 43 reinforces this theme. Identical markings appear on the Urfa Man statue and on the Sayburç Master-of-Animals relief, both from the same cultural horizon. These parallels imply that the V-symbol denoted not merely ornament but a semantic signifier of time, culmination, or sacred day.

3. Early Developments in Proto-Writing

3.1 Emergent Symbolic Systems

The integration of animals, geometric shapes, and celestial references at Göbekli Tepe represents a nascent semiotic system—a means of encoding information that transcends purely visual or decorative intent. Each symbol holds a consistent referent: the disk for the sun, V-shapes for counting or days, and animals for constellations. Combined, they form a structured grammar of symbols capable of expressing astronomical events.

This corresponds closely with Gurshtein’s (2005) concept of early humans writing “world ages” using the four cardinal constellations, but the Göbekli Tepe evidence reveals an even more sophisticated stage—one capable of recording a specific solar date. The design of Pillar 43 demonstrates that the boundary between symbolic art and written notation was already blurring in the 10th millennium BCE.

3.2 Proto-Cuneiform Parallels and Transregional Motifs

Several later artifacts suggest that the semiotic principles found at Göbekli Tepe persisted across millennia. In early Sumerian proto-cuneiform, a semicircle symbolized both the sun and units of time (see Fig. 7c and Woods, 2010; Encyclopedia Britannica, “Sumerian Writing”). Similar semicircular forms appear beneath animal figures on the Uruk Vase (c. 3500 BCE), where Hartner (1965) identified a probable representation of Aquarius and other zodiacal motifs (see Fig. 7b). In Jiroft, Iran, semi-circular “handbag” stones feature Master-of-Animals figures holding serpents or felines—imagery directly recalling Göbekli Tepe’s motifs (see Fig. 7a and Counts & Arnold, 2010).

Figure 7. Ancient Iranian Jiroft ‘handbag’ with Master-of-Animals symbol, circa 2500 BC (a, from Wikipedia, CC-BY-4.0). Uruk Vase, Mesopotamia, circa 3500 – 3000 BC (b, from Wikipedia, CC-BY-4.0). Bottom of Figure 2.9 from Woods (2010) showing proto-cuneiform time-keeping symbols that resemble a sunset symbol turned on its side (c).

Comparable patterns also appear on the Gebel Djauti petroglyphs in pre-dynastic Egypt (Darnell & Darnell, 2002), depicting semicircular signs, a scorpion, and a bird-of-prey compositionally similar to Göbekli Tepe’s pillar scenes. These parallels indicate a long-lived symbolic continuity linking Anatolia, Mesopotamia, and Egypt through a shared cosmological language.

Figure 8. Sketch of the inscription at the Gebel Djauti rock shelter site discovered by Darnell and Darnell (2002).

3.3 The Master-/Mistress-of-Animals Tradition

The Master- or Mistress-of-Animals motif, showing a human or anthropomorphic figure flanked by animals, appears from Göbekli Tepe’s era through the Bronze Age (Counts & Arnold, 2010). At Sayburç, a near-contemporary of Göbekli Tepe, the motif shows a human dominating a pair of felines, an image later echoed in Mesopotamian, Minoan, and Greek art (see Fig. 9c). At Çatalhöyük, the “Mistress-of-Animals” figurine with twin felines may represent a solar or fertility deity (see Fig. 9b). In Tepe Guyan and Ur, similar figures appear among constellational motifs (see Fig. 9a).

Figure 9. Neolithic Master-of-Animals symbols. a) Stone plaquettes from Tepe Guyan (5th millennium BC) possibly showing Ophiuchus as the Master-of-Animals; b) A Mistress-of-Animals from Çatalhöyük, 7,100 – 6,000 BC; c) A Master-of-Animals from Sayburç near Göbekli Tepe. (Images a and b from Wikipedia, CC-BY-4.0, image c adapted from Özdoğan (2022)).

This unbroken transmission of symbolic forms demonstrates that Göbekli Tepe’s system of animal and geometric symbolism was not an isolated invention but the foundation of a pan-regional proto-writing tradition. It preserved cosmological and temporal knowledge through recurring iconographic archetypes.

Conclusion

Göbekli Tepe stands as a monument not only to early architectural ingenuity but to a deep and systematic intellectual tradition. The site integrates astronomical observation, arithmetic notation, and symbolic communication into a unified knowledge system.

Astronomy: The alignment of animal motifs with constellations and solstitial markers reveals a sustained and accurate record of celestial cycles. Göbekli Tepe’s builders appear to have understood the structure of the sky and the principle of precession.

Arithmetic: The ordered sequences of V-shapes and squares on Pillar 43 constitute a functional lunar-solar calendar, encoding both numerical precision and conceptual abstraction.

Proto-writing: The fusion of celestial, numerical, and geometric symbols into a stable, repeatable code indicates the emergence of representational semantics—early steps toward written communication.

In sum, Göbekli Tepe encapsulates the convergence of observation, quantification, and symbolic representation that defines the earliest scientific thought. Far from being a mere cultic or ritual site, it represents a cognitive revolution at the dawn of civilization—where the human impulse to measure, record, and explain the heavens first took monumental form.

 

References

Benz, M. & Bauer, J. (2015). On Scorpions, Birds and Snakes – Evidence for Shamanism in Northern Mesopotamia during the Early Holocene. Journal of Ritual Studies, 29(2), 1–23.

Condos, T. (1997). Star Myths of the Greeks and Romans: A Sourcebook. Phanes Press.

Counts, D.B. & Arnold, B. (2010). The Master of Animals in the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean.

Darnell, J.C. & Darnell, D. (2002). Theban Desert Road Survey in the Egyptian Western Desert. Oriental Institute Publications 119.

Dietrich, O. et al. (2013). Establishing a Radiocarbon Sequence for Göbekli Tepe. Neo-Lithics, 13, 36–41.

Encyclopedia Britannica. Sumerian Writing. https://www.britannica.com/topic/writing/Sumerian-writing

Gurshtein, A.A. (2005). Did the Pre-Indo-Europeans Influence the Formation of the Western Zodiac? Journal of Indo-European Studies, 33, 103–150.

Hartner, W. (1965). The Earliest History of the Constellations in the Near East and the Motif of the Lion-Bull Combat. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 24, 1–32.

Hodder, I. (2011). Çatalhöyük: The Leopard’s Tale. Thames & Hudson.

Hughes, D.W. (2005). Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Skywatchers and the Precession of the Equinox. Journal of the British Astronomical Association, 115, 29–35.

Kinzel, M. & Clare, L. (2020). Monumental – Compared to What? A Perspective from Göbekli Tepe. In Gebauer, A.B. et al. (eds.), Monumentalising Life in the Neolithic.

Marshack, A. (1972). The Roots of Civilization. McGraw-Hill.

Petropoulos, E.K. (2018). Homer and the East on the Aegean Crossroads.

Rogers, J.H. (1998a,b). Origins of the Ancient Constellations I–II. Journal of the British Astronomical Association, 108, 9–89.

Schmidt, K. (2011). Göbekli Tepe: A Neolithic Site in Southeastern Anatolia. In McMahon & Steadman (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia.

Sweatman, M.B. & Tsikritsis, D. (2017). Decoding Göbekli Tepe with Archaeoastronomy: What Does the Fox Say? Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, 17(1), 233–250.

Sweatman, M.B., (2019). Prehistory Decoded (Matador).

Sweatman, M.B., and Coombs, A., (2019). Decoding European Palaeolithic art: extremely ancient knowledge of precession of the equinoxes. Athens Journal of History 5, 1-30.

Sweatman, M.B., (2020). Zodiacal Dating Prehistoric Artworks. Athens. J. History 6, 199-222.

Sweatman, M.B. (2024). Representations of Calendars and Time at Göbekli Tepe and Karahan Tepe. Time and Mind, 17(3–4), 191–247.

Woods, C. (2010). Visible Language: Inventions of Writing in the Ancient Middle East and Beyond. University of Chicago Press.