Prehistoric architecture in th context of Anatolian geography and place of ritual in architecture

For the architectural activity, the moment as Mesopotamian city states occured in the scene of history is, at the same time, the moment of experiecing a qualitative division. There was on the one hand cities and the situation of being governmental centers which was symbolized by city. Architecture in the city develops as a class based design process which is open to avant-garde ideas. On the other hand there were peoples outside of the city walls and a traditional attidute represented by rurals. The architecture in rural settlement areas develops as a tradition based reproducing process. İt is here clear that the main distinction between two architectural activities occur in their rates of change in aspect of style. However, it is not possible to speak about unchangeable point with same precision, which makes it possible to unite both activities under architectural structure. İn this case it is a question of research, how the core value of architectural identity, namely cultural structure gets involved in architectural design process. This thesis has been written with the aim of presenting an answer in a particular way to the question of research which is defined in general terms. Boundries of the framework consist of historical and geographical periods, in which the studied interaction between architecture and culture took place. Historically the period between first primitive human beings (hominids) and the establishment of mesopotamian city states has been taken as reference. This period, which is known as ''prehistoric'' or ''stone age'' is important as it includes first phases of socio-cultural structures and architecture. At the end, the traces belonging origin can change and become unvisible but they can not disappear. Geographically the area of Anatolia with it's surrounding regions have been taken as reference. These areas include the first examples of transition from nomad way of life order to settled way of life. Accordingly, it is important because of being locality of a revolutionary socio-economic transition. İnferences have been made through taking determinative quality of economic infrastructure on the political (and cultural) superstructure as basis at the analysis of developments and events. The natural result of this method is to follow a sequence parallel to phases of humanity history. By this way the economic, ideal and cultural developments could be analysed revealing their continuity and cause effect relationships between them. On the other side, the effects of stated developments on architecture could be presented as a concrete phenomen. As the duration until upper paleolithic era in the sequence of prehistoric ages worldwide is the same, this common agreement has been accepted. However the duration of transition to upper paleolithic and following eras changes from area to area. This problem has been solved through taking datings including Anatolia and Near East as basis. İn this way the part of analysis could be collected under four chapter titels: Origin of Symbolical Thought, Paleolithic Era, Epipaleolithic/Mesolithic Era and at the end the Neolithic Era. The conclusion includes the transformation of information, which has been collected through analysing prehistoric ages, in a form of thesis. The human of stone age discovers the problems about sheltering and landscaping through a intuitive knowledge but their solutions are based on magical motives. Because they saw the steady order of universe in relation with its vitality. They found the guarantee of keeping themselves alive in staying continious interaction with it. Traditions and rituals are the ways of this activity. Architecture is not independent from it. Therefore the design at the architecture of stone age dependens as much on technological possibilities as ritual rules.