Back then it seemed obvious the Sumerian ziggurat dominated its skyline as much because the first citystates grew up around it as because of inherent prominence. Likewise squabbles right down to the present make it seem more likely the first priest-kings supplemented existing religious authority with ever growing temporal authority rather than the reverse (it would be easy for an experienced naturalist to claim divine guidance. ) Another contemporary example in settling the American West shows that large communities are not necessary for agriculture, but agriculture is necessary for large communities. Given the number of prehistoric human sites several times older than this that have religious art associated with pre-agricultural societies, the suggestion religion was an outgrowth of civilization doesn't strike me as tenable.

I guess what I'm saying, basically, is WTF? But it sounds better the other way.

Very cool find; I'm always fascinated by that post-prehistoric, pre-civilized period because it's so pivotal but murky. That "the oldest known Neolithic village" is a couple weeks drove from there, that so many vital animals were domesticated nearby after this sites construction, is very compelling, and interesting. Of course, if it all turns out to be the worlds first drive-in we'll need another fundamental reassessment of anthropology.

EDIT: Could go either way; overlap is common there.