The northernmost kites in Southwest Asia: A preliminary report from the Fringes of the Ararat Depression (Armenia) (original) (raw)
Related Papers
The Armenian kites are the northernmost known kites in south-west Asia. In contrast to those in the deserts further south, their research has only recently begun. The Armenian kites are situated at high elevations, mostly between 900 and 1500 m above mean sea level, in steppic conditions where Artemisia is at present the dominant shrub on the landscape. In our ongoing project we excavated three V-shaped kites and one enclosure kite. The two kinds are similar in construction details, but they differ in size and location: the former run down into gullies, while the latter were placed on the plateau. Six OSL ages suggest terminal Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age construction dates, while geomorphological considerations and surface artefacts suggest earlier dates. A preliminary palynological study suggests a gradual increase in grazing-resistant vegetation since the mid-Holocene, probably reflecting human impact on the natural vegetation through the herding of grazing animals.
In A. Betts and P. van Pelt (eds), The gazelle’s dream: game drives of the Old and New Worlds. Adapa Monographs. Sydney: Sydney University Press
The first kites in Armenia were recorded in 2009 by geologist Arkadi Karakhanyan of the National Academy of Sciences of Armenia (Karakhanyan 2010). Fieldwork by the Globalkites project in 2011 established that these structures possessed all the necessary kite components – drivelines, enclosures, and cells – and allowed investigators to draw a preliminary map validating satellite observations. This initial campaign was followed by three further seasons in 2012, 2013, and 2015 that included archaeological excavation.
In a recent article, Malkinson and his colleagues (Malkinson et al., 2017) have put forward a series of hypotheses on the function, seasonality, and chronology of kites discovered on the slopes of Mount Aragats, in Armenia. Among their hypotheses relevant to function, Malkinson et al. propose that the kites without antennae would have been meant for pastoralism, while those with antennae would have been for large herbivore game. In our opinion, this hypothesis appears to be particularly flimsy: it rests on a very incomplete body of evidence, and does not take into consideration the analysis of the morphological and morphometric aspects of these constructions. The question is whether kites with antennae and kites without them have characteristics that are sufficiently apart from one another to consider different functions.
Some 180 desert kites were reported from Armenia, with puzzling aspects regarding the typological variability and distribution patterns. Although the study of kites in southwest Asia has made many recent advances, their dating and cultural context remain uncertain due to apparent limitations. A division of them includes two major categories, v-shaped hunting kites, and enclosure kites. The latter have two subgroups: those with and those lacking guiding walls. Here, we analyze the architectural characteristics and geographical settings of v-shaped and enclosure kites in order to shed new light on their past function. It appears that the rare v-shaped kites are limited to the topographical lower end of the kites' phenomenon in Armenia. On the other hand, the enclosure kites are found across the topographical range of the phenomenon, between about 900 and 1500 m above msl. Furthermore, the typical Arme-nian enclosure kite has a heart-like morphology, with trapping pits located upwards and 'behind' the main entrance of the enclosure. Such a layout is uncommon further south in the deserts of the Near East, but documented for game traps on the Ustyurt Plateau, and similar structures were used for hunting and herding in Scandinavia. We thus suggest that the two Armenian enclosure kite types were used for hunting wild game, most likely Red Deer (with guiding walls); and for keeping livestock (without guiding walls). We also suggest that the hunters and/or herders that constructed the kites practiced seasonal vertical movement between winter and summer grazing lands.
Kites in Armenia were recently discovered, and investigations into their construction, typology and dating are ongoing. With these discoveries, it has become necessary to investigate a series of unsolved questions. In order to test the functions of kites, we conducted a synthesis describing the occurrence and habitat range of Late Pleistocene and Holocene wild ungulates in Armenia. Wildlife is discussed by emphasizing animal behavior and distribution, along with the hunting strategies adopted by the communities that inhabited Armenia. In spite of the fact that wild ungulates did not contribute largely to the daily meat intake or to the major raw products needed by humans since their domestication (around 6000 cal. BC), wild goats, gazelle and red deer were the animals most frequently hunted in Armenia in different time periods and in a variety of landscapes. Hypotheses put forward suggest that these preferences might be linked to using kites as traps for herds at different seasons of the year and on different altitudes, between 3000 and 500 BC.
Desert kites are found across a vast region. This paper presents a detailed description of kites from the Harrat al-Shaam region (Jordan) and proposes a comparative study, as well as an analysis of the morphology and organisation of kites known from Mount Aragats (Armenia) and the Ustyurt Plateau (Kazakhstan). A complete inventory of the structures in each region highlights their architectural characteristics and their spatial distribution in the landscape. Some preliminary results were obtained by comparing both regions: the core area in eastern Jordan, and peripheries—sometimes very distant— such as in the Caucasus and Central Asia. Chronological data were also compared, when available. All these different and complementary aspects were finally combined with satellite imagery analyses. The interactive process between satellite images and fieldwork observations has enriched both approaches, while yielding preliminary key elements of interpretation for a better understanding of the kite phenomenon on a global scale.
The Aralo-Caspian region includes a ninth of the total number of 'desert kites'. These are located at a considerable distance from the large concentrations of the Near East and the Levant. A combined fieldwork and satellite image analysis, undertaken in September 2013 on the southwestern fringe of the Ustyurt plateau, allowed us to record and describe 143 kites of different morphological types and to obtain new chronological data. Within the framework of the Globalkites research project, set up at the scale of the whole distribution area of kites, a GIS database was constructed using a methodology successfully tested in other regions (Armenia, Jordan, Saudi Arabia). This paper is a detailed description of the kites of this region, focusing on location in the landscape, morphology, architecture and chronology. Despite the lack of accurate information about their use, relationships with animal migration routes can sometimes be suggested. Our chronological data show that the southwestern Ustyurt kites have a long history of use and were abandoned only very recently. Some architectural details and morphological features, commonly observed on Near Eastern kites, lead to the conclusion that Ustyurt kites belong to a single phenomenon.
Since the discovery of desert kites during the 1920s in southwestern Asia (where they are widely distributed) their possible functions have received much attention from archaeologists. Two main functions have been hypothesized, namely, kites primarily used either as game traps or as structures used for livestock husbandry. Two papers published in the 1990s expressed opposing views about the relevance of these different uses. During the last two decades much information has been gathered on kites as a result of archaeological excavations and satellite imaging. However the function or functions of desert kites remains uncertain. Starting from the 1990s debate, we revisit this controversial issue by reviewing the academic literature published since then. On the basis of this literature and other considerations, we conclude that although some (or all) may have been used for hunting, their main use was for the mustering of livestock. This favors the hypothesis of Echallier and Braemer (1995). In addition, it seems likely that kites were used for a third function, namely the capture of some wild or feral species of animals, particularly goats.