AMMAN — Desert kites had been determined by the social and economic organisation of the hunters living in desolated areas of the Arabian Peninsula.
While we know from archaeological studies something of the people who lived in the Badia, we need first to be able to date the kites in order to identify the hunters who built and used these structures, why they did so, and how this might have been achieved.
“The economy and lifestyle of the hunters will considerably influence the ways in which a hunt is conducted, whether people are hunter-gatherers, pastoralists, settled village communities or elite groups hunting for sport,” noted the professor of archaeology from The University of Sydney Alison Betts.
The professor added that the tools currently available are extensive satellite imagery, aerial photography, limited archaeological fieldwork, ethnographic parallels from other regions and travellers’ accounts from the Badiyat ash-Sham.
Since the last detailed field studies of the kites in Jordan and in Syria, a great deal of new evidence has become available, and while there has been little new fieldwork, it is still valuable to reconsider the Jordanian kites in the light of other sources of data, Betts emphasised.
Regarding morphology and typology of the Jordanian desert kites, they refer to the large enclosures with trailing walls that visibly dominate the landscape of the Black Desert.
The term is generally understood as referring to an enclosure comprising a wall, continuous but for one narrow opening, with small rounded structures set out around the periphery, and two long walls converging on the entrance.
"It is argued here, however, that this definition is too narrow. The advent of aerial imagery has shown great variety in the forms seen in the steppe. Not all of these neatly fit the standard definition of a desert kite. To define the structures by form without regard for function may cloud the discussion," said Betts.
The archaeologist noted that various attempts have been made to create a typology of kites.
Some scholars argue that it is only the irregularity of their construction that gives kites the impression of a great variety of forms. They suggest that the kites can, in fact, be classed into five basic categories: star, arrow, circle, trapeze and axe.
"They also stress that it is necessary to make a distinction between the classic form of kite, with enclosure and guiding walls, and less well-defined structures—walls forming partial or complete enclosures, open or closed, without guiding walls and occasionally with small cells attached to the enclosure walls," Betts said.
The professor noted that this eliminates Echallier and Braemer recognise these forms, but dismiss them as enclosures of uncertain form not related to the kites themselves.
A recent study by Kempe and Malabeh conducted in 2010 contradicts this suggestion. In a detailed study of Google Earth images for sectors of eastern Jordan, they have identified a chronological sequence of forms that begin with walls that simply meander in long lines across the landscape.
Betts continued: "Some extensions of the meanders then stretch into elongated bag shapes, which can be shown to be a slightly later development. In the next stage, these develop multiple loops, forming clover-leaf-shaped enclosures with wide entrances and fairly straight walls."
"The final form is the highly complex star-shaped desert kite, with cells on the enclosure, a narrow neck and long divergent guiding walls," the professor noted.
In some cases, the older walls have been incorporated into the more recent structures or, where they lie across the entrances, breaches have been made in them.
In addition to demonstrating how one form replaces the next, Kempe and Malabeh have shown these to be unified systems, located in the same places in the landscape and—therefore arguably—designed to perform the same function, in an increasingly sophisticated manner, over time, Betts elaborated.
The archaeologist noted that adapted from a Google Earth image of a wadi on the Saudi border, shows a meandering wall with extensions, some of which have cells at their apex.
The wall appears designed to entrap animals moving north-westwards out of a wide wadi, where grazing and possibly rain pools would attract them.
Assuming that the ‘true desert kite’ was most frequently used for hunting, this type of wall cannot be described as an ‘enclosure’, but must still be seen as a device designed for the same function as the ‘true’ kites, Betts said.
The correlation between these various systems can also be seen clearly in the case studies of Kennedy, Banks and Houghton.
In each example a wadi runs north-east to south-west. Along the western edge of the wadi is a highly complex mesh of meandering walls, some forming pockets, points or extended loops.
In the second example, upslope to the west of these is a line of kites that fall in form somewhere midway between Kempe and Malabeh’s clover-leaf form and a simple star-shaped kite.
"The walls splay only slightly, as in the clover-leaf form and the enclosure entrances are fairly wide. There are clusters of cells attached to the enclosure. Upslope, again to the west and dropping down over a break of slope at the entrance, is a star-shaped kite, heavily rebuilt many times, with widely splaying walls," Betts outlined.
The professor added that the kites found across western Asia from Saudi Arabia and the Sinai to the Aralo-Caspian region vary in form, but do not show obvious signs of typological development.
In Jordan and the Saudi Arabian border regions, however, there is a clear sequence of development in form. In discussing desert kites, earlier forms must bead dressed or placed in a sub-category of the broader phenomenon.
"It is argued here that any sub-division by form would be fairly arbitrary, while the function appears to remain the same throughout. A basic typology of form is, in any case, no longer sufficient. Aerial imagery reveals different forms can be identified as clustering in groups, some in long chains, others arranged around a topographical feature such as a hill, wadi or mudflat."
"There are also distinct individual kites. In light of this, it is clear that a typology must include form, relationship to landscape, relationship to other similar structures and relationship to other groups if appropriate," Betts highlighted.
While kites and their associated forms elsewhere in the Middle East may eventually be individually counted and documented, the task would be almost impossible for Jordan.
The construction of a meaningful typology would take a great deal of intensive study of aerial imagery with ground-based follow-up, the professor explained, adding that this too may prove almost impossible as the typological developments, while outlined generally by Kempe and Malabeh, do not change suddenly from one form to another, but morph gradually from one to another.
