Archaeologists are mystified by ancient “gates” in Saudi lava fields
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
The 4th and the last image are fair matches to form and wall height of desert hunting kites of Central Asia seen here: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/08/desert-kites-out...
See especially this image: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/content/dam/news/rights-...
From the linked article (on nationalgeographic):
“They make more sense when looked at from above,” says Shamil Amirov, an archaeologist who uses satellite imagery to map the colossal artifacts in western Uzbekistan. “Most are shaped like arrows. We have found them in chains across the migration trails of antelopes. They probably directed thousands of animals into killing pits.”
In effect, Amirov says, Central Asia’s desert kites—named after similar triangular or kite-shaped features discovered earlier in the Middle East—were massive protein pumps. Built over generations by nomadic pastoralists some 2,500 years ago, the structures siphoned vast numbers of animals from the environment.
...
Desert kites first came to the attention of science nearly a century ago, when World War I pilots reported low walls tracing gigantic polygons, funnels, and triangles across the sunbaked barrens of modern Jordan, Israel, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. Experts have been debating the function of these cryptic structures ever since.
These kinda look like stockyards to me.
If they said these things were for hunting or agriculture, they'd have to explain how. But if they're for "rituals" then they don't have to explain what the use was or the ritual was.
However it leaves us with an impression of ancient peoples as superstitious fools who spent vast amounts of time and energy building ritual objects with no practical purpose.
Instead maybe we should be left with an impression of archeologist's massive ignorance about ancient culture.
I would not describe a television as being used for "ritual purposes". It has a specific function and is used for a specific reason. If future archeologists cannot determine that function or describe that reason, then I would expect them to say "we don't know what this is used for", not "it was used for ritual purposes".
That's the thing that bugs me about it. If they said "we don't know" that'd be much more intellectually honest.
Drawing the lines around what is or is not religion is surely in itself a can of worms!
"a set of fixed actions and sometimes words performed regularly, especially as part of a ceremony" http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ritual
and yeah, determining what an ancient person would have thought of as religious, or not, or even ritual, would be tricky.
but the point is that "rituals" (as opposed to "habits" or "customs and practices") make up a tiny part of our average day, and a tiny fraction of the objects we use.
To suggest that ancient peoples spent vastly more of their time in rituals gives a completely erroneous impression of both the ancient people and their objects.
Every culture spends vast amount of time and energy building ritual objects with no practical purpose. But that doesn't make them superstitious fools, that just makes them human beings with a culture, thus whose lives aren't entirely consumed by practical matters like survival. That's a good thing!