Although there's no unanimity among the scholars about the primary function of these structures, the majority view on their purpose is that they were used as traps for hunting game animals such as gazelles, which were driven into the kites and hunted there.

Desert kites are monumental stone constructions characterized by their convergent, funnel-like form. They consist of long, low alignments of piled stones, often less than one metre in preserved height due to erosion, which extend from tens of metres to several kilometres in length. The two principal lines, frequently termed “antennae” or "tails", run toward a narrowing end that terminates in a larger enclosure, sometimes equipped with subsidiary compartments or “cells”. These cells, which occur in many but not all examples, are regarded by some researchers as a defining element of the type, functioning as holding pens once animals had been funneled into the kite.

The linear walls are not always continuous; in some cases they appear as discontinuous rows of cairns rather than uninterrupted lines, possibly by intentional design. A 2022 study demonstrated that deep pits, several metres in depth, were often constructed along the margins of the terminal enclosure. These have been interpreted as killing or trapping pits, reinforcing the interpretation of kites as large-scale hunting installations. Enclosed areas vary widely in size, but the median surface area is around 10,000 square metres, with extremes ranging from very small structures to vast complexes covering far greater expanses.

Topographical setting is a critical feature of kite placement. They are most often located on elevated but relatively flat plateaus, in broken or complex terrain, or at the margins of mountain ranges. They are conspicuously absent in humid zones, endorheic basins, steep slopes, or the highest mountain regions. Within their enclosures, the ground surface tends to be comparatively open, often stripped of rocks or vegetation. Entrances and convergences are frequently positioned at slope breaks, which would have impaired the visibility of escape routes for animals driven inside. Orientation is not random: within a given region, kites typically display consistent directional preferences, though these vary from area to area.

The construction methods of desert kites reflect adaptation to local landscapes. In certain cases, builders incorporated natural features such as cliffs or lava flows into the funnel system, reducing the need for continuous stone walls. In volcanic regions, contrasts were heightened by selecting stones of a different colour from the surrounding background or by clearing vegetation along the lines to accentuate the visual effect. In parts of ancient Arabia, associated features such as cairns (a mound of rough stones built as a memorial or landmark, typically on a hilltop or skyline) and subsidiary linear alignments occur in proximity, suggesting integrated use of these elements within broader ritual or hunting landscapes.

Finally, scale and visibility distinguish desert kites as among the most striking prehistoric features of arid and semi-arid regions. From ground level, their low walls can be difficult to discern, but their immense outlines are readily visible from the air. This aerial conspicuousness has been key to their modern identification and mapping, revealing distributions across the Levant, Arabian Peninsula, and Central Asia.

Desert kites have been documented across a broad geographical range, extending from the Middle East into Central Asia. Concentrations are particularly well attested in Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Armenia, and Türkiye, as well as throughout the Levant, including Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Israel/Palestine, and Jordan. Substantial numbers are also recorded on the Arabian Peninsula, notably in modern day Saudi Arabia and Yemen, and further west in Egypt and Libya. Beyond these core areas, additional examples have been identified as far afield as Mongolia, while isolated cases are known from South Africa.

By 2018, systematic surveys and remote-sensing projects had identified more than 6,000 kites across Asia and the Middle East. In certain regions of Syria their density is exceptionally high, with distributions reaching roughly one kite per two square kilometres, in some cases so close together that their outlines overlap or link into complex, interconnected systems.

Comparative evidence suggests that the concept of large-scale stone-built traps was not confined to the Middle East. Enclosure-like structures that appear to have served similar purposes have been reported in Europe, with radiocarbon dates placing some of them in the Mesolithic and Neolithic periods. Analogous hunting systems are known from North America, where so-called “drive lines” were employed by Indigenous groups into the 19th century CE. Other parallels, though less extensively studied, have been noted in South America and Japan, indicating that communal hunting strategies using landscape-scale constructions were a recurrent solution in diverse cultural and environmental contexts.

Archaeological and ethnographic evidence suggests that desert kites in the Middle East and North Africa functioned primarily as large-scale hunting traps for wild ungulates such as gazelles. While some scholars have proposed alternative roles in livestock management, the debate persists due to limited direct evidence and the disappearance of traditions linked to kite use. Little is known about the fate of the captured animals, yet depictions in petroglyphs from Israel, Mongolia, and Sinai, as well as references of similar trap-structure in the Epic of Gilgamesh, point to their role in organized hunting practices. The construction of these vast enclosures required coordinated communal labor, underscoring a degree of social organization behind what was, at its core, a straightforward hunting technique.

The efficiency of desert kites lay in behavioral rather than physical barriers. Studies demonstrate that animals instinctively follow guiding lines—whether low walls, fences, or similar obstructions—without attempting to cross them, enabling hunters to funnel herds into concealed pits or narrowing enclosures. The design often exploited migration routes or daily movement patterns, with hidden traps placed at converging points. This strategy ensured that animals, once driven into panic, were unable to detect or avoid the final capture zones. Such large-scale hunting methods likely exerted substantial pressure on local wildlife populations, shaping the ecological and cultural landscapes of the regions where they were employed.

Safawi Kite 104
It is one of the more substantial "kite" structures, with its head measuring some 200 meters across and three tailes ranging from 600-1300 meters. The structure has a very curious trapezoidal shaped inclusion on its south-eastern wall (centre, left). Tails’ (the radiating walls), extending some 3.7 km which stretch across a wadi (top right) before intersecting with a baffling succession of stone-built structures.

Safawi Kite 118