Mysterious Stone Towers Discovered In The Himalayas

A French woman explored these towers and though I had once heard of them, some years ago, today on YouTube I located a good video. I am very interested in history pertaining to Asia. Spend time and please, more than the towers, look at the landscape, the rivers and valleys and the construction used. Can you see yourself lifting up such heavy stones when in the high mountains? I judge that the locals living there are not lazy people. Also notice the cattle. I think many of us would appreciate public interest discussions and history is a good thing to look into.

 

The towers were probably used for defensive purposes in older times.

Might have had something to do with the Mongol invasions.

Another possibility, some of them might have served as signal markers on trade routes, so travelers would be able to more easily spot them from a distance and know there was a major village there. These travelers would have brought revenue into the local economy.

 

She explores that idea in the video. For the most part, she could not prove that contention.

 

unlikely mongol defense, mongol armies weren't very active in this area ...very, very likely defensive... the irish built similar towers for defense, having the doorway high above the ground accessed by a ladder that would be pulled up after the last person was safely inside...safely inside the occupants would wait until raiders who wouldn't have siege weapons would leave...many of the towers in video you could see a window high above the doorway, a nice spot from which to drop rocks and hot liquids on anyone attempting to reach the door...

 

She studied them taking into account the Mongols. She studied them for defense possibilities. See if you are in a restricted tower as these are, all the enemy has to do is camp below and wait you out. Few had archery slits. She is over 70 years old today so we may not find out a lot more. She viewed them as trophies also such as a show of wealth. Most seem to be in very mountainous areas so this has to be factored in as well. Many have crumbled due to factors such as earthquakes and perhaps poor construction techniques.

 

she may not be able to definitively say they were defensive because of a lack of historical records but the oral history of the inhabitants has to be respected and they claim it's defensive...

raiders of those times were not equipped for long sieges and warfare was seasonal, they'd quickly run out of food loot whatever they could carry and leave...this is has been the tried and tested defensive system used around the globe by many cultures for many centuries...these towers would've been stocked with food and water..

considering how many many centuries these have been standing and the height they reached in an earthquake zone I'd say their building technique was exceptional...

 

Particular towers did stand up very well. Many crumbled.

Did she say in the video that raiders were not set up for long sieges? I was thinking of starving them out rather than waging a siege on the people in the towers. Can you imagine the hygiene problems of living in the towers?

The square towers suffered much more due to earthquakes she found than did the star shaped towers. She alleged the room in the interior lacks space. The walls she said were very thick.

But perhaps you know of some study and if so will you try to add information from said study?

 

those towers have stood for centuries, more than likely they'll be standing for centuries more after your home is gone....

hygiene was never great in castles and towers, being in a siege party having excrement thrown down on them wouldn't have been fun either or healthy...the early French kings would regularly switch residences as the stench of the sewage drove them from one residence to another...

sieges didn't usually last long as the amount of food required to sustain a siege was significant they'd need to carry it with them...putting a siege army together was difficult as standing armies were rare, armies and raiders of period would typically be peasants/farmers and fight only in the summer...winter was too difficult, spring was planting season, fall harvest season...waiting out the besiegers was a winning formula used everywhere...

 

Theory suggest a status symbol.....pretty bad a$$ though.

 

possible, but unlikely when considering how they were constructed with the inaccessible doorway...

in Italy there is a region/city where towers were built as a status symbol, the wealthy would feel the need to build a higher tower than their wealthy neighbours, but there too they may have started as a family defensive fortress...

 

30 ft off the ground is not much in the way of defense and the internal corridoes are too narrow to do anything anyway. these would be almost as effective as a Trump Wall.

 

the same method worked in Ireland to keep the Vikings out...it may not seem to secure by our standards but to a raider or bandit of the day not equipped for a long siege it's a substantial defense...they'll give up and look for easier targets...

visit any castle tower in europe and you'll see similar designs...european towers typically had stairs that turned right as they ascended preventing right handed attackers from swinging their swords...here the design seems to be pull the ladder up on each level as you retreat and rain hell down upon anyone on the lower level, it would take very few defenders to hold them at bay...

 

These are stand alone towers (No castle or supplies) with no room for combat and no holes for archery. Basically they are simply very thick walled towers with hexagonal walls and elevated doors. Seems a useless siege design and bares no resemblance to European design.

 

just like the Irish towers and many towers through out europe, I've been in more than a few, the principle is the same...limiting combat room was the point, one attacker at a time coming through a doorway or up a ladder is easily defeated by a couple of defenders...holes for archery were very few and far between in european castles as well, one or two opening to cover the doorway is all they usually had, these towers have that...and rocks dropped from a height were much more effective than an arrow...castles were a part of an defensive evolution, european castles generally started with a single defensive tower, the typical "movie" castles were a later development...

 

Okay....you are clearly correct. I'll let the professionals know for you.

 

with a strong background in anthropology and history and exploring castles for 40 years there's a very good chance that I am correct...choke points, limiting access to entry points(doors), murder holes above doorways, everything I see there says defensive fortification...all that and the local oral tradition says the same thing....

 

They sound like a type of Broch, a Scottish construction, into which the local community would retreat when raiders were spotted. They were essentially a double-skinned wall with an internal passage surrounding a central courtyard. Zero visiblity, and limited defensive capability they were a kind of community "safe room" sufficient to protect against a passing threat, but not a sustained attack.

 

Been awhile since I started this thread but unless memory failed me, I think your solution was tried by the experts that examined those towers. They would not be called mystery towers otherwise. What you say does make sense.

 

Towers in China are not made by the Scots.

 

Silly remark.. There are ancient towers all over Mesopotamia and Arabia.. They were watchtowers and at night they were signal towers.. You could see an enemy coming 20 miles away and not be taken by surprise.

 

Frankly Margot2, I think a lot of what you say is silly, yet you do not catch me talking at you that way.

The towers I speak of have had experts examine them yet they are called a Mystery. Do you think the experts are silly?

 

true but cultures everywhere had similar problems and would find similar solutions independently...the pyramid shape for building huge monuments was common everywhere even among cultures that never had any contact with each other, a pyramid is the simplest engineering solution to build a very large stable monumental structure...

towers are the simplest solution to similar defensive problems so it's not surprising to see many cultures come up with the same solution...a tower works well for a small group or family as it doesn't take a large number of people to construct and is adequate to hold off raiders from nearby neighbors or bandits for short periods of time...

a little off topic there is a culture in New Guinea that took to building their homes at incredible heights in trees, easy to defend, high above arrow range and above the forest floor with all the snakes and insects..

 

Yes......... or looking for attention. Sorry you were taken in.

 

defensive towers in different cultures, wouldn't hold off a determined army but enough to keep raiders, bandits and assassins at bay...

Georgia

Ireland


Italy-this was in a city that at one time had 250 towers

 

..or both.