Svan Towers

The mountainous regions of the Caucasus are distinguished above all by their ancient towers, and Georgia is no exception. These formidable structures can be found scattered across Tusheti, Khevsureti, Mtiuleti, Khevi, and even in the remote valleys of Racha. Yet, among them all, the Svan towers have achieved unparalleled renown—primarily because of their sheer abundance. Steeped in mystery and steeped even deeper in mythology, the story of the Svan towers continues to baffle scholars and visitors alike. To this day, their exact purpose remains unclear. What were they built for? Why were they needed? Their outward appearance and internal architecture are without equal—neither in the Caucasus, nor anywhere else in the world.

For centuries, the Svans constructed robust quadrangular towers from stone to protect their settlements from potential foes. The towers that still stand today date roughly from the 8th to the 13th century. After that golden epoch, tower-building ceased entirely.

Literature often asserts that these towers served as defensive strongholds, meant to shield against either foreign invaders or neighboring clans. However, the Svans themselves unanimously insist that there has never been internal warfare in Svaneti. Many of the towers were built during a time of peace and prosperity—the Golden Age—when the region was not threatened by invasion. Furthermore, another compelling detail undermines the defensive theory: in their current form, the Svan towers are hardly suited for active defense.

Each floor of a tower contains a single narrow window, typically facing south. These apertures lack splayed sides, making it nearly impossible to fire weapons or even hurl projectiles from within. The uppermost floor contains small openings, but these too lack any clear function; from them, it is difficult to launch an arrow, let alone throw anything substantial. In some towers, these upper windows are completely sealed, sometimes even plastered over—a surprisingly common phenomenon.

Unlike other medieval Georgian fortresses, Svan towers contain neither chimneys nor hearths. Considering the ferocious mountain winters of Svaneti, the absence of heating systems is a strong argument against the idea that these towers were ever used as dwellings. On the rare occasion that a fireplace niche is discovered, it is regarded as a minor archaeological sensation.

All towers follow a shared architectural logic. The first level forms a solid foundation—about two meters high—designed to stabilize the structure against earthquakes and enemy raids. Above this base, a small hatch served as the entrance, accessible only by ladder. Above the entry point were rooms of varying functions, arranged across several tiers. At the very top, a lookout platform offered panoramic views of the surrounding valley.

Today, many of these towers stand untended. Some are privately owned, while others belong to the state. A few have been adorned with decorative lights, while enterprising guesthouse owners toy with the idea of transforming them into tourist accommodations—capitalizing on the widespread assumption that these towers were once inhabited.

To glimpse the interior of a Svan house and tower, one can visit a modest museum located in the former home of the Margiani family—an influential Svan clan once in possession of several such towers.

The true function of the Svan towers remains a riddle—half-rooted in fact, half-buried in folklore. The most enduring mystery of highland Svaneti is this: What were the towers really for?

Here are ten prominent—and some not-so-prominent—theories:

Theory 1: Watchtowers or Signal Beacons.
These towers may have served as early warning systems. In times of danger, fires would be lit atop each tower, relaying the signal of alarm from one end of the valley to the other, rapidly alerting the local population of approaching threats.

Theory 2: Defensive Fortresses.
According to this view, the towers functioned as family fortresses. In times of external threat, entire households could retreat into them. Large stones stored on the ground level were used to barricade the entrance.

Theory 3: Protection from Blood Feuds.
Closely related to the previous theory, this posits that towers offered sanctuary not from foreign enemies but from vendettas among local clans. Essentially, the purpose remains defensive; only the identity of the enemy differs.

Theory 4: Avalanche Protection.
Some suggest that the towers were built to shelter residents from frequent avalanches descending from the surrounding peaks. This idea falters, however, upon inspection of towers constructed on slopes where avalanches are unlikely. Yet, the structures’ seismic resilience is beyond doubt.

Theory 5: Symbols of Prestige.
The towers may have served as architectural emblems of wealth and status. Typically built adjacent to family homes, they were preserved and passed down like heirlooms. Notably, when Western Svaneti was conquered, the ruling princes often razed local towers. Ironically, the Dadeshkeliani princes who seized control of the region erected a tower of their own—the tallest in all of Svaneti, rising ten stories high. In 1921, as the Soviet regime approached, its owners destroyed the tower before fleeing the country.

Theory 6: Residential Use.
Some claim that the towers were once lived in. However, the lack of chimneys and the harsh winters make prolonged habitation improbable. At best, they offered temporary refuge during times of crisis.

Theory 7: Storage Facilities.
In peaceful times, the towers may have been used as granaries or pantries—essentially, monumental Svan refrigerators. Archaeologists have uncovered stone-embedded vessels for water on the upper floors of some towers, as well as hidden niches where families concealed valuables. Local legend even suggests they occasionally hid kidnapped brides there.

Theory 8: Towers of Love.
Romantic folklore surrounds several towers. One tale from the village of Ipari tells of a young woman whose beloved died while hunting. In her grief, she visited the site of his death daily. Her father, moved by her sorrow, built her a tower where she remained for the rest of her days.

Theory 9: Intimate Retreats.
One less conventional theory posits that the towers were used for private, intimate encounters—allegedly due to the lack of other suitable places.

Theory 10: Pure Aesthetics.
And finally, perhaps the towers were constructed simply to beautify the landscape.

For each of these theories, compelling arguments—and equally compelling counterarguments—can be made. Most likely, the truth lies somewhere in between. Over the centuries, the Svan towers have served many purposes, adapting to the shifting needs of the people who built and inhabited them. Their legacy endures not just in stone, but in the stories that rise with them toward the sky.