muslim towers in the medieval syrian countryside

MUSLIM TOWERS IN THE MEDIEVAL SYRIAN COUNTRYSIDE

Balázs MAJOR

Pázmány Péter Catholic University — Department of Arabic and Islamic Studies

Avicenna Institute of Middle Eastern Studies

The Near East in general and Syria in particular has always been a landpossessing highly developed military architectural tradition. The mostobvious and world famous remains of this rich tradition on the soil of present day Syria were left by the acceleration of military activity in the10th-13th centuries. One important element of the medieval military archi-tecture in the countryside was the tower, which either stood alone or “tow-ered” above a small enclosure, sometimes with some additional buildings.The arrival of the Crusaders gave a special impetus to the building of freestanding or enclosed towers in the Levantine countryside. The surviv-ing archaeological corpus is clearly dominated by the remains of thesetowers, most of which, fulfilled defensive, administrative and residentialfunctions alike. While Crusader towers in Palestine had been the subjectof thorough research,1 and work has begun on their counterparts in thenorthern Crusader states,2 very little attention has been devoted to similarMuslim structures that stood on the territory of present day Syria. Thoughwritten sources on them are very scarce and firmly identifiable archaeo-logical remains are almost nonexistent, the combined use of the scantydata might permit the drawing of some preliminary remarks on the subject.

TOWERS FROM THE LATE ANTIQUITY

Earlier research tended to lay considerable emphasis on the role of theLate Antique military architecture on the fortifications of the Crusader

1 For the most detailed study and report on the excavation of such a tower see:D. Pringle, The Red Tower (al-Burj al-Ahmar): Settlement in the Plain of Sharon at theTime of the Crusaders and Mamluks, A.D. 1099-1516 [British School of Archaeology inJerusalem, Monograph Series, vol. I.] (London, 1986), for a general picture see idem,“Towers in Crusader Palestine”, Château Gaillard: études de castellologie médiévale,vol. XVI (1994), Actes du colloque internationale tenu à Luxembourg 1992, pp. 335-50.

2 B. Major, “Crusader Towers of the Terre de Calife and its Vicinity”, The Arabist,19-20 (1998): 211-228; idem, “Castles Towers and Vaults: Second report on the field sur-veys in the Syrian littoral”, in Proceedings of the 21st Congress of the Union Européennedes Arabisants et Islamisants, Palermo, La Memoria, 15 (2004), pp. 73-94.

0197-07_Vermeulen_171_25_Major 04-10-2007 14:06 Page 423

period, especially on the building of towers, but this has been revised inrespect to Crusader towers,3 and it seems that the same applies to theMuslim towers of the same period. The most that can be hoped to beproved for a Late Antique tower is its usage in the medieval period, andeven this can be a very complicated job.

If investigating the possible “recycling” of Late Antique towers inSyria, special attention has to be paid to the north, the area of the so calledDead Cities, where a special branch of the Christian monks retreated intopurpose-built towers, the remains of which still stand in dozens.4 Whilemost of the towers of the period can be connected with religious pur-poses, there are examples that seem to have longed to domestic buildingsand could have functioned as storage areas and refuges.5 These towerswere usually built of well-cut ashlars without bonding material, and con-sisted of two to four levels with only a few rectangular openings. In somecases the ground floor was covered by stone slabs, but the other levels weredivided by wooden mezzanine floors, that were connected by woodenladders.

Even if the medieval usage of these towers can be proved, it isalmost impossible to find out who the actual medieval owners were.There were at least three basic groups of combatant, who are likely candidates for making use of such structures. One was the army of theByzantine reconquest, that had a well-established reputation of makinggood use of former buildings and ashlars in the region of the DeadCities. The second could have been the Crusaders, who in the firstdecades of the 12th century were very active building multiple defensivelines on the territory sandwiched between their main base in Antiochand Aleppo, which was the centre of the Muslim resistance. The thirdpotential users of existing towers could have been the Muslims trying toresist the two above mentioned invaders.

The only Late Antique tower that can be relatively certainly connectedto a medieval owner is the one that is called Burj ¨Abd Allah.6 Themedieval contribution took the form of a rugged glacis that was very

424 B. MAJOR

3 Pringle, “Towers”, 335-336.4 I. Peña, P. Castellana and R. Fernández, Les reclus syriens, recherches sur les ancien-

nes formes de vie solitaire en Syrie [Studium Biblicum Franciscanum Collectio Minor 23](Milano, 1980), pp. 47-58.

5 G: Tate, Les campagnes de la Syrie du nord du IIe au VIIe siècle, Tome I [Biblio-thèque archéologique et historique, vol. 133] (Paris, 1992), pp. 48-51.

6 I. Peña, P. Castellana and R. Fernández, Inventaire du Jébel Baricha, recherchesarchéologiques dans la région des Villes Mortes de la Syrie du Nord [Studium BiblicumFranciscanum Collectio Minor 33] (Milano, 1987), p. 179.


likely done by the men of Balduin II in the year of 1121, when he hastilyfortified the remains of the neighbouring monastery.7 Archaeologicalremains of possible medieval refortification of former monastic towerswere also detected at the towers of Burjka and Burj Îaydar8 and thedesign of the fallen corbel beside Shaykh Sulayman seems to be also outof the usual Late Antique context, but there is no certain clue for thebuilders. It is worth noting that the later improvements usually took theform of a primitive glacis or enclosed the ground floor of the tower witha 0.5-1 m thick shell of reused ashlars and refrained from more seriousdevelopments. The fact that various other buildings, mostly abandonedchurches that had considerable standing walls to be used were strength-ened with the same basic methods,9 points to the possibility that thesetowers were not necessarily intended to serve as permanent bases. Thesesimple emendations were the easiest way to strengthen the thin walls and the vulnerable wooden interior in a territory frequently struck byearthquakes. Many of these towers were likely to have been used onlyoccasionally, like the tower of Khuraybat Musfan, where the Franks hadposted a sentinel at the time of the invasion of the Muslims of Shayzar,10

and which was in all probability built in the pre-Islamic period. Thetower with its wooden ladders that was used by Muslim soldiers to guardthe crops near Rafaniyya11 sounds very much like a Late Antique monas-tic tower put to temporary use. Medieval tower constructions tried tokeep wooden elements minimum or omit them altogether from the struc-turally important parts, like floors and stairs.

In contrast with most of the towers of the Dead Cities that were orig-inally built for a rather peaceful purpose, the more threatened environ-ment of the Syrian steppe saw the development of a genre of towersthat were built with defensive purposes.12 They usually had two levels

MUSLIM TOWERS 425

7 Ibn al-¨Adim, Zubdat al-Halab min tarikh Îalab. ed. S. al-Dahhan, vols. I-III(Damascus, 1951-1967), vol. II: 199.

8 Peña, Les reclus syriens, 272-273.9 J. Sourdel-Thomine, “Vestiges médiévaux”, in Villages antiques de la Syrie du

Nord:La massif du Bélus à l’époque romaine, ed. G. Tchalenko (Paris, 1958), vol. 3: 114,116-118, 120-121, 126.

10 Usama ibn Munqidh, Kitab al-I’tibar. Ed. P.K. Hitti (Princeton, 1930), p. 48;P.K. Hitti, The Memoirs of an Arab Syrian Gentleman [Records of Civilization, Sourcesand Studies, vol X] (New York, 1929), p. 76.

11 Ibid, 78; trans. 107.12 This is clearly reflected both in their construction and some of the inscriptions,

the best example of which was found on Tower B. of QaÒr al-Mukharram. J. Lassus Inventaire archéologique de la région au Nord-Est de Hama, vols. I-II (Damas, 1935-36),vol. 1: 145.


covered by stone slabs resting on wide transverse arches, and wereendowed with several arrow-slits. Many of them grew out of a neatlybuilt glacis. Though none of them is proven to have been used in theMiddle Ages, many of them have the remains of a medieval settlementaround them. There is a good reason to conclude that the medieval pop-ulation, much reduced in numbers in comparison with the population ofthe Late Antique period, was content to use the already existing towersand this might explain the total absence of small scale medieval forti-fications in this region. The tower of Sina, that was taken during the 1121 campaign of Balduin II from the Muslims13 was likely to have beena tower of such kind, and the same text mentions that several other sim-ilar fortresses were occupied during this campaign.14 In spite of theirpresence and possible usage, there is no trace of any considerable archi-tectural influence of the Late Antique towers of Syria on those remainsthat date after the Muslim conquest.

TOWERS OF MUSLIM CONSTRUCTION

If Ibn Aybak al-Dawadari is precise in his information, one of the first towers built by Muslims, around the middle of the 7th century, wasright in the neighbourhood of present day Syria. In his recollection of the Muslim conquest of Tripoli he states that ∑ufyan ibn Mujib al-Azdi,the leader of the Muslim forces, built a tower opposite to the Byzantinetown, from which he conducted the siege and which was named afterhim.15

We are also informed about a network of riba†s (small forts) and hightowers guarding the Palestinian coast in the 10th century.16 The latterwere functioning as watchtowers forewarning the Byzantine raids by fire

426 B. MAJOR

13 Ibn al-¨Adim, Zubda II: 201.14 For the Late Antique tower remains in the region and its vicinity see: R. Mouterde

& A. Poidebard, Le Limes de Chalcis (Paris, 1945); and H.C. Butler, Publications of the Princeton University Archaeological Expedition to Syria (1904-5,1909). Division II,Section B — Northern Syria (Leiden, 1907-20), pp. 8-23, 65-71, 74-75, 83-84, 100-104.

15 Ibn Aybak al-Dawadari, Kanz al-durar wa jami¨ al-ghurar, Vol. 8, ed. U. Haarmann(Cairo, 1971), p. 284. This information must be handled with care however, as in the earlier text of al-Baladhuri a fort (ÌiÒn) is mentioned being built on a meadow (marj)opposite the town. The marj could have easily transformed itself to burj (tower) in laterreadings. (al-Baladhuri, Futuh al-buldan, eds. ’A. Anis al-Tabba’i & ’U. Anis al-Tabba’i(Beirut, 1987), p. 173.)

16 Al-Muqaddasi, AÌsan al-taqasim fi ma¨rifat al-aqalim, ed. M.J. de Goeje [Biblio-theca Geographorum Arabicorum III] (Leiden, 1906), p. 177.

0197-07_Vermeulen_171_25_Major 04-10-2007 14:06 26

and smoke signals. The existence of similar towers was even more justi-fied in the more vulnerable Syrian coast, which was the scene of constantfighting between the Byzantines based in Antioch and the local Muslimpowers. The site that features in the work of Yaqut as Burj ibn Qurt17

might have belonged to this cathegory. The tower that stood on thecoast between Marqiyya and Buluniyas (present day Banyas) got itsname from the fact that it was here that the raiding Byzantines killed acertain Äbdallah ibn Qurt al-Thumali, the wali of Homs, who was on anight patrol in the area. The tradition of building coastal towers producedrecordable traces in the archaeological material some three centurieslater, when the Mamluks erected several such towers at Tripoli, to thesouth of the Syrian coast.18

We have little clue on what the early Muslim towers might havelooked like. Due to the lack of evidence and comparative material, thereis a good amount of uncertainty even in the case of well preserved andmuch studied monuments, like the “donjon” of the Qalät Abu ∑ufyan in al-Bara. It is still attributed variably to Byzantines, Muslims and Crusaders or the different combinations of these three.19 Even less isknown about the ruins of a small tower near the castle of Abu Qubays,which might date from the Muslim period.20

MUSLIM TOWERS 427

17 Yaqut, Mu’jam al-buldan. 7 vols. ed. F.’A. al-Khubadi (Dar al-Kutub al-Ïlmiyya,Beirut), vol. I: 444.

18 H. Salamé-Sarkis, Contribution à l’histoire de Tripoli et de sa région à l’époque descroisades: problèmes d’histoire, d’architecture et de céramique [Bibliothèque archéo-logique et historique, vol. 106] (Paris, 1980), Carte no. 8. The Lebanese coast abounds in the traces of medieval coastal towers seemingly of 12th -14th century date, but their original builders are hard to identify. For some examples see: the “Burj al-Sela” (R. Boulanger, Lebanon [Hachette World Guides] (Paris, 1955), p. 123.), Burj al-Fidar(M. van Berchem, ? (?, 1900), p. 104), Burj ™abarja (R. Dussaud, Topographie historiquede la Syrie antique et médiévale [Bibliothèque archéologique et historique, vol.IV] (Paris,1927), p. 62; L. Nordiguian & J. Voisin, Châteaux et Eglises du Moyen Age au Liban(Beyrouth, 1999), p. 73.), and the coastal tower at Naqura (Nordiguian & Voisin, p. 48).

19 According to Jean-Claude Voisin the fortress is originally Byzantine but was reoc-cupied by Arabs (Voisin 2000: 125, 214-215). Ross Burns simply writes that it is an Arab fortification (R. Burns, Monuments of Syria, An Historical Guide (London & NewYork, 1999), p. 59). The most detailed studies, done by Fourdrin have identified differentbuilding phases and led to the conclusion that the core of the donjon is 11th c. Muslim (J-P.Fourdrin, “L’association de la niche et de l’archère dans les fortifications élevées en Syrie entre le VIe et le XIIe siècle”, Syria, 75 (1998): 284-286) but its outer shell is Crusader (J-P. Fourdrin, “La fortification de la seigneurie épiscopale latine d’El Bara dansle patriarcat d’Antioche (1098-1148)”, in Pélerinages et Croisades, Actes du 118e congrèsnational annuel des sociétés historiques et scientifiques (Pau, 1993), pp. 387-390).

20 I. Ämiri, Silsilat al-Jibal al-SaÌiliyya (Damascus, 1995), pp. 288-289.


The arrival of the Crusaders seem to have had a stimulating effect on their Muslim neighbours, not just on the field of large scale militaryarchitecture. The number of the identifiable freestanding Syrian Muslimtowers, or tower dominated small fortresses is minimal if compared with their Crusader counterparts, but some of the written sources help to balance this disproportionateness. Enumerating the building activity ofits master Ibn al-Athir makes the following statement in his obituary ofNur al-Din:

He also built towers on the roads and between the Muslim lands and thoseof the Franks and had guards installed in them with birds for signalling. If they caught sight of even one enemy, they set the birds fly and so the people got notion of the danger and could look after their defence, thus ruining the objectives of the enemy. This was one of his greatest and mostuseful ideas, may the Almighty God grant him mercy.21

It is clear that the text speaks of two types of towers, one guarding the marches, and the other standing beside the roads, perhaps facilitatingthe commercial traffic, like the later ones that feature frequently in theMamluk texts. None of these 12th century towers has been identified yet.

Another obituary, some seven decades later mentions another set ofwatchtowers on the Muslim-Crusader borderlands. They were built byAsad al-Din Shirkuh II, ruler of Homs (1193-1239), who was the son ofthe most famous commander of Nur al-Din. His towers were intended to perceive any approach of the Franks, specially those stationed in theCrac des Chevaliers.22 None of these towers has been traced yet, but thereis one well-preserved tower in the region often frequented by Frankishraids, that might have its origins in this period.

The ancient dam on the Qa††ina lake to the southwest of Homs hasbeen existing from at least the Roman times, but the remains of the towerstill standing near its western end are clearly from a much later period.Given the existence of a reused stone with Greek inscription in its walltexture, the tower was attributed to “medieval Arab builders” at an early date.23 That the dam already had some buildings added to it by the13th century is made clear by a short passage in the chronicle of IbnWaÒil.24 After the death of the sultan al-Malik al-Kamil (March 11, 1238)

428 B. MAJOR

21 Ibn al-Athir, al-Tarikh al-bahir (?, ?), p. 171.22 Ibn WaÒil, Mufarrij al-kurub fi akhbar Bani Ayyub, eds. J-D. al-Shayyal &

H. M. Rabi’, vols. I-V (Cairo, 1953-1975), vol. V: 255.23 Van Berchem, ? (?, 1914), p. 47; L. Brossé, “La digue du Lac de Homs”, Syria, 4

(1923): 240.24 Ibn WaÒil, Mufarrij, V: 177-178.


al-Malik al-Mujahid started a total war against the neighbouring city of Îama, during the course of which he tried to block the water of theOrontes by closing the dam on the Qa††ina lake, from where it started.The main aim was to facilitate an attack on Îama, the city which had no riverside walls, by drying up the river. The waters were diverted intothe neighbouring wadis, but after two days these became completelyfilled and the surplus water found its way back and “destroyed the build-ing that al-Malik al-Mujahid had built on the dam”.25 Whether this wasthe predecessor of the tower still standing today or another building isimpossible to say, but the damage might have been repaired soon. Thegeography of Abu l-Fi∂a, finished by 1321, notes that: “In the middle of the dyke, and on it, are two towers of black stone.”26 The dam in itspresent state preserves the clear traces of different building periods andreparations, and there are several wall remains attached to it around itsmiddle section, but to tell whether they could have formed the base of the tower mentioned by Abu l-Fi∂a needs further research. Howeverthere is a very well preserved medieval tower on the dam at its northernedge, which could very well be identical with the second tower of thedescription.

The tower, called Burj Balqis by the locals, was built with two facingsof lime mortared ashlars enclosing a rubble core bonded with plentifulmortar. The perimeter of the tower measures 8.25 ≈ 7.6 m and its remainsstand 8.5 m high. Its 0.8 m wide doorway opens on the southern side,about 1 m higher than the original height of the dam. Entering throughthe 1.3 m high, narrow doorway one steps into the “ground-floor” roomwith an area of 5.3 ≈ 4.4 m, which was originally covered by a barrel-vault on a north-south axis. The northern and eastern walls of the roomwere pierced by a pair of arrow-slits, those on the eastern side inclinatedto the north. The western wall facing the lake had no openings. Therewas little likelihood of an attack from this direction and the stairway thatled up to the first-floor room was also situated on this side. As it was not situated in the approximately 1.6 m wall thickness, but broke throughthe vault, that otherwise rested on the northern wall, any further openingson this wall would have weakened the structure considerably. The first-floor room has disappeared almost without a trace, but the remains of apair of arrow-slits in its southern wall over the entrance of the tower are

MUSLIM TOWERS 429

25 Ibid. 178.26 G. Le Strange, Palestine Under the Moslems from A.D. 650 to 1500 (London, 1890),

p. 70.


still clearly seen. It is very probable that there were similar slits insertedinto the rest of the walls and the weakening effect of the many open-ings might have contributed to the collapse of the first-floor. This level had thinner walls, and might not have been strong enough to supportanother vault, so the existence of a lighter covering structure is not to beexcluded. The tower was set on the eastern edge of the dam. The remainsof a wall protruding from the western wall of the tower were in all prob-ability part of a gateway that, together with the tower itself, controlled theaccess over the dam.

Generally speaking, Burj Balqis fits so well into the context of the12th-13th century freestanding towers built on a small scale, that it couldalmost be taken as one, built by the Crusaders save for a few peculiarthings. The walls of the tower are pierced by channels of circular shapethat were left by binding beams. Wooden beams were never employedthis way in contemporary Crusader towers of the region, but were some-times used in the wall textures of Muslim fortifications of the period.Though the dimensions of this tower are very similar to that of the neigh-bouring Crusader ones, its geographical context and its more expressedlymilitary character (emphasised by the high concentration of the arrow-slits and the inclination of their axis to left or right) makes it differentfrom the surviving Crusader towers in the region of the Gap of Homs.

Another tower from possibly the same period is Burj al-AÌmar, whichis supposed to have been built in the Ayyubid period.27 Its dilapidatedremains stand near the Damascus-Homs highway 7 km to the north ofBurayj. Unlike Burj Balqis, it shows distinctive phases of different build-ing periods and reparations, which might partly have been the conse-quence of the much weaker construction techniques employed. The build-ing, which covers a 13.25 ≈ 8 m rectangle can be divided into threesegments. Its eastern part measuring 8 ≈ 8 m was built of rather largeashlar facings filled with rubble stone bonded by clay. The large aper-tures between the roughly cut ashlars were galletted by stone chips. It iscovered by a barrel-vault on an east-west axis. The rear of this squarestructure preserves a staircase that led up to the first-floor and two smallcavern-like rooms. To the back of this 8 ≈ 8 m structure a 5 m long annexwas attached at some stage, but its 0.8 m thick walls could not have supported a vault spanning the 6.4 m wide interior area, so it was eitheran open courtyard, or rather had some wooden roofing and possibly

430 B. MAJOR

27 al-Mu’jam al-jughrafi li-l-qu†r al-¨arabi al-suri, volumes I-V (Damascus, 1992), vol. II: 270.


served as a stable. The walls of the first-floor level are even more patchywith the remains of a crudely executed arrow-slit and a large rectangularopening. The tower was clearly much weaker than the Burj Balqis, butin the dry environment this cheap construction proved to be solid enoughand easy to repair.

In all possibility Burj al-AÌmar belonged to those towers that dottedthe highway between the large cities of the interior of Syria. Their func-tion was not so much military as being road stations and bases of thepigeon post. As such, builders had to count only with the destruction ofthe elements and not with that of a hostile army. These cheap structuresmust have been constantly repaired and constructed anew. The biographyof al-Malik al-Åahir Baybars written by ¨Izz al-Din ibn Shaddad statesthat the sultan built several towers on the highway between Damascusand Homs “and posted in them sentinels and pigeons for the sake of thetravellers, and paid salary for them to defend the roads, because theywere impassable in the time of the kings (ie. the Ayyubids).”28 Accord-ing to the same text, these towers built by Baybars extended towardsPalmyra and the Euphrates as well.29 Though the royal biography natu-rally emphasises the merits of Baybars, we have seen above, that the tradition of building watchtowers on the roads was very well establishedin the repertoire of Muslim military architecture.

The chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres on the expedition of Balduin IIagainst the Damascene territories in January 1126, mentions a number of towers fulfilling a kind of refuge function for the local Muslim forcesof the Jawlan. The first tower the Crusaders are mentioned to have come upon stood near present day al-Muzayrib.30 After the battle foughtat Marj al-∑uffar, the king ordered the return and on the way back theCrusaders

surrounded and captured a tower along with ninety-six men whom theykilled. The king took another tower and the twenty Turks who had taken

MUSLIM TOWERS 431

28 Ibn Shaddad, Tarikh al-Malik al-Åahir, ed. A. Hutayt [Bibliotheca Islamica — Band31] (Wiesbaden, 1983), p. 375.

29 The description of Pococke in the 18th century might be taken as an indicator of the durability of this type of towers. He mentions a chain of them stretching towardsPalmyra and describes the existence of several others on the Damascus-Homs highway (R. Pococke, A Description of the East and Some Other Countries, volumes I-II (London,1743-45), vol. I: 132-139).

30 Fulcher of Chartres, Gesta Peregrinantium Francorum cum Armis Hierusalem Pergentium, in Recueil des Historiens des Croisades. Historiens Occidentaux vol. 3, ed.D. Bongars (Paris, 1866), p. 477; trans. F.R. Ryan, A History of the Expedition toJerusalem, 1095-1127 (Knoxville, 1969), p. 289.


refuge in it. When these latter realized that our men were digging aroundthe tower and prying huge stones out of it they surrendered both themselvesand the stronghold to the king in their fright. By agreement the king letthem depart, but he had the tower torn down. It was very necessary that itbe seen destroyed, for its fortifications would have incited many to revolt.For it could have stood out as a secure refuge for its possessors and a sourceof doubt and worry for its assailants. 31

The text gives the impression that the concentration of these towerswas relatively high in this region, however it fails to give any additionaldetails, that would help deciding whether these towers were designed by the Muslims or were just inherited from previous builders. SouthernSyria abounds in antique towers, some of which were intended for funer-ary purposes, while others were serving domestic functions or were usedas refuges in times of danger.32 Most of the still standing towers in theÎawran, the Laja and the Jawlan were built before the Muslim conquest,but that the medieval Muslims could also build similar structures is testified by a number of minarets, that faithfully to the ancient local tra-dition were entirely built of the hard basalt stone.33 Owing to their solidconstruction, these could have been put to use in times when raiding parties roamed in their vicinity. That minarets were used for “military”purposes is well illustrated by a story recorded in the chronicle of Ibn al-Ädim, in connection with the earthquake that struck the north Syriancastle of A¨zaz on the 29th of November 1114.

It is said that it was the muâdhdhin of A¨zaz who was on duty in the castle, but fell asleep in the tower of the mosque of the castle. When theearthquake came, it threw him into the bottom of the castle ditch, while hewas still asleep and could not notice it. A group (of survivors) found himand thought him dead, but when they took off his blanket, he woke up andinquired about what had happened and they told him.34

432 B. MAJOR

31 Ibid. 478; trans. 291-292. The same story is repeated by William of Tyre, HistoriaRerum in Partibus Transmarinis Gestarum, in Recueil des Historiens des Croisades. Historiens Occidentaux vol. 1, ed. S. Jacobs (Paris, 1844), p. 585; trans. E.A. Babcockand. A.C. Krey, A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea, volumes I-II [Records of Civilization, Sources and Studies, vol. XXXV] (New York, 1976), vol. II: 29-30.

32 Sartre-Fauriat, ? (?, 2001), vol. II: 66-69.33 Gottlieb Schumacher lists the remains of no less that seven medieval minarets in

the south-western part of the Jawlan, the region that lay in the way of the Crusader expe-dition of 1126. (G. Schumacher, Across the Jordan. Translated from the Transactions ofthe German Society for the Exploration of the Holy Land (London, 1886), pp. 42-43; 98;123, 128, 131-134; 170-172; 210-211; 224-225; 232.) It is worth noting that many ofthese minarets were built in a distance from the mosque itself.

34 Ibn al-Ädim, Zubda, II: 173-174.


The fact that the text uses the word burj (tower) for the minaret of the mosque instead of the manara or maˆdhana might be taken as an indicator that the minaret was used for military purposes not only on this single occasion. This story might draw our attention to the possi-bility that other minarets, amongst them minarets in the countrysidecould have been used for similar purposes. If it was so, their use couldalso have contributed to the conspicuously low number of identifiablemedieval tower structures in the Muslim countryside.

Enumerating medieval Syrian towers used by the Muslims, one mustnot forget those towers that were built by the Crusaders, but were keptin use after the expulsion of the Europeans. The treaty between sultanQalawun and Bohémond VII mentions Miär as being amongst the newlyoccupied fortresses of the Muslims.35 Miär was listed together with the territories belonging to it in another two successive treaties36, mak-ing it possible that the Crusader tower, the remains of which still standon the highest point of the village hill, was continuedly used by theMamluks as a governmental centre. Both these and other treaties mentiontowers in the countryside in general, which, though they were almost certainly of Crusader origin, are found in context, which might easilyrefer to them being in Muslim possession.

Archaeological finds including a 14th century coin and pottery frag-ments indicate that the Crusader tower on the top of Tall Sukas was used and even repaired in the Mamluk period.37 This coastal tower, thatstood between two natural harbours and overlooked a wide stretch of the littoral, might have had a role in navigating the coastal shipping.Ceramic evidence found in the fields around Burj Zara in the area of theGap of Homs indicates that the tower might have been inhabited in the14th century, long after its original Crusader builders were expelled.

MUSLIM TOWERS 433

35 Ibn Äbd al-Åahir, Tashrif al-ayyam wa-l-üÒur fi sirat al-Malik al-ManÒur. ed.M. Kamil (Cairo, 1961), p. 210; trans. P.M. Holt, Early Mamluk Diplomacy (1260-1290):Treaties of Baybars and Qalawun with Christian Rulers [Islamic History and Civilization,Studies and Texts, vol. XII] (Leiden, 1995), p. 63. This treaty came into force on the 27th of Rabiä I. 680 H. (16th of July 1281).

36 The second treaty was concluded with the Templars and came into force on the 5th of MuÌarram 681 H. (15th of April 1282). Ibn Äbd al-Åahir, Tashrif, 21. (trans. Holt, 67).Miär even made its appearance in the ten-years treaty with Acre, which started its count-down on the 5th of Rabi¨ I. 682 H. (3rd of June 1283). Ibn Äbd al-Åahir, Tashrif, 38.

37 P.J. Riis, “L’activité de la mission archéologique danoise sur la côte phénicienne en1958”, Les Annales Archéologiques Arabes Syriennes, 9 (1958): 123.


CONCLUSION

In spite of the scarcity of sources, there is some, mainly written evidenceindicating that the use and building of freestanding towers in the coun-tryside was a common practice in the repertoire of the Muslim militaryarchitecture of present day Syria. These towers could fulfil various func-tions, being used as watchtowers, bases for carrier pigeons and places of refuge. Some of them possibly served as administrative centres, whileothers could help in navigating ships cruising the coastal waters. Theonly function that they seemingly lacked in comparison to their Crusadercounterparts was that they did not seem to have been used as residencesof lesser feudal lords or iq†a¨ holders. As most of the surviving Crusadertowers in present day Syria seem to have been built with this primaryaim, the difference in the social organization surely contributed to thelower number of towers on the Muslim side. The few identifiable Mus-lim tower sites show that they were likely to have been designed for thespecial purpose they were expected to fulfil, and there might have hadbeen serious regional variations in their construction techniques.

As this short paper tried to demonstrate, further research both in thearchaeological and the written material has a good chance to bring uscloser to the better understanding of the medieval Muslim towers andhopefully to the identification of more archaeological remains.

434 B. MAJOR


1. Burj Haydar: the entrance with the remains of the surrounding medieval“shell” near the doorway.

MUSLIM TOWERS 435

Quadri ?


436 B. MAJOR

3. Burj Balqis: the southern arrowslit in the eastern wall of ground-floor ofthe tower

Quadri ?


MUSLIM TOWERS 437

4. Burj Balqis: the plan of the tower

Quadri ?


438 B. MAJOR

5. Burj al-AÌmar: the northern facade of the tower showing different periodsof constructions and reconstructions

Quadri ?


muslim towers in the medieval syrian countryside

Documents