Article publié dans H. Kennedy (dir.

), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006,

p.225-242.

THE TOWER OF AYBAK IN ʿAǦLÛN CASTLE : AN EXAMPLE OF THE SPREAD OF AN ARCHITECTURAL

CONCEPT IN EARLY 13TH-CENTURY AYYUBID FORTIFICATION 1

CYRIL YOVITCHITCH

p.225
Built under the Ayyubid rule on the remains of a Byzantine church2, the castle
of ʿAǧlūn was modified several times from the reign of Ṣalāh al-Dīn until the accession
of Baybars to the Mamluk sultanate. Never taken by the Crusaders, it is one of the most
interesting monuments for the understanding of the development of Muslim castles at
the turn of the 13th-century, a period during which fundamental changes took place in
the fortifications of the Levant.
Despite the fact that the castle is well known, since the fundamental work of C. N.
Johns in the 1930s, the new excavations that have been carried out until recently have
unearthed new elements. This meant that a new plan needs to be drawn, more
especially as the ones published by Johns often
p.226
mixt up, without clear distinctions, his archaeological observations and assumptions3.
The castle of ʿAǧlūn, Qalʿat al-Rabaḍ (fig. 1), is situated in the north of Jordan, 40
km north-west of Amman and 20 km west of Jarash. It is erected on the Jabal ʿAǧlūn,
on the top of a round knoll overlooking the Wadi Kufranja and, in the distance, the
Jordan river . It was built ca. 1184 by an emir of Ṣalāh al-Dīn named ʿIzz al-Dīn Usāma,

1
This paper was presented during the conference under the title : « An Early Example of Ayyubid
Fortification in north Jordan : ʿAǧlūn Castle ». This study is part of an ongoing Ph.D., on the Ayyubid and
Mamluk fortifications in the principality of Damascus, under the supervision of Prof. Marianne
Barrucand at the University of Paris IV Paris-Sorbonne.
I would like to thank Dr. Fawaz al-Khrisheh, director of the General Direction of Jordan Antiquities, and
Mr Mohammed al-Balaouneh, Curator of the castle of ʿAǧlūn, who was most helpful during the April
2002 and June 2003 survey campains. Those surveys would not have been possible without the financial
support from the Ministère français des Affaires Etrangères and of the Centre d’Etudes Supérieures de
Civilisation Médiévale de Poitiers (UMR 658) and the precious collaboration of Gabriel Humbert (Ifpo-
Jarash) and of the team members : Brigitte Beuzen, Cédric Devais, Jocelyn Martineau, Fabien Sanz-
Pascual and, particulary, of the architect Philippe Dangles with whom I share many interpretations
developed in this paper.
2
According to Abū Šāma, quoted by Johns, the castle was built on an ancient monastary. A few years ago,
a mosaïc and the part of the base of a chancel barrier were found in the entrance of the primitive
nucleus corroborating the existence of a Byzantine religious monument on the knoll : Johns, C. N.,
« Medieval ʿAjlûn », Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine, I, 1932, 21-33, reprint in 1997 :
Johns, C. N., Pilgrims’ Castle (ʿAtlit), David’s Tower (Jerusalem) and Qalʿat ar-Rabad (ʿAjlun), Three Middle
Eastern Castels from the Time of the Crusades, ed. D.Pringle ( Aldershot, 1997), 23-24.
3
For example, Johns draw arrow-slits that never existed as those of the west towers of the primitive
nucleus (n°2&3), and he is mistaken with the localisations of some doors.
Article publié dans H. Kennedy (dir.), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006,
p.225-242.

to face the attacks of Bedouin tribes in the region4. With the creation of the Kingdom of
Jerusalem the traditional migration routes of the Bedouins had been blocked and so
they concluded agreements with the Franks and often guided them through the
desert5. Quite early, chronicles relate how Franks, informed by bedouins, seized
caravans on the road between Damascus and Cairo and the threatened the ḥajj
pilgrimage6. It was probably to secure this area, and facilitate the circulation of his
troops between Egypt and Syria, that Ṣalāh al-Dīn tried, in 1183-1184, to take control of
the region around Tiberias and Baysan7, and undertook twice the siege of Karak. The
castle could then have played a role in the control of this important road even though
it was not very close to it. It has also been suggested that it
« arose as a direct retort to the new Latin castle of Belvoir (...) loftily placed on the
escarpment on the opposite side of the Jordan valley, between Tiberias and Baysan.8 »

Some months after the battle of Hattin in July 1187, the fall of the most
important Crusader fortresses of the region (Karak, Safad, Belvoir, and
p.227
Šawbak/Montreal9), meant that the road from Damascus to Cairo was not really
threatened by the Franks any more, but it still was essential to anyone who wished to
unify the Ayyubid realm. ʿAǧlūn could be also used as a bridge-head to reconquer

4
Johns, « ‘Ajlūn», 24. For different opinions on the origins of the castle, see Humphreys, R. S., From
Saladin to the Mongols. The Ayyubids of Damascus, 1193-1260, New-York, 1977, 78 ; Zayyadin, F., Qal‘at al-
Rabad, Saout al-Ard al Mouqadasah (in Arabic), 1987, 239, 38-46, quoted in Minnis, D., Bader, Y., « A
comparative analysis of Belvoir (Kawkab al-Hawa) and Qalʿat al-Rabad (‘Ajlun castle) », Annals of the
Department of Archaeology of Jordan, 1988, 258.
5
Prawer, J., Histoire du royaume de Jérusalem, (C.N.R.S., Paris, 1969-70), i, 510.
6
In 506/1112-1113, the king Baudouin, acting in complicity with the Zoraïq Bedouins, seized a large
caravan full of silver and other goods set out from Bosra to Egypt, Ibn Al-Qalanisi, Damas de 1075 à 1154,
trad. Le Tourneau, (Institut Français de Damas, Damascus, 1952), 118. Even after the victory of ∑alæh al-
Dîn at Hattin those relations between Franks and Bedouins still continued as illustrated by the
Continuations of William of Tyr : « Les Bedoyn qui orrent espié une riche caravane le firent savoir au roi (i.e.
Richard), et li distre que la plus riche caravane qui fust venue passé à vij anz, venoit d’Egypte a Damas (...),
MORGAN, M.R., La continuation de Guillaume de Tyr (1184-1197), (Geuthner, Paris, 1982), 148.
7
Recueil des Historiens des Croisades, Historiens Orientaux, iv, (Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres,
Paris, 1872-1906), 218.
8
Johns, « ʿAjlūn », 23.
9
For full bibliographical details on those castles, see the precious work of Pringle, D., Secular Buildings in
the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem, an Archaeological Gazetter, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
1997 ); for Safad see also the recent paper of Barbé H., and Damati, E., «Le château de Saphed ; sources
historiques, problématiques et premiers résultats des recherches », in La Fortification au temps des
croisades, actes du colloque international de Parthenay (26-28 sept 2002), (Presses universitaires de
Rennes, Rennes, 2004), 77-93 ; for Shawbak see in the same volume the paper of Faucherre, N. et al., « La
forteresse de Shawbak (Crac de Montréal), une des premières forteresses Franques sous son corselet
mamelouk », 43-66.
Article publié dans H. Kennedy (dir.), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006,
p.225-242.

Frankish territories. This is why the castle continued to play an important role in
Ayyubid policy in the principality of Damascus until the advent of Mamluk rule.

Though it was built less than a decade after the campaign of fortifications
undertook by Ṣalāh al-Dīn in Cairo, the citadel and the urban fortifications10, which
consisted principally of large enceinte walls flanked by
p.228
circular or semi-circular towers pierced with a series of bent entrance doors,
the castle of ʿAǧlūn presents a very different shape.

The primitive nucleus

In its first stage, the castle consisted of a compact stronghold resembling the
Romano-Byzantine quadriburgium type : an irregular quadrilateral with square towers
at each corner, strongly defended on its southern and eastern fronts11 (fig. 3). The poor
state of preservation of the northern and western fronts does not show clearly
whether these curtain walls were as strong as the others. Nevertheless, the lack of
arrow-slits in towers 2 and 3 on their western front, the upper one of the castle, and
the very small projection of the two towers seem to prove that this front was not as
heavily defended as the eastern, entrance one. The main gate of the primitive nucleus
was a kind of vestibule, a frontal entrance, with two doors locked with sliding beams
(fig. 3 – P1, P2 ). The defense of the external door was provided by two levels of arrow-
slits and several others located at the different levels of the strongly projecting north-
east and south-east towers (T.1, T.4). In addition, this external door was reinforced by
a single brattice12 of which Byzantine fortifications and Umayyad castles provide many
examples (fig. 3)13. A barbican was added to the main entrance, but it is not easy to
determine if it belonged to an original programme or to a later addition. The upper

10
Creswell, K.A.C., The Muslim Architecture of Egypte, vol. 2, Ayyûbids and early Bahrite Mamlûks, A.D. 1171-
1326, (reprint of Hacker Art Books, New York 1978), 1-63 ; Pradines, S., et al., « La muraille ayyoubide du
Caire : les fouilles archéologiques de Bâb al-Barqiyya et Bâb al-Mahrûq », Annales Islamologiques, 36,
(2002), 287-337.
11
It is possible that the irregularities of the plan result from the constraints of the pre-existing religious
building and its original access.
12
This brattrice is partly hidden by the later vaulting of the barbicane.
13
Many byzantine towers of Jordan or Syria have got brattice above their doors ; Umayyad Qaṣr al-Ḥayr
al-Šarqī also shows beautiful examples of this kind of machicoliation. In Palmyra the defense of the
medieval door of the Temple of Bel (built in 527/1132-33) shows, with ostentation, two levels of brattice
above the door framed in a monumental segmental arch.
Article publié dans H. Kennedy (dir.), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006,
p.225-242.

part of the barbican had a crenelated parapet as can be seen in its remains preserved
by a later vaulting. The merlons were alternatly pierced by arrow-slits.
It seems likely that at this time the castle was not surrounded by a ditch, but
only perched on a rock cut to form a glacis, as it is clearly visible at the basements of
the barbican and of the walls of the towers and curtains of the southern front. The
topography of the site ant its sleep slope did not require a ditch.
As noted by Johns, who partly based his relative chronology on this point,
p.229
while the upper levels are armed with arrow-slits within arched niches (fig. 5)
(the most widespread model in Ayyubid fortifications), all those located at the first
level are of a more basic shape : « wedge-shaped in plan, narrowing to a slit on the
outside and covered with a tapering arch ».14 Given the homogeneous state of the
towers, the difference in the shape of arrow-slits may rather be a deliberate choice
made by the builders, who may have preferred not to weaken the lower levels by wide
opennings in the masonries. Besides these architectural factors, one may also suggest
the possibility that non Muslim workers, whether, free or slaves15, were employed and
this would explain the profile of those « Frankish-type» arrow-slits. The « latin-style »
masons’ marks situated on the arches of the two arrow-slits of the tower 5 could
reinforce this assumption which is not in total contradiction with Johns’ view when he
writes : « Such Frankish features (i.e. diagonal chisel-dressing and the cut-stone
vaulting) were the fruit of local tradition and of common experience in the wars rather
than of direct foreign influence ».16 Nevertheless it must be kept in mind that the
profile of the arrow-slits in the lower levels of the primitive nucleus are of a realy rare
type. Whereas wedge-shaped in plan arrow-slits, covered with a tapering arch are very
frequently found in the Crusader castles as Šawbak, Marqab, or closer Belvoir, almost
all Ayyubid arrow-slits have an intermediate lintle covering the slit.

14
Johns, « ʿAjlūn », 26.
15
For a general discusssion about the exchanges of competencies between Franks and Muslims during
the Crusades, see Prouteau, N. « Bâtir et assiéger au temps des croisades : regards sur l’utilisation du
savoir-faire technique de l’autre », in Chrétiens et Musulmans en Méditerranée médiévale (VIIIe-XIIIe siècle).
Echanges et contacts, actes du colloque de Beyrouth (29 avril-2 mai 2002), (collection Civilisation
Médiévale n°15), (Poitiers, 2003), 159-172.
16
Johns, ʿAǧlūn, 29.
Article publié dans H. Kennedy (dir.), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006,
p.225-242.

The enlargement of the castle

In a secondary phase, the « primitive nucleus » was enlarged southward and to

eastward with two courts increasing, as noted by Johns, the storage capacity of the
castle (fig. 2). As a result, the barbican became useless, as did the line of arrow-slits of
the southern curtain now hidden by a new masonry. As the general level of the castle
became lower (about 10m down on the west side) it was decided to surround it with a
ditch cut in the bedrock. This need for storage is illustrated at least twice in the 13th
p. 230 = fig. 2 ; p. 231 = fig. 3; p. 232 = fig. 4; p.233 = fig. 5
p. 234
century, when the castle was used as an arsenal during operation led by
Ayyubids and Mamluks in the Sahel against Frankish positions17.

The tower of ʿIzz al-Dīn Aybak 611/1214-1215 (fig. 6)

When these last enlargements took place is not precisely known, but the
southern tower, built under the supervision of ʿIzz al-Dīn al-Manṣūr Aybak al
Muʿaẓẓamī (the mamluk of al-Muʿaẓẓam ʿĪsā, son of al-Malik al-ʿĀdil), dated from
611/1214-1215 by a fondation inscription on its estern face, provides us a terminus ante
quem18. In this campaign, Aybak also built a new gateway, with a large assommoir, and
enlarged the ditch.
According to Johns, this tower was a military reinforcement needed to compensate the
weakness of the southern front ; Chevedden has argued that « From the early 13
century onward, fortifications were steadily overhauled and improved to defend
against the devastating counterweight trebuchet »19. Although these arguments must
not be ignored, particularly because nothing is known about the main door of the
second phase which was in this area, they should not be over-estimated either. Even if
it could have been linked to an urgent necessity of rebuilding, I think, above all, that
the erection of tower 7 symbolised the taking possession of the castle by Aybak, a

17
In 1217 during the siege of Damiette, Johns, « ʿAjlūn », 30, quoting Röricht, Geschichte des Königreichs
Jerusalem, (1898), 726, n.3. Half a century later, when Baybars was engaged in the siege of Cæsarea he got
arrows for his troops from the castle of ‘Ajlûn, Prawer, Histoire, i.464.
18
Répertoire Chronologique d’Epigraphie Arabe, X, n°3746, I.F.A.O., (le Caire, 1936-1975).
19
Johns, « ʿAǧlūn », 27 ; Chevedden, P.E., « Fortifications and Development of Defensive Planning during
the Crusader Period », in The Circle of War in the Middle Age, D.J. Kagay, and L.J.A. Villadon, (Woodbridge,
Suffolk, 1999), 39.
Article publié dans H. Kennedy (dir.), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006,
p.225-242.

political act following the arrestation of ʿIzz al-Dīn Usāma, convicted of plotting
against al Malik al-ʿĀdil20. The symbolic and ostentatious aspect of this construction
was reinforced by its type and its proportions that remind us those of Aleppo, Bosra,
Damascus, Šayzar etc.21,
p. 235 = fig. 6
p. 236
so close to the contemporaneous Frankish « master-towers »22 or donjons.
At an other level, it also illustrates the patient policy of al-ʿĀdil (conducted with
the help of his son al-Muʿaẓẓam ʿĪsā) of reclaiming possession all the strategic castles
within his sphere of influences to the detriment of the emirs previously established by
Ṣalāh al-Dīn who could have, some time or other, come out in support of al-Malik al-
Ẓāhir Ġāzī of Aleppo23.
This new construction breaks with the programme of the primitive nucleus, and is the
same style as al-Malik al-ʿĀdil’s fortifications developed in Damascus and Bosra in the
first decade of the 13th century.
The similarities between those citadels are particularly striking if one considers
the plan of the tower of Aybak, and its internal organisation and decoration. We can
recognise in it the same « L-shaped » plan used for some angle towers in both citadels
of Damascus and Bosra24, there wrapping around pre-existing constructions, here
leaning against the southern court without destroying it. Those common points
between Aybak’s constructions and those of al Malik al-ʿĀdil testify to a diffusion of
Ayyubid concepts of construction which should not be surprising given the high rank
occupied by Aybak in the Ayyubid political system, and then his closeness of the rulers.
They also suggest the intervention of a master of works recruited in the Sultan’s or
who had acquired his training there.

20
Humphreys, Saladin, 144.
21
On Aleppo see Gonnella, J. (forth.) « The Citadel at Aleppo : the Islamic Periods », in Second International
Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East : Strategies for Islamic Archaeology in Bilad al-Sham and the
Jazira, Copenhagen, 22-26 May 2000 ; on Shayzar see Tonghini, C., and Montevecchi, N., « The Castle of
Shayzar. The Results of Recent Archaeological Investigations », in La Fortification au temps des croisades,
actes du colloque international de Parthenay (26-28 sept 2002), (Presses universitaires de Rennes,
Rennes, 2004),137-150.
22
Folowind the usage of MESQUI, J., « tour maîtresse », in Châteaux et enceintes de la France médiévale,
(2 vol., Picard, Paris, 1991-1993).
23
Humphreys, Saladin, 125-153.
24
King, D.J., « The Defense of the Citadel of Damascus ; a Great Mohammedan Fortress of the time of the
Crusades », Archeologia, XCIV, (1951), 62, 64 ; Yovitchitch, C., « La citadelle de Bosra », in La fortification au
temps des croisades, actes du colloque international de Parthenay (26-28 sept 2002), (Presses
universitaires de Rennes, Rennes, 2004), 209. In Bosra, both the north-west and north-est towers
(n°4&10) adopt such a plan.
Article publié dans H. Kennedy (dir.), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006,
p.225-242.

The comparison between ʿAǧlūn and Bosra does not come to a stop with the
plan, but is continued in the decorative and display programmes. The residential
character of the tower of Aybak, with its internal partitions, its windows and latrines
at the first and second level, is reinforced by the presence of a palace on the top, of
which the only remain is a travée-rythmique (triple arch) (fig. 7). The architecture
enhances the status of its owner through the motif of the travée-rythmique, a typical
and pregnant architectural motif of the Ayyubid palatial architecture that can be
found throughout the Ayyubid realm25. The arcades opened on a central space orna
p. 237
mented with a geometric pavement and a central device that can be interpreted
as a spring, or more probably as a basin. Remains of several pipes in the walls could
testify to the presence of an hydraulic system at this level.
The use of scalloped windows lintel (fig. 8) and other spolia reminds us of those
used in the gate-tower of Bosra built by al-ʿĀdil in 608/1211 (fig. 9)26. In the tower of
Aybak, most of the lintels of the windows were decorated with antique spolia, smooth
or sculpted conches, that gave the tower a dimension beyond the purely military. In
Bosra, those spolia where situated in the room of the emir responsible for the main
gate, an important man for the security of the citadel. The ornamented lintel of the
triple arch of this room, an antique spolia with an engraved flower, also seems to
underline the status of its occupant (fig. 10).
p. 238 = fig. 8 et 9
p. 239
All these common points show the adoption by Aybak of a program and
aesthetic criteria in use in the circle of Ayyubid rulers, specially in Damascus and
Bosra, and his desire to appear as their equal27. The arch of the main door (fig. 2 – P4)
is ornamented with low reliefs representing birds : one, alone, on the left side and two
fighting roosters, or hawks, on the right side, which could symbolise the fighting and
ruling military class Aybak belonged to and also being the expression of the

25
On this subject, see Tabba, Y., Constructions of Power and Piety in Medieval Alepo, (Pennsylvania State
University Press), 1997, 92-93.
26
King describes a window in tower 3 of the citadel of Damascus (in the middle of the southern front)
coverded by a classical spolia : a conche : King, « Fortress », 70.
27
In the same period, Aybak was given the iqta‘ of Salkhad, in the Hawran 20km east of Bosra, where he
had an intense building activity, see the Encyclopédie de l’Islam, Second Edition, viii, 1029-1031.; Ory., S.
Cimetières et inscriptions du Hawrân et du Djabal al-Durûz, (Paris, 1989), passim.
Article publié dans H. Kennedy (dir.), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006,
p.225-242.

magnificence of the new ruler28. A fourth bird is visible in the first level of tower 7 on a
voussoir of the southern bay.
Indeed Aybak did not neglect the defensive aspect of the tower, because of the
proximity of the new main door. While all the openings of the towers
p. 240
are windows, the north-east angle and eastern side were defended by an arrow-slit at
each level, flanking the new entrance and the west curtain wall. I do not follow Johns
when he writes
« Frequently the arrow-slit is made up of removable blocks inserted in a square opening
which could thus be opened to the air in times of peace and clement weather »29.

In fact the windows of this tower were transformed in arrow-slits, as in different other
places in the castle, during a period of troubles that is not easy to determine : this
could have been the threat of the sixth crusade led by the Emperor Frederick II who
disembarked at Acre at the end of October 624/1227, the conflicts between Ayyubid
rulers in the 1220s and 1240s or the threat of the Mongols twenty years later.
The new access ramp built by Aybak, situated against the southern front of
tower 6, was crowned by machicoliations, that could be considered as a kind of
prefiguration of those in use in the Mamluk period, of which the north-est curtain of
Bosra and the southern front of Crac des Chevaliers provide good examples for the
1260s and the 1270s. But as they were located only in the first part of the slope they
could better be considered as a large battrice.
p. 241
Conclusion
The castle of ʿAǧlūn shows that, in the end of the twelfth century, in spite of the
important campaign of fortifications carried on by Ṣalāh al-Dīn in Cairo, ten years
before, Ayyubid military architecture is not standerdised and still refer to
« traditional » style of of fortification. The reasons may have to be found in the
distance between the castle and the Ayyubid capital of Cairo with its « Fatimid
traditions », which forms (particularly the round towers) did not really spread out of
Egypt before the Mamluk sultanate. Financial reasons could also have played a part,
preventing the employment of more skilled craftsmen.

28
For a discussion about this kind of decoration in Ayyubid fortification, see Mouton, J.M., and ‘Abd AL-
Malik, S.S., « Les décors animaliers de la forteresse de Ṣadr (Qalʿat al-Ǧindī) », Annales Islamologiques,
t. XXX, Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire, (1994), 59-69.
29
Johns, « ʿAjlūn », 26.
Article publié dans H. Kennedy (dir.), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006,
p.225-242.

If the primitive nucleus refers to architectural concepts partly inherited from

the Romano-Byzantine period, the thirty years between the construction of the castle
by ʿIzz al-Dīn Usāma and its restoration by ʿIzz al-Dīn Aybak testify to a real change :
the emergence of an almost stadardised architecture, or at least one whose models or
concepts spread throughout the Ayyubid empire and were adopted by the princes or
the clientele of the sultan al-ʿĀdil.
The castle of ʿAǧlūn demonstrates that the standardisation of the Ayyubid
fortification did not appear before the very beginning of the thirteenth century when
the struggle between Aleppo and Damascus for the power, following the death of Ṣalāh
al-Dīn in 1193 and the new developments of artillery30 contributed, as much as the
crusader threat, to the emergence of a new military architecture.
The tower of Aybak, built on the same pattern than some towers of Damascus
and Bosra, illustrates, within the principality of Damascus, the recruiting in the
entourage of the Ayyubid princes, probably with their financial support, of craftsmen
specialised in the construction (master masons, stonecutters...). These could create and
spread among the first rank of emirs, the emerging military and social architectural
forms specific to a center of power. Indeed we can find this same phenomenon in the
north of Syria, in the principality of Aleppo, where several castles built by al-Malik al-
Ẓāhir Ġāzī31 (Aleppo, Ḥarīm, Qalʿat Naǧm, Šuġr-Bakās), between 595/1199 and
612/1215, have identical plans of bent entrances, testifying the formation and diffusion
of military architectural standards32.
Nevertheless if the tower of Aybak exemplifies a construction process, using a concept
met in Ayyubid fortifications, it would be wrong to consider the « L-shaped » plan as
one of the general characteristics, or an archetype of the Ayyubid fortification, in so
far as this plan can only be met in al-ʿĀdil’s citadels in the principality of Damascus
and not beyond. It rather seems to belong to a larger phenomenon of the Islamic
process of fortification, a process consisting in the constant adaptation of pre-existing
constructions for technical but also symbolic reasons.

30
Chevedden, P.E., « The Invention of the Counterweight Trebuchet : A Study in Cultural Diffusion », in
Dumbartom Oaks Paper, 54, (2000), 71-116.
31
See the paper of Tabba, Y. in this volume on the fortifications of al-Malik al-Ẓāhir Ġāzī.
32
On the elaboration of bent entrences in Ayyubid fortifications, see my paper in : Burgen und Städte der
Kreuzzugszeit im Vorderen Orient, Mathias Piana (Ed.) Petersberg 2005 (forthecoming).
[C. Yovitchitch, « Die Befestigung der Tore aiyubidischer Burgen - Herausbildung eines Standards », in
Burgen und Städte der Kreuzzugszeit, M. Piana (ed.), Petersberg, M. Imhof Verlag, 2008, p.110-117. pour un
développement complet de cette question on se reportera à C. Yovitchitch, Forteresses du Proche-Orient :
l'architecture militaire des Ayyoubides, Paris, PUPS, 2011, chap. 7, p. 217-266.]
Cyril Yovitchitch
«The Tower of Aybak in ‘Aǧlûn Castle : An Example of the Spread of an Architectural Concept in Early 13th-Century Ayyubid
Fortification», in H. Kennedy (dir.), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006, p.225-242.

Fig. 1 - ‘Ajlūn castle, general view from the south-east,

Photo Cyril Yovitchitch
995
1000

98
9

995,16
99
0

1003,54 995

1004,24
1000

1001,87
1001,82
T5

N
1009,61
5
99

1013
1000 5
100
1010
993,42
Level 0 Fig. 2 - ‘Ajlūn castle,
plan of level 0,
drawing Ph. Dangles,
1003,99
C. Yovitchitch, 2004
T6
P5
P4 992,45

1,93
100

1000,23
990,48

1000 1003,49 1 (ca. 580 AH/1184 AD)

T7 990,50 2
1000
3
99 4
5
5
98

995 982,42 5
6 (611 AH/1214 AD)
990
985,34
7
undetermined
989,75

990

0 10 50 m

Fig. 3 - ‘Ajlûn, general plan, levels 0 & 1 - Drawing Ph. DANGLES, C. YOVITCHITCH 2003
Cyril Yovitchitch
«The Tower of Aybak in ‘Aǧlûn Castle : An Example of the Spread of an Architectural Concept in Early 13th-Century Ayyubid
Fortification», in H. Kennedy (dir.), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006, p.225-242.

995
1000

98
9
995,16
99
0

1003,54 995

1004,24
1000

1001,87
1001,82
T5
1009,61
N
Level 1
5
99

1000 5
1013
T4
100
1010
993,42
Rubble fill
T3

P2
P1
Rubble fill

1003,99
P3
T6
1013,11

T1 P5 992,45
T2
1012,72

1,93
100

1000,23
990,48

1 (ca. 580 AH/1184 AD)

1000 1003,49 1004,02

2
T7 990,50
1000 3
4
99
5 5
5
98

995 982,42
6 (611 AH/1214 AD)
7
990
985,34
undetermined
989,75

990

0 10 50 m

Fig. 3 - ‘Ajlūn castle, plan of level 1, drawing Ph. Dangles, C. Yovitchitch, 2004
995
1000

98
9

995,16
99
0

995
991,30

1004,24
1000

1001,87
1001,82
T5
1009,61
N
5
99

1000 5
1013
T4
100
1010
993,42

1003,99

T6

T1 992,45
T3
1,93
100

1000,23
990,48

1000
1 (ca. 580 AH/1184 AD)
T7 990,50 2
1000
3
4
99
5
5
5
98

995 982,42

6 (611 AH/1214 AD)

985,34
990
7

989,75

990

0 10 50 m

Fig. 4 - ‘Ajlūn castle, plan of level 2 & 3, drawing Ph. Dangles, C. Yovitchitch, 2004
Cyril Yovitchitch
«The Tower of Aybak in ‘Aǧlûn Castle : An Example of the Spread of an Architectural Concept in Early 13th-Century Ayyubid
Fortification», in H. Kennedy (dir.), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006, p.225-242.

South court,
eastern arrow-slit

Tower 5, level 0
northern arrow-slit

Tower 4, level 1
eastern arrow-slit

Fig. 5 - ‘Ajlūn castle, Different types of

arrow-slits found in the castle, drawing
C. Yovitchitch, 2004 Tower 7, level 3 (palace)
eastern arrow-slit

Fig. 6 - The Tower of Aybak,

tower 7, (611AH/1214-
15AD), plan and section,
drawing Ph. Dangles, 2003,
C. Yovitchitch, 2004 2-
N

2-

1-

1-

0-

0 5m

0-

0 5m

‘Ajlûn Castle, tower 7 / "tower of Aybak" (611H./1214)

Drawing P. Dangles, C. Yovitchitch 2003
Cyril Yovitchitch
«The Tower of Aybak in ‘Aǧlûn Castle : An Example of the Spread of an Architectural Concept in Early 13th-Century Ayyubid
Fortification», in H. Kennedy (dir.), Muslim Military Architecture in Greater Syria, Leiden, Brill, 2006, p.225-242.

Fig. 8 - ‘Ajlūn castle, tower 7, level 1, south-west

bay, detail of the Ayyubid ornamented lintel,
Photo C. Yovitchitch, 2004

Fig. 7 - ‘Ajlūn castle, the palace, triple arch,

Photo C. Yovitchitch, 2004

Fig. 9 - Citadel of Bosra (Syria), Fig. 10 - Citadel of Bosra (Syria), gate-tower (608AH/1211AD),
gate-tower (608AH/1211AD), triple arch, Photo C. Yovitchitch, 2004
southern arrow-slit, detail of the
conche-shaped roman spolia
ornementing the lintel,
Photo C. Yovitchitch, 2004