Old Bridge, Hasankeyf

Background

In Roman times, Kepha (Hasankeyf) was a base for legionnaires on the frontier with Persia, and for a time the capital of the Roman province of Arzanene. The existence of a Roman bridge across the Tigris at Hasankeyf has been viewed as "highly probable" by one scholar who speculates that (like the later bridge) it may have had "a wooden superstructure based on piers of masonry and natural stone". However, none of the remaining structure of the bridge appears to date from Roman times. Roman builders had trouble bridging major rivers that were subject to spring flooding, such as the Tigris. Nevertheless, there was at least one bridge across the Tigris upstream from Hasankeyf as early as the fifth century AD, when Bishop John Saʿoro of Amida (who was appointed in 483/484) is reported to have built the bridge that forms the foundation of the present-day On Gözlü Köprü outside Diyarbakır.

The earliest mention of any bridge across the Tigris at Hasankeyf is in an account of the Muslim conquest of Mesopotamia in 638. Over the subsequent five centuries, Hasankeyf was ruled by the Ummayad and Abbasid caliphates and later by semi-autonomous Hamdanid and Marwanid rulers. There is little information on river crossings at Hasankeyf during this period. In the 11th century, Seljuq Turks and their Turkmen and Oguz allies moved into eastern Anatolia, culminating in the Seljuq defeat of Byzantine forces at the Battle of Manzikert in 1071. Victory at Manzikert quickly resulted in Seljuq forces controlling large parts of Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia. The Seljuq sultan Rukn ad-Dīn Barkiyāruq granted Hasankeyf as a fief to the Artuqids in AH 495 (1101/1102).

Control of trade along the Diyarbakır–Mosul road paralleling the Tigris, and north–south between Lake Van and the Euphrates generated prosperity for the Artuqids and ensured their power in the region. Consequently, the existence of a reliable river crossing for goods and people was a priority.

Date

Current scholarship suggests the bridge was built in the mid-12th century, no earlier than 1147 and no later than 1172. Early 20th-century scholars generally dated its construction to the year AH 510 (1116/1117), based on an anonymous writer who annotated what is now known as the Paris manuscript of Ibn Hawqal's Surat al-Ard some time after AH 534 (1139/1140). This dating has changed based on closer reading of a pair of manuscripts by the 12th-century Artuqid historian Ibn al-Azraq al-Fariqi held by the British Library. Ibn al-Azraq writes that the bridge was built on the orders of Fakhr ad-Din Qara Arslan of the Artuqid dynasty. Ibn al-Azraq also states that the Hasankeyf bridge was built after the Malabadi Bridge, the earliest in the Diyar Bakr, construction of which started in AH 541 (1146/1147) under the Artuqid ruler of Mardin, Temür Tash, and finished in AH 548 (1153/1154) under his son Najm ad-Din Alpi. A date some time after AH 541 (1146/1147) is consistent with Qara Arslan being the sponsor of the Hasankeyf bridge's construction, as his accession is variously dated to AH 539 (1144/1145) or AH 543 (1148/1149) and he ruled Hasankeyf until AH 562 (1166/1167), AH 567 (1171/1172) or AH 570 (1174/1175).

The same conflicting sources leave it unclear whether the Hasankeyf bridge was built entirely new, or was rebuilt from an earlier structure. According to the German historian of Islamic art Michael Meinecke, Ibn al-Azraq says the bridge was a replacement for an earlier and less substantial bridge. In contrast, the English geographical historian Guy Le Strange, using Ibn Hawqal as his source, says the bridge was restored by Qarā Arslān in AH 510 (1116/1117).

Construction

The bridge had four main arches. Two huge piers were built in the river to support the 40 m (130 ft)-wide main arch. Again, there is some confusion as to how this main arch was built. Some scholars describe it as a wooden construction, anchored into the stone piers, and that the purpose of this may have been to allow the crossing to be easily dismantled in time of war. Other sources, including several from the period before the bridge was destroyed, do not mention a wooden element, despite providing a detailed description of the bridge. And one 17th-century source that does mention a wooden central span describes it as a repair due to an earlier collapse.

However it was built, this central arch had a span of about 40 m (130 ft). That was about 1.4 m (4.6 ft) larger than the nearby Malabadi Bridge, which means it probably had the largest span of any single arch from the time of its construction until completion of the Pont du Diable in 1341.

The roadway of the bridge rose from the north bank (where it is just above the flood plain) to the south bank (where it meets the top of the cliff on which the lower city sits). Flanking the main arch were slightly smaller arches to the north and south, with the roadway climbing towards the center of the bridge. A fourth arch, smaller than the others and the only one still remaining somewhat intact, carried the roadway to the northern abutment. At the south, where the roadway meets the steep slope up to the citadel, there was no need for a corresponding fifth arch, and the flanking arch led directly to the massive masonry construction of the abutment. The abutment is pierced by an arched window, and it appears that some writers have counted this as a fifth structural arch.

Meinecke describes the bridge as a whole as being "a unique masterpiece of architectural engineering". The total length from one abutment to the other is about 200 m (660 ft). Meinecke notes that the sides of the bridge contained passages that could accommodate townspeople on both sides of the river in case of emergency. The presence of arrow slits indicates that these passages had a defensive purpose.

Decoration

On the western (upstream) faces of the triangular buttresses is a series of reliefs that have been interpreted by Estelle Whelan as Qarā Arslān's khāṣṣakiyya (his page corps or bodyguard). Five reliefs remain out of a total that Whelan estimates was originally eight, two on each of the four upstream walls of the two main piers. Each shows a single human figure carved on a vertical block and set into the middle course of masonry. The western pier shows a standing human figure wearing a kaftan, boots and hat known as a sharbush. His bent arms rest on a straight object that may be an arrow or a mace. A figure on the inner wall of the same pier rests on a bow and the other figure on this wall holds a bird.

Comparison with contemporary bridges

Meinecke compares the style of the bridge in Hasankeyf to that of two other bridges: Malabadi Bridge (built between AH 541 (1146/1147) and AH 548 (1153/1154)) over the Batman River about 60 km (37 mi) north of Hasankeyf on the orders of the Artuqid ruler Temür Tash, and a bridge in Cizre (built before AH 558 (1162/1163)) on the orders of the vizier of Mosul, Jamal ad-Din Muhammad al-Isfahani. Meinecke records Ibn al-Azraq's statement that the Hasankeyf bridge was modeled on Malabadi Bridge, but does not explain how the Hasankeyf Bridge apparently predates the Malabadi one. All three bridges contain similar panels of figural designs, and follow a similar pattern of construction. Meinecke also notes that the Hasankeyf and Cizre bridges display similar Artuqid mason's marks, as does the Great Palace in the Hasankeyf citadel.

Describing the bridge at Hasankeyf in the Mu'jam Al-Buldan ("Dictionary of Countries"; 1224–1228), the Arab geographer Yaqut al-Hamawi wrote: "I have not seen a bigger [bridge] in any of the lands I have traveled." Yaqut describes the bridge as having a single great arch over two smaller ones, a description that may have been intended to indicate the flanking arches.

Rebuilding during Ayyubid and Aq Qoyunlu periods

Ḥasan Ibn al-Munshiʾ records in the Taʾrīkh bait Aiyūb (AH 822 (1419/1420)) that by the early 14th century the bridge was unusable. It was restored during the reign of the Ayyubid sultan al-ʿĀdil Sulaimān (AH 779 (1377/1378) to AH 827 (1423/1424)).

There is evidence that additional repairs were made around AH 878 (1473/1474), when Hasankeyf was under the rule of the powerful Aq Qoyunlu bey Uzun Hassan, who had conquered Hasankeyf from the Ayyubids in 1462. Historian Thomas Alexander Sinclair dates the brick repairs on the surviving northern arch to the Aq Qoyunlu period. Meinecke sees the presence of brick masonry, and turquoise glazed bricks in particular, as evidence that the repairs were performed by a group of Iranian craftsmen who also worked on the nearby Tomb of Zeynel Bey along with local stonemasons. Meinecke speculates that the leaders of the Iranian workshop included Pīr Ḥasan b. ustādh ʿAbd ar-Raḥmān, whose name is inscribed on the tiles of the Zeynel Bey Tomb's entrance niche. He believes they operated as craftsmen-for-hire and traces their route from work on the Blue Mosque in Tabrīz before AH 870 (1465/1466), to Istanbul's Çinili Köşk in AH 877 (1472/1473), and then to the tomb and bridge in Hasankeyf around AH 878 (1473/1474), before moving on to the south iwan of Isfahan's Masjid-i Jumʿa in AH 880 (1475/1476).

A Venetian merchant who traveled to Hasankeyf around 1507 provides a detailed description of the bridge:

Going to the city from this market, one crosses the river on a magnificent stone bridge, which is wonderfully built, and in my opinion has no superior. It has five lofty, wide, solid arches; the one in the middle is built on a firm foundation of stones, two and three paces long and more than one pace broad. This foundation is so large that it is about twenty paces in circumference, made in the form of a column, and sustains the central arch, being fixed in the middle of the river. The arch is so wide and lofty that a vessel of three hundred tons, with all its sails set, can pass under it; and in truth, many a time when I have been standing on it and looking down into the river, the great height has made me shudder. But while I recollect it I will say that I consider three things in Persia to be great marvels—this bridge of Asanchif, the palace of Assambei Sultan and the castle of Cimischasac.

Ottoman period

After Sultan Selim I's victory at the Battle of Chaldiran, the Ottoman empire gained control of Hasankeyf in 1515. Historical records report little about Hasankeyf or the bridge for the next century. By the second half of the 17th century, travel to the region had evidently increased, and two accounts suggest that the bridge remained functional, although perhaps with some damage.

The Ottoman traveller Evliya Çelebi visited Hasankeyf in 1656 during his third major travel through Kurdistan. Çelebi's trip north from Baghdad, which took him through Cizre, Hasankeyf and Nusaybin, is recorded in fragmentary notes in Volume 4 of his Seyâhatnâme (written in 1673) that have not yet been published in full. Excerpts from the manuscript indicate that Çelebi was clearly impressed by the "great bridge" at Hasankeyf, which he laments his inability to adequately capture. He does note that the Hasankeyf and Batman bridges contained chambers to accommodate travellers on both sides. Çelebi also mentions the bridge at Hasankeyf later in Volume 5 as one of several notable bridges that was less impressive than the 15th-century Uzunköprü Bridge near Edirne. Neither reference describes the bridge as ruined and the implication is therefore that the Hasankeyf bridge was functional in 1656.

The young Venetian nobleman Ambrosio Bembo traveled down the Tigris and reached Hasankeyf on 6 February 1673. He provides a clear description of the state of the bridge. "Over the river there is a broken stone bridge of four arches, one of which has fallen and has been remade in wood. In the middle of the bridge there is a covered place that serves as a guardhouse. The entire bridge used to be covered in ancient times. All around, it has several figures in relief, but I was not able to get any information from these ignorant people." Given that central arch was likely always wooden, resting on stone piers, Bembo may have mistaken this for repairs to a fallen arch or the bridge may have been genuinely damaged by this point.

The importance of Hasankeyf shrank beginning in the 17th century and subsequent historical records of southeast Anatolia do not mention the bridge. Therefore, it has been assumed that the bridge became unusable due to damage during the late 17th century.

By the 19th century, travelers in the region noted the already collapsed bridge for its impressive ruined piers. The British consul in Diyarbakır, John Taylor, visited Hasankeyf in October 1861. He forded the river and described this "noble bridge of three large and three smaller pointed arches" as "now in ruins". However, his comment that the piers "appear much older than the superstructure" suggests that there may have been some attempt to repair the bridge after its initial collapse. Taylor mentions the relief figures on the two central piers, which he interpreted as Parthian, and also notes the overall similarity with the Malabadi Bridge.

By 1873 a report noted that the "only remaining arch" had fallen in 1869. As the smallest arch still remains standing, this probably referred to the collapse of one of the two arches flanking the main span. The artist Tristram James Ellis traveled down the Tigris on a raft from Diyarbakır in March 1880 and at "Hassan-Keyf" noted "some high towers standing in the river, with a minaret on one side, and huge precipices rising from the water just in front." He correctly identified these as "piers of a Saracenic pointed arch bridge, now ruined, which at one time carried the great Persian caravan road over the river". During a raft voyage down the Tigris in the spring of 1909, Ely Banister Soane encountered "the great piers of a once colossal bridge ... that tower above and shadow the passer-by in his humble kalak". Soane reported theories that the bridge was Roman or Venetian.

Modern period and archaeological study

Present-day road traffic crosses the Tigris slightly to the east on a modern three-arch concrete bridge built in 1967. The old bridge has been a focus of architectural and historic interest by scholars for many years.

Gertrude Bell photographed the bridge during a visit to Hasankeyf in April and May 1911. At this time, the only river crossing was via raft. The Gertrude Bell Archive at Newcastle University contains many of her photographs of the bridge from this visit.

The first detailed survey was performed by the French architectural historian Albert Gabriel, who visited Hasankeyf twice in 1932 along with the epigraphist Jean Sauvaget. Their survey of the town was published as a chapter of Gabriel's Voyages archéologiques dans la Turquie orientale. This included a detailed plan and elevation of the bridge.

Ilisu Dam impact

Although the first plans for a dam across the Tigris below Hasankeyf were made in 1954, it was not until 1997 that the State Hydraulic Works added the Ilısu Dam to its formal programme.

The remains of the bridge are expected to be submerged by the filling of the reservoir behind the Ilısu Dam. This is expected to begin during 2018 and take at least a year. The lake is expected to have a surface elevation of 525 m (1,722 ft), 65 m (213 ft) above the current river level at Hasankeyf.

Following the announcement of the plans for the Ilısu Dam, the bridge was among various historic sites in Hasankeyf to receive closer scrutiny. Based on notes from short visits in June 1975 and May 1989, noted Islamic scholar Michael Meinecke gave it considerable attention in the chapter on Hasankeyf in his 1996 book Patterns of Stylistic Changes in Islamic Architecture. Since 1986, Professor M. Oluş Arık of Ankara University has been the prime investigator documenting the archeological heritage of Hasankeyf. Arık helped organize the site survey in late 2002 by the Center for Research and Assessment of the Historical Environment (TAÇDAM) at Middle East Technical University that resulted in a detailed plan of both the town and the bridge.