Jisr Yibna/Pont sur le Nahal Sorek (ca.671/1272)

Localisation : à l’est de la ville sur le Nahal Sorek, à l’angle des rues Ha-Nesi’im et Ha-Rishonim/route 410.

Réf :

Clermont-Ganneau (1896), II, p.173-175 ; 181-182

Meinecke (1992), 4/170

Historique

Le pont à triple arches est clairement identique à ceux construits par le sultan Baybars (r.17 dhu’l-qa’da 658/24.X.1260 – 27 muharram 676/30.VI.1277), le Jisr Jindâs à Lod/Lydda et le Jisr Isdûd à Ashdod. Il est érigé à partir de remplois Croisés provenant probablement des édifices situés sur le tell plus au sud et fait partie d’un programme de construction de ponts initié par le sultan afin d’améliorer les communications au sein de son territoire.

Ce pont n'était pas situé sur le Darb al-Barid, la principale route de Damas jusqu’au Caire, qui passait par Ramla et Isdûd/Ashdod. Yavne étant à mi-chemin entre ces deux villes, elle devait servir d’étape secondaire.

L’ouvrage est étudié par Ch. Clermont-Ganneau en 1870 et 1873, il est le premier à identifier l’ouvrage comme une construction du sultan Baybars et à faire le parallèle avec les ponts de Lod/Lydda et Ashdod (voir plus bas). Il est aujourd’hui à l’écart à 20m au nord de la route 410.

Epigraphie

Pas d’inscription.

Biblio complémentaire

Petersen (2001), n°159

Fischer/Taxel (2007), p.204-284

Petersen (2010), p.291-306

1/ vue du site	2/ vue du pont en amont	3/ face amont du pont

4/ vue du pont en aval	5/ face aval du pont	6/ l’arche centrale de la face aval

Documents anciens

Clermont-Ganneau (1896), II, p.173-175 ; 181-182. Visite en 1870 et 1873.

The bridge. - In the immediate vicinity of Yebna, in the Wady et-Tâhûnât, "valley of mills," may be seen a bridge with three arches and cut-waters, like the one at Lydda, with which it has much in common. At first sight one would say it was a bridge of Arab construction ; but on closer inspection I noticed that the arches were formed of arch-stones with the mediaeval toolmarking. In this case also the Arabs must have availed themselves of materials borrowed from some erection of the Crusaders. It would not surprise me - unluckily I had not the time to settle it - if the building thus laid under contribution were in this case also the fine church at Yebna. This would account for the disappearance of a considerable part of its naves ; for only two triforia (transversal bays) have been preserved, and converted into a mosque ; the remainder has been probably utilized for building the bridge and also most likely for building or repairing the wely of Abu Horeira. In particular I suspect that the three handsome ogive arches forming the porch or lewan of the Wely were borrowed from the church of the Crusaders.

There is one indication which appears to me to transform these two conjectures - at any rate the former, concerning the bridge - almost to certainties.

The Survey Party noted in the courtyard or area of the wely an Arabic inscription to the effect that this blessed "cloister" was founded by Sultan Beibars in 673 (1274 a.d.), under the superintendence of " Khalil ibn Sawir," walî (governor) of Ramleh.

This inscription is, as I shall show, much more instructive than it looks. It will be remembered that the bridge of Lydda was built by order of Beibars in 671, that is to say two years before the "cloister" of the Sanctuary of Yebna.

Now an Arab chronicle which I have quoted from in this connection informs us that Beibars, in 672, had two bridges built of a strategic nature, " in the neighbourhood of Ramleh." I have shown that the first of these was that at

Lydda, and it becomes to me extremely probable that the second is the one at Yebna. The object of Beibars was, as I have explained, to keep open his communications at all seasons along the high road from Egypt which passed

through Yebna, Ramleh, and Lydda. The bridge of Yebna was intended to play the same part to the south of Ramleh as that of Lydda to the north. It was another fruit of the same idea, and, what is most interesting, made with

materials of similar extraction. The same course was pursued at Yebna as at Lydda, and in each case it was the arches of the two churches of the Crusaders close at hand that were laid under contribution for the bridge. The whole proceeding was in pursuance of a system - the construction of the two bridges was ordered and probably carried out almost at the same time. The bridge at Lydda was constructed in 671, as the tarikh built into it bears witness, while the Arab chronicler assigns the date 672 to the construction of the two bridges. It may be supposed that this slight discrepancy of a year is due to the fact that the second bridge, the one at Yebna, was built a year after the one at Lydda, but the chronicler only took into account the date of the one finished last (672).

A further proof that the bridge of Yebna is really the second bridge built by Beibars, " in the neighbourhood of Ramleh," lies in the mention on the inscription of the wely of the governor of Ramleh, who built the "cloister" there in 673. Thus at the very time when the two bridges near Ramleh were in building, which operation would naturally fall to the care of the governor of that town, we see this governor carrying out some important operations at Yebna. It seems well nigh certain that the governor killed two birds with one stone, and that after having taken part of the church at Yebna to make his bridge, he conceived the idea, which Beibars approved of, and for which the governor gives him all the credit, of utilizing the rest to adorn the Musulman sanctuary with the "cloister," probably the three arcades we see there today. It is very possible that a diligent search may bring to light in the bridge of Yebna, as in that of Lydda, some tarikh declaring that it was built in 671, 672 or 673, at the bidding of Sultan Beibars and under the direction of the governor of Ramleh. It should be noted that the bridge of Lydda was not constructed under the direction of the governor of Ramleh, but of another personage, who doubtless was placed under his orders. They probably shared the work ; and perhaps the construction of the two bridges, which are some distance apart, was carried on simultaneously.

The Bridge - M. van Berchem was also kind enough to make a special study of the bridge, which confirms my conjectures as to its origin. He satisfied himself that, as I supposed, ‘’Crusaders’ arches undoubtedly form part of it "

(I quote his own words). The analogy with the case of the bridge at Lydda is a striking one, and it now seems altogether probable that at Yebna, as well as at Lydda, Beibars, or rather his agents, laid the church under contribution for the building of the bridge. I now give a suggestive view of this bridge, from an excellent photograph taken by M. M. van Berchem, from the side of the village, i.e., from the south-west, and some items extracted from his note-book.

"Bridge with three 'brisés' arches" (arches with broken curves)," resembling the bridge at Lydda ; brown tufous limestone. The central arch is wider. The heads of the arches are of more careful workmanship than the other part of the soffits, and have diagonal strike throughout ; the vertical joint is at the top . . . The soffits, apart from the groins, are of porous rubble as at Lydda. The difference between the two materials is very noticeable. On the side facing up stream (south) the central arch has only a few voussoirs with striae at the springing ; the rest is of small porous rubble ; here the difference strikes the eye at once. However, the vertical joint is also found on this arch, which is the only one not entirely constructed of material bearing Crusaders' tool-marks. On the up side are two pointed cutwaters, as at Lydda. The intrados of the central arch is made of materials carefully dressed as far up as the springings, where the small rubble begins. There are traces of cement, especially on the intrados of the eastern arch. Above the central arch, on the north side, in the crowning of the parapet, is a breach, which might have contained

an inscription. . . . The fleche of the bridge is very conspicuous. Length about 48 m., breadth 11'" 50 ; width of the central arch 6"' '80 ; width of the side arches, about 5m. The height varies, the base of the bridge being buried in mud. I found masons' marks on several voussoirs, and Madame van Berchem made squeezes of them for you. Some of these marks are doubtful."

Menu précédent