Location
Qasbar Fort lies less than 1 km north of Ain Tabruq on a hilltop about 450 m a.s.l. It commands a strategic position with an extensive view of the coastline (9 km away), and must have been an effective post for observing the movement of people and their animals. It lies 27 km east of Salalah.
Directions
Drive east from Salalah, taking the road towards Taqah. About 4 km before reaching the Taqah turnoff, turn north at the sign marked Nashib (15 km from Al-Mamurah roundabout). After driving 6 km on this road, park on the side of the graded road, about three quarters of the way up the hill. The fort is directly to the east on the top of a conical hill about 3 km walk away – an hour’s walk.
To get to the fort itself, follow the well-worn path to the right of the road. It skirts north around the edge of the hillside, and after crossing several rocky wadis it heads south-east across rock strewn fields, which form a saddle to the hill on which the fort is situated. As you start to climb the hill from the north you first come to what appears to be a deliberately cut 2 metre wide trench with a sheer three-metre high rock face on the higher side and 1 to 2 m one on the lower side. The solid rock face on the higher side is topped with a wall made of blocks of cut stone. This 40 metre long defensive moat across the hillside blocks the only practical path to the fort, making it very difficult for intruders to break through. Locals say that defenders used to light fires in this trench to stop attackers. The hillsides on the east and west lead down steep slopes to wadis, while the southern side of the hill is extremely steep and thus a natural defence.
Once past the trench there are piles of hewn stones some of which are cut in curves as if to fit over an arched doorway or window. Other pieces have been cut to fit into each other like a mortise and tenon joint. Many of the stones are overgrown with trees and other vegetation. Once past these on the eastern side of the hill you come to the ruins of two buildings. The first and smaller one is about 4 m long, 3 m wide with a height of about 2 metres. The other is near the summit. It is a much larger building – 18m by 10m by 3m high. Both walled structures, which these days are open at the top, show few signs of wear and tear, indicating how well designed and constructed they were. The walls are constructed of blocks of stone, with the walls an average thickness of about 1 metre. The internal and exposed parts of the external walls are thickly plastered with gypsum, much of which has survived intact. An unusual aspect of these buildings’ design is that neither have any windows, only a doorway. However, it would appear that these doorways are later additions. In both cases it looks as though the walls have been breached at a later date so that the space may be utilised, perhaps by goat or cow herders. The remains of any roof or its beams have long since disappeared. Exactly how these buildings were used is a matter for conjecture. It is thought that the smaller one was used for storing water, and the larger one perhaps for food stuffs.
Who built Qasbar Fort, and when?
According to stories passed on by local Dhofaris, the stone used for the construction of the buildings and their defences was carried from near the coast (from the quarry at Deirab near Khor Soli) some 8 km away. Locals say that the fort was built by Portuguese soldiers, who passed the hewn blocks of stone from hand to hand all the way up the hillside. However from a cursory examination the materials it is built of are the same as the hillside on which the fort stands. However, the gypsum which was used in the mortar and also for plastering the completed walls could well have come from the Khor Soli quarries.
On the southern slope of the hill, facing the sea, there is a 150 m cliff, which forms a natural defence. Near it, running along the southern and western sides there are the remains of a thick, stone wall, with what appears to be regular defensive turrets or lookouts projecting from the walls. There are also ruins of other smaller buildings and fortifications on the hilltop site, but their purpose and even shape is covered with years of rubble as well as being overgrown by the roots of trees and shrubs. The whole fort complex covers an area about 100 m by 40 m.
As far as water supply is concerned one story says that there was an ingenious pumping system for conveying water from Ain Al-Sarooj (about 500 metres to the west and 100 metres below the hilltop) to the fort. Another story says there was a well on the southern side, set into the side of the cliff some 50 metres down from the top. A possible piece of evidence to back up this latter story is an unusual cut stone lying on the top of the hill. This piece of limestone is about 60 cm long, 20 cm wide and 20 cm high. There are deep grooves running around it, like friction marks made by ropes. In fact it is very similar to a block of limestone which is part of the 2000 year old well in the old city of Samhuram.
From an examination of Portuguese policies, fortresses were generally built on the coast in order to maintain their trading routes. If it were a Portuguese enclave, how did they manage to keep their forces fed and watered in such a remote area with hostile inhabitants all around them?
Other Dhofaris connect the ruins to the Al-Manjuwi Dynasty. Al-Manjuwis originated, according to some, in Al-Qashar (hence, Qasbar Fort) in Iran, or to others, in Yemen. The ruins are sometimes referred to as Qasrul Banat (Girls’ Palace) or Qasra Assadeen (Prisoners’ Palace).
An alternative dating is that of Yuris Zarins who, without excavating it, tentatively dated it to the same era as Samhuram and the nearby Hamran Fort (less than 5 km to the south-west). Both of these were occupied between 1600 and 2400 years ago. Another member of Zarins’ team at that time (in 1992) stated: “Since any occupants … could observe much of the Plain of Salalah including … Taqah …, it was reasonable to deduce that this was a mountain garrison from which the incense trade was policed. If so, and should these ruins tie in time-wise with the pre-Islamic city of Samhuram, then we could draw a theoretical line over the mountains towards Andhur and the only other known frankincense storage centre, Hanun. No invaders from the sea could head inland for either of these key storage sites without being spotted from this key vantage point.”(Fiennes pp.135,136)
In one of the wadis adjacent to Qasbar are numbers of rock drawings and paintings – see Jan Schreurs’ blog for details.
References
Fiennes, Ranulph. 1992. Atlantis of the Sands, The Search for the Lost City of Ubar. Bloomsbury Publishing: London.
Above article Copyright © Ross Hayden 2010
