arx journal volume 5 2008

48
ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARYARCHITECTURE 1 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

Upload: arkitettura

Post on 22-Mar-2016

360 views

Category:

Documents


34 download

DESCRIPTION

Arx Journal of Military Architecture and Fortifications

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

1 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

Page 2: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

1 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

CONTENTSISSUE V 2008

2. French Military Architecturein the Maltese IslandsStephen C Spiteri

8. Discorso del Gozo et SuaFortificatione: Two reports byGiovanni Rinaldini AnconitanoGodwin Vella

12. The Art of Fortress Buildingin Hospitaller MaltaStephen C Spiteri

18. Insular sentinel: St MaryTower, CominoStephen C. Spiteri

21. Water and HospitallerFortificationsStephen C. Spiteri

24. Alcune Riflessioni sullaricostruzione del luogo forte diMdina a Malta dopo il terremotodel 1693Denis de Lucca

33. Documenting fortificationsand military structures throughphysical surveys and archivalresearchPaul C. Saliba

39. Castles and fortresses ofRhodesStephen C SPiteri

49. Publication of research

50. Active links to projects,documents, books and resourceson the web

51. Fortification news on theweb

Front Cover illustration:Sea-front of Wied MousaCoastal Battery, Marfa.This page: Grand Masterd'Aubusson instructing Rhodianworkmen on the fortifications ofRhodes (after Caoursin).

Page 3: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

2 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

ARX - FORTRESS EXPLORER

Historians and researchers wishing to publishtheir studies in this journal are invited tosubmit their articles in word format togetherwith illustrations to the Editor via e-mail at([email protected]). All papers andillustrations published in ARX are subject tocopyright and may not be copied in anymanner without prior consent of theirrightful authors and editor.The design and layout of ARX, unless wherespecifically stated otherwise, are thecopyright of FES.

FRENCHMILITARYARCHITECTUREIN THEMALTESEISLANDSBy Dr. Stephen C. Spiteri Ph.D.

A two-day seminar was held in Vallettato commemorate the trecentaryanniversary of Vauban’s death and hisinfluence on the fortifications in Malta.This seminar was organised by theEmbassy of France in Malta, theInternational Institute for BaroqueStudies (UOM) and the Ministry forResources and Infrastructure.

When Napoleon Bonaparte enteredValletta on the 12th of June 1798 , he issaid to have been astonished by the‘power of resistance’ of the vast systemof fortifications which had fallen to himso easily with hardly a shot being firedand was thankful that the knights nolonger hand men of the calibre of Jeande Valette to defend it. Ironically this ‘power of resistance’ soevidently manifest in the mighty ring oframparts and bastions owed much toFrench influence, for French militaryengineers and their ideas had been atwork in the Maltese islands ever sinceSébastien le Prestre de Vauban began togive France the lead in the developmentof military architecture in the latter halfof the seventeenth century. Theappearance on the local scene ofdistinguished men like Louis Nicolas deClerville, Louis Viscount de Arpajon andBlaise François Count de Pagan notonly marks the decline of the Italians asleading exponents in the art of fortress

building but also signals the shift of theOrder from the imperial into the Frenchsphere of influence.

From around the mid-1600s onwardsFrenchmen like Mederico Blondel,

Editorial

In recent years, most studies of fortificationhave tended to shift away from the fortressto focus, after a fashion, on its armament andgarrison life. This increasing fascination withfortress armament, garrison drill, and so-called 're-enactments' - although undeniablynecessary to provide a fuller picture of thewider context and workings of gunpowderfortifications - has now, in many instances,reached the point where interest in thefortress itself, as a structure, has all but beenset aside and the fortress reduced merely to abackdrop. Many forget, however, that beforeany fortress was put to use, it had first to bebuilt, and the skills that were required toplan, design, and build a fortress were notthe same as those that were necessary todefend it. No proper understanding of thesubject of fortification, therefore, can existwithout an understanding of the fortress as astructure, of the fortress as a work of

architecture and engineering. The recentexhibition organized jointly by the FortressExplorer Society (FES) and the NationalLibrary of Malta (The Art of FortressBuilding in Hospitaller Malta) sought to re-focus the attention of scholars, researchers,and the public on the very art and science offortress construction.

We at FES believe that there is much more tothe study of fortification than dressing upand playing at soldiers, and firing blankcannon charges. It's called MILITARYARCHITECTURE and it has a gravitas thatgoes beyond the world of ' infotainment'.

Therefore, FES is committed to diffusing aproper understanding of military architectureto as wide an international audience aspossible. All issues of ARX, now in PDFformat, are downloadable and printable, freeof charge. In this world of ever-increasingcommercialization of cultural heritage, where

even NGOs are fast becoming profit-orientedbusinesses ready to exploit both professionalresearchers and students alike for a quickbuck, it is refreshing to find websites thatprovide educational material and resourcesfree of charge. ARX tries to bring many ofthese online resources to your attention withdirect links. We are also proud that bothARX and the FES Website itself fall withinthis category.

Editor: Dr. Stephen C. Spiteri Ph.D.

ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

Marshal Sébastien le Prestre de Vauban

Image courtesy of Miranda Publications

Page 4: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

3 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

Claude de Colongues and FrançoisBachelieu were finding employment inthe Order but the real connection camewhen Grand Master Perellos turned toFrance in his search for militaryassistance following the emergency of1714, when the Island was beingthreatened with attack by the Turks.The generous French response was asmuch a case of real politik as it was acalculated act of propaganda. Alongwith French guns, cannon, andmunitions, and the promise of troops,came also a corps of French militaryadvisors. From now on, France and notSpain, would be the patron andprotector of the Order.

The French military mission was headedby Brigadier René Jacob de Tigné. Atthe time he was then one of the mostexperienced engineers in France with 26years service. Later in 1720, he wouldbe appointed to the post of director offortifications in Charlemont, and thentransferred to a similar position in LaRochelle where he remained until hisdeath in 1730. Assisting him as secondin command, was Charles François deMondion. The group also included theordinary engineers Delafon, Grillot dePredelys, D’Artus, and Philip Maigret.Various other engineers, such asMegreill, arrived in the retinue of the

Prior of France, Philip de Vendôme.Among the latter, the ablest of thesewas undoubtedly Maigret – his Traitede la sûreté et conservation des etatspar le moyen des forteresses, which waspublished in Paris in 1725, became thestandard work on the strategicimportance of forts used at the École deMeziere, the French military school ofengineering. Maigret remained in Maltauntil August 1716 in order to supervisethe construction of coastal defences.Likewise remaining on the Island afterthe departure of Tigné, was Mondion,who was entrusted with supervising theday-to-day work on the fortificationsbefore eventually being called back toFrance in 1719.

The knights were reluctant to loseMondion and admitted him into theOrder as a knight of grace. The GrandMaster then sought to secure his returnin order to serve as the residentengineer. Perellos’ wish was grantedand Mondion was employed asingegnere della religione in January1721. He served the Order faithfullyuntil his death in December 1733.Mondion’s eighteen years of servicerepresent the most important andintense period of fortress-buildingactivity in the Island’s history. Hisinvolvement also extended to the civil

sector where his considerablearchitectural skills and aesthetic feelingcontributed greatly to theembellishment of many Baroque palacesand churches, particularly in the old cityof Mdina, which was largely renovatedduring the magistracy of Manoel deVilhena (1722-1736).

Between them, these French expertswould effectively reshape the Order’s

Fortress Malta 360° is a publication thatfocuses all its attention on the militaryarchitecture of Malta. It seeks tocapture a representative cross sectionof the great diversity of shapes, forms,and textures that make up Malta’sunique military architecture ensemble. Itdoes so by playing on the visual powerof military architecture, Vitruvius’

venustas. This book revolves aroundthe artistic aspect of the subject, not itsmilitary merits. It focuses on thosearchitectural features that are trulyunique to Malta - such as the qualityand feel of the beautiful honey-colouredlocal stone over drab (and universal)concrete shapes fabricated fromimported cement, wrought iron, andother alien materials. All thephotographs were specifically chosenfor their artistic and sculptural qualitiesand great effort was made (given thespecial requirements and format of thepublication) to present them in achronological order so that they couldstill reflect the salient developments inthe art and science of fortification.

Fortress Malta 360° is a book aboutfortifications as monumental works ofarchitecture, as structures andbuildings.

MIRANDA PUBLICATIONS326 x 322 mm170 pagesISBN 978-99909-85-34-4

Text by Dr. Stephen C. SpiteriPhotography by EnricoFormica

CLICK PHOTO TO ACCESS WEBSITE

Grand Master Perellos.

Page 5: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

8 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

Giovanni Rinaldini of Ancona was thefirst military engineer of note to haveseriously examined the defenceproblems facing Gozo and to produceplans for the Island’s initial fortification.(1) He studied the art of fortificationunder Germanico Sovargnano (2) andwas working in Rome before comingover to Malta in March 1599. During hisstay, Rinaldini carried out two fieldsurveys of Gozo and authored tworeports of superior professional valuewith accompanying plans and designs.Unfortunately, the latter have sincebeen lost.

Rinaldini’s reports are entitled“Discorso del Gozzo et suafortificazione” and “Della fortificazionedel Gozzo – Secondo Discorso”respectively. They are written in a fairlylegible script and have a combinedlength of 30 folios and over 9000 words.These reports are preserved in theArchives of the Order of Malta at theNational Library, Volume 6554 – “Pareri eDiscorsi sopra le Fortificationi”.(3)

Evidently, many scholars in the field ofmilitary history consulted Rinaldini’sreports and published substantialsections in a number of authoritativepublications, particularly Samut-Tagliaferro’s “The Coastal Fortificationsof Gozo and Comino”. Notwithstanding,

none of the respective publicationsoffers a comprehensive resume of thesaid reports, and this short write-up will,therefore, attempt to give a summary ofall pertinent details.

Primo Discorso (FOLIOS. 253 – 266V)Rinaldini opens his first report by listingthe topics to be covered, namelywhether Gozo is to be fortified or not,the sites to be fortified, the layout of theproposed fortifications, and theprojected expenses.

Fortifying Gozo

Curiously enough, Rinaldini does notmake any direct statements on thecompelling need to fortify Gozo, butmakes a number of references andcomments that betray his strongpositive conviction. These include thevital role of Gozo during the Great Siegeof 1565 (fol. 255), effective control of theGozo and the Malta channels

respectively (fol. 257), the Island’simportance for livestock rearing (fols.260v & 262v), and the monitoring ofvessel movement between the MalteseIslands and Sicily (fol. 264v).

The Sites to be Fortified

The four most appropriate sites for theconstruction of a new fortified town areRas it-Tafal (overlooking M!arrharbour), the Gran Castello, G’ajnDamma plateau (overlooking Marsalfornbay), and Il-Pergla plateau (overlookingRamla bay). (Figure 1)

Ras it-Tafal, referred to as il sito delMugiarro, is well located to prevent theenemy from making use of the abundantfresh water springs flowing in WiedBiljun, to preclude any hostile vesselsfrom seeking shelter or sail through theGozo Channel, to send and receivemessages from Malta, to facilitate thedeployment of relieving forces to Gozo,

DISCORSODEL GOZZOET SUAFORTIFICATIONE:TWO REPORTSBY GIOVANNIRINALDINIANCONITANO

by Mr Godwin Vella

Page 6: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

4 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

military establishment, dictating theshape of the Order’s militaryorganization as well as the course of thedevelopment and design of militaryarchitecture in the Maltese islandsthroughout the rest of the eighteenthcentury. During this seminal period, theensuing imprint of French ideasextended to cover all aspects of themilitary arts, particularly thearchitecture, from the planimetric designof a fort down to the decorativeelements of Baroque gateways. Indeed,the first quarter of the eighteenthcentury was to prove most prolificwhere the construction of fortificationswas concerned. While it is true that thesixteenth and seventeenth centurieswere the most formative periods in thefortification of the Maltese islands,where the strategic and militarydecisions culminating in the foundationof the new fortress of Valletta and theformation of massive outlying enceintes

were to remain largely responsible fordetermining the defensive strategythroughout the remainder of the Order’srule, many of these schemes hadremained unfinished and incomplete bythe end of the 1600s. So it was largelydue to the work of the French militaryengineers in the eighteenth century thatmost of these earlier monumental workswere brought to completion and fittedwith all the adjuncts of defence –gateways, outwerworks (counterminesand glacis), powder magazines,retrenched bastions and detached forts.Inevitably, therefore, much of the finalshape, form, and character of most ofthe fortifications of Malta, includingearlier fifteenth-century works like Birguand Mdina, became largely the productof the French school of militaryarchitecture. And a large part of thecredit must go, indirectly, to the geniusof Sébastien le Prestre de Vauban, theman who helped establish France as theleading exponent of military architecturein the latter half of the late seventeenthcentury. So much so, that many of thenew elements that were introduced bythe French military engineers, such asthe purposely-built gunpowdermagazines or polveriste as they wereknown, and the drawbridge mechanismsfitted to the new Baroque gatewaysdesigned and built by Mondion, weredescribed in the Order’s documents asbeing ‘à la Vauban’. Many of thebeautifully decorated gateways, withtheir trophies-of-arms and escutcheonsthat nowadays are taken as the familiar

face of Baroque Malta, first appearedduring Mondion’s period in office.It was not simply new ideas anddevices, however, that the Frenchmilitary engineers brought over withthem to the Maltese islands. Above all,they helped usher in a new sense ofprofessionalism in the field of militaryengineering and architecture. The primadonna attitude of many an earlierhaughty Italian military engineer, suchas Floriani and Laparelli, was replacedby the professionalism of disciplinedmen who were the product of acontrolled system and a formalizedschool of engineering. They helped theOrder create an organized fortificationsdepartment, equipped with surveyors,agrimensori and disegnatori. Theirfirst systematical exercise was to drawup a record, a sort of stocktakingexercise, documenting all the existingdefences, with accurate plans andelevations, many of which were missingor non-existing. A few decades earlierfor example, Mederico Blondel, asresident engineer in charge of theKnights’ fortifications, was greatlysurprised to find large casematedinteriors within the Valletta ramparts ofwhich he was ignorant, there havingbeen no plan and records of them in thesala delle fortificationi.

The systematical and methodicalapproach of the French military mind isperhaps best reflected in these manywell-prepared and beautifully executedplans of the fortification projects still to

Plan of Fort Manoel and one of its salientunderground countermine galleries situatedbeneath the covertway (NLM). Bottom right,Outerworks in front of Porta Reale, Valletta.

Page 7: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

5 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

be found preserved in the NationalLibrary in Valletta, together with theiraccompanying analytical reports. Thesescaled, meticulously detailed technicaldrawings and sectional elevations,drawn to an established convention,contrast markedly with the morecrudely-executed designs of the earlierepochs.

The second other important Frenchmilitary mission to visit the island, camein 1761. This was headed by FrançoisCharles Count de Bourlamaque and aparty of four military engineers by thename of Pontleroy, Desandroüins,Fournier, and De Cuire. Under thedirection of Nicholas de Pontleroy, whohad seen service in Quebec as engineer-in-chief, this group of engineersconducted a thorough evaluation of theexisting defences. However, apart fromurging the Order to complete theharbour fortifications according to RenéJacob de Tigné’s earlier masterplan andwritten instructions, and endorsing thestrategy of opposing the enemy on thebeaches with yet more coastal defences,their visit, however, did not translateinto any real concrete outcome, otherthan the commencement of a fewentrenchments.

The man who would effectively guidethe Order’s fortress building efforts inthe latter half of the eighteenth centurywas the Balì Francois Jacob de Tigné, aknight and the nephew of BrigadierRené Jacob de Tigné himself. Although,strictly speaking, Balì de Tigné was acommissioner of fortifications, he seemsto have been a competent engineer inhis own right and continued to exercisethis role for many a decade in theabsence of a resident engineer after thedeparture of Francesco Marandon in1761. The Order’s records only mentionone other engineer working for theknights during the late 1780s, again aFrenchmen , the ‘Ingénieur Fra Henry deMazis’. Balì de Tigné was responsible,amongst many other things, fordirecting the various coastal works ofentrenchments, the outerworks of FortRicasoli, and the renovation of thearmouries in Valletta. Fort Tigné, thelast fort to be built in 1793, was actuallynamed in his honour, in recognition forhis long service to the Order. The fortitself, however, was built by another

Frenchmen Stephen Tousard who wasto be the last of the resident militaryengineers to be employed by the Orderbefore its surrender to Napoleon in1798.

The tangible products of this Frenchconnection can be seen all over theisland. They are most evident aroundthe island’s shores – the redoubts,batteries, and entrenchments built in1715-16 and at Fort Manoel and FortChambrai. The coastal batteries inparticular were all based on patternsevolved by the French towards the endof the seventeenth century - FortLupinat Saint Nazaire (1683), Fort StLouis at Toulon (1692-1697), la Tour deCamaret (1694), Fort du Chapus atBourcefranc (1690-1692) and Fortd’Ambleteuse at Pas-de-Calais (1680-

1690) are typical prototypes. Althoughmuch smaller in scale, the Maltesebatteries were given the same type ofsemi-circular gun platforms withbetween 4 to 9 gun positions firingthrough embrasures in the parapet whiletheir rear, facing landward, were closedoff by one or two defensible rooms anda redan. Although many of the batterieswhich took root around the Islands’shores materialized in the years 1715-16,the idea for these French style coastaldefences had been first mooted by theCommissioners D’Arginy and Fontetand a French secondary engineer by thename of Francois Bachelieu in 1714. Thecoastal defence strategy found a greatexponent in the Prior of France, the Balìde Vendôme and it was mainly throughhis insistence, and a generous loan of40,000 scudi which he presented to theOrder, that the network of batteries andredoubts was made possible. A numberof other knights too, made financialdonations.

It is Fort Manoel and Fort Chambrai,however, which are the most strikinglocal examples of the work of Frenchengineers. Originally conceived byTigné in 1715, the two forts wereslightly redesigned when eventuallybuilt later in the century by Mondionand Marandon respectively. Their lowsilhouette and system of aggressiveouterworks sets them distinctively apartfrom the other bastioned fortresses inthe Maltese islands.

Plan of gunpowder magazine 'a la Vauban'at Fort Manoel, with a cutaway diagramshowing layout of such magazines, bottom.

Page 8: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

6 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

Fort Manoel was the first to be built.The date on the main gate reads 1726but the fort was not truly completeduntil well into the 1730s. It wasdesigned to command the hithertoexposed northern flank of Valletta andMarsamxett Harbour. Grand MasterManoel de Vilhena financed itsconstruction out of his own pocket andeven set up a special fund (FondazzioneManoel) to enable the ongoingmaintenance of the fort.Although in plan, the square, four-bastioned pattern adopted for its designwas a common and standard designsolution, Fort Manoel was givengraceful proportions and a well laid outinterior. Furthermore, owing to thenature of the terrain, the fort waspractically carved out from the bedrock,making it virtually bombproof by thestandards of the time.

Fort Manoel’s internal arrangement,centred around the piazza (paradeground), a range of arcaded barrackblocks and a church, was a hithertonovel arrangement by local standards.The fort was also fitted out with twoVauban-style powder magazines and anextensive system of undergroundcountermine tunnels and galleriesbeneath the glacis. The Comte deBourlamaque, seeing it for the first timein 1761, called it a ‘modèle defortification fait avec soin’ and completein all its parts.

Fort Chambrai, on the other hand, wasconceived primarily as a fortified city,but having failed to attract inhabitants,it remained a purely militaryestablishment. Of all the fortifications itis perhaps this fortress which would

have best sumed up the contemporaryideas that European military architectsof the time considered to be the apogeeof the art of fortification. In this respectit holds a unique position as the onlyfortress conceived as a true Baroquefortified town – one designed toembody contemporary theories on theunification of the visual arts with urbanand military planning to produce astructure with a heightened sense ofdrama and power. A plan of the fortifiedcity drawn around 1754 reveals a townintended to be laid out on a grid patternof avenues and streets enclosed bysquare blocks of houses with internalgardens.

The focal point of the new city, whichwas to be approached by a wideavenue, took the form of a spaciouspiazza containing the main church, thecastellania (courthouse) and thegovernor’s palace, which was also todouble as a ‘grande place d’armes’. Thetwo blocks in the plaza were to befronted by an arched portico in thefashion of contemporary ideas aboutthe visual quality and vista potential ofurban spaces conceived as part of thenew Baroque order.

In practice, however, the town insidethe new fortifications never took rootand Fort Chambrai remained a purelymilitary station, an empty enclosuredevoid of any structures except for alarge bomb-proof barrack block, achapel, and a small powder magazine.

The existence of documents such as thestatutes and regulations of the Frenchcorps of military engineers among themanuscript volumes in the archives ofthe Order, one example shown here onthis page, reveals quite clearly howkeenly the Hospitaller militaryestablishment sought to keep itselfabreast of all the developments andpractices taking place in France.One of the las t important devicesintroduced from France was theGribeauval carriage. When in 1770s theFrench introduced the Gribeauvaltraversing carriages in their coastalbatteries, the invention did not gounnoticed by the knights. In 1788, wefind the Congregation of Fortificationand War examining the ‘modelli’ (samplemodels) and instructions for the

Ordonnance du Roi found amongst themanuscript volumes of the Order of St Jonat the NLM.

Page 9: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

7 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

construction of the latest Gribeauvalcarriage forwarded by Balì de Tigné andappreciating the advantages offered byits design, particularly the wider field offire provided by the rotating mountingand the added protection that it gavethe gun crew. Consequently, thecommander of artillery was ordered tosee to the construction of a prototypecoastal gun mounting for an 18-pdrcannon according to the designspresented to the Congregation and todraw up an account of the costsinvolved. The cost of replacing all theexisting gun carriages with the newGribeauval-type model, however, wasfound to be exorbitant, and since theOrder did not have the money, it wasnot possible to proceed with the desiredconversion. Furthermore, to workproperly, the Gribeauval carriage had tobe accommodated in specially modifiedparapets that allowed for the traversingof the platform. This meant that theexisting parapets and embrasures hadalso to be rebuilt. A few plans showingthe parapets of Fort Tigné, and otherbatteries erected at St. Elmo (St. GregoryBastion) and Fort Ricasoli show thatthese were designed to house the newgun carriages. Whether or not suchworks were ever actually equipped inthis manner, however, is difficult todetermine. The minutes of the meetingof the Congregation of Fortification andWar held on 28 August 1789, reveal thatit was only possible to replace thosecarriages rendered unserviceable withthe new pattern while an entry for 1795,shows that orders were given for theproduction of only one Gribeauval

carriage a year (‘secondo il nuovomodello’).

A very important reason why FortChambrai, mentioned earlier, wouldprove to be the last of the bastionedfortresses can also be found in the factthat by the latter half of the eighteenthcentury, the supremacy of the bastionedsystem of fortification was beingincreasingly challenged by the growingpopularity of another style offortification – the tenaille trace, revivedand developed by another Frenchmen,Marc René, Marquis de Montalembert.The appeal of this new ‘polygonalfortification’ was that it did away withbastions and curtain walls and enableda greater concentration of guns to make

full use of the increased effective rangeof which the latest weapons were thencapable of. Ironically, Montalembert’spioneering ideas found little favour inFrance as most French engineers clungto the traditional models established byVauban, but his concepts were quicklytaken up and developed by the Germansin Prussia and would eventually becomethe established method of fortress-building throughout the rest of Europein the course of the following century.

That Montalembert’s ideas also foundtheir way to Malta is attested by FortTigné, the last significant fortified workbuilt by the knights in Malta in 1793-95.This small fort, more of a redoubt really,was designed by the Order’s residentFrench military engineer StephenTousard who seems to have borrowedheavily from the lunettes built by JeanClaude Eleonore Lemichaud D’Arçon atMontdauphin and elsewhere. With itscircular tower-keep, diamond-shapedplan, and counterscarp musketrygalleries and countermines, it was toprove a definite and clear break from thetraditional bastioned style offortification found around Valletta andits harbours. That however, is anotherstory.

Graphic reconstruction of theGribeauval-type of carriage andemplacement erected by the Knightsin the last decade of their rule.

Left, Scale model of Fort Tigné, the lastmajor work of fortification constructed bythe Knights on Montalembert's 'polygonal'system.

Page 10: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

9 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

and to prohibit enemy landings at M!arrbay. Besides, the plateau’s underlyingsteep Blue Clay cliffs and narrowforeshore rule out the setting up ofoffensive gun platforms by enemyforces, while the site’s proximity to thesea eases the transportation of buildingsupplies. (Figure 2)

The construction of a fortified town atRas it-Tafal, however, would not stopthe enemy from replenishing fresh watersupplies or land at Marsalforn Bay, andis too distant to overpower decisivelyenemy vessels sailing through theMalta Channel. Likewise, effectivesignalling can be achieved from greaterdistances, whereas the requiredrelieving forces can land in any otherbay.

Of greater concern is the gently risingGhajnsielem hinterland, whichdominates Ras it-Tafal and is too vast tobe incorporated within the proposedfortified town. Also, the bedrock is veryfriable and could be mined withoutdifficulty by the enemy, while thebuilding materials that are to bereclaimed from the excavation of theditch are of inferior quality. A newfortified town at Ras it-Tafal would alsobe relatively distant from the mainagricultural region of the Island.

Rinaldini, thus, suggests theconstruction of a coastal tower armedwith four pieces of artillery to preventthe enemy from landing at Mgarr bay orsail through the Gozo Channel. Such atower should endure assaults by smallparties of besiegers, and no large enemyforce would waste its time and energyto defeat it.

The Gran Castello’s only advantages arethe availability of the domestic unitsand the fact that its central locationoffers a quick retreat from all parts ofthe Island. Its setting, however, isseriously deficient. The underlyingfriable cliff face can be mined withrelative ease in view of the Castello’sround shape and lack of flankingoutworks. The existing time-consumeddefensive walls are not stiffened byterrapleins and are not able to resistenemy bombardment for more than twodays, particularly from the Rabat side.(Figure 3)

Moreover, the adjacent hill of Ta’Gelmus dominates the Castello andneighbouring Rabat, and is ideal for thelocation of a rival besieging battery.Should the Castello be reinforced tocounteract such a bombardment fromTa’ Gelmus the majority of the existinghouses are to be knocked down to makeroom for a capacious gun platform,since the existing defensive walls andunderlying cliffs are exceedingly high tobe screened off by a new line offortifications. Consequently, theIsland’s population and their livestock(around 16,000 heads) can no longer beaccommodated therein duringemergencies. This means that Rabat isalso to be enclosed by a new defensivewall that can in turn be easilyneutralised from Ta’ Gelmus, and shouldthe Order opt to construct a small forton Ta’ Gelmus, it will be obliged toconstruct and maintain three newfortifications and not one. Likewise, theresulting expensive and extensivedefence network could still be attackedand breached with relative ease alongits eastern flank. Rinaldini, thus,concludes that the site of the Castello isto be abandoned in view of the manyserious faults highlighted.

Ghajn Damma, referred to as il sito diMarsalforno, is a north-facingpromontory 300 canne long and 180canne wide. The greater extent of itsperimeter is demarcated by sheer cutUpper Coralline cliffs and underlyingsteep Blue Clay slopes, while the mesa

consists of a well compacted and solidrock formation. G’ajn Damma istherefore safe from mining and surpriseattacks from the sea-facing sides,dominates Marsalforn Bay, commandsthe prime agricultural region ofMarsalforn valley (ideal also for thegrouping of livestock duringemergencies), controls the entrance ofRamla Bay, is flanked by Il-Pergla valley(referred to as vallata delli giardini), andcan be relieved from the sea in theeventuality of a siege. (Figure 4)

Below, Graphic reconstruction of theGranCastello prior to Rinaldini's intervention (Il-lustration by Stephen C. Spiteri).

Page 11: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

10 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

The northern half of the Ghajn Dammapromontory offers ample space for theconstruction of a new fortified town toaccommodate the entire population ofthe island and to shelter a substantialportion of the livestock duringemergencies. Its south-facing flankneeds to be defended by a three-bastioned land front, while theremaining perimeter is to be enclosed bya low and indented parapet wall. Inaddition, a tower is to be erected on themost elevated part of the resultantenclosure. This can serve as a platformfor the church’s belfry and establish adirect visual link with the proposedtower at Ras it-Tafal. Should the saidcommunication link fail, another simpletower is to be constructed somewhere inbetween.

Ghajn Damma is also ideally positionedto monitor vessel movements betweenthe Maltese Islands and Sicily, and isreached from Marsalforn valley by amanageable road. Notwithstanding thehighlighted good qualities, the bedrockis extremely hard and will prove to beproblematic for the construction of thehouses and for the excavation of thewater cisterns and of the ditch.

Il-Pergla, referred to as il sito dellaRamla, has the same footprint, elevationand qualities of Ghajn Damma, exceptthat it dominates Ramla and notMarsalforn bay. The bedrock, however,is more workable, a consideration ofextreme relevance for the initialconstruction costs and eventual breachrepairs during enemy assaults. As to theless commanding position in relation to

Marsalforn bay, it is to be borne in mindthat neither of the respective plateausenjoys complete control of both bays(i.e. Marsalforn and Ramla). In thisrespect, Rinaldini ends his PrimoDiscorso by identifying Il-Pergla as themost appropriate site for theconstruction of Gozo’s new fortifiedtown.

Secondo Discorso (Folios. 267 – 282)

Having exhausted the debate onwhether Gozo is to be fortified or notand the sites to be fortified, Rinaldiniopens his second report by stating thathe will be focusing on the layout of theproposed fortifications and theprojected expenses.

Proposed Layout

Rinaldini reconfirms his earlierconclusion about Ras it-Tafal byrepeating that a tower would be fitting,and makes reference to anaccompanying plan. On the contrary,following a reassessment of GhajnDamma it was established that thebedrock is apt for quarrying, while itsconsistency is very similar to that of Il-Pergla. Consequently, the site of G’ajnDamma is preferred in view of itsnarrower land front.

Rinaldini, then, refers to theaccompanying plans, and clarifies themeasurements adopted (whereby acanna is equal to 10 palmi or 1½ passi,and a passo is equal to 5 pied), andexplains its colour coding. The

perpendicular cliffs running along thenorth, west and east facing flanks are tobe crowned by a shallow 800-cannelong parapet wall, whilst the town’s gateis to be positioned along the westernhalf of the south facing land front,therefore, on the same side of theapproaching road from the Marsalfornside.

Had the land front been more extensive,one could have spaced out more therespective bastions, even if theproposed three-bastioned layout is veryeffective and can withstand enemybombardment relatively well. Anyrelieving forces are to reach G’ajnDamma by sea, climb the north-facingsteep Blue Clay slopes and enter thetown through a rock-hewn tunnel at thefoot of the Upper Coralline cliff face,which is to remain walled up undernormal circumstances.

Although dry, the ditch is safe frommining in view of the extreme hardnessof the rock, while its counterscarp is tohave a two-passi wide covered-way tofacilitate movement around and breachrepairs. As to the constructiontechniques, Rinaldini claims that thelocal methods are very prone tobreaching because of the poor bondingbetween the outer skin and thebackfilling and due to the excessive useof un-squared boulders in the samebackfilling.

The Gran Castello is to be abandoned,as any refortification attempts will proveto be futile. It is dominated by the hill ofTa’ Gelmus and by the neighbourhoodof the Franciscan’s Convent, 180 and160 canne distant respectively, and wellwithin the shooting range of thearquebus and the musket. Nonetheless,should the Order persist in retaining theCastello, it can be fortified in fourslightly different manners ashighlighted in the attached designs.

The main southwest-facing land front isto feature two bastions and a centralravelin, and the Castello’s door is to beconcealed from the Ta’ Gelmusviewpoint. Besides, two strongshoulders are to be erected in the westand east extremities to shield the sameland front and the greater part of thehabitations from Ta’ Gelmus and fromthe neighbourhood of the FranciscanFriary respectively.

Page 12: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

11 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

The existing enceinte along theremaining circumference (from thenorth-west to the south-east) is to berendered unassailable by shaving offthe underlying cliff face and bylowering the soil level at its foot,whereas the debris generated is to bepartly employed for the thickening ofthe same enceinte.

To be noted that the resultant fortresswill be unproportionally high, thuseasily hit and damaged by the enemy.Nonetheless, if the fortifications aremade lower the domestic units willbecome exposed completely and theenemy can opt to defeat the Castello bybattering the said houses and force thedefenders into surrender.

Besides, as the Order is not in aposition to stop the enemy from landingon Gozo and plant a gun platform on Ta’Gelmus, a small fort that can take eightor ten pieces of artillery and 300 soldiersis to be erected on the said hill. Such afort, however, will still not render theCastello impregnable since its east-facing flank will remain vulnerable.

With regards the claim that theCastello’s surrounding terrain is notstable enough to withstand the weightof the proposed fortifications, it is to bestressed that the said terrain is of verygood quality, particularly when it comesto breach repairs and related emergencymitigation measures.

Provided that the Order is determined toretain the Castello, the existing walls areto be stiffened by terrapliens, whereasthe abandoned houses are to be

repaired to accommodate theinhabitants of Rabat. All stonebarricades lying within a radius of 200canne are to be removed and Rabat is tobe raised to the ground and levelled.Besides, the recently repaired Rabatmuraglia is to be pulled down. At thispoint Rinaldini replicates once more thatGozo’s new fortified town is to be sitedat Ghajn Damma.

Projected Expenses

The capital investment required forGhajn Damma is very difficult toquantify in view of the hardness of therock. However, it should not beunbearably expensive as the span of theproposed bastioned front is only 200canne long and the stones reclaimed areto be employed for the construction ofthe same fortifications. The parapet wallalong the remaining circumference canbe erected with 1600 scudi (2 scudi percanna), and another 2000 scudi arerequired as sundry expenses. Thus, thetotal expenditure for G’ajn Dammashould not exceed 80,000 scudi.

An estimate of the costs to be incurredin connection with the refortification ofthe Castello is equally intricate. Thebuilding stones are to be sourced fromthree different localities (Figure 3),namely San Giuliano (Wied Saraneighbourhood) (4), Santa Agnese(Gran Fontana neighbourhood) (5) andthe Nunziata (Lunzjata valley).Conversely, the expense to be incurredin connection with the excavation of theditch can be calculated with relativeease in view of the workability of theterrain. This is estimated to reach aminimum of 12,800 scudi (8 tari x 19,200canne cube), and possibly escalate to15,000 scudi when taking into accountalso the shaving off of cliff face alongthe northern enceinte.

The erection of the proposed bastionedland front seems to be achievable with25,000 scudi. Besides, 10,000 scudi arerequired for the scaffolding, andanother 10,000 scudi for the provisionof various supplies and related sundryexpenses. This means that the Castellocan be refortified with 60,000 scudi. Asto the fort on Ta’ Gelmus the projectedexpense depends on the type of artilleryto be deployed. Rinaldini ends his

second report by stating that the saidworks could be completed within twoyears.

In a nutshell, Rinaldini advocated theOrder to defend the Island of Gozo byconstructing a coastal tower at Ras it-Tafal and a new fortified town at G’ajnDamma. These were to be linkedtogether visually via one or two towers.Likewise, the Gran Castello andunderlying Rabat were to beabandoned. The Order, however,decided to retain and re-fortify theCastello (1599 – 1620’s), and toconstruct Garzes tower (1607) at Il-Blatal-Bajda (Figure 2), and the firstMarsalforn tower (1616) at G’ajnDamma. (6)

Godwin Vella, B.A. (Hons.)(Archaeology), MBA is manager, GozoMuseums and Sites, within HeritageMalta.

Notes and References

1.Samut-Tagliaferro A., 1993, The oastalFortifications of Gozo and Comino, (MidseaPublications – Malta), 47.2. Spiteri Stephen C., 'The Role of theMilitary Engineer in the Organization of theHospitalier Military Order of St John',Paper presented during the InternationalConference on Fortifications and SeaBorder. The development of bulwarkedfortifications from the Mediterranean to theAtlantic between the 15th and 18th century(Centre d’Informacio Jove de l’Ajuntamentd’Eivissa), http://cijae.eivissa.org.3. The last section of AOM 6554 (Folios251 – 327) is entitled “Discorsi sopra leFortificatione del Gozzo”. 4.Agius De Soldanis G.P.F., 1999, GozoAncient and Modern, Religious and Profane,Media Centre Publications – Malta, 82.5. Ibid., 79.6. Samut-Tagliaferro, 48.

Above, Garzes Tower, as seen from thelandward side to the rear, after SalvatoreBusuttil. The tower was demolished in thenineteenth century.

Page 13: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

12 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

THE ART OFFORTRESSBUILDING INHOSPITALLERMALTA

byDr Stephen C Spiteri

By dr. Stephen C. Spiteri

The religious and military Order of knightsof St. John sought to affirm its destiny instone. Its long military history can be saidto have been moulded by ramparts of stone.Indeed, the one constant feature of theHospitaller war machine throughout its longsix hundred-year history was its heavyreliance on formidable stongholds and forts.In all the theatres of war in which the Orderestablished its convent - the Latin East,Rhodes, and Malta - fortifications were theOrder’s prime instrument of war. Withouttheir fortified bases, the knights would nothave been able to take the war to theirenemies, nor defend themselves from theheavy retaliatory blows that were sure tofollow. The castles and fortresses of Syriaand the Latin East such as Crac deChevaliers,Marqab and Belvoir, togetherwith the fortresses of Rhodes and theDodecanese islands and the bastionedenceintes and towers of Malta all standmonument to the importance that theHospitaller knights assigned to the designand construction of their fortifications.Nowhere was this commitment to buildfortresses, however, so manifestly evidentas during the Maltese period of the Order’slong military history.In the two-and-a-halfcenturies that the knights occupied theMaltese islands, they transformed themfrom a barren outpost on the fringes of theEuropean mainland, what was then adependency of the Spanish crown, into afront line bulwark for all Christendom andone of the heaviest defended islandsanywhere in the world – literally an island-fortress in the centre of the Mediterranean.

This prodigious fortress-building effort wasmade possible by the Order’ssinglemindedness of purpose and the hugefinancial resources that the knights wereable to muster and funnel into their

ambitious building programmes. Equallyimportant, was the Order’s highly efficientform of government, run on a relativelystable constitution that had been developedand perfected very early in its formationand one that allowed it a continuity andconsistency in its actions.By the time of thearrival of the Order in Malta in 1530, theHospitallers had acquired a long fortress-building tradition. Their administrative andorganizational mechanism, geared towardsperpetual warfare, had developed, over thecenturies, into a highly efficient structure.

The Art of Fortress Building in HospitallerMalta was an exhibition that drew attentionto this unique building process. Organizedby the National Library and Dr StephenC Spiteri with the assistance of theFortress Explorer Society and theSuperintendence of Cultural Heritageunder the auspices of the InternationalInstitute of Baroque Studies, UOM, itfocused on the issues that military engineershad to contend with in the implementationof fortress schemes, following theconstruction of a complex work offortification throughout its many stagesandalso examining the organization of theworkforce, the workings of the fortificationatelier, and the roles played by militaryengineers, commissioners, surveyors,draughtsmen, master-masons and thevarious skilled craftsmen and labourers.

A crucial aspect of this exhibition was toshow how the knights themselves and theircontemporaries recordedthis extensivebuilding activity. The end product is asynthesis of contemporary engineers’ andcommissioners’ reports, originalarchitectural plans and maps, buildingcontracts and ‘appalti’, minutes of themeetings of the Order’s council and theCongregation of War and Fortification,testimonials, notarial deeds, and numerous

‘supplichi’ by master-masons, skilledcraftsmen, and other individuals involved inthe building industry. The story is also toldby means of specially designed panels,detailed scale models of fortifications,building tools and replica instruments. (Anonline catalogue can be downloaded fromwww.fortress-explorer.org/exh_catal.html)The art of fortification in the Malteseislands throughout the Order’s rule was acomplex and multifaceted activity that grewto impinge upon many aspects of theknights’ organizational, military, andtechnical capabilities. The numerous and ongoing schemes of fortification impressedthemselves not only upon the Order itselfbut also, inevitably, upon the Maltesesociety in general. The extent to which thewhole fortification enterprise affected theMaltese milieu was considerable. Asidefrom the financial benefits derived from thelarge sums of money drawn from abroad,which filtered down into the economy ingeneral, the fortification works providedwide employment, generating in theprocess, a prosperous quarrying andbuilding industry. On the other hand, theimposition of taxation and other financialburdens did lead to a growing sense ofresentment among the inhabitants which,coupled with other long-standing grievances,eventually resulted in the downfall of theOrder. But there is no denying the fact thatthe fortifications did provide the inhabitantswith an increasing sense of security,especially from 1566 onwards. At no timein their past history had the Malteseinhabitants been so well protected againstinvasion and predatory piratical raids asthey were throughout the seventeenth andeighteenth centuries. The populationexplosion which the Maltese islandswitnessed throughout the two hundredyears or so of the Order’s rule must havebeen, to some extent, ascribable to theeffects of the fortress building activity.

Page 14: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

13 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

Within the military and technical sphere, thebuilding of fortifications throughout theperiod under review was characterized byan effort aimed at establishing an all-encompassing defensive strategy designedto cover the whole of the island (includingGozo). This, in turn dictated an ever-broadening span of projects and a parallelincrease in organizational and logisticalcommitments. The whole process reachedits climax by the middle of the eighteenthcentury with the erection of works such asFort Manoel, Fort Chambrai and the coastaldefences of St Julians, Birzebbuga andArmier. The effort becomes all the moreimpressive when one realizes that it wasaccompanied by a similarly huge investmentdesigned to bring to completion many of themonumental, yet largely unfinished,seventeenth-century Baroque schemesaround the harbour area – the enceintes ofFloriana, Firenzuola and Cottonera.In terms of military architecture, however,the eighteenth century cannot be viewed inisolation from the previous epochs,particularly the 1600s, when the basicfundamental strategy and many of theprocesses that were to condition the finalconfiguration of the fortifications were laiddown by the Order. Indeed, a considerablepart of the building effort invested duringthe 1700s was intended to bring tocompletion and rationalize the seventeenthcentury monumental schemes. This was nomean task in itself especially since most ofthese vast enceintes had still to be fittedwith outerworks and many of the othernecessary elements of defence such asretrenchments, magazines, and barracks.If one can identify any characteristicdifference between seventeenth andeighteenth century defensive works, thismust surely be the fact that the monumentalBaroque schemes of vast and continuousbastioned enceintes projected during the

1600s, such as the Floriana, Sta Margheritaand Cottonera lines, had begun to give wayto a preference for a system of smallerdetached works as the eighteenth centurywore on. With the exception of the overtlyambitious schemes of the coastal lines ofentrenchments, which were designed toenvelope the shores within miles-longstretches of ramparts, a scheme which,however, was quickly abandoned, thedefences erected during the 1700scomprised mainly of small batteries,redoubts, and detached forts. Although itcan be argued that this development wassomewhat dictated by the state of theOrder’s dwindling financial resources, it alsoreflects the increasing trend in militarycircles towards a new style of militaryarchitecture – a shift from the traditionalbastioned enceintes to the new polygonalsystems that was to become the fashionthroughout later centuries. This evolution isbest illustrated at Fort Tigné, the lastsignificant work of fortification erected bythe knights and one which was influencedby the writings of the Frenchmen, MarcRene, Marquis de Montalembert. Ironically,Montalembert’s pioneering ideas found littlefavour in France since most Frenchengineers clung to the traditional conceptsestablished by Vauban.And it is largely to Vauban’s influence thatthe Order’s defensive works in the Malteseislands during the eighteenth century owemuch of their shape and appearance. Indeed,the second important characteristic featureof the Order’s eighteenth centuryfortifications is that they are all a productof French military architecture, as opposedto the previous two centuries where thefortifications were invariably of Italiandesign. This was no coincidence, for by thelate 1600s the Order found itself shiftingfrom the imperial into the French sphere ofinfluence, lured by France’s growing

military might and prestige in the world.And in military architecture, France wasthen undisputedly the leading exponent.

The real connection began with GrandMaster Perellos’ request to King Louis XIVfor military assistance following theemergency of 1714, when the Island wasonce again threatened with attack by theTurks. The generous French response wasas much a case of political alliance as it wasa calculated act of propaganda. For alongwith French guns, cannon, and munitionscame also a corps of French militaryadvisors. Brigadier René Jacques de Tigné,

Excavation of fortress ditch in the Maltese rocky terrain.

The 18th centurysaw theintroduction ofexplosives (fornelli)in quarrying ofditches andclearance ofground.

Page 15: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

17 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

stone in the manner of permanentfortifications rather than in earth. In suchcases, however, a dry-stone wallingtechnique, known as ‘à pietra à secco’, wasemployed without the use of mortaralthough at times wet soil was used toprovide a degree of binding strength to suchworks. The use of earth as a binding mortar,even in normal ramparts, was a practicewhich remained in widespread usethroughout the 1700s. Many engineersdecried this habit as earth did not producevery strongly bonded walls, especially inrepair works. Others believed it was a goodcost-effective substitute that could beresorted to in order to cut down onexpenses, for the production of limeconsumed vast amounts of wood fuel.Although, wherever possible drybrushwood, collected from around thecountryside, was used to fire the kilns, thepressure of ongoing works meant that therewas also a heavy reliance on importedtimber, inevitably raising the cost ofproduction of this important material and attimes causing difficulties in meeting therequired production quotas.

The scarcity of timber can also be gaugedfrom the fact that even as late as 1782 manyfortress gateways were still lacking theirwooden doors and drawbridges, some ofwhich had to be walled up. The list ofbuilding materials present on site during thebuilding of Fort Chambrai, for example,shows how every single piece of timber wasinventoried and accounted for. Col.Morshead, Commanding RE in Malta in1832, records how the woodwork of mostcoastal towers and redoubts around theisland had been ‘stolen and carried’ away bythe public.

The eighteenth century also witnessed theneed for greater control over all buildingmaterials and supplies. New, and firmer,regulations were laid down by the ChapterGeneral of 1776 in order to ensure greateraccountability over the resources,particularly the supplies of wood, metal,lime and pozzolana held in variousmagazines, with consignments of newstocks having to take place in the presenceof auditors and detailed records kept of allprovisions.

The eighteenth century saw ever-increasingburdens imposed by an ever-growingsystem of fortifications. By the latter halfof the 1700s, it was no longer possible togive attention to all the elements in thedefences and inevitably some areas wentneglected for many a decade. Even so, theOrder exerted great effort to maintain thefortifications in a reasonable state of repairand even when impoverished by theconfiscation of its European revenuestowards the end of the 1700s, it alwayssought to allocate some funds towards theupkeep of the fortifications. By 1795,however, many repair works had to besuspended and subsequently abandoned fora lack of funds.

Like today, most of the causes of decayresulted from erosion, torrential rains andvegetation, and even the inhabitants werenot lacking in contributing to the spoliationof parapets and walkways. The knightswere also not impartial to allowingconsiderable sections of the fortifications toserve as private orchards and gardens, andeven as a form of social housing for thepoorer sections of the Maltese society – anunmilitary practice that did little tocontribute towards the overall upkeep andgood state of repair.

The picture that emerges of thefortifications during the eighteenth centuryis that of a complex network of defenceswhere nearly all of the defensivecomponents had been laid out according tothe defensive master plan established earlierat the beginning of the century by Tigné.Some areas such as the Corradino heightsand Ta’Xbiex, however, still lacked anyfortifications and even Dragut Point hadonly just been fortified with a small newwork that was completed in 1795. Many,though not all, of the forts and fortresseshad been fitted with all basic adjuncts ofdefence – outerworks and countermines,glacis, powder magazines, drawbridges,sally-ports etc. Yet the whole system,although generally depicted quite neatly oncontemporary maps and plans of theharbour was still not quite so complete in allits details. Bourlamaque’s remark, in 1761,that Fort Manoel was a ‘model offortification’ could not be said of all theother fortifications, including those on thenearby island of Gozo, and of the system ofcoastal defences.

This state of affairs emerges very clearlyfrom the early reports of the Britishmilitary in the nineteenth century. TheBritish documents show that even thoughthe fortifications were hardly tested inaction during the French blockade and were,therefore, inherited in a relativelyundamaged state, they appear in a prevailingstate of unreadiness, and sometimesdisrepair. Notably lacking were infantrybanquettes and firing platforms while manyditches, scarps, countermines, and glaciswere on the whole uncompleted. Indeed,they echo in a way many earlier reportsprepared by the Order’s engineers and helpbear out the fact that the knights lacked theresources during their last years on theIsland to enable them to maintain and finishall the defensive works.

Yet this was not the reason why the wholenetwork of defence works succumbed toNapoleon’s troops when finally put to thetest in 1798. Ironically, neither the well-thought out and engineered design solutionsadopted by the Order’s engineers nor thecarefully chosen building materials and time-proven methods employed by the localbuilders played any part at all in the dramaof the Order’s capitulation. It was the Orderof St John itself, and not the walls withwhich it had sought for centuries tosurround itself, that had collapsed.

Graphic reconstruction and cutaway of theconical polverista at Fort Chambrai (builtby Francesco Marandon), with its sfiatatori(aeriation vents) designed to keep thepowder dry.

Page 16: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

18 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

INSULARSENTINEL:ST. MARYTOWERCOMINO

byDr Stephen C Spiteri

There was a time, particularly in the latemiddle ages, when a journey across theFliegu - the channel separating Malta fromGozo - was not so pleasant an experience. Itwas a trip to be avoided if possible, and oneundertaken at great peril. Unlike thosemaking the crossing today, those bygonetravellers would have nervously scoured theseas for any sign of suspicious vessels,ready to turn back at the double at the leastsign of danger. Their real trouble would havestarted midway across the channel as theysailed by the island of Comino. For ratherthan the idyllic and tranquil location that itpresents today, Kemmuna was then atreacherous haven for pirates and corsairs, a‘nidu et latibulu di li ... sarrayni’, hidinginside its cliff-side caves, waiting to pounceupon hapless and unarmed boats plyingbetween the islands. Many, indeed, werethose unfortunate enough to fall prey tothese marauding corsairs, dragged away to amiserable life of slavery.

The Maltese and Gozitan authorities wereunderstandably concerned with thesituation. As early as 1418, we find theUniversita of Malta determined to build atower on Comino. In the following year theinhabitants petitioned King Alphonse V ofAragon for his royal approval. In theirpetition they stressed the danger of the‘continui invasioni deceptioni et dapmi ki lidicti fusti de moru fannu continue a la dictainsola a loro habitaturi’ and that it was vital,therefore, to ‘hedificari una turri a la insoladi cominu’. The king, through his viceroys,approved the request but rather than forkingout the money, decreed that the Universitawould have to impose a local tax to defraythe building costs. The Maltese dutifullyaccepted, imposed a tax on imported wine,and collected the necessary funds but themoney found its way into Alfonso’s war-starved coffers and the tower was never

built.The need for the tower, however, wassorely felt through the course of thefifteenth century, and although the issuewas raised again in 1488, following anotherdevastating Turkish razzia, the desireddefensive work failed to materialize.The knights of St. John too, were quick toappreciate the threat posed by the littleisland to the safety of the new island home.In 1533, ten Barbary galleys, after havingraided Malta and sacked the hamlet ofGudja, carrying away four peasants andtheir livestock, proceeded to Comino wherethey stayed for three days. Grand MasterL-Isle Adam, wishing to prevent arecurrence of the situation, quickly sent hisFlorentine military engineer Piccin, then justreturned from Tripoli, to visit Comino anddraw up plans for the building of anadequate tower. In the event, however, withso many urgent defence requirements to beattended to, the Piccin’s design wasforgotten and the knights refrained frominvesting in any form of fortification on thelittle island.

As a matter of fact, it was only after theOrder was securely settled in its newfortress city of Valletta, the knights began toconcern themselves with the defence of theremote parts of their little domain. The firstGrand Master to consider the problem ofthe Fliegu was Nicholas Garzes, who left inhis will money for the building of a strongartillery tower at Mgarr harbour,overlooking the channel. It was hissuccessor, Grand Master Alof de

Wignacourt, however, who finally erectedthe desired structure. On 11 October, 1618,Wignacourt informed his Venerable Councilof his intention to erect a tower at his own

expense on the island of Comino. This wasto be the sixth of a total of seven coastaltowers built during Wignacourt’s reign – theothers, were sited at St Paul Bay (1609), StLucian (1610), St Thomas (1614),Marsalforn (1616 – paid for by the Order)and Sta Maria Delle Grazie (1620). At17,628. 5.10 scudi, the Comino Tower wasto prove the costliest of them all. Work on itbegan in 1618.

Traditionally, the structure is said to havebeen designed by Vittorio Cassar: For somereason, Gian Frangisk Abela, writing in1647, attributes the design to him. The onlyproblem with Abela’s assertion is the factthat Cassar died in 1609!. Aside from thisjarring discrepancy, there is then the factthat the only tower that Cassar seems tohave been indirectly involved with, TorreGarzes in Mgarr, initially designed byGiovanni Rinaldini in 1599, was totallydifferent in shape and form from theComino tower. Indeed, what really makes allthe Wignacourt towers unique (except for

Graphic reconstructionshowing the roofed faussebrayedesigned to serve as a musketrygallery as shown in contemporarysketch, top right.

Page 17: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

19 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

the Marsalforn one built in 1616) are theircorner-turrets, rudimentary and embryonicform of bastions, as Dr. Quentin Hughescalled them. These projecting corner turrets,like bastions, were designed to provide adegree of flanking fire. Rather than beingsimple towers, therefore, Wignacourt’scoastal structures were veritable gunpowderforts – or fortini – as they were frequentlycalled. The towers’ solid manner ofconstruction – the thick masonry walls(about 6 m at the base) and barrel-vaultedinteriors 'à prova di bomba' – also showsthat these structures were designed servemore than lookout posts - they weredesigned to absorb punishment and mountheavy pieces of artillery, guns which wererequired to engage enemy ships over longdistances.

Although, as a rule the Wignacourt towersfollowed a common design concept, StMary Tower (as the Comino Tower came tobe called) has many unique and interestingfeatures that set it distinctly apart from itssister structures. To begin with, there is itsheight of 65 feet (19.6m), some 25 ft higherthan the other towers, an extension deemednecessary to provide a commanding viewover the island and its environs. This extraheight is frequently attributed to themasonry plinth, on which the tower is saidto be raised. However, this is only anillusion, for the so-called ‘plinth’ is actuallyan external buttress designed to reinforce thebase of the barrel-vaulted structure in orderto counter the lateral thrusts of the twosuperimposed barrel vaults. What makesthe linth interesting, however, is that ratherthan being finished to form a scarped lowerhalf of the tower, it was levelled out andmade to provide a wide passage around thefloor level of the upper vault; this passage(2.5m wide) was then enclosed by a walland roofed over to provide a defensivefeature in the form an all-round musketrygallery pierced with loopholes for close-in-defence, what in some documents is referredto as a falsabraga. This enclosure alsocontained a gateway served by a basculetype of drawbridge a’ fleccie, and wasapproached up a masonry flight of steps.Although no longer visible today, thisgallery is clearly illustrated in a sketchfound in a Hospitaller document of theperiod (see illustration).

Internally, as already stated, the tower’sstructure consisted of two barrel-vaults, onebuilt above the other, with the uppermosthaving a greater height. At some later stage,the upper vault was subdivided into twofloors, each divided into four square rooms;an adhoc arrangement, possibly intended toenable the tower to accommodate the 25 to30 soldiers which were stationed there

during the emergencies of 1635 and 1645, orperhaps even later when it was being usedas a prison.

Surrounding the tower, at ground level was acrudely-formed glacis, built from the rock-chippings and other debris generated in thecourse of the quarrying and shaping of thestone used in the construction of the tower.A solitary sally-port, opening into the faceof the plinth on the west side of the towerprovided access to the ‘ditch’ enveloped bythe glacis. This opening was fitted with itsown portcullis, which dropped from a slit inthe ceiling of the vaulted passageway.Apparently, the original design madeprovisions for a second postern, situated onthe opposite side of the tower, but thesecond vaulted passageway was blocked upwith masonry and sealed off early in thebuilding stage.

To the defend itself, and command thesurrounding seas, Comino Tower had itsown battery of guns. By 1761, thesenumbered six in all, two 12-pdr iron cannon,and four bronze pieces, a 10-pdr, a 4-pdrand two 3-pdrs. Two 26-pdrs proposed inby D’Arginy and Bachalieu in 1715apparently were never installed. The gunswere mounted on the roof of the tower, and

Details of tower, showing reconstructedmizieb, and putlog holes for wooden beamswhich once supported the roof of themusketry gallery on the faussebraye.

Page 18: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

20 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

as such were only useful in long-distancecounter bombardment role, against shipssailing through the channel. Given theheight, they would have been of little use inthe defence of the tower itself.St Mary Tower saw little military action. Itserved its time mainly as a deterrent andsignalling post, conveying signals fromGozo to Malta, its guns used more to firesalutes whenever the Grand Master’sgalleon sailed past the island. The littleisland was by–passed by the French duringtheir invasion of the Maltese islands in 1798and during the subsequent blockade of theFrench by the Anglo-Maltese forces (1798-1800) it served out its days as a place ofinternment for spies and suspectedFrancophiles. Militarily, the tower wasabandoned in 1829 and devolved to the localcivil authorities. It saw service once again

during both World War I and World War II.The Armed Forces of Malta took it over in1982 as a lookout post against contrabandand the illegal hunting of migratory birds atsea, until in 2002 it was handed over to Dinl-Art Helwa, Malta’s national trust, forrestoration and cultural use.

The restoration works, which wereundertaken between 2002 and 2004, weremainly designed to consolidate andrehabilitate the building. Structurally, thetower has retained its integrity reasonablywell throughout close to 400 hundred years.Sent to inspect the Comino tower in 1681,the knight Fra Ugo de Floregni Vauvillierscould only find a few worn out steps on thedetached stairway ramp and someconsumed masonry blocks on the side walls.Since then, the only elements to disappear

have been the roofed musketry gallery andthe terrace parapet with its gallerymachicolation (gallerija tal-mishun) andmusketry loopholes, and even these, ratherthan having fallen off of their own accord,seem to have been systematicallydismantled over the years for their material– timber beams, xorok slabs and smooth-faced blocks – which were carried away tobe re-utilized elsewhere.

Thanks to Din l-Art Helwa’s efforts, thepublic can now visit the tower to admire itsarchitecture and enjoy the breathtaking 360views of Comino and its surrounding seasfrom the roof. As from last April Din L-ArtHelwa volunteers have been opening thetower on weekends and this year a specialopen week was held from 18th to 24th June.

CHAPTERS

Fortress Building before 1530The Making of a Bulwark of Christendom

Completion of a SchemeThe Administration of Fortress Building

The Principles of defencesProposals, Plans and Foundations

The Structure and Form of RampartsGateways and Sally-ports

Auxiliary BuildingsOuterworks, Countermines, and Glacis

Towers, Coastal Works, & Field DefencesBuilding Materials

Building Equipment and ToolsRepair and Maintenance

Arming the FortressPostscriptum - The Early 1800s

Fully documented texthundreds of original drawings,plans, maps and photographs,book size : 170 x 240 mm

paper quality : 135 grm matt artpaperpaperback & hardboundISBN: 99932-648-2-8 (H/B)ISBN: 99932-648-3-5 (H/B)

BOOK DETAILS COLOUR PUBLICATION

600 PAGES

Page 19: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

14 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

who headed the mission, was then one ofthe most experienced engineers in Francewith 26 years of service. Assisting him wasCharles François de Mondion, and a troopof lesser engineers. Between them, thesetwo military experts would effectivelyreshape the Order’s military establishment,dictating the course of the development anddesign of military architecture in theMaltese islands throughout the rest of thecentury. Mondion would eventually go onto serve the Order as resident engineer untilhis death in December 1733. His eighteen

years of service represent the most intenseperiod of fortress-building activity in theIsland’s history wherein some of the bestand most beautiful examples of forts andfortifications were erected and where mostof the existing fortifications were eitherremodelled or finished with all the modernadjuncts of defence that eighteenth centuryFrench military architecture could offer.

During this seminal period, the ensuingimprint of French ideas extended to cover allaspects of military architecture, from theplanimetric design of a fort down to thedecorative elements of baroque gateways.Not surprisingly, many of these newelements, such as the purposely-builtpolveriste and drawbridge mechanismsintroduced by Mondion were described inthe Order’s documents as being à la Vauban.

It was not simply new devices, however,that the French military engineers broughtover with them to the Malta. They alsohelped usher in a new sense ofprofessionalism in the field of militaryarchitecture. The prima donna attitude ofmany an earlier haughty Italian militaryengineers, such as Floriani and Laparelli,was replaced by disciplined men who werethe product of a controlled system and aformalized school of engineering. Thesystematical and methodical approach ofthe French military mind is perhaps bestreflected in the many well-prepared andbeautifully executed plans of thefortifications projects still to be foundpreserved in the National Library in Valletta

together with their accompanying analyticalreports. These scaled, meticulously detailedtechnical drawings and sectional elevations,drawn to an established convention,contrast markedly with the relativelycrudely-executed designs of the earlierItalian engineers.

The Order’s documents also reveal afortress-building activity that followed veryclosely the contemporary technicalpractices, in consonant with theconventions of the profession at the time –from the techniques of surveying to thegeometric configuration of plans; from thedesign of countermine tunnels andgunpowder magazines to the workingmechanisms of drawbridges; from thegradient of ramparts walls to theornamentation of Baroque gateways.Indeed, the close resemblance of some of theadopted solutions to designs featured invarious illustrated treatises of the period,such as those of Bernard Forrest deBelidor’s treatise La Science des Ingénieursdans la conduits des travaux de fortificationet d’architecture civile, stand witness tohow instrumental printed material hadbecome in exporting ideas and standardizingpatterns. The attempts to introduce theGribeavaul carriage in the late 1780s, forexample, also stands witness to the desire toremain in line with all the latesttechnological developments.The knights and their military engineers,however, did not simply keep abreast ofdevelopments but were at times even able tolead the field. The development of thefougasse-pierrier, the bonded-merlon

Diagram showing thedifferent typologies of parapet

construction in Hospitallerfortifications. Far left,

reconstruction of the radiolatino used for measuring

distances and surveying(courtesy of Mr. George

Grima).

Page 20: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

15 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

reinforced against displacement (at FortChambrai), and most importantly, theconstruction of Fort Tigné, one of the firsttruly polygonal forts, were importantcontributions to the art of fortification –they were to exert a profound influence onthe British military throughout the course ofthe nineteenth century.The stimulus of foreign ideas was balancedby the local building practices, dependent asthese were on the nature of buildingmaterials and long-established traditions,and by the idiosyncrasies of nativeexpertise. Above all, the Order’s builderswere constrained to operate within a long-established administrative andorganizational framework that had changedlittle from the time of the Order’s earlyyears in Rhodes. This structure wasprimarily designed to retain direct controlover the whole process securely in thehands of the knights – from the selection ofthe engineer down to the distribution ofmaterials and supplies, at all levels of thebuilding process. The only notabledevelopment throughout the 1700s was thatthe whole apparatus became somewhatlarger and more bureaucratized, a trendcommon to most of the other institutions ofthe Order throughout this period.

The official to emerge most in charge of thefortification building process during theeighteenth century was the residentengineer. Mondion, Marandon, the Balì deTigné and Tousard acquired a freedom ofoperation, particularly in designing andconceiving new projects, that would havebeen the envy of their seventeenth-centurycounterparts. Hitherto, such a privilege hadgenerally rested solely with the visitingexperts invited over to advise on specificprojects. Reliance on direct foreign expertisein the earlier Hospitaller tradition is largelyconspicuous for its absence throughout the1700s. To a large degree this is explained bythe fact that Tigné’s scheme was adoptedby the Order as the definitive master planfor the defence of the fortifications in 1715in an attempt to prevent a recurrence of theneedless expenditure and changes of planthat had resulted from an over-abundance ofconflicting advice from numerous foreignexperts during the late 1600s. Although, inreality, Mondion, Marandon, and the Balide Tigné were simply working within theplan originated and masterminded by Tigné,they were still able to achieve more thanjust the supervision of the day-to-dayworks. Marandon, for example, inventedand introduced the fougasse, and Mondionredesigned Fort Manoel and built variousgateways among other projects. The soleexception to this pattern was the visit of theFrench military mission, headed byBourlamaque, which was called in during theemergency of 1761. Even so, this brief

interlude did not lead to the implementationof any substantial new works.The eighteenth century building effort wasdriven by a locally raised workforce. Thelabour shortages of the sixteenth and earlyseventeenth centuries had given way to asurplus of manpower by the 1700s and atleast one documented instance has beenencountered where fortification schemeswere purposely used as an opportunity toprovide work for hard pressed inhabitants.The smaller scale of the eighteenth centurybuilding projects, when compared to themassive seventeenth century schemes meantthat although the actual size of a work forceat any one site was considerably muchsmaller, there were usually many morebuilding projects going on at the same time.In one of his reports, for example, Tignérecords that during the final phases of theworks on the Floriana lines there were onlytwo masons working on the left branch ofthe hornwork and on the construction ofsome traverses in the ditch. Again, thebuilding of Fort Chambrai, in the 1750snever saw more than 200 persons labouringon site. This contrasts sharply with the4,000 or so men toiling on mount Sciberrasin 1566. Yet in the years 1715-1720 therewere over fifty separate building projectsmaterializing all across the archipelago.There is then the fact that there was neverthe same sense of urgency during the 1700sas there had been during the construction ofValletta. Fortifications built in times ofpeace progressed much more slowly thanthose put up in times of war.

The late eighteenth century also saw theOrder attempt to introduce and maintainsquadrons of sappers for use in times ofsiege, in imitation of the practice which wasbeing introduced in most European armiesof the time. These were generally based on asystem of volunteers, recruited from thevarious guilds and comprised a company200-strong by the time of the Frenchinvasion in 1798.

In terms of building methods and materials,the eighteenth century saw little divergencefrom earlier practices. The fortress-buildingactivity remained a predominantly labour-intensive one where tools and equipmentemployed had not changed much fromearlier medieval and Roman times. Nocomplex mechanical devices seem to haveever been employed for shifting largevolumes of earth or lifting of huge weights.The one notable introduction was the use ofexplosives (fornelli) to facilitate thequarrying and clearing of rocky sites, apractice which was used extensively duringthe construction of the coastalentrenchments in the second half of theeighteenth century.Stone was the basic building block offortress construction, its quarrying,transportation, and dressing similarlyunchanged from earlier epochs. The size ofthe stone blocks was still that which wasintroduced in the earlier days of Hospitallerrule (course height of 41cms). The onlydevelopment was the application ofrustication, but this was largely limited tothe smaller coastal works and was added

Counterforts and casemates used toreinforce rampart construction, as employedalong the fausse-braye of the FlorianaLines.

Page 21: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

16 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

mainly for aesthetic rather than militarypurposes. The sandwiched form of rampartconstruction, with earth filling, remained thestandard form of wall building, though outerface walls were given a steeper gradient inline with the formula established by Vaubanand later engineers. Earth retained itsimportance as the best effective shockabsorber in the formation of ramparts andcontinued to form the body of terrepleinsand glacis, though the scarcity of soil in the

French engineers found little merit in such amanner of construction they tended torecommend the strengthen of the existingbreastworks (by raising their height) ratherthan their substitution for earthen ones,given the magnitude of such a task.

The scarcity of earth also meant that eventhe usually more ephemeral field defences,as introduced in the shape of coastal andinland entrenchments during the course ofthe eighteenth century, had to be built of

Maltese islands usually meant that theterreplein had largely to be composed of therock and stone chippings generated duringthe quarrying of the ditch. The splinteringqualities of this type of deblai made its usein parapets and other breastworks quitedangerous to the guncrews and defendingtroops sheltering behind parapets. As aresult, local parapets continued to berevetted with dressed stone and designed toresist displacement rather than absorb themomentum of incoming shot. Although the

RESOURCES ON THE WEBThe Construction Industryand the Aesthetics ofMilitary Architecturetaken from Ayyubid Architecture by Terry AllenISBN 0-944940-02-1

This chapter deals with the development of a military style inmasonry, what the existence of that style indicates about the attitudeof Crusader and Muslim architects, and what effects milirtaryconstruction campaigns may have had on the construction industry

and Islamic civil architecture.

CLICK PHOTO TO ACCESS WEBSITE

Lifting devices and digging and shovellingtools used in Maltese fortress construction -a predominantly labour-intensive effort.

Page 22: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

21 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

With a growing urban population, however,the demand for water also became a problemin times of peace. By the end of thesixteenth century the collection of rainwateralone was no longer sufficient to meet theeveryday needs of the inhabitants ofValletta. As a result the knights began toconsider the possibility of utilizingalternative sources of supply situated welloutside the city itself particularly thoselocated in the highlands around theBoschetto area to the north of the island. In1596, a Jesuit by the name of PadreGiacomo was brought in to advise on thismatter. His proposals were immediatelyaccepted and work taken in hand on theconstruction of an aqueduct although thishad soon to be suspended once it becameevident that the resulting cost was going tobe far in excess of the original estimates.Works, however, recommenced in 1610 on

the advice of another Jesuit by the name ofPadre Natale Tomasucci and was continuedunder the direction of Bontadino Bontadin,a hydraulic expert from Bologna, assistedby Giovanni Attard amongst others, a localcapomastro who had indicated how theaqueduct could be carried across certaindepression in the ground. The newaqueduct, commenced and completed duringthe magistracy of Alof de Wignacourt,became operational in 1615 and provided amore reliable and plentiful supply of waterto the relief of the inhabitants of Valletta aswell as the military authorities who couldnot have contemplated the water situationwith confidence in the event of a anothersiege, particular at a time when the Turkshad once again begun to venture deep intothe western Mediterranean.The Order’s military administrationentrusted all matters related to theprovisioning of its fortified places to aspecial commission of knights known as theCongregation of War and Fortification.Among its members was the residentmilitary engineer whose duty it was to lookinto the question of the supply of water.Mederico Blondel, for example, wasfrequently instructed to inspect the watersupply of Mdina and the harbour towns.In 1708, this task was entrusted by GrandMaster Perellos to the Italian architectRomano Carapecchia. His first task was tocarry out a preliminary survey of all publicwater cisterns within the fortified enclavesof Floriana, Valletta, Fort St. Elmo, FortRicasoli, Fort St. Angelo, Vittoriosa,Bormla, Senglea and Cottonera. It wouldseem that the ageing Grand Master had beenperturbed with the vulnerability of theaqueduct built in the previous century withthe objective of supplying fresh spring

water to Valletta, particularly in the event ofa siege.The overriding concern then was for thequantity of stored water viz-a-vis inevitableleakages and the quality of the drinkingwater, particularly so in the hot summermonths when contaminated water couldvery easily cause all kinds of diseases. Theinformation requested of Carapecchiaincluded a detailed assessment of thenumber of water cisterns in each of theinhabited fortified areas, their estimatedmaximum capacity and their existingcapacity. Carapecchia’s report wascompleted by 24 May 1708 and the resultsof his survey were presented to the GrandCouncil of the Order in the form of reportentitled Distinta Relazione di tutte legebbie descritte nel infra Luoghi dal CavreFra Romano Carapecchia.Again, in 1723, Carapecchia was asked bythe newly elected Grand Master’s, AntonioManuel de Vilhena, to compile a detailedassessment of the water storage situation inthe Grand Harbour area. Unlike his previousreport on this subject, Carapecchia’s‘Ristretto generale di tutte le Cisterne eGebbie publiche e private con I’acqueritrovate nelle medesime, tanto in questacittd Valletta come nelle cittd di Vittoriosa,Senglea e Bormola. Ordinato dall’Emmo eRevmo Sigre Gran Maestro Fra DonAntonio Manoel de Vilhena e dalla c VdaCongregazione di Guerra, per laconservatione della Sua Sacra Religione,e i Suoi Popoli’, consisted of ameticulously compiled volume containingdetail description of all public and privatewater containers in the indicated areas as

WATER ANDHOSPITALLERFORTIFICATIONS

byDr Stephen C Spiteri

Details from Carapecchia's report showingproposed solution for protecting wellheadfrom falling projectiles (above) andValletta's system of cisterns (bottom left)..

Page 23: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

22 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

well as a number of suggestions intended toimprove the quality and quantity ofreservoirs and render them fit to resistartillery fire employing advanced ricochettechniques.Carapecchia’s signed report was presentedto Grand Master Vilhena on 20 January1723, beautifully illustrated withwatercolour drawings, amongst which werea plan of a reservoir in the ditch of Fort StElmo; a plan of another reservoir protectedby an earth cover with overlying timberboarding, this time situated near the VallettaFerreria; a representation of a well situatedin a courtyard having a pyramid type coverin the form of a timber framework resting onfour legs firmly anchored to the ground soas to protect it from cannonballs; a drawingin perspective of the Valletta fortificationswith reservoirs depicted in section; anannotated plan of a water system at Marsaand annotated block plans of Valletta,Vittoriosa, Senglea, Bormola and St. Angelo.Romano Carapecchia’s report wasconcluded with a list of Avvertimentid’osseruarsi per le bisogni et urgenzepresenti in beneficio di questo Publico,which suggested a series of measuresdesigned to address the water storagesystem of the harbour towns, namely:• The need for frequent inspections

by the Maestri Fontanieri to ensure that

all public and private wells were filledup in the rainy season;

• all rainwater from the streets andhouse roofs and terraces was to becollected, these were therefore to fittedwith proper parapet walls and adequatepipe connections to the wells;

• excessive use of rain water forirrigation purposes in gardens andcotton fields was to be prohibited;

• the need to construct a number oflarge reservoirs adequately protectedfrom artillery fire;

• the necessity for the constantsupervision of private wells to ensurethat they were in a good state of repair;and finally,

• the need to ensure that the supplyof water for the large gardens at S.Antonio and S. Giuseppe would not bemade at the expense of the regular flowof water to Valletta where it was moreurgently needed.

The construction of wells and cisterns was avery straightforward exercise. The pliableand easily worked Globigerina limestonemade the excavation of wells an easy, albeitlaborious task. The porosity of the rock,however, necessitated that suchsubterranean containers had to be lined witha waterproof coating, a process known as

bittumaura, which involved the applicationof a cementitious layer of a lime-basedmixture added with pozzolana (importedfrom Naples) and deffun ( made fromcrushed pottery).Not all rain water, however, was seenfavourably by military engineers. Indeed,where fortifications were concerned, aperennial cause of spoliation anddestruction were the torrential rains.Francesco Marandon’s journal records,under the year 1745, how heavy rainsbrought down some walls at Mdina.Similarly destructive was the torrentialdownpour of the previous winter when therevetment of the counterscarp wall at Birgugave way under the weight of water.Especially vulnerable to torrentialdownpours were the earthen-filled rampartsand glacis. In 1738 Marandon complained ofthe continual repairs that were necessary toreplace the earth that was washed away byheavy rains. Unfinished works, too, wereparticularly susceptible to damage by thewinter downpours. Frequently, orders wereissued to the gangs labouring on the varioussites to complete unfinished buildingsbefore the onset of the rainy season so as toensure ‘che le pioggie non deteriorino il gia

Detail from olan of Fort Manoel showinglocation of two large undergroundcisterns designed to collect all the run-offrainwater from around the fort. Topright different typr of 'mizieb' culverts forchanneling water out of coastal batteriesat Ras il-Qala (top) and Armier.

Page 24: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

23 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

fatto’. The most vulnerable were theexposed fills of ramparts set in an earthmortar, without lime, which quickly washedaway with the rain. The winter rains alsoprevented lime-mortar from setting.Being simply an uncovered packing of earth,the bastion’s terreplein tended to absorbrain water and thereby cause damage to theenveloping revetments. The most harmfulwere the torrential rains and to this end anumber of culverts were generally built intothe earthen packing of a rampart and thesewere made to open out into the face wallsso as to drain out the water into the ditch asquickly as possible. At Fort Chambrai, forexample, Marandon intentionally left asmall gap (‘un piccolo voito [vuoto] di unpalmo’) between the terreplein and the innerrampart wall (scorcia interiore) to helpchannel the seeping rainwater out throughthe flanks of the bastions.

Blondel, on his part, recommended that theuppermost layer of terreplein (‘il massiciodella superficie della terra’) was to beconstructed with a rubble fill made of largestones (‘con mazzacani e terra grivatamischiata al solito,’), thereby making itmore difficult for the rain water to washaway.

An important consideration during theexcavation and formation of a dry ditch wasthe need to drain off rain water collectinginside it. Apart from defensiveconsiderations, this was also important forhealth reasons as pools of stagnant watersoon became breeding grounds for malarialmosquitoes. The draining of rainwater wasusually affected by tilting the groundtowards the mouth of the ditch and theopen country or, in the case of the harbourfortifications, towards the sea. A commonpractice was to cut a cunette (cuvette), a v-shaped trench which channelled the water inthe centre of the ditch. Pietro PaoloFloriani’s written instructions to hisassistant Francesco Buonamici prior to hisdeparture from Malta in 1536 mention a

‘cunetta ... accosta alla muraglia, e falsabracalarga da 30 in 35 piedi e profonda non menodi 15’.

To conclude this short presentation, it isalso important to understand that as muchas the Order was conscious of guaranteeingits garrisons with adequate supplies ofwater, it was likewise concerned withdenying an invading enemy the possibilityfact of tapping outlying water sources. Thissituation is well illustrated by the events ofthe Great Siege of Malta in 1565, when theisland was invested by a 24,000 strongOttoman armada for more than threemonths. With such a huge army was accessto adequate supplies of water was aprincipal concern for the Turkishcommanders. They solved the situation byencamping near the springs in Marsa.Unknown to the Turks, however, theknights, had taken the precaution ofpoisoning this and nearby sources of water.The flax, hemp, and ordure that werethrown into the waterholes contributedmuch to the dysentery, typhus, and otherinfectious illnesses which quickly began toafflict the Turkish troops. Exhaustion, heat,and poor nutrition did the rest.

Ironically the very dryness and bleakness ofMalta, if appearing initially extremelydisagreeable to both L’Isle Adam and theeight commissioners before him whencompared to the larger and more fertileRhodes that had left behind, was to proveits very salvation. Malta was a naturalfortress.

SourcesDenis De Lucca, Romano Carapecchia:Master of Baroque Architecture in EarlyEighteenth Century Malta (Malta, 1999)Alison Hoppen, The Fortification of Maltaby the Knights of the Order of St John(Edinburgh, 1979).Roger de Giorgio, A City by an Order(Malta, 1985)Stephen C Spiteri, The Art of FortressBuilding in Hospitaller Malta (Malta,2007/8)Stephen C Spiteri, Fortresses of theKnights (Malta, 2001)

Culverts and channels for run-off rainwaterat Kassisu Entrenchment (from top left),Armier Entrenchment, Polverista Curtain(Floriana) and Fort Chambrai (bottom).

Page 25: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

24 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

Un libro intrigante nella BibliotecaNazionale di Malta alla Valletta raccontain modo colorito il terremoto del 1693che colpì la Sicilia e Malta. Il libro scrittoda John Shower è intitolato PracticalReflections on the late Earthquakes inJamaica, England, Sicily, Malta, etc., eha come sottotitolo, With a Particular,Historical Account of those and diversother Earthquakes. Inizio la miarelazione con una citazione da questolibro dove John Shower riassume lasituazione a Malta solo dopo cinquegiorni dal terremoto. È scritto in stilebarocco, drammatico e retorico, e nonsenza qualche esagerazione, ma chenonostante rende piacevole la lettura:

‘All the Account we have yet of thefurther effects of this Earthquake, andthe Extent of it to the Island of Malta, isin a Letter from thence, dated January16, publish’d by Authority. On the 9thInstant about ten at Night happenedhere an Earthquake, and another onthe 11th at three in the Afternoon: Thelast was so violent, and lasted so long,that everybody thought this City wouldhave been quite destroyed. The Roof ofthe Church of Our Lady de Pelay wasthrown down, with part of that of St.Laurence: The Church and College ofthe Jesuits also suffered very much: butthe Cathedral and the Church of laGusmane received the greatest damage,and are so ruined that they can hardlybe repaired. Most of the Houses areextremely shatter’d and deserted by theInhabitants, who lie now in Grotto’s,

and under Tents in the Fields. Thegreat Master was then abroad ahunting and he and all his Companywere in great Danger by the falling of aMountain near them. We cannot yet tellthe Particulars of the Loss this Islandhath sustained, but only in general,that ‘tis very great, and theConsternation of the Inhabitantsinexpressible, which hath received anew Addition by the sad Accounts wehave from Sicily, of the same Calamitythat hath befallen their Island, in amore terrible manner – Whereof I havegiven particular Account yet extant’ (1)

A Malta, il primo vero resoconto delterremoto fu scritto in modo assaiinsolito. Il notaio Dott Mario AntonioBrancati stendeva l’ultimo testamentonella casa dell’anziana zitella, GraziaCassar a Mqabba, quel giorno didomenica 11 gennaio, quando ilterremoto colpì l’isola con tutta la suaviolenza. “Verso le due pomeridiane”scrisse il notaio in latino,interrerompendo la scrittura deltestamento di Grazia, ‘si sentì un rombodistante come quello di un carro daguerra, la casa di Grazia da prima siscosse poi oscillò come la vela di unanave in burrasca, e la terra sembrò discuotersi dalle proprie fondamenta’ (2)

Come si può ben immaginare, le scossedel terremoto si sentirono da tutte leparti di Malta e di Gozo, ma con diversaintensità. Il primo terremoto del venerdìnove, fu abbastanza mite, e non fecedanni alle abitazioni (3),benché lapopolazione fosse naturalmenteterrorizzata e presa dal panico,situazione aggravata dal buio di unanotte d’inverno. La tragedia avvenne ilgiorno undici, causando danni ovunquealla Valletta e alle altre città e ai villaggidi Malta e di Gozo, e in modo particolarealla vecchia citta capitale di Mdina.

Il panico e la paura si disseminarono perle isole. La notte dell’undici, molta genterimase fuori casa e passò la notte e altrenotti ancora all’aperto, la gente dellaValletta ‘nel piano della Floriana’ (4).Nella città di Senglea gli abitantiabbandonarono le loro case e trovaronorifugio sulle galere e altre imbarcazioniancorate nel porto. Altri lasciarono lacittà dalla porta principale e preserod’assalto il fossato di fronte alla città di

Cospicua e innalzarono tende chelegarono con corde ad anelli di ferronelle mura dei bastioni e le fissarono apali di legno forte(5). Nessuna mortalitàa causa del terremoto è ufficialmenteregistrata, benché si possa desumereche ci furono casi di persone chemorirono per cause naturali, osoccomberono, più tardi alle feritesostenute dalle pietre cadenti. Unnumero considerevole di maltesi,comunque, perirono in Sicilia durante ilterremoto, quando la Recettoriadell’Ordine di Malta ad Augusta crollò emolti maltesi che lavoravano sulle galerepersero la vita sotto le macerie dei forni.

Il 16 di gennaio il Gran Maestro istituìuna commissione di tre cavalieri, FràClaudio de Moretton Chabrillan, FràRoberto Solaro il giovane e Frà DonIgnatio Lores con l’incarico di valutarela condizione di tutti gli edifici dellaValletta, di Vittoriosa e di Senglea (6). Aicommissari venne data l’autorità di darordine alla demolizione di edifici chefurono considerati di pericolo alle caseadiacenti e al pubblico; tale spesa daaddebitare ai proprietari rispettivi o alComun Tesoro da recuperaredall’introito di affitti o dal valore di altreproprietà in possesso dei proprietari. Ilcavaliere Fra Mederico Blondel desCroisettes, fratello del grande FrancoisBlondel e capo ingegnere dell’Ordineresidente a Malta e i capomastri maltesiGiovanni Barbara e Vincenzo Casanovaaccompagnarono i commissari per laValletta e per le Tre Città. Il lororapporto, sottomesso solo sei giorni piùtardi, riportò come premessa il fatto chei commissari e i capo mastri girarono pertutta la Valletta e ispezionarono ogniedificio indicato loro e che fuconsiderato come aver riportato danniseri. Nel rapporto venne aggiunto chequegli edifici considerati facilmenteriparabili non furono inclusi nell’elenco‘il cui numero è molto considerabile,non essendovene forse una casa' (7) .

Si notò che la facciata della vecchiaAlbergia di Castiglia in Strada S.Giacomo si era distaccata dal corpoprincipale dell’edificio e dai muritrasversali principali, e che richieseattenzione immediata per prevenire ilcollasso(8) . Nell’Albergia d’Aragona, lafacciata principale come pure quellaadiacente alla chiesa di Nostra Signora

ALCUNE RIFLESSIONISULLA RICOSTRUZIONEDEL LUOGO FORTE DIMDINA A MALTA DOPO ILTERREMOTO DEL 1693.

byProf. Denis de Lucca

Page 26: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

25 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

del Pilar si erano pericolosamenteinclinate all’infuori nella direzione dellastrada e avevano bisogno di esserepuntellate immediatamente. La pietra peril restauro dell’Albergia d’Aragonavenne portata da una cava aperta pertale scopo nella piazza di fronte(9).Tutte le chiese principali della Valletta,in varia misura di gravità, riportaronoogni sorta di danni. La chiesa di SanGiacomo fu duramente colpita enonostante il restauro venisse subitoeffettuato, fu ancora in cattivo statoverso la fine del diciassettesimosecolo(10). La volta della chiesa deiCarmelitani riportò crepe in diversiposti, e su parere degli architetti esull’insistenza dei commissari, la chiesafu subito chiusa al culto pubblico11. Lachiesa di Nostra Signora del Pilar inStrada San Michele, che come la chiesadi San Giacomo fu più tardi ricostruitadall’architetto romano e allievo di CarloFontana, Carapecchia all’inizio delsecolo diciottesimo, perse la cupola(12)e la chiesa dei Gesuiti subì gravidanni(13). Sembrerebbe strano che lechiese di San Giovanni e del Gesù, duedelle chiese più importanti della Valletta,non furono citate nel rapporto deicommissari, ma tale omissione potrebbeessere dovuta al fatto che ai commissarivenne dato l’incarico di elencare soloquegli edifici che furono consideratipossibilmente un pericolo alle caseadiacenti e ai pedoni. Secondo DeSoldanis, la Chiesa Conventuale di SanGiovanni subì pure lievi danni(14).L’edificio del Collegium Melitenseappartenente ai Gesuiti dalla parte diStrada della Fontana sviluppò crepeestensive e doveva essere demolito(15).Anche i frati francescani conventualichiesero aiuto dal Tesoro dell’Ordineper il restauro del convento in Strada

San Giorgio che secondo loro ‘si ritrovadi maniera sconquassata dalliterremoti, che minaccia rovina d’ogniparte’(16). La chiesa e il convento diSanta Maria del Gesù subì solo danniminori(17), ma una casa adiacente allachiesa in Strada del Monte dovevaessere demolita per impedire il collassoe danni alle cappelle laterali dellachiesa(18). All’interno della chiesa deifrati domenicani di Porto Salvo, il muroprincipale doveva essere demolito per idanni subiti e ricostruito(19). LaVeneranda Assemblea della ChiesaConventuale che aveva subito dannialla residenza principale di fronte a SanGiovanni come pure ad altre proprietàalla Valletta, chiese pure aiuti finanziarial Tesoro dell’Ordine(20). I commissariinclusero nel loro elenco di edificidestinati alla demolizione una casaall’angolo della loggia che dava sullaPiazza della Tesoreria che fu di proprietàdi Pompeo de Fiore, il quale avevaintrodotto la stampa a Malta; una casain Strada San Paolo dietro il Collegio deiGesuiti; la residenza di un Dott. Crispo,un funzionario alle dipendenzedell’Inquisitore, in Strada San Rocco;

un edificio in Strada San GiovanniBattista, angolo con Strada del Fianco;due case nella Scesa della Dogana, eun’altra di proprietà di Gio. PaoloButtigieg, un farmacista, accanto allachiesa di Santa Orsola(21). Sarebbedifficile identificare alcuni edifici perchéi dettagli forniti sulla loro esattalocazione sono assai scarni.

I danni subiti nelle Tre Città furonomolto meno di quelli riportati dentro laValletta come viene riferito. AllaVittoriosa, i commissari, su parere diBlondel, Barbara e Casanova,raccomandarono solo la demolizione delPalazzo Vecchio ‘quasi già distruttodall’antichità’ e una vecchia casavicino alla Porta Marina(22). Si sa daaltre fonti, comunque, che la chiesaparrocchiale di San Lorenzo subì danniconsiderevoli(23). I commissarinotarono con sollievo che gli effetti delterremoto alla Cospicua furonoinsignificanti, dove solo una casa

Depictions of Mdina in the mid-16th century,after D'Aleccio (top left and below).

Page 27: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

26 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

piccola vicino al Manderaggio era statadanneggiata, ma anche qui, si sa da altrefonti che il convento dei CarmelitaniScalzi di Santa Teresa aveva pure subitoqualche danno(24).

Il luogo forte di Mdina pure avevaavuto la sua parte di danni, manonostante, la città vecchia fu omessadalle istruzioni originali del GranMaestro consegnate alla commissioneufficiale del terremoto. La parte orientaledi Mdina, dove il terreno discendebruscamente ad un’alturaconsiderevole, si trova su uno strato diargilla di circa 50 piedi di profondità cheriposa su un letto di pietra calcareaglobigerina ad un angolo acuto dipendio(25). Questa è, infatti, la zona chesubì più danni dal terremoto, e fuprincipalmente qui che l’aspetto dellacittà vecchia fu completamente cambiatodalla ricostruzione post-terremoto, dalmedioevo fino alla sua attualefisionomia barocca. Preoccupati dallamancanza d’interesse dell’Ordine, ilCapitano della Verga e i Giurati di Mdinamandarono una petizione al GranMaestro il 21 di febbraio e lo esortaronocon urgenza di prendere nota dei dannigravi riportati dentro la città murata e difornire i mezzi per i dovuti rimedi. Soloallora all’ingegnere Mederico Blondelfu ordinato di condurre una dettagliataperizia di Mdina. Egli infatti riferì che ilterremoto fu in realtà il colmo che causòil collasso o danni seri a molti edificiche, a parte che furono vecchi, eranostati abbandonati o trascurati per moltianni(26). Blondel fece presente laquestione degli ordini immediati aiproprietari di edifici di ripararli subito, eai proprietari di case abbandonate diobbligarli di vendere le loro proprietà aprezzo fissato secondo la correntepragmatica. Egli, comunque, previde quiuna difficoltà pratica che ‘la maggiorparte (delle case) appartengono apersone esenti dalla giurisdizione diVostra Eminenza’. Sebbene la cattedralesubisse danni considerevoli e di naturagrave, non fu completamente distrutta,ma solo in parte collapsum(27). Fu,comunque, una vecchia struttura,avente visibilmente segni di età, e ladecisione di sostituirla con un nuovoedificio, era stata presa molto primadell’anno 1693. La decisione diricostruire la cattedrale, partendo dalcoro barocco, fu, infatti, presa nel 1679

sotto la guida dell’architetto malteseLorenzo Gafà che ne aveva fatto ildisegno e il modello. Il fatto che il coro,una nuova struttura, era l’unica partedella cattedrale a non subire dannidurante il terremoto, è un tributo alleabilità architettoniche e ingegneristichedi Gafà. Ma il terremoto fece sì che ilavori di ricostruzione riprendesserosubito e di fatti il ritmo dellaricostruzione fu accelerato. Gafà,Barbara, Casanova e Blondel, tutti nomiche affollano la storia architettonica delperiodo, furono chiamati per sottomerele loro vedute sulla sicurezza strutturaledella cattedrale(28), e in aprile dellostesso anno il Capitolo decise diprocedere con la ricostruzione secondoil piano e il modello in legno presentatoda Gafà e approvato dai suoi colleghiprofessionisti. Il palazzo vescovilecontemporaneo alla cattedrale, e ilseminario, completarono lo straordinariocomplesso nel 1733. Molte mura deibastioni di Mdina furono danneggiateseriamente e il ponte che dà alla portaprincipale della Città sviluppò dellecrepe pericolose negli archid’appoggio(29).

Nel sobborgo di Rabat, il convento deidomenicani ebbe alcune parti lesionateseriamente, e il Signor IngegnereLorenzo Gafà raccomandò, dopoessergli stato richiesto parere, unintervento immediato per evitaremaggior danno(30). Nel frattempo, lacomunità domenicana a Rabat decise diutilizzare la somma di 30 onzeprecedentemente lasciata da Fra Stateladi Noto per il restauro del loro conventoa Rabat . Un altro edificio importante aRabat che figura nell’elenco dei dannisubiti dal terremoto è la chiesaparrocchiale di San Paolo. Il campanilecrollò, l’abside del coro cedette e lacupola subì gravi danni. Alcuni dettaglimolto interessanti affiorano da duevolumi manoscritti conservati negliarchivi del Collegio della chiesa di SanPaolo, dove si legge che Lorenzo Gafà,‘architettore di detta fabrica’(31),disegnò un muro massiccio d’appoggiointeso a stabilizzare il muro posterioredel coro, e che si può vedere tutt’oggi;che il capomastro Salvo Borg di CasalSiggiewi disegnò il nuovo campanile, eche Giovanni Barbara fu il responsabileper il restauro della cupola. GiovanniBarbara affittò un calesse per andare

alla Valletta per consultare il vescovo,ma il procuratore della chiesa dovevaandare a cavallo per lo stesso scopo. Ipannelli di vetro per le finestre dellacupola furono comprati da unnegoziante alla Valletta, mentre unostagnaio, anche egli abitante dellaValletta, fu impiegato a brasare legiunture in piombo per il fissaggio deipannelli di vetro. Il capo architettoresponsabile dell’intero progetto, IlGafà, ricevette 10 scudi in tre diversipagamenti ‘per i suoi disegni e travagliin detta chiesa’ tra i mesi di giugno e didicembre del 1693.(32)

Il 20 settembre 1722, ventinove annidopo il terremoto, il Gran MaestroManoel de Vilhena prese ‘possesso’ diMdina con una cerimonia barocca senzaprecedenti. Per celebrare l’avvenimento,tutte le strade principali furono adornatecon damasco pesante e con paramenti ela piazza appena dentro la vecchia portaprincipale fu decorata da un arcotrionfale in legno eretto dal capofalegname il Maestro Andrea Camillerisecondo il disegno di Pietro PaoloTroisi ‘della Zecca’, architetto dellamunicipalità di Mdina. Il quadropittoresco di questa bellissima opera difantasia architettonica fu fatto dalpittore Aloisio Buhagiar. Impressionatoda questi segni di munificenza e dalcaloroso benvenuto estesogli, il GranMaestro, ordinò il restauro della CittàVecchia. Lo fece pubblicando unchirografo magistrale(33) il 3novembre 1722:

‘Avendo considerato, dopo aver letto ilrapporto del nostro Ingegnere, lanecessità assoluta di restaurare lemura e le fortificazioni della nostraamata città Notabile che, con il passardel tempo, sono in uno stato di sfaceloe di costruire una moderna stradacoperta sul bastione principale perrendere la città difendibilenell’eventualità di un attacco nemico,Noi, Manoel de Vilhena, autorizziamo iMagistrati della Municipalità dellenostre gloriose città della Valletta,Senglea, Vittoriose e Burmola diamministrare a tali effetti 350 scudi asettimana in aggiunta alle 400 scudigià amministrate secondo i nostriordini. Specifichiamo inoltre che ilprimo pagamento debba essere fattoentro sabato prossimo, da essere

Page 28: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

27 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

continuato su base settimanale finchénon ci siano ordini al contrario’.

In un ulteriore chirografo (34) datato 18marzo 1723, Vilhena ordinò laMunicipalità di amministrareun’aggiunta di 350 scudi a settimana peraccelerare il lavoro già iniziato sullefortificazioni di Mdina. Ma il 4 giugno diquello stesso anno, il Gran Maestrorevocò quest’ordine e stipulòl’amministrazione settimanale di 300scudi. I veri lavori sulle fortificazionidella Mdina iniziarono a luglio del 1722sotto la direzione di Carlo Francesco deMondion, l’ingegnero militaredell’Ordine e allievo del grande Vauban,che aveva allora presentato uno schemadi disegno dettagliato per lo scopointitolato ‘Plan et Profils de la CitteVielle ou Citte Notable de Malte’.Questo piano principale, che fuaccompagnato da parecchi disegni dilavoro, fu eventualmente seguito dapiani ulteriori datati 1723, 1725 e 1730.Dopo il 1722, lo sviluppo di Mdinaprese la forma seguente, presentata permotivi di chiarezza in ordine cronologicocon riferimento alle fonti originali su cuil’informazione è basata:

1722 – Lavoro di sgombro preliminaresulle vecchie fortificazioni (35)

Il 24 luglio 1722 iniziarono i lavori sullebastioni cinquecentesche eseicentesche di fronte a Rabat. Per talemotivo il fossato a fianco del bastioneeretto dal Gran Maestro De Redin fupulito dalle macerie di costruzione dellavecchia cattedrale e altri edifici, che sierano accumulate dopo il terremoto del1693. Verso il 29 agosto quest’opera dirimozione fu praticamente completata ecominciarono i lavori con l’obiettivo didemolire parte del vecchio muroverticale non portante per inserire unanuova porta principale monumentaleaccanto a quella vecchia. Il 10 ottobre, ilavori di demolizione iniziarono purenella zona della vecchia ‘Porta deiGreci’ per lo stesso scopo di erigere unanuova porta. Durante l’anno corrente,comunque, i lavori si concentraronosulla pulitura e sull’allineamento delfossato esistente e sulla demolizionedella vecchia controscarpa. Durantequalche stadio dei lavori, iniziaronopure le operazioni sull’allineamento esul miglioramento della strada principale

che collega Mdina alla Valletta. Questilavori furono adempiti sono la direzionedei capomastri Salvo Galea e GiuseppeVella mentre quelli dentro Mdina furonoeseguiti sotto la direzione generale diPetruzzo Debono e Simone Mifsud.

1723 – Inizio della fase di costruzione:fortificazioni esterne e falsabragadietro il Palazzo Magistrale (36).

Nei primi mesi di quest’anno, iniziaronoi lavori di allargamento e diapprofondimento del fossato libero damacerie e si cominciò a lavorare sullanuova controscarpa. In aprile il lavorosu questa controscarpa fu praticamentecompletato e si registrò progressoanche sulla nuova strada coperta conpiazze d’armi, opere traverse, parapetti espalto. A questo punto un nuovocapomastro – Salvo Borg – appare inscena. Quest’anno corrente vide purel’inizio dei lavori della falsabraga dietroil vecchio Palazzo Magistrale, costruitonegli anni del 1530 dal Gran MaestroPhilippe Villiers de L’Isle Adam.

1724-Costruzione delle Ported’Ingresso (37)

Il lavoro iniziato nel 1722 sul bastioneDe Redin fu finalmente concluso el’operazione simultanea del sigillo dellavecchia porta principale demolendo gli

edifici vecchi medioevali dietro dettaporta ed erigendo la nuova magnificaporta d’ingresso fu iniziata e completataalla fine dell’anno. La costruzione dellanuova ‘Porta dei Greci’ porta anche ladata dell’anno 1724.

1725- Costruzione della nuova Torredello Stendardo e del PalazzoMagistrale(38)

Dopo l’erezione della nuova ‘Porta deiGreci’, i lavori in questa zona furonoestesi nel 1725 e compresero il muroportante di San Pietro e il bastioneadiacente. Il 28 luglio il lavoro didemolizione su questo bastione fuiniziato. Nel frattempo il 26 maggio iprimi carri di pietra per la ricostruzionedella vecchia Torre dello Stendardo e ilPalazzo Magistrale dentro la portaprincipale arrivarono ed il lavoro suquesti due edifici fu subito iniziato sottola direzione del capomastro PetruzzoDebono e sui disegni consegnatigli daMondion.

1726– La costruzione del nuovoPalazzo Municipale (39)

Nel mese di maggio dell’anno corrente illavoro di demolizione, che fu in corsogià da qualche tempo nella zona delbastione di San Pietro all’angolo sud-ovest, fu intensificato. Nel frattempo,

Proposedgraphicreconstruction of the Mdina

Cathedral c. 1565 (byStephen C. Spiteri)

Page 29: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

28 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

nella zona dell’entrata principale, i lavorisulla Torre dello Stendardo erano staticompletati e due stemme in marmo diFrancesco Zahra venne inserito nelnuovo edificio (6 luglio). Dopo il mesedi luglio, la maggioranza delle forzelavorative, che adesso raggiunse ilnumero di 500 operai maltesi apagamento, venne spostata ai lavori sulsito del nuovo Palazzo Magistrale difronte alla torre. Verso settembre unanuova operazione di costruzione fuinaugurata quando le pietre vennerotrasportate su carri al sito del nuovoproposto Palazzo Municipale in piazzaSan Paolo e a dicembre le fondamenta diquesto secondo palazzo furono allestitesotto la diretta direzione di Francois deMondion, di Francesco Zahra e diPetruzzo Debono.

1727- Ripristino dei lavori al PalazzoMagistrale e al Palazzo Municipale(40)

L’anno corrente vide il progresso deilavori iniziati negli anni precedenti alPalazzo Magistrale con l’adiacenteTribunale e al Palazzo Municipaleaccanto alla piazza di San Paolo. Versosettembre l’opera del nuovo muroportante di San Pietro fu completato conl’erezione del parapetto strombo.

1728-Allineamento delle piazze di SanPublio e di San Paolo (41)

Durante quest’anno il PalazzoMagistrale e il Palazzo Municipale

furono completati per tutti gli effetticome pure la strada Mdina-Valletta e leprincipali fortificazioni anteriori.Quest’anno vide pure gli inizi dei lavorialla nuova chiesa di S. Rocco, chedoveva sostituire la vecchia chiesetta diSanta Maria della Porta che fu demolitanel 1723 per dare spazio alla nuovaentrata principale. Pure nel 1728, laforma definitiva delle piazze di SanPublio e di San Paolo fu stabilita e tutti inuovi lavori furono benedetticerimoniosamente dal VescovoAlpheran de Bussan tra grandi festività,tra cui una ‘luminaria’.

1729-31 - La costruzione della chiesadi San Rocco, del monastero di SanPietro e di altri edifici (42)

I quattro anni correnti furono segnati daattività di costruzione largamenteeseguite da persone private che furonoattratte a Mdina dagli incentivi attraentidi Vilhena come spiegato nel chirografomagistrale il 22 gennaio 1727. Le stradeprincipali che furono soggette a taleattività di costruzione furono StradaVillegaignon e Strada San Paolo. Nel1731, la nuova chiesa di San Rocco fucompletata con successo e nel 1732alcuni restauri furono eseguiti sul muroportante dietro la cattedrale su ordini diMondion, che pure condusse unostudio sulla fattibilità di erigere unnuovo bastione. Pure in quell’anno illavoro incominciato nel 1719 almonastero di San Pietro delle suorebenedettine venne portato a termine evenne stabilito il nuovo reticolo distrade generato dal nuovo edificio.

1733-6 – La costruzione del SeminarioVescovile e dell’Armeria (43)

Le ultime tre opere maggiori eseguite aMdina durante il principato di Vilhenafurono la costruzione del SeminarioVescovile nel 1733 e l’erezione dellanuova Armeria in Strada Villegaignoncostruita su disegno di PetruzzoDebono nel 1734. Lavori ulteriorieseguiti dopo la morte del Gran Maestronel 1736 compresero la costruzione delBastione dietro la cattedrale tra il 1739 eil 1746.

Si potrebbe dedurre dalla tabellacronologica dello sviluppo edile come

elencato sopra che il lavoro allefortificazioni di Mdina fu in tutti irispetti correlato alla ripianificazioneinterna della vecchia città medioevale, ilcui tessuto fu largamente danneggiatodal terremoto del 1693. Per avere unavalutazione critica più dettagliata deimiglioramenti eseguiti sarebbeopportuno di dividere la città in tre zone– la zona dell’entrata principale, la zonadella cattedrale e la zona della ‘Portadei Greci’.

La zona dell’entrata principale

Prima della ripianificazione del 1722 daparte di Mondion, il piano dell’entrataprincipale prese una forma che segueun’antica bozza del piano della cittàconservato negli archivi della cattedralea Mdina(44) . Gli aspetti principali diquesto piano sono la mancanza difortificazioni proprie esterne, la presenzadi un arco trionfale eretto qui nel 1609,una piccola chiesa romanica che reca ilnome di Santa Maria della Porta,un’interessante disposizione di entratatriplice separata da una fila di negozi ein fine il vecchio Palazzo Magistrale delGran Maestro L’Isle Adam la cui entrata,comunque, era dalla parte di una piccolapiazza in Strada San Paolo. Di questecaratteristiche la più interessante fu ladisposizione dell’entrata triplice, inmodo particolare il posizionamento dellaseconda porta in relazione alle porte diingresso e di uscita. Questadisposizione che forzava il nemico diviaggiare per una rotta indiretta prima dipenetrare la città propria era una praticacomune nelle città medioevali in Africa ein Sicilia. Secondo il piano della Mdinasi può anche notare i tre grandi depositie la loggia a doppio arco nell’ ‘IngressoPrimo’ costruita per commemorare il‘possesso’ del Gran Maestro De Paule(1623-36). Il piano antecedente il 1722della zona dell’entrata principale diMdina viene anche rilevato su una scalaalquanto più piccola nelle bozze deidisegni delle fortificazioni datate 1722 e1723 del Mondion ma non, si potrebbenotare, in un piano di disegno più tardodell’ingegnere nel 1725 circa. Inquest’ultimo piano, tutto il sistema difortificazioni è riformato, il sistema dientrata triplice demolito e lo spazioparzialmente incorporato nel cortileanteriore del nuovo Palazzo Magistralee in fine, la loggia del Gran Maestro De

Mondion's new gate.

Page 30: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

29 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

Paule con i suoi depositi e negoziadiacenti furono sostituiti dall’alaanteriore del nuovo palazzo. La piccolavecchia piazza fu pure estesa daincorporare lo spazio finora occupatodalla chiesetta di Santa Maria dellaPorta con il deposito adiacente. Si puònotare che l’unica caratteristica dellazona dell’entrata medioevale chesopravvisse, fu l’isolato di case privatee di negozi di fronte alla stradaconosciuta oggi come Strada Inguanez.Più tardi, nel 1947, questo isolato fudemolito per accomodare la costruzionedi una nuova ala per il PalazzoMagistrale mentre le case private dallato opposto della stessa strada furonointorno l’anno 1735 integrate nelmonastero di San Pietro da formare unafacciata vuota e arcigna che fece tantoper rovinare la scala dellaripianificazione del Mondion.

Ci sono due aspetti della ripianificazionedella zona dell’entrata principale del1722-28. In primo luogo ci ful’approfondimento e l’allargamento delfossato esistente, la formazione di unanuova controscarpa con la sua stradacoperta, e la riformazione della spalto difronte al sobborgo di Rabat. I lavorifurono governati da una serie dispecifiche (45) stabilite da Mondion il31 luglio 1722. In secondo luogo ci fu latrasformazione della zona d’entrata inuno scenario teatrale tipicamentebarocco. A lavori compiuti, lo spazio

aperto qui era generato da tre edifici – ilnuovo ingresso (1724), la Torre delloStendardo (1725) e il Palazzo Magistrale(1726). Con riferimento al piano del 1725,camminando per la nuova stradaallineata Valletta-Mdina, si entrava inuno spazio triangolare occupato da unapiazza d’armi della strada coperta eprotetto da ambedue i lati da operetraverse. Questo spazio ribassato diedeaccesso al ponte in pietra cheattraversava il nuovo fossato e loseparava dalla nuova porta con unponte levatoio quadrato e di legno.Attraversando questo ponte, la scenaera dominata da una porta magnifica, lacui costruzione fu soggetta da unaseconda serie di specifiche stabilite daMondion il 14 maggio 1724.

Entrando la porta principale di Mdina cisi trova in piazza San Publio. Il piano diMdina del 1725 rivela, che all’inizio delsecolo diciottesimo questa piazza erainfinitamente più interessantearchitettonicamente di quella che è oggi.Per primo benché i tre lati della piazzafossero occupati dalla Torre delloStendardo, la facciata posteriore dellaporta principale e il Palazzo Magistralefurono in gran parte come oggi,un’importante differenza fu la presenzadi tre negozi strategicamente ubicatinell’isolato proiettato accanto al PalazzoMagistrale la cui congiunzione fuoccupata da una nicchia dedicata a SanPaolo per commemorare il terremoto del

1693. Quel che appare essere statoanche molto differente nel 1725 ful’isolato che chiudeva il quarto latodella Piazza. Questo sembrerebbe esserestato composto da un numero di caseprivate a due piani posti in una filaadiacente alla piccola chiesa diSant’Agata disegnata da Lorenzo Gafàdopo il terremoto,nell’anno 1694.

La Torre dello Stendardo recostruita nel1725 è una costruzione tipica militare deldiciottesimo secolo modellata sulle torridi Mederico Blondel risalenti aldiciassettesimo secolo. Secondo idocumenti (46) aveva due funzioni,quella di piattaforma elevata sopra laporta della città e quella di fortezzadominando il muro portante dell’entrataprincipale. L’aspetto austero della Torredello Stendardo con i due stemmi fattidallo scultore maltese Francesco Zahraè controbilanciato dal lato opposto dallamagnificenza del Palazzo Magistralecostruito nel 1725 ‘secondo il disegnodato dal Sig. Ingegnere Cavaliere deMondion’(47). Tutto il complesso èpianificato attorno a un grande cortilecentrale, un lato del quale fu occupatodal Tribunale, mentre i rimanenti tre latifurono avviluppati dal PalazzoMagistrale. Molto più interessante delladisposizione planimetrica è iltrattamento della facciata del cortileanteriore, il Tribunale e il retro delgrande edificio dominando il muroportante ad est delle fortificazioni. Incontrasto alla varietà dinamica dimagnifici stemmi, un alto rilievo di

Plan by Mondion, showing existing andprojected works during thereconstruction of the Mdina main gatearea and the Torre Mastra (NLM).

Mondion's Torre dello Standardo.

Page 31: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

30 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

bronzo del gran maestro, finestre eportali ornati e loggiate di archi ellitticidi gusto assai teatrale rappresentatanelle facciate del cortile anteriore, ildisegno della facciata del Tribunalenella piazza di San Paolo è più formale eripetitivo. Qui la caratteristica principaleè la campata centrale che è più pregiatadi quella del Palazzo Magistrale perché ilvuoto sopra l’entrata viene risoltotramite un recesso a forma di nicchiaposto tra i pilastri stile Corinto con unafortissima presenza scultorea di gustodecisamente francese. La facciataposteriore del Palazzo Magistrale offreun contrasto completo alle altre facciatedell’edificio rivelando una somiglianzanotevole allo stile vaubanescodell’entrata principale di Mdina. Benchélargamente distrutta per causa difondamenta difettose, si può vedere chequesta facciata fu concepita come unaserie di pilastri pesantemente bugnati ecornici modanate. Una caratteristicasignificante nel disegno generale è laqualità certa della cornice del tetto el’utilizzo di ornamenti in forma di palleper coronare il legame tra i pilastri equesta cornice.

Prima di parlare della piazza dellaCattedrale, vorrei aggiungere undettaglio per quel che riguarda laripianificazione dell’entrata principaledel Mondion. Questo implica la chiusuradel vicolo stretto che secondo il pianomedioevale collegava Strada Inguanezcon un’altra strada, adesso chiusa,stendendosi tra Strada Villegaignon ePiazza San Paolo di fronte al Tribunale.Mentre il vicolo fu chiuso nell’anno1725 circa, la strada sopravvisse aquesta fase di cambiamenti. Questoimplicava che la piazza di fronte alTribunale era affiancata da due stradestrette separate da case private a duepiani, abbellendo pertanto la facciata delnuovo edificio del Tribunale. Manell’anno 1735 o incirca, tanto la stradain questione, quanto le case privatefurono assorbite dal monastero di SanPietro che in quell’epoca necessitavauna nuova sistemazione.

La zona della Cattedrale

Ci sono due aspetti riguardanti losviluppo della zona della Cattedrale aMdina. In primo luogo ci fu latrasformazione della vecchia piazza

medioevale di fronte alla cattedraledovuta all’erezione di quattro magnificiedifici – la stupenda cattedrale diLorenzo Gafà (1697), il Palazzo delVescovo (1718-1719), il PalazzoMunicipale di Mondion (1726), e ilSeminario Vescovile (1733). In secondoluogo, ci fu la ricostruzione di diversiisolati in Strada Villegaignon e in StradaSan Paolo, che governano gliavvicinamenti alla piazza. Questicomprendevano almeno due palazzi edue chiese (la chiesa e il convento deicarmelitani del 1690 e la chiesa di SanRocco del 1728) in Strada Villegaignon euna casa grande in Strada San Paolo.Uno dei due palazzi in StradaVillegaignon – quello di fronte CasaTestaferrata – fu ricostruito nel 1734secondo il disegno di Petruzzo Debono,e fu usato da armeria della città dopoche questa fu rimossa dal sito adessooccupato dal Palazzo Municipale.L’edificio originale aveva una voltaaccomodato la vecchia ‘CorteCapitaniale’ e la ‘Corte Guratale’prima del loro rispettivo trasferimento ainuovi palazzi, quello Magistrale e quelloMunicipale. La ripianificazione dellazona della cattedrale fu conclusa nel1739 quando iniziarono i lavori per lacostruzione di un nuovo bastione dietrola cattedrale. Questo bastione che fucompletato solo nel 1746 fu costruitosecondo i disegni dell’ingegnereFrancesco Marandon secondo alcunidisegni lasciati dal suo predecessoreMondion dopo che questi avevacondotto uno studio di questo settorevulnerabile delle fortificazioni nel 1732.

Un paragone tra il piano moderno diMdina e il piano del 1725 ci consenta divalutare in modo chiaro lo sviluppodella vecchia Piazza Medioevale difronte alla cattedrale. Nel 1725, il piccolospazio rettangolare aperto di fronte allacattedrale era in modo ovvio inadeguatovisto il disegno grandioso del Gafà. Madopo 1693, questo spazio fu aumentatoa causa della demolizione di due isolatigrandi che racchiudevano la cattedraledalla parte meridionale e dallasusseguente erezione del PalazzoVescovile e del Seminario. Lo spazioaperto adesso prese la forma diun’irregolare L confinando le duefacciate principali della cattedrale. Quelche sembra strano è che per qualchemotivo o altro, il vecchio isolato

medioevale di fronte alla facciataprincipale della cattedrale fu lasciato arimanervi al fine del settecento quandofu demolito durante le insurrezionicontro la guarnigione francese diNapoleone. Questo è un fattoimportante, perché implica che il centrodi Mdina resistette le idee barocche diripianificazione della Valletta e inveceritenne il suo carattere medioevale di unborgo chiuso e multi accessibile.Pertanto si è affacciati dalla perplessadicotomia barocca medioevale chesembra aver caratterizzato il pianourbanistico del diciottesimo secolo diMdina. Da un lato ci fu la zonadell’entrata principale che dall’esitodello schema di Mondion assunse uncarattere molto barocco e francesementre dall’altro canto ci fu la zona dellacattedrale che ritenne il suo aspettomedioevale nonostante che i nuoviedifici ivi costruiti furono concepiti efatti secondo l’idioma ‘moderno’.L’opus magnum della zona dellacattedrale è la magnifica cattedralebarocca di Lorenzo Gafà. Secondo unmandatum datato 14 settembre 1682 (48)l’architetto maltese, fratello del grandeMelchiorre Gafà, disegnava la nuovacattedrale barocca quattordici anniprima del terremoto quando Gafà avevaanche presentato un bellissimo modellodi legname e susseguentementecompletato il nuovo coro barocco deledificio proposto. Questo coro era lasola parte del la vecchia cattedraleromanica che soppraviveva il terrimoto.Dopo il ripreso dei lavori nel 21 maggio1697, la parte medioevale dellacattedrale gia ‘in parte collapsum’venne demolita e la nuova cattedralebarocca del Gafa fu completata nel 1705,con una splendida facciata di duecampanili e una cupola ornata baroccache trasformò il profilo medioevale diMdina. In vista delle sue grandidimensioni, ci si rese subito conto chelo spazio aperto anteriore fu inadeguatoe necessitava un rifacimento. Ilproblema diventò più acuto nel 1713quando un nuovo ‘zuntir’ ridusseulteriormente lo spazio aperto .

La facciata laterale della cattedrale ècontrobilanciata dal lato opposto dalSeminario Vescovile del 1733 disegnatoda un architetto sconosciuto. L’erezionedel nuovo seminario fu suggerita dalfatto che il seminario era all’epoca una

Page 32: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

31 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

‘Casa d’Affitto’, che, nonostante la suafacciata esterna attraente, non offrivaun’adeguata accomodazione, e fucostruita in malo modo, era umida eesposta alle correnti d’aria. Questainformazione è riportata in una lettera(49) depositata originariamente negliArchivi Segreti Arcivescovili, datatadicembre 1772. Nel 1728, comunque, unsignore maltese offrì un sito alternativovicino al Palazzo del vescovo e nel 1733l’edificio del nuovo Seminario fu iniziatocome parte della prima fase delsopradetto rifacimento dello spazioesteriore del cattedrale, tra le proteste dialcune persone che sostenevano chesarebbe stato meglio costruirlo allaValletta – una proposta cheeventualmente fu scartata per il fatto‘molto conosciuto’ che ‘Valletta era lacittà esclusivamente riservata aiCavalieri’. Adiacente al Seminario econtiguo alla Cattedrale dall’altra partedella piazza ci fu il Palazzo del vescovocostruito nel 1718-1719 dopo il rilasciodel permesso necessario da Mondion il26 ottobre 1717. L’architetto di questoedificio era Lorenzo Gafa e il primovescovo che occupava il nuovo edificioera il spagnolo Iago Cannaves.

L’ultimo edificio importante nella piazzadella cattedrale è il Palazzo Municipalenoto anche come la ‘Casa della Città’(1725-8). Nonostante l’evidenza precisaricavata dai documenti, ci sono qua e làprove documentate che indicano che ildisegnatore di questo edificio fuMondion forse aiutato dall’architettomaltese Pietro Paolo Troisi ‘dellaZecca’, vincitore nel 1705 di un primopremio all’accademia di San Luca aRoma dove studiava. La costruzione delnuovo Palazzo Municipale (1726-8) fuseguita dalla questione del chirografomagistrale del 1727 di Vilhenariguardante il ravvivamento di Mdina.La pubblicazione di questo documento(50) diede avvio ad un’intensa attività dicostruzione, che in modo fondamentalecambiò l’aspetto di Strada Villegaignone di Strada San Paolo iniettandonell’ambiente costrutto un nuovosapore barocco come richiedeva lanuova Cattedrale del Gafà. Il precedentefu stabilito nel seicento con l’erezionedella Chiesa dei Carmelitani, in StradaVillegaignon costruita su pianta ovalesecondo i disegni del maltese FrancescoSammut. Dopo il 1728, gran parte della

strada ne seguì le orme; tra i nuoviedifici i più importanti furono il PalazzoMunicipale (1726), la piccola chiesa diSan Rocco (1728) e la nuova Armeria(1734) eretta secondo i disegni diPetruzzo Debono – l’ormai famosocapomastro che sembra essere stato ilresponsabile di gran parte delle caseprivate e governative di Mdina duranteil principato di Vilhena. È interessantenotare camminando per queste stradecome i ‘nuovi’ edifici ben si fondanocon gli edifici più vecchi di stile gotico-chiaramonte rappresentati nei Palazzi diSanta Sofia e di Falsone – un fenomenoche è arricchito dalla strettezza dellestrade. La chiesa di San Rocco (1728),costruita per sostituire la chiesettaromanica di Santa Maria della Porta chefu demolita per far spazio allaripianificazione della zona dell’entrata(51), riproduce molte caratteristichestilistiche dei primi disegni di Mondionper il lato posteriore della portaprincipale di Mdina (1724). La storia(52) della vecchia chiesetta di SantaMaria della Porta è interessante – unavolta nel 1540 serviva da scuola dinegromanzia dove due preti sposati, uninsegnante e uno straniero conosciutocome Gesualdo, predicarono parecchiedottrine eretiche per cui Gesualdo fu piùtardi bruciato al rogo nella piazzapubblica di Vittoriosa. Dopo il terremotodel 1693, la chiesetta di Santa Mariadella Porta servì pure come Cattedrale. Ilterzo edificio barocco importante nellaStrada Villegaignon era il Palazzodell’Armeria. Secondo un Chirografodatato 25 settembre 1734, il disegno diquesto edificio fu fatto dal capomastroPetruzzo Debono. L’isolato consistettedi due piani con i negozi che davanoalla Strada Villegaignon occupando ilPiano Terra e con una grande sala perl’Armeria occupando il piano di sopra. Ilavori nella zona della cattedrale ebberotermine nell’anno 1746 con ilcompletamento del bastione dietro laCattedrale. È stato già detto che l’11novembre 1732, Mondion, dopo unostudio approfondito del sito, ebbeordinato i restauri alle fortificazioniesistenti. Benché i lavori al nuovobastione iniziassero nel 1739, sembrache fossero già programmati nel 1725come si vede dal piano di Mdina del1725. Si nota la forma raffinata delnuovo bastione quando lo si paragonaai bastioni anteriori, in modo particolare

l’angolo ottuso saliente di 110 gradi e lesvasature curate in dettaglio. L’angolodi circa 80 gradi del nuovo bastione conl’orizzontale è pure significativo seviene paragonato alla natura verticaledei settori medioevali delle fortificazioni.Dopo la morte di Mondion nel 1733, ilprogetto per questo bastione furaffinato dall’ingegnere Marandon chenel 1739 ordinò l’inizio dei lavori chefurono di seguito completati nel 1746.

La zona della ‘Porta dei Greci’

A parte i disegni famosi di Perezd’Aleccio (54) non esiste evidenza dellaforma del settore a sud-ovest di Mdinaprima della ripianificazione di Vilhena.Ad ogni modo le modifiche delMondion in questa zona compreserol’erezione di una nuova porta sul sitodella vecchia ‘Porta dei Greci’, ilrestauro del muro portante circostante,le modifiche al bastione cinquecentescodi San Pietro e agli adiacenti mura, ed infine, la costruzione di una serie didepositi situati accanto al muro portantead occidente. Tutti questi lavori furonoeseguiti tra il 1722 e il 1739. Di questi, lapiù importante per quel che riguarda ildisegno è la nuova ‘Porta dei Greci’costruita secondo un disegno ispiratodall’lavoro di Vauban presentato dalMondion nel 1724. L’ordine inferioredella porta riproduce molti elementi, chesi trovano nella porta principale –pilastri bugnati, modanatura agli archi,fregi ornamentali. La diversità principalesta nel trattamento del frontone chenella porta greca assume una formatriangolare. Architettonicamente, leproportioni dimensionali della secondaporta di Mdina rivelano unmiglioramento di quelle della portaprincipale; infatti, questa porta è unadelle migliori e delle meno cospicuemanifestazioni architettoniche diMondion a Malta, disegnata sottol’influenza del suo tutor, il grandeVauban. Per quel che riguarda i disegnidei depositi da parte dell’ingegnere, sipotrebbe dire che la forma a striscecome decoro adottata è nello stile deidepositi Calcara disegnati per laFloriana da Mondion nel 1726.

Come conclusione di questa relazionenon sarebbe fuori luogo fare qualcheriferimento ai risultati del programmaedile di Vilhena a Mdina dopo il grande

Page 33: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

32 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

terremoto del 1693. Si può dire chenonostante gli incentivi del GranMaestro forniti nel chirografomagistrale il 22 gennaio 1727, Mdinadopo quella data ritenne molta della suaaura tradizionale, di una città silenziosaed esiste documentazione dalle figuredemografiche che anche con laripianificazione di Vilhena non ci funessuna corsa per trovare nuovi alloggidentro la nuova Mdina barocca. Puredal punto di vista commerciale, la nuovacittà fallì nel generare quel commercioche si aspettava che facesse e, quel chefu peggio dal punto di vista dell’Ordine,fallì pure di sorgere come depositoconveniente dell’entroterra dove tutte lemerci della campagna potevano essereraccolte per l’esportazione. Ma la nuovapianificazione e la costruzione servironoper uno scopo importante. Perché lostile barocco dei nuovi palazzi e chiese,un vero ‘inno all’ occhio e alla teoriadella visione’(55), stabilì l’influenza diun grande Gran Maestro del settecentoin una città dove l’interferenza deiprecedenti Gran Maestri fu disapprovatae risentita. Questo è il significato delcontributo di Mondion a Mdina chepotrebbe, in questo contesto, esseredefinito come un monumento dellasettecentesca propaganda magistraleseguendo la tradizione dell’architetturabarocca francese di Luigi XIV con cuiMondion, un parigino, aveva moltaconoscenza (56). Il terremoto del 1693facilitò in modo conveniente questoesercizio politico.

Prof. Arch. Denis De Lucca is theDirector of the International Institutefor Baroque Studies at the University ofMaltaThis paper was presented by ProfessorDenis De Lucca, at an internationalconference entitled Difese, Terremoti eRicostruzioni in Eta Modernaorganised by the Dipartimento diStoria e Progetto nell’architettura ofthe University of Palermo 11-13 October2006.

References and Note

1. J.Shower, Practical Reflections on the lateEarthquakes in Jamaica, England, Sicily,Malta, etc., Anno 1692 (Londra, 1693) 30.2. B(iblioteca) N(azionale di) M(alta),Manoscritto XVIII, f.2

3. M. Ellul, The Earthquake of 1693 – Ahistorical survey in Mdina and theEarthquake of 1693 (ed. Mons. GiovanniAzzopardi) (Malta, 1993) 274. BNM, Manoscritto 1146, f.359r5. A. Bonnici, L’Isla, Vol.II (Malta, 1986)158.6. A(rchivio dell’) O(rdine di) M(alta) 263,f.138v.7. AOM 263, ff.138v-139v8. AOM 263, f.141v9. AOM 1016, f.83 ; G.Darmanin Demajo,Le Albergie delle Lingue Iberiche e le LoroChiese Nazionali in Archivio Storico diMalta, Anno III, Vol. III (Malta, 1932) 87-88.10. G. Darmanin Demajo, op.cit., 8811. AOM 263, f. 138v12. D. De Lucca, Carapecchia: Master ofBaroque Architecture in early eighteenthcentury Malta (Malta, 1999) 134.13. J. Shower, op.cit., 30.14. G.P.F. Agius de Soldanis, Il GozoAntico-Moderno e Sacro-Profano (Malta,1746) 92v.15. AOM 263, f. 143v.16. AOM 263, f.145v.17. Arcivio Provinciale dei FrancescaniMinori a Valletta, Libro Esito 1675-1715,f.106v.18. AOM 263, f.138v.19. Ibid.20. AOM 263, f.139v.21. AOM 263, ff.138v-139r.22. AOM 263, f.143v.23. A(rchivio del) C(attedrale di) M(alta),Misc. 62, Serie B, Tom.IV, citato da M.Ellul, op.cit., 41.24. Ibid.25. D. De Lucca, Mdina: A History of itsUrban Space and Architecture (Malta,1995).26. AOM 1016, f.158v.; BNM, Univ.23,notizia datata febbraio 1693.27. ACM, Manoscritto 176, f.884.28. ACM, Acta Rev.mi Capituli, Vol.III,f.605.29. AOM 265, f.26.30. M. Ellul, op.cit., 42.31. Archivio dei Padri Domenicani a Rabat,Manoscritto 516, Esito Straordinario 1681-1698, f.22.32. Archivio della chiesa di San Paolo aRabat, Manoscritto Fabrica di San Paolo1693-1705, f.120v.33. D. De Lucca, Mdina: A History of itsUrban Space and Architecture (Malta,1995) 89. Si puo anche consultareMedievale e Barocco a Mdina scritto dallostesso autore in DEMETRA, numero 6(Palermo, 1994) 8 e il libro Mondion: Theachievement of a French military engineerworking in Malta in the early eighteenthcentury (Malta, 2003) scritto dal professorDe Lucca.34. Ibid.

35. BNM, Univ. 95 e 27. L’informazioneinteressantissimo trovato dall’autore neglianni 1974-1975 nelle diversi pagine diquesto fonte, sono discussi in dettaglio nelcitato volume su Mdina e anche nel suocontributo intitolato ArchitecturalInterventions in Mdina following theearthquake of 1693 nel libro gia citatolibretto Mdina and the Earthquake of 1693.36. Ibid.37. Ibid.38. Ibid.39. Ibid.40. Ibid.41. Ibid.42. Ibid.43. Ibid.44. ACM, Manoscritto 60, f.645. BNM, Univ. 187, f.5646. ACM, Manoscritto 60, fol.var.47. ACM, Manoscritto 60, ff.23-2448. ACM, Depositeria, Vol.II, f.363v49. ACM, Manoscritto 21, f.13550. BNM, Univ. 27, Reg.1726-1727, ff. 58-60v.51. ACM, Manoscritto 60, f.19.52. ACM, Manoscritto 60, ff.22-23.53. BNM, Univ. 187, f.139.54. J.Quentin Hughes, Fortress:Architecture and Military History in Malta(Londra, 1969) 151-15255. C. Rizza, Per una teoria del Barocco(Milano, 1985) 8.56. In questo riguardo si puo consultare D.De Lucca, The Contribution of Francois deMondion in the Architectural Developmentof 18th century Malta in Proceedings ofHistory Week 1981 (Malta, 1981) e anche lostesso autore, French Military Engineers inMalta during the 17th and 18th centuries inMelita Historica (Malta, 1980).

Page 34: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

33 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

DOCUMENTINGFORTIFICATIONSAND MILITARYSTRUCTURESTHROUGH PHYSICALSURVEYS ANDARCHIVALRESEARCH

byMr. Paul C. Saliba

The aim of this paper is to provideinformation regarding the proceduresfor documenting structures andlandscapes through physical surveysand archival research, with reference tosome restoration and conservationprojects, carried out by the RestorationUnit(Works Division, Malta) mainly onMaltese fortifications. It considers twoimportant aspects, surveying (orlandscape archaeology) and historicalresearch and documentation. Thecompiled information is used to build adatabase designed to informrestoration interventions.

Spatial and temporal limits

Although there is ample physical anddocumentary evidence relating toMaltese fortifications , particularlydoes dating from the Knights to theBritish Period, yet the urbandevelopment that has been taking placefor the past fifty years has created aconsiderable distortion of the militarylandscape such that it is not alwayspossible to understand the originalrelationship of military structures totheir surrounding lanscape. If thepeople strolling across the BusTerminus at Valletta were to be askedhow the Bus Terminus looked 150 yearsago, very few would answer that theyare standing on the site that actuallyformed part of the outer works ofValletta land front fortifications and thatmost of the roads, tree and residentialareas were once preceded by a barrenearthen glacis.

It is therefore extremely important whensurveying pre-industrial and modernmilitary landscapes for one to analysethoroughly their spatial and temporallimits as many have been subjected to agradual evolution and deformation,particularly in the last half of thetwentieth century. A case in point, outof the many that exist is the subsequentchanges that occurred on St.Christopher’s Bastion, Valletta, asclearly illustrated in Figs. 1 to4 overleaf.

Cartographic and pictorial evidence

The problem of delineating spatial andtemporal limits can be minimizedthrough familiarization with the fullrange of cartographic material andillustrations available for the area understudy and the literature that supports it.After the arrival of the Knights of StJohn in Malta in 1530, the islands alsoshared in the benefit of map production,especially after the Great siege of 1565,when they gained popularity amongstthe great powers in Europe and beyond.Apart from the large range of maps,engravings, paintings and otherpictorial material dating to the time ofthe Order, the Knights have also left arich collection of documents which arenow housed in the National Library andother archival depositaries. The cabreiwhich contain hand-painted maps andplans depicting the property of theOrder are of great use to the study oflocal landscapes. However, early mapsand engravings should be checked fortheir reliability as in certain instancesartists used to depict biased versions ofevents. In some instances the overallconfiguration of the topography wasdistorted, especially when artists copiedmaps and scenery from earlier printsinstead of drawing on the spot. Often adegree of artistic licence andimagination was involved.

Map production depicting localtopography continued to increase inquantity and quality during the BritishPeriod, especially since the latenineteenth century with the issue of theordinance survey maps.Photogrammetric mapping, air-photointerpretation and surveys using totalstation equipment added precision tothese maps.

The type of significant changes thatcan occur in the local landscape wereencountered during in the rehabilitationof Pembroke Battery, a nineteenthcentury coastal work of fortification.The survey sheets were instrumental inrevealing the many rapid changes tolandscape in question before and wellafter the battery was built, when it wasalmost totally obliterated after the sitewas incorporated within a housingscheme in the 1980s ( see page 36).

The first set of survey sheets for theIsland of Malta was published inseveral batches between 1898 and 1924.Only land surveying methods were usedfor the collection of the data and thesheets did not include any contours.The set comprises 149 sheets. The firstset of Gozo is undated and does notinclude contours and is presumed to benot later than 1940. The second set ofMalta is the six-inch-to-one-mile set often survey sheets dated 1911 to 1940. Itdoes not include contour lines. Thethird set of Malta also consists of 149survey sheets and was compiled by theOffice of the Public Works, Malta andreproduced by the War Office duringthe first decades of the twentiethcentury. It was revised, contoured andredrawn through the use of airphotographs and published in 1958. Alllater sets include contour lines exceptthe 1996 set for both the Islands ofMalta and Gozo having a scale of1:10,000. The second set for Gozo wasprinted by the Ordnance Survey for theGovernment of Malta in 1965. Itconsists of 42 sheets. The fourth andfifth sets for Malta only and for bothMalta and Gozo were published in 1973and 1989 respectively. All sets include avery rich toponomy.

The importance of chronology

An issue on which all historians agreeis the importance of chronology. Theorder or sequence of events withrespect to the temporal scales is crucialin the reconstruction of fortifications.Structures have to be thoroughlyinvestigated so that any extensions,accretions, changes, and developmentscould be identified and put in sequentialorder. The upgrading of the BiagioSteps Examination Centre which formspart of St. Andrews Bastion was a

Page 35: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

34 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

difficult exercise in this aspect asevidenced from Fig. 14.

Tapping the sources

Reference to all documentation thatexists about the sites under studyincluding contemporary literature is alsovery important. Written sources areoften the best type of evidence for thesupply of secure dates of events.Documentary evidence can confirm orcontradict any results obtained whenanalysing past landscapes. However,early documentation and modernliterature should always be taken intoaccount with an open eye for anyimperfect information either purposelygiven to distort the true course ofevents or through simple human error.

Often expert advice provesindispensable when analysingfortifications and the surroundinglandscapes. During the restoration ofSt. Helen’s Gate (Sta. Margherita Lines,Bormla), for example, it was suspectedby the Superintendent of Fortificationsthe gate harboured a buried internaldrop-pit which was used to house theinner part o fthe tavolatura (woodenplatform) of a ‘a la Vauban’ type ofcounterweighted drawbridge. Suchdevices were introduced in Maltesefortifications by the French militaryengineer Charles Francois de Mondionin the early decades of the eighteenthcentury. Although no specific record ofsuch a device existed for this particulargate, the fact it was design (but notcompleted) by Mondion raised thepossibility of the existence of such a‘cantina di ponte levatoio’. The onlyway to find out was through physicalsurveys and archaeological excavation.

The initial task was to identify anappropriate area within the gate,measuring about one metre by twometres, which was to serve as asondage to check what really existedunderneath the surface. In the meantimeall the required permits were issuedbefore the excavation started.

It was taken under consideration that ifa drop-pit really existed, the twosidewalls of the vaulted gateway couldbe followed straight down into the pit.Therefore, it was decided that the trial

pit would be positioned along theeastern wall of the gateway andextended by half the width of thetunnel, so that pedestrians could usethe other half. Once the four walls ofthe drop-pit were detected, theexcavation could be easily carried out.The material could then be removedusing hand tools only in spit levelsranging from about 0.5 metres to 0.75metres.

The upper surface consisted of a thicklayer of concrete covered with tarmacthat varied from 180mm to 320mm andsometimes even thicker . When theconcrete surface was eventuallyremoved, a compact fill consisting of amixture of stones of varying sizes,gravel and debris was uncovered. Thepit was cleared from the material up to adepth of one metre using hand toolsonly. However, the pit was notadequate and deep enough to enableone to check whether the eastern wallwas made up of ashlar fair-faced blocksbelow ground level. Blocks with arough surface would indicate afoundation wall, and if so, one had toeliminate the existence of a drop-pit.

Nevertheless, the wall seemed to behighly disturbed, probably due to theconstruction of the present concretefloor. Moreover, a number of services(water pipelines and electricity cables)were found within this level runningclose to the wall, along the north-southdirection. The trial pit was furtherextended all through the tunnel for afurther length of about four metres. Thesame type of rubble was found all alongwithin the trench. Attention was givenso that the cables and pipes wouldremain covered with earth until theywere checked and declared safe by theresponsible personnel. At this stagethere was no indication of a drop-pit.The laying of the pipelines and cableshad disturbed all the area with theconsequence that, also in the presenceof a drop-pit, the upper part of thechamber would definitely be obliterated.The eastern wall of the tunnel, whetherit formed part of the foundation or theinternal wall of the chamber, wasdefaced since a stone channel was duginto it to serve as a bed for the waterpipeline.

Chronological development and evolution ofSt. Christopher Bastion, Valletta, showingthe various stages from its conception as aproposal in Laparelli's original design to itspresent day mutilation and configurationwith a modern road cutting right throughthe face of the rampart. Grunenburg's fleaurd'eaux battery has also largely disappeared.(Illustrations by P. Saliba)

Page 36: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

35 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

Excavation work immediately started onthe opposite side, and a trench aboutthe length of six metres by about oneand a half metres (half the width of thetunnel), was dug down to a depth ofabout one metre. The same negativeresults, as in the case of the oppositeside, were reached. A number of cablesand pipelines were found running closeto the tunnel wall with the result that alarge amount of disturbance was causedto the said wall.

The northern and southern wall of theexcavation trench consisted of a massof concrete and stones, which werecaused by the laying of the pipelinesand cables. The trench now consistedof an approximate area of 6.4 metres by2.8 metres and about 1.6 metres deep.The results were absolutely negative.The western and eastern walls of thetunnel were highly disturbed and werenot fair-faced as one expected them tobe so as to serve as indicators for theexistence of the drop-pit. There was nosign of any walls either in the southernor northern part of the trench.

On the insistence of theSuperintendent of Fortificationsexcavation work was resumed in the pitand carried out along half the width ofthe tunnel for a further depth of onemetre. The fill consisted of rubble anddebris belonging to relative recenttimes. At this level the western wall wasset slightly backwards and the blocksappeared to be ashlar and fair-faced,signifying that they did not form part ofa foundation but of the internal wall ofan underground chamber. This findencouraged further digging along thislength of the wall and a continuouscourse of ashlar blocks about 42cm highwas uncovered. Also most of theblocks had masons’ marks incised ontheir fair-faced surface, therebyimplying that some type of constructionwas present below ground levelpertaining to the period of the knights’,owing to the fact that similar types ofthese particular marks are only recordedon many Hospitaller buildings.

The western and eastern walls of whatnow appeared to constitute anunderground chamber appearedimmediately below the disturbancecaused by the laying of the services.

However, the southern and northernwalls were discovered at a depth of 2.8metres below ground level, underlying athick mixture of concrete and rubble.Now with all four walls of the drop-pittraced, the excavation process wasmuch easier.Three main types ofmasons’ marks were found. These havethe following shapes: X, D, V. Out of atotal of 241 blocks of stone, 213 havemasons’ marks were recorded.The unearthed drop-pit at St Helen’sGate proved to be very similar to theother known drop-pits at Mdina, Birgu,Porte des Bombes and Fort Manoel (thelater still to be excavated but fullydocumented), confirming that thisgateway too was designed by theFrench resident engineer CharlesFrancis de Mondion to take an ‘a laVauban’ type of drawbridge. Theexcavation, however, could not confirm,however, whether the drawbridge itselfwas actually fitted, or whether it wasfitted and removed, as is known to havehapped in some other gates, largelybecause the ‘a la Vauban’ drawbridgeproved to be highly unpopular andunreliable, if not outright dangerous topedestrians. The gate was eventually,and unceremoniously, adapted to take achain-and-tackle type of drawbridgemechanism, the slits for which werecrudely cut into the decorative featureso fthe façade. This has often been takento have occurred during the earlyBritish period but may well date to thelate Hospitaller period.

Direct dialogue with local residents,especially old folk and owners of sitesor buildings under study is often veryrewarding as it may reveal unrecorded

Top right, Graphic reconstruction of 'a laVauban' drawbridge mechanism as wouldhave been designed for, and probablyinstalled at, St. Helen's Gate, Bormla.Below, Elevation sketch recording mason'smarks on wall of 'cantina' or internaldrawbridge pit and, right , detail of mason'snarks on blocks.

Page 37: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

36 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

information. Such people can sometimesprove to be well acquainted with thestructure of their land/building and itspast history. This type of evidence,however, has to treated with greatcaution as it often can be based onimperfect information, or un or hearsay.Also, the continuous familiarisationwith the site or building concernedthrough physical surveys andobservation is highly essential as thehistorian/surveyor has to acquire a feelfor the site/building. Here experienceand an observant eye are an invaluableasset. The continuous surveys carriedout by the project team at the medievalsite of Is-Simblija in the limits of Rabat/Dingli, for example, helped establishthat an number of walls within thevalley of Wied Hazrun were actuallyBritish ridge defences and not ordinaryfield rubble walls, dating back to the latenineteenth/early twentieth. Theirmethod of construction is similar toother contemporary ridge defences builtwith semi-regular blocks laid in linearcourses and having their frontal sidebuilt with a talus.It is important that all data collectedthroughout a research exercise shouldeventually be brought together andcompiled into a report. Once thisoccurs, restoration experts can analysethe information and draw up a map ofthe anatomy of the structure and itsvarious stages of development.Inconclusive evidence or contradictoryresults indicate the need for furtherresearch.

Mr. Saliba is a qualified Archaeolgistworking in the Restoration Unit, WorksDivision, Floriana, Malta. He is currentlyreading for his MA in LandscapeArchaeology.

Survey sheet Nos. 42 and 43 dated 1901 and1897 respectively showing Pembroke RifleRanges, Fort Pembroke, St. Andrew'sBarracks and St. George’s Barracks. Theterrain is still made up of garigue and partlyexposed rock. The second map shows detailfrom Survey sheet No. 5276 showing theinclusion of Pembroke Battery. The surveysheet published for the Maltese Governmentby the British Government’s OverseasDevelopment is dated August 1968 when thesite was no longer used for militarypurposesig. The bottom map showsPembroke Building Development Areasuperimposed on survey sheet 5276.

Page 38: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

1 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

Detail of gateway of St Anthony Battery, Rasil-Qala, Gozo. This arched entrance waywith its escutcheons and inscribed dated

(1732) fell a few years ago and is currently inthe process of being reconstructed by Din l-

Art Helwa and the Qala Local Council.Photographic documentation will enable

restorers to identify and recuperate some ofthe original masonry and reconstruct

missing elements.

Page 39: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

39 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

THE CASTLESANDFORTRESSESOF RHODES

byDr Stephen C Spiteri

In all the theatres of war in which theOrder established its convent, theHospitallers followed an unremittingaggressive policy of offensive actions.This continual belligerency rousedheavy retaliation from their Muslimenemies and the Hospitallers’ survivalthroughout nearly six hundred years ofwarfare was as much a result of theirdaring, bravery, and fighting prowess asit was due to their unceasing efforts instrengthening and buildingfortifications. Their ability to surviveon the border outposts of Christendomin the face of ever-growing Muslimpower was largely possible because ofthe possession of formidable fortresses.

Fortified strongholds, therefore, were anindispensable tool of the Hospitallers’crusading métier. Their strongholdsfunctioned both as frontier marchesguarding against Muslim incursionsinto Christian territory and as militarybases spearheading raiding expeditionsinto enemy lands.

One of the most significant factors thatwas to influence the nature of theOrder’s fighting tradition was itstransformation into a naval force afterthe loss of Acre in 1291, effectively thelast Christian outpost in the Latin East.After 1291, the Hospitaller knights hadno other option but to trade theirchargers for galleys in order to retaintheir crusading métier, going on to fightmost of their battles at sea, preying onTurkish shipping. What made thistransformation possible was the

knights’ ability to acquire a base fortheir operations. They found it in theisland of Rhodes and took it by force ofarms .

The opportunity presented itself in1306. Rhodes and the other islands ofthe archipelago were then part ofschismatic Byzantium and papalapproval for the project was not difficultto obtain. Furthermore, the ByzantineGovernor of Rhodes had cast off hisallegiance from Constantinople suchthat the island was effectively ruled asan independent state (1). Still, the Orderwas careful not depict the attack onRhodes as a crusade against the GreekByzantine empire (the Latin kingdom ofConstantinople had collapsed in 1261)and, early in 1307, the Hospitallers hadeven sent an embassy to Andronisus IIoffering to hold the island as hissubjects (2). The attack on Rhodes wasenvisaged as a preliminary step in thereconquest of the holy places. Theisland was nevertheless a Christiancountry of Orthodox Greeks but the

pretext was good enough to justify ascheme which sought to take advantageof the Greeks’ inability to withstandTurkish pressure.

The city of Rhodes, well fortified andamply garrisoned, however, did not falleasily into their hands. The long andunexpected resistance put up by theRhodiots placed a great strain on theOrder’s resources so that the knightswere reduced to mortgaging theirrevenues to a Florentine money-lenderby the name of Peruzzi. Two decadeslater, the Hospitallers were still payingoff their debts (3). In the end, thefortress fell to the Hospitallers notthrough military operations but througha stroke of luck. A relief force sent bythe Byzantine emperor was carried offby a storm to Famagusta in Cyprus andthe captain of the ship was forced bythe Hospitallers to talk the Rhodianpopulace into surrender (4). With theirreinforcements gone and with adequate

The citadel of the fortress of Marqab, one ofthe principal Hospitaller strongholds inSyria during the 13th century.

Page 40: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

40 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

terms presented to them, the Rhodiangarrison had no other option but tosurrender and on 15 August 1309, thegates of the city were thrown open tothe Hospitallers (5).

With the occupation of Rhodes, theHospitallers did not only acquire a newbase from where to organize theirmilitary activities but also a little islandkingdom. For with Rhodes came therulership of the surrounding islands ofNisyros, Symi, Halki, Alimonia, Telos,Kalymnos, and Leros. In 1313 the Orderalso took possession of the islands ofKarpathos and Kassos, disturbing therule of Andrea Cornaro who inducedVenice to intervene.Not long after the transfer of the Order’sconvent from Cyprus to Rhodes, theHospitallers were soon attractingTurkish attention and Osman, one of theMuslim princes on the Turkishmainland, unsuccessfully attacked theirisland base in 1310. The Hospitallers,however, were quick to assert theirnaval control over the Aegean and, by1320, they had won two importantvictories over the neighbouring Turkishemirates. They even secured and

temporarily held a small number ofcastles on the Anatolian mainland itselfand for the next century Rhodes wasable to prosper in relative peace. Before1306, Turkish razzias and slave-raidinghad severely reduced the population ofthe Dodecanese islands. In Rhodes, anisland 80 km long and 38 km wide, thenumber of inhabitants had dropped towell below 10,000 and much of the fertilelands had fallen out of cultivation.

The Hospitallers’ first task once theyhad taken control of the islands was torepopulate them with Latin settlers anddevelop their commerce and agricultureso that men and supplies would beavailable for the defence of Rhodes.Farms, mills, and agricultural estateswere leased out in emphyteusis or in

perpetuity.6 In 1316 the fertile volcanicisland of Nisyros was granted as a fiefto the Assanti family of Ischia, forwhich they owed the service of a galley(an obligation which was latercommuted for an annual sum of 200florins in 1347) and in 1366, the islandsof Kos and Telos were granted toBorrello Assanti, burgensis of Rhodes,on condition that he was to erect awatch-tower on the little island ofAlimonia, near Halki. Nevertheless, thenumber of men who actually settleddown permanently on Rhodes,especially fighting men, remained small.In 1313 the Order offered land andpensions to any westerners who wouldsettle as soldiers or sailors in Rhodes.The statutes of 1311 and 1314 projecteda force of 500 cavalry and 1,000 footsoldiers to serve as a permanentgarrison in Rhodes while the number ofbrethren in the East stood between 200and 350. The Greek inhabitants werealso involved in the defence of theislands and had to perform servitude inthe building of fortifications. On Kos,for example, the inhabitants were forcedto fortify the suburbium in 1381.(7)

Each district, or castellania, had a castleunder the command of a Hospitallercaptain to which the rural populationcould retreat in times of danger, thoughmost of the fortifications scatteredaround Rhodes and the neighbouringislands, with the exception of a few likeLindos, Pheraclos, Horio (Kalymnos),and Platanos (Leros) were neitherpowerfully built nor large enough towithstand determined attacks. Indeed,in times of crisis, many of these castleswere actually abandoned and theinhabitants shipped off to the safety ofRhodes or the nearest impregnable

Page 41: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

41 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

fortress such as happened in 1470 and1475, when the population of theislands of Telos and Halki wereevacuated to Rhodes.To ensure that Rhodes was governedeffectively, it was divided into a numberof castellanies. The Castellania of thecity of Rhodes included the strongholdsand villages at Trianda, Psinthos, andPhilerimos; the towers of St Etienne,Faliraki, Afandou, and Massari; thehamlets of Marista, Salia, Katangaro,Ermia, Eleoussa, Arhipolis, Platania,Malona, and Kamiro; and the fortifiedmonasteries of Aghios Ilias andTsambika. The castles and villages ofKoskinou, Archangelos, and Kremastiwere autonomous and had to arrangefor their own defence. In 1479 thecastellany of Pheraclos was set up andit came to include properties which wereformerly part of the castellany ofRhodes; the castles and villages ofPheraclos and, Archangelos, and somehamlets. The castellany of Lindosconsisted of the castle and burgus ofLindos, the castles and villages ofAsklipion and Lardos, the towers ofPefka, Aghios Yorghios and Gennadion,and the hamlets of Pilona and Kalathos.In 1475 it was decreed that ‘al Castellodi Lindo ridurre si dovessero i Casali diCalatto, di Pilona, di Lardo, di Steplio(Asklipion) e di Ianadi (Gennadion).’Askiplion was detached from thecastellany of Lindos in 1479 and,together with the castle and village ofVathy, formed into a separateadministrative unit. The castellan ofLahania was responsible for the villageand castle of Lahania, the towers atAghia Marina, Cap Lahania, and CapVaglia together with the hamlets ofTararo, Tha, Defania, and Efgales. Thecastellany of Kattavia consisted of thevillage and stronghold of Kattavia andthe hamlet of Messangros. Thecastellan of Apolakkia governed the

survive of others, such as Kattavia,Apollakia, and Sianna (9).The island of Kos, the largest of thearchipelago after Rhodes, was alsodivided into a number of districts:Narangia, Pyli, Kefalos, andAndimacchia. Kefalos castle could onlyprovide refuge against minor raids andits inhabitants had to retreat to thesafety of Narangia in 1504 (10).At the time that the Order invadedRhodes, the Hospitallers regarded theisland as a base from where military

castle of Apolakkia and its villagetogether with the other hamlets ofArnitha, Profilia, and Istrios. In 1479this district was amalgamated with thatof Monolithos (8).The castellany of Sianna consisted ofthe castles and villages of Sianna,Telemonias, and originally, evenMonolithos and the towers of Glifada,Amartos, and Cape Armenistis.27 In all,there appear to have been 20 castles onRhodes. Of these, however, the ones atLachania, Laerma, Psinthos, Apollona,Salakos, and Trianda have disappearedwith time and only a few scanty remains Below, The ruins of the castle of Pheraclos,

on the eastern coast of Rhodes.

Page 42: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

42 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

operations could be launched for therecovery of the Holy Land. However,growing Turkish power led instead to apolicy of resistance and to the defenceof the Latin possessions in the easternMediterranean.

As the Ottomans advanced farther intothe Balkans, the Order becameincreasingly involved in the defence ofGreece and after 1356 there were evenproposals which favoured establishingthe Hospital on the mainland.By 1402, the Hospitallers hadrealistically decided that large-scaleoperations in Greece were beyond theirresources and instead decided toconcentrate their efforts at Smyrna, butthe city did not last for long and in Julyof that same year it was destroyed anddismantled by the Mongol ruler, Timur.

After the initial Turkish counter-attacksof 1310-12 and 1318-19, Rhodes enjoyedperiods of comparative peace and therewas no major assault on the island until

the unsuccessful Egyptian Mamelukecampaigns of 1440 and 1444. TheMamelukes had already invaded Cyprusin 1428 and, after the fall ofConstantinople in 1453 to SultanMehmed II, Rhodes became theeasternmost Christian outpost in theheart of an ever-growing Turkishempire. Thereafter, the retention of theOrder’s position in the Aegeandepended on the capacity of Rhodes toresist major assaults and the knigtsspent the rest of their stay on the islandinvesting heavily in the fortification ofthe island and its dependencies.

The Hospitaller’s organization of theirdefences centred around the fortifiedcity of Rhodes. This mother fortresswas the largest and most heavilyfortified Hospitaller entity serving bothas the political and military seat of theConvent, a base for their military andnaval forces and it was here that theknights invested most of their efforts.This fortress fed and controlled a

number of secondary strongholdsscattered around the outlying districtsand islands. Most served primarily asadministrative centres or as a shelter forthe population in rural areas (11). Themajority of these strongholds werepredominantly Byzantine origin relyingwithout exception, on the strength ofnaturally defensible sites for theirprotection.

Gabriel rightly remarked that theHospitaller fortifications in Rhodesshow nothing of the essential featuresof the Order’s earlier strongholds inSyria. Indeed, the fourteenth- andfifteenth-century fortifications in theDodecanese reflect a predominantlyByzantine influence. This is attributedpartly to the fact that many of thefortifications in the Greek islands were

Plan of the fortified city of Rhodes (afterGabriel) and view of its 14th and early 15thcentury system of double walls along itslandfront.

Page 43: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

43 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

of Byzantine origin and partly becausethe Hospitallers, after 1310, continuedto utilize indigenous labour functioningin Byzantine tradition. Nearly all of thefortifications, particularly those in thelesser islands, are undoubtedly ofByzantine construction with minimalHospitaller additions. A few of thestrongholds, particularly those builtanew by the knights, however, such asthose of Apolakkia, Sianna, and Lardos,reflect other influences as well. Thecastle of Apolakkia, for instance, ofwhich only a few sparse remains survivetoday, consisted of a central tower orkeep surrounded by an outer enceintesimilar to the donjon-and-bailey type ofearlier Frankish strongholds in Syria.4The donjon, or strong tower, alsoformed the backbone of other castles,such as those found at Lardos andSianna. However, given that many ofthe strongholds on Rhodes have notsurvived, it is difficult to draw anyconclusions from so few examples. Theearliest castle erected by theHospitallers on Rhodes, that ofVillanouva (1319-46), has unfortunatelynot survived to shed light on earlyarchitectural preferences of the Order,although it is known that this castle,too, had a large rectangular plan.

In Rhodes, the Hospitallers establisheda base which remained in the forefrontof the struggle against the Turks, butafter the initial assaults of the seconddecade of the fourteenth century, theywere relatively untroubled by any

serious threat given that the Turks didnot as yet possess a sufficiently strongnaval force to mount an invasion of theisland. Consequently, there appearedno serious military threat to the Rhodianfortress during the first half of thefourteenth century and the Hospitallerseem to have been content with simplyrepairing the city’s Byzantinefortifications. Some building activitydid take place during the magistracies ofVilleneuve (1319-46) and De Gozon(1346-53), but most of this initial effortwas directed towards the extension ofthe city’s enceinte in both a southernand eastern direction in order to absorbthe suburbs that had grown outside thecity walls (12).

The Byzantine city of Rhodes which theknights took over in 1309 occupied onlya section of the ancient Hellenic cityand was built on a level site where theonly advantage lay in its harbourswhich were now vital for the Order’snew naval role. The level site meantthat the city’s defences had to dependtotally on the strength of man-madefortifications. The earliest defencesbuilt by the knights employed a systemof double walls running parallel to eachother, with the inner wall being higherthen the outer one and stiffened atregular intervals with wall-towers.These served to provide enfilading firealong the adjoining curtain walls and toisolate whole sections of the rampartsfrom the rest of the enceinte.

This system of concentric defences wassimilar in concept to the walls ofConstantinople but had only two linesof ramparts. The inner wall, the teichos(teicos), of about two metres thickness,was stiffened at regular intervals withrectangular wall-towers (13). In front ofthis, but at a lower level, stood the theproteichisma (proteicisma) orfaussebraye, with its own walkway.

Percopius had laid down that the spacebetween the two walls had to be onequarter of the height of the inner wall.This is roughly the case at Rhodes too.A good example of this early type ofRhodian system of defence hassurvived in the stretch of city walls eastof St Athanassios gate. Only at thecastle of Narangia in Kos and at Bodrumis there any evidence that the knightsemployed this system of double wallselsewhere besides the city of Rhodes.

The earliest type of wall-towers built onthe enceinte of the city of Rhodes weresquarish ones. Apart from the remainsof the square towers to be found on thewalls of the collachium which, however,are actually Byzantine in origin, theoldest surviving towers actually builtby the knights date to the period 1377-96. These are the two towers sited on

Development of the Bastion of Auvergne.

Page 44: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

44 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

the north seaward side of the city alongthe trace between the towers of St Peterand St Paul. These are rectangularstructures and bear the coat-of-arms ofGrand Master Heredia. These are quitearchaic in appearance and are armedonly with cruciform arrow-slits.Rounded towers appeared relatively latein Rhodian fortifications and not untilthe first half of the fifteenth centurywhen they coincide with the appearanceof gunpowder-operated weapons. Bythis date, the design of Rhodianfortifications was being heavilyinfluenced by Iberian ideas. Thus, wall-towers were built in the Portuguesealbarra style, i.e. detached from the mainwalls to facilitate their isolation in casethese fell to the enemy. The majortowers, such as the Tower of Naillacand the French Tower at Bodrum, werebuilt tall and slender, and were provided

with short turrets or echaugettes(garitas) at the corners in the manner ofSpanish and Portuguese menagem.

Circular towers can be foundinterspersed with rectangular ones onthe walls of the pre-Hospitaller fortressof Philerimos, but apparently even thesewere added later by the knights. AtPheraclos, another important pre-Hospitaller stronghold, there are nocircular wall-towers except those addedat a later date by Grand Master Orsini.In fact here, as in the majority of the restof the strongholds found throughoutthe Order’s possessions in the regionwhich relied on natural elevated sitesfor their defence, the trace of wallsfollows a tortuous course, changingdirection in accordance with theconfiguration of the outer edge of thesummit of the rocky outcrops.Enfilading fire in such places was notprovided by means of wall-towers butfrom jogs in the indented trace. Thecastle of Narangia in the island of Kosis the only one which reflects Venetianinfluence in its rectangular castrum planwith circular corner wall-towers. TheVenetians seem to have beenresponsible for erecting the innercastrum, since the island is known tohave been in their hands at an earlierdate. Indeed, this type of castle can beseen on many other Greek islands whichwere once Venetian outposts, such as atKelefa in the Poleponnese, Aptera, andFrancokastello in Crete.

The introduction of gunpowder-operated cannon in the late fourteenthcentury led towards a gradualtechnological revolution in the art ofpoliorcetics and did much to assure thatcastles design did not ossify. Themedieval castle, however, did notdisappear over-night in the face of this

new siege weapon, mainly because ofthe vast investment in existing castlesand, therefore, the first reactions wereminor practical alterations to the castlesthemselves. High walls, once proofagainst scaling and direct assault,became exposed targets and were eitherthickened or backed up with terrepleinsto withstand the impact of shot;exposed walls were sometimes coveredwith earth or timber to absorb the shockof impact while fragile structures, suchas machicolations and combustiblewooden brattices, were removed frombattlements. The defence of castles,however, remained a predominantlyvertical one. The greatest importance ofHospitaller fortifications during theRhodian period is that these illustratethe important transition from medievaldefences to gunpowder fortificationsand ultimately to the development ofthe bastioned trace in its embryonicform.

The gradual development of firearms inthe later middle ages is first reflected inthe provision of gun-loops and gun-ports to accommodate the new weaponsto the advantage of the defenders. Tomount cannon, castle walls requiredstable platforms and the most adaptablefeature in castle design suited for thispurpose was the wall-tower. Logically,cannon were placed on top of wall-towers and effectively, these becamegun-platforms. At the Tower of StGeorge we find one of the firstprovisions for defence with guns inRhodes. This appears to date to theperiod 1421-37, a comparatively lateappearance that is somewhat surprisingsince gun-ports had been in use, evenin England, as early as 1380.

The period from 1454 to 1467 saw theHospitallers add various large but lowpolygonal towers liberally supplied withgun-ports along the faussebraye of thecity’s land front defences. The additionof these works performed a function notunlike the medieval barbican althoughhere these served not only to covergateways and entrances but alsoenabled enfilading fire to be directedalong the faces of the adjoining curtainwalls. In effect, these projections of thefaussebraye were actually bulwarksbuilt specifically for use with cannon.Such bulwarks, as are still to be seen

RESOURCES ON THE WEBFORTRESSES OF THEKNIGHTSPhotographs of HospitallerFortifications in Rhodes and theDodecanese islands.

http://members.tripod.com/romeartlover/Rodi2.html <CLICK PHOTO TO ACCESS WEBSITE

Framed escutcheons bearing the arms ofGrand Master D'Amboise, 1512,D'Amboise gate, Rhodes city.

Page 45: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

45 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

behind the Koskinou Gate and in frontof the Tower of St George, were alreadyapproaching the solution of the bastion- only their solidity and dimensionswere different.

Following the siege of 1480,D’Aubusson began to reconstruct andstrengthen the city’s defences alongquite different lines than those that hadbeen employed till then. Evidentlydrawing on the lessons learnt from thesiege, in which the city had experiencedfor the first time Turkish siege artilleryfire, massive and solid polygonalbulwarks, or boulevards as these werecalled, were projected ahead of theearlier defences to shield them fromcannon fire. These boulevards,together with the large tenailles cut outin front of the long curtain walls, wereall built to different shapes. One cantherefore regard them as being virtuallyexperimental works, or better still,attempts to find the optimal method ofdefence along different sections of theterrain. A tendency towards regularityin the design of these massivestructures began to manifest itself in theboulevard of Spain (1489) and then theboulevard of Auvergne which dates to1496. The latter was the largest andmost impressive of these works,pentagonal in plan in the manner of laterItalian bastions and with a bomb-proofcasemated battery in its flank. Actuallythe boulevard of Auvergne has long

been disputed as being the prototype ofthe first true bastion developed by theItalian military engineers. It wasdefinitely a step in the right directionbut, for reasons which will be discussedlater, it was not actually conceived as atrue pentagonal bastion (14).

So much so that the Hospitallersabandoned the development ofpentagonal bastions in the followingdecades in favour of semicircular ones.A number of these were built during themagistracy of Del Carretto, the moststriking example being the bulwark atthe post of Italy, but other examples canbe found at the castle of Andimacchia inKos, at Symi (but on a much smallerscale) and at Narangia, also in Kos,where the structure was actuallyincorporated into the main enceinte andthus can actually be called a bastion.Only on the island of Leros does thepolygonal form re-appear, where one ofthree bastions with a sloping base hassurvived on the Hospitaller-addedenceinte, though it is difficult to datethis work.

The transformation from medieval castleto the bastioned fortress is attributed asa development which first took place inItaly in the late fifteenth and earlysixteenth centuries but it is evident thatat Rhodes important developments weretaking place on parallel lines throughoutthe same period (15). Indeed, Italianengineers were operating in Rhodesthroughout this period. The firstdocumented reference to an Italianmilitary engineer working in Rhodesdates to 1502, when the ‘Cremonese

ingeniere e architecto, Bartholino deCastellione’ is reported as being in theservice of the Hospitallers (16).Bartholino appears to have been in theOrder’s employ for a number of years (‘estato stipendiato ali servitij nostri’) andwas employed also at Kos and at‘castello sancti petri quanto altre nostreisole’ (17). Apparently, he was still inthe employ of the Order at Bodrum in1507 (18).

Pietro Spagnesi, in his book on CastelSant’Angelo, mentions the Hospitallerknight Frà Antontio di S. Martino asone of the persons employed by PopeAlexander VI to ‘sovrintendere allafabbrica’ of the Roman stronghold. Thegreat similarity between the bulwarkserected by D’Aubusson at Rhodes andthose built by the pope at CastelSant’Angelo tends to indicate acommon author, though historians haveyet to determine which influencedwhich.

Top right, Graphic reconstruction of Fort StNicholas, c. 1522 and top right, during thesiege of 1481 (after Caoursin). Right,Hospitaller knights c. 1500.

Page 46: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

46 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

Page 47: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

47 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

The first mention of a military engineerin the employ of the Order is given byGiacomo Bosio. This was the GermanGeorg Frappan, ‘Mastrogiorgios’, whowas finally hanged by the knights fortraitorously assisting the Turks duringthe siege of 1480, after he had actuallydefected from the Turkish army to jointhe knights (19). Prior to 1480, however,there is no information on the militaryengineers working for the Order. Thepost of ‘Provediteur des Fortifications’,which was held by Pierre d’Aubussonbefore his election to grand master in1476, during which time he wasresponsible for strengthening the city’sseaward defences, however, seems tohave been only a temporary oneresulting from the fact that D’Aubussonwas especially well versed in militaryengineering (20).

During the last two decades of theOrder’s stay in Rhodes, the Hospitallersmade increasing use of the services ofItalian engineers, a practice they were toretain in Malta throughout the rest ofthe sixteenth and first half of theseventeenth centuries. Both GrandMasters Del Caretto and L’Isle Adamemployed mostly Italian engineers likeBasilio della Scuola and the SicilianMaestro Zuenio (Geoini), the BergameseGabriele Tardini da Martengo, and theFlorentine Gerolamo Bartolucci (21).During this period, one can also beginto encounter the two categories ofengineers employed by the Order, apractice that is well documented inMalta; that is, the distinction between aresident engineer, the ‘Ingeniere dellaReligione’, who was employed by theHospitallers and was responsible forexecuting and maintaining all works offortification like Maestro Zuenio, andthe foreign expert loaned by someEuropean monarch to design specificprojects, such as ‘Basilio della Scuola,Ingegniero dell’Imperatore Massimiano;il quale era il maggiore huomo di quellaprofessione ch’in quei tempivivesse’(22). Gabriel refers also to arequest by the Hospitallers, in 1516, forthe services of the military engineerScarpagnino which request, however,was turned down by the VenetianRepublic. The relief model in wax of thefortified city of Rhodes which ‘MaestroZuenio’ prepared for Pope Leo X in 1521

must have shown the latestimprovements in the art of fortification -the semicircular and polygonalbulwarks, the use of caponiers andcurved parapets and gun embrasures.The fortifications were soon put to thetest in the course of the following year.In effect, the siege of 1522 proved to bea complete departure from contemporarymedieval siege warfare and was insteadfought out with powerful artillery andexplosive subterranean mines. The factthat 6,000 men were able to resist a largeTurkish army for six months says muchabout the effectiveness of the earlybulwarks of Rhodes. Had the knightsreceived substantial reinforcementsfrom Europe they would probably nothave had to surrender the city.

References and Notes

1. J.C. Poutiers, Rhodes et ses chevaliers1306-1523 (n.p. 1984) 23-8.2. E. Zachariadou, Trade and Crusade:Venetian Crete and the Emirates of Mentesheand Aydin: 1300 -1415 (Venice, 1983).3. E. Brockman, The Two Siege of Rhodes(London, 1969) 30.

4. E. Edwards,’The Knights Hospitalliersand the Conquest of Rhodes’, TheProceedings of the Royal PhilosophicalSociety of Glasgow (1918-20) 50-63.5. A. Luttrell, ‘Hospitallers in Cyprus’, inThe Hospitallers of Rhodes and theirMediterranean Worlds (London, 1992),162.6 A. Luttrell, ‘The Hospitallers of Rhodesconfront the Turks’ in The Hospitallers ofRhodes and their Mediterranean Worlds(London, 1992), 273-81.7 . Luttrell, ‘Military & Naval Organizationat Rhodes:1310-1444’ in The Hospitallers ofRhodes and their Mediterranean Worlds(London, 1992), 137.8. Bosio, II, 256, 260, 261, 274, 321, 326,350, 367, 396, 398, 561, 587-9; Poutiers,190-6; Bosio, II, 349-50, gives the villagesassigned to the various castles in 1475;Lindos, Calatto, Pilona, Lardo, Stlepio,

Ianadi; Canea (Lahania), Tha, Defania,Efgales; Catavia, Messiuagro, Vati;Polochia, Stridio, Porfilia, Arnita; Polona,Laderma; Salaco, Capi, Quittalia; Fanes,Diosoro,Nicorio, Dimilia; Villanouva,Chimedes, Altoluogo, Dimitria, Sicegai;Feraclo-Salia, Ianadoto, Malona, Catagro,Camimari; Arcangelo, solo guardare sidovesse. E che nella città di Rhodi ritiraresi dovessero le genti de Casali di Fando, diPsito, di Archipoli, d’Arima, di Calaties, e diDemathia; other defence preparations canbe found in 321 (1470), 375 (1475), and 387(1479); Poutiers, 190-6.11. S.C. Spiteri, Fortresses of the Knights(Malta, 2001) 28.12. Q. Hughes & A. Migos, ‘Rhodes: TheTurkish Sieges’ in Fort XXI (1993), 5.13. L. Villena, ‘The Iberian Strategic Castle’in IBI Bulletin 47 (1990-1), 59-66.14. B.H. St. J. O’Neil, ‘Rhodes and theOrigins of the Bastion’ in The AntiquariesJournal (1954); Spiteri, 106-12515. For early Italian military engineers seeJ.R., Hale, Renaissance Fortifications: Artor engineering? passim; R. Santoro,Architetti Italiani Operanti alle Difese delloStato dei Cavalieri di Rodi in Architetti eIngegneri Militari all’ estero dall XV alXVIII Secolo, Istituto Italiano dei Castelli(1994), 33-7.16. A. Luttrell & K. Jeppesson, TheMaussollein at Harlikarnassus (London,1991), 108:17. AOM 394, f.246v.18. Luttrell and Jeppesson, 169.19. Bosio, I, 393, 400, 411-2.20. Bosio, I, 335.21. G. Gerola, ‘Il contributo dell’Italia alleOpere d’arte militare rodiesi in Atti Veneti 89(Venice, 1930)’, 1015-27.22. Bosio, I, 624.

The Bastion of Italy, Rhodes city. Rightartistic reconstruction of the fortifications ofRhodes under assault during the siege of1522. (by Stephen C. Spiteri),

Page 48: Arx Journal Volume 5 2008

ARX- ONLINE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

49 / ISSUE 5/ 2008

NEWPUBLICATIONON THEFOUGASSEThe excavation of the fougasse at ix-Xattl’Ahmar in Gozo during the summermonths of 2005 was the first everscientifically documented operation of itstype in Malta. It was conducted by theSuperintendence of the Cultural Heritagein conjunction with the Fortress ExplorerSociety. The excavation was aimed tocombine a series of other similarprocedures with historical research, whichis intended to document Malta’s uniquecollection of surviving fougasses.

The excavation has provided more preciseinformation on the fougasse and the stoneprojects which it fired. This fougasses wasaccidentally discovered by Mr MikeSpiteri after a particularly heavy rainstormearlier in 2005 had carried away the topsoil along a stretch of foreshore at ix-Xattl-Ahmar. The survey also located twoother 'unknown' fougasses, likewise filledin with soil and debris.

Excavation works commenced on 26May 2005 and lasted until 8 July 2005.The team also excavated the partlyfilled-in fougasse at Ramla l-Hamra inGozo.

The results of the archaeologicalexcavation together with new historicalstudies are being prepared forpublication later this year.