No, we are not talking about the Inquisition. Six or seven centuries ago, the towers of the fortresses of northwestern Russia, Novgorod and Pskov, were called bonfires. Well, the vices were the then siege stone-throwers: trebuchets and ballistas. What did their confrontation look like in those days? We decided to show this on the example of Izborsk, one of the most famous Pskov fortresses.

Sergey Sysoev

The loopholes of medieval fortresses sometimes seem to be located haphazardly, but in reality, the architects did not allow any accidents in this most important issue. Firing sectors were assigned based on the requirements of the terrain and the capabilities of weapons; both are now not always easy to establish. If necessary, the loophole could be oriented not directly, but in the direction necessary for defense. The photo shows the embrasure of the Nikolskaya tower of the Porkhov fortress (Novgorod Republic, 1387). Looking closer, you can see that she "looks" to the side.

Talav tower, view from the inside One can see the characteristic shape of loopholes with chambers-pechura, typical for the fortifications of the “gunshot era”. Pechura gave enough space to place guns. In some places, this design appears even before cannons, but it becomes ubiquitous from the end of the 14th century.

A wall with a secret Even well-studied fortresses like Izborsk have their own mysteries. One of them is a foot battle loophole located in the western wall of the fortress. Judging by the shape, size and location at ground level, there should have been a cannon here. However, we have a wall of 1330 before the first mention of artillery in Russian chronicles for another half a century. The loophole cannot be a later construction - it was laid on the outside with a butt of the end of the 14th century, built to increase the thickness of the wall, just in view of the appearance of cannons.

Moscow, as you know, stands on seven hills at the same time. From the time of its foundation, Izborsk happened to stand on two hills in succession. Initially, the fortress was located on a hill near Gorodishchenskoye Lake, now known as Truvorovo Settlement - in honor of the legendary (most likely fictional) brother Rurik. It is with him that the first annalistic mention of Izborsk in 862 is connected: Truvor “sat down” here to reign. The location on a hill, bounded by steep slopes, made it possible to storm the fortress from only one side, which was called the assault. The other walls of the fortress were, as you might guess, impregnable, since they were beyond the reach of the then siege equipment: stone throwers did not have enough range, and it was impossible to drag a ram up the slope. Cape architecture prevailed in Russia until the middle of the 15th century and sunk into oblivion with the development of siege artillery: the details of the relief did not interfere with the cannonball.

Excavations at the end of the 20th century showed, however, that the fortified settlement existed at least from the beginning of the 8th century, being one of the tribal centers of the Krivichi. Approximately from the 11th century, the fortress became stone, with a three-meter-thick wall, two gates and a watchtower on the spit of the cape, on the side opposite to the assault. Nevertheless, already in the first half of the 13th century, the then Izborsk was taken by the Germans twice: in 1233 and 1240. By that time, the hill had also become cramped: the area of ​​the settlement on it was only about 1000 m². But conclusions followed only after 60 years. In 1303, a new, then still wooden, fortress was built on Zheravya (Crane) Hill, 1.5 km southeast of the former one. After another 27 years, a team of urban planners sent from Pskov, headed by the mayor Sheloga, replaced the wooden wall with a stone one.

Without towers

The towers with tents and crenellated parapets at the top, menacingly reaching for the sky, seem to be an integral part of medieval fortress architecture. But they just seem. The fortifiers of the Early Middle Ages often did without them - with one wall with a fighting passage at the top. The level of siege equipment then allowed the garrison to behave quite passively, limiting itself to frontal shelling of the enemy storming the wall. A sufficient condition for success was to prevent the enemy from entering the wall, regardless of the damage inflicted on him.

This fully applies to Russia: wooden fortresses of the pre-Mongol era usually had only a gate tower to protect the entrance, not oriented to the flanking fire along the wall. Stone fortresses followed this tradition - however, there were few of them then.

Let's pay attention to the shape of the wall in plan: in some places it is curved, in the western section it is strongly. Since flanking fire was not supposed during its construction, the posadnik Sheloga had no need to demand straight lines from the architects. They placed the wall based on the relief - a typical solution of that era. Straight fences and towers at the corners will become an indispensable attribute of fortifications in a hundred and fifty years - with the onset of the firearms age.

In Izborsk in 1303, apparently, there was one tower - Lukovka, or Kukovka - located, as in the predecessor city, on the arrow of the cape. Her appointment has been a subject of controversy for many years. Fortresses with one tower were quite common in those centuries, but the tower was more often erected in a threatened area in order to have a better view of the battlefield and the ability to fire at the enemy from above. Lukovka stands in the most protected place of the fortress, too far from the attacking wall and gate for the attackers to be reached with a bow or crossbow. Perhaps we have a donjon in front of us - the last refuge of the defenders in case the enemy breaks into the fortress, but such structures are not very typical for Russia. In addition, if now Lukovka stands inside the fortress (the wall of 1330 bypassed it, obscuring part of the loopholes of the lower tier), then in the “wooden period” it was clearly included in the wall. This is evidenced by the exits laid back in antiquity, through which it was once possible to get from the wall to the tower and vice versa. It is possible that the main function of Lukovka was sentinel: an observation deck is still equipped on it, but again it is strange that the observation point is not located where you can expect an assault. By the end of the 14th century, the “lookouts” were on the Vyshka tower, built by that time, on the western tip of the fortress, which looks much more rational. But the Tower and other towers will be discussed below.

The role of the stairs in history

You will not immediately notice this sign of antiquity, but having noticed, you will not immediately understand what this heap of stone was six centuries ago. And in front of us, it turns out, a staircase leading to the fortress wall. The construction, which is quite common in any modern (and even then) house, is not very typical for a fortress: after all, the steps can help not only the defenders to climb the wall, but also the attackers, who occupied the wall or part of it, go down.

In fortresses of later eras, communication between the wall and the surface was maintained only through towers. By the end of the 15th century, the “standard” was the tower, opening the battle course, so that it was possible to move from one section of the wall to another only through the tower, the entrances to which were blocked if necessary. In Ivangorod (1492), the city planners went even further: there the entrance to the tower tier is separated from the wall by a drawbridge, and the enemy who breaks into the wall has every chance of staying there. But in Izborsk there have never been such tricks - its walls were built in the "turretless era", and the stone staircase has remained since that time. It may well be that once she was not alone.

Enter and die

The weakest point of the fortress at all times was considered the gate. Indeed, what could be easier - kick the door and enter? Defenders of the "door" such a turn of events, of course, did not suit. They tried to complicate the lives of their opponents and, if possible, shorten them while they were rushing to visit. To make this procedure long and replete with non-obvious meanings, in many fortresses of the XIII-XV centuries. ekov entrance architecture was a bit complicated. The adversaries who passed the first gate had to then go through the zakhab (sometimes called a sleeve) - a corridor between two walls, usually blocked from above and shot through by hospitable hosts from all sides. To increase the fun, the zahabs were sometimes made curved, covered with gratings-gers, and in general, the set of surprises prepared for the guests was limited only by the imagination of the hosts. The prize for the survivors was the opportunity to take out one more, last, gate. Behind them, dear guests could finally rake bread and salt directly from the hosts, but, as far as we know, no one did this.

Izborsk fortress has two zahabs - Nikolsky and Talavsky; the second of them, much smaller in size, was obviously an understudy of the main one. Only ruins remain of both. As the medieval castle lost its military significance, the extra walls at the entrance turned from a survival factor into a hindrance to passage and passage. They were not taken care of too much, and the scale of the structure contributed to the destruction: the outer walls of the zakhabs in Izborsk were only about a meter thick - and this is perhaps the only thing that is reliably known about their structure. Most historians assume that six centuries ago the zahab was covered from above, and the outer wall was not only thinner, but also lower so that the defenders of the fortress could fire on the enemy over it - but these assumptions cannot now be verified.

Bonfires on the hill

Formidable fortress towers appeared near the walls of Izborsk in the second half of the 14th century - about half a century after the walls themselves. Izborsk is no exception in this sense - since about that time, the towers have become an integral element of fortress architecture throughout Russia. Obviously, the reason was the development of siege technology, which made the traditional passive "sitting" behind the walls a hopeless exercise. To repel a well-equipped enemy, it was necessary to dominate the battlefield, and for this, shooters needed better positions.

The rapid development of firearms also played a role. By the end of the 14th century, it was not yet an effective siege weapon - its low power and difficulties in transportation affected it, but it was already widely used to protect fortresses, and this required equipped positions and good firing sectors. The strengthening of the fortress walls also indicates a significant role of cannons: at the turn of the XIV-XV centuries. ekov masonry thickness was increased and reached 4.5-5 m against the original 2-2.5. Western and southern walls of Izborsk

even intensified twice, becoming three-layer, the least dangerous northern one - once. Similar work was then carried out on most of the most important fortresses of Novgorod and Pskov.

There were six towers built at the end of the 14th century, one of them, covering the middle part of the Nikolsky zakhab, has not survived to this day. Four towers are concentrated on the frontal side of the fortress and are strongly pushed forward, adjoining the wall only with the back side. The loopholes on the tiers are located mainly in a checkerboard pattern, allowing you to shoot both along the wall and in the front. Unlike Lukovka, originally designed for all-round defense, later towers do not have loopholes facing the inside of the fortress. The entrance to the towers was arranged from the back.

Separately, we mention the only loophole of the sole fight in the fortress, arranged directly in the wall on the attacking side of the fortress. In subsequent eras, this detail will become widespread, but for the XIV-XV centuries. ekov was a rarity.

Water problem

Zheravya Mountain is not only quite high, but also made of limestone. On the one hand, this circumstance once made life easier for the posadnik Sheloga and his people - the fortress stands on natural stone as a foundation. On the other hand, it is difficult to cut a sufficiently deep well in a limestone massif. Well drilling in the 14th century has not yet been heard of. Meanwhile, there must be water in the fortress, otherwise the besiegers will not need to storm it.

The problem was solved by the device of a secret passage from the foot of the southern wall down to the base of the hill. A trench with fortified walls was dug in the hillside, descending from the Bell Tower to a spring at the foot of the hill. Then the passage was covered with a vault, covered with turf and disguised. The enemy (the Germans) managed to find it only once, in 1341, but the fortress was not taken, and then the besieged started a rumor that they still had plenty of water, and this trick worked. It may seem strange that the cache was not discovered during the subsequent sieges, but in those days there were no GPS navigators and databases, and the archives were arranged very simply - apparently, valuable information was simply forgotten.

Before the advent of gunpowder and, as a result, large fire-breathing cannons that could erase fortress walls into dust, siege work was a much more interesting and difficult task. The army could stand under the walls of the fortress for several years, in which there were ten times less, without achieving anything. Often, the besiegers simply took the castle into the ring and waited for the guys behind the wall to begin to die from hunger, exhaustion and disease. But this might not have happened, because the fortifications were built according to the entire logic of war - they had to withstand long sieges. Food supplies, access to a source of water, a strict food distribution system are only some of the conditions that allowed it to be under siege for years. But it is easier to wait out the winter in the fortress than outside. Therefore, not every commander decided on a long siege, some preferred an open and relatively honest assault, which could not pass without siege weapons.

1. Siege tower

An imposing structure, which made it possible to climb the walls in the fastest way, with a good combination of circumstances. Also, the siege tower served as a cover from enemy arrows and was a kind of platform from which archers could attack opponents on the walls. They made siege towers out of wood, which seems reckless - it will light up like a match. But the tower was always covered with non-combustible material, such as cattle skins, which had to be fresh, sometimes metal sheets were used for this purpose.

The tower was moved on wheels by means of draft cattle or by manual traction. Such a tower could accommodate up to 200 people, not counting the additional siege weapons installed on its levels. But these are already giants, an example of which is the siege tower of Eleopolis (“capturer of cities”), which was used by the Macedonian troops during the siege of Rhodes in 305 BC. It was 45 meters high and 20 meters wide. Due to its bulkiness, it was assembled immediately before the siege. Eleopolis had 9 levels, which housed two hundred archers. But it was a monster, celebrated in legend, that was used to storm one of the most fortified cities of antiquity. Ordinary siege towers were, of course, much smaller.

Since the appearance of the first siege tower, which was built by the genius of Carthage, and until the beginning of the era of gunpowder, the design of these siege weapons has undergone a number of changes, but the essence has always remained unchanged. Which gave rise to the same problem over and over again: the siege tower became helpless when the surface was not even enough. The same Eleopolis turned out to be useless during the siege of Rhodes, since the defenders guessed to flood the space in front of the wall, and the tower eventually got stuck. The last siege towers carried not archers, but artillery pieces, they were called battery towers, but their effectiveness is often questioned.

2. Catapult

Who does not know the catapult? The kind of thing that sends rocks like a sling, smashing walls into tiny pieces. The picture immediately popped into my head, right? Now forget about it, because a real catapult looks completely different. It's all about terminological inaccuracies that, for some strange reason, hit the heads of modern generations.

Great Hercules! This is the end of military prowess!
- the words of the Spartan king to Archides at the sight of a catapult -

A real catapult is a simple arrow launcher and has always been an arrow launcher that works on the principle of torsion action. In other words, a catapult is an easel crossbow and nothing more. There were a great many designs, but, one way or another, the name of this siege weapon spoke primarily about the principle of operation. The invention of the catapult is credited to Dionysius I, the tyrant of Syracuse, who gathered the toughest artisans of his city and encouraged them to create a technological weapon that would terrify enemies. So they created a catapult for him, which helped to destroy the fleet of Carthage when he dared to attack Syracuse.

The catapult was used both against people and infantry, and as a siege weapon. For the latter, not arrows were used, but stones, a kind of cannonballs. The psychological factor of the catapult attack was extremely important, because the penetrating power of a long and heavy arrow launched from this weapon was so great that the projectile could pierce a metal-bound shield and enter the body half its length, breaking through the armor.

Cars at this sign began to throw arrows at the Scythians, who were riding horses along the shore. Some were wounded; an arrow pierced through the shield and shell of one, and he fell from his horse. The Scythians were afraid of arrows flying at such a great distance, and that their hero was killed, and moved a little from the coast.

3. Onager

It is the onager that is most often confused with a catapult, and is listed as the most popular among all those presented. At the same time, it is popular only in our popular culture, because in fact, onagers were used quite rarely.

This machine is called tormentum, because the tension is achieved by twisting (torquere) - a scorpion, because it has a sting sticking up; modern times have also given it the name of the onager, because wild donkeys, pursued in the hunt, kicking back, throw such stones that they pierce (283) the chest of their pursuers or, breaking through the bones of the skull, crush the head.
- late Roman officer and historian Ammianus Marcellinus -

The mechanism of the onager was torsion, which made this tool look like an easel sling. It was necessary to rotate the lever so that the shoulder went down. A stone or metal projectile was put into it, and then the lever was released, which led to a shot. Most often, onagers were used against infantry, not buildings. Since they were not adapted for conducting mounted fire, the trajectory of the projectile was flat. Thus, they were used in the defense of fortresses, but not in a siege. For the siege, ballistae were needed, which fired at a higher elevation angle.

4. Trebuchet

A crushing throwing machine that uses the gravitational principle of action, which allows you to throw very heavy projectiles, causing serious damage to the fortress walls. Despite the appearance of this siege machine, the design itself is quite simple: a lever and two arms (short and long) are attached to a stable frame. On the long one there is a rope saddle for shells, on the short one there is a counterweight. Even corpses could be used as a counterweight.

Who exactly invented the trebuchet, no one knows. There are written references to the fact that a similar machine is found in China in the 5th century BC. But a more serious source can be called the work of the Archbishop of Thessaloniki John "The Miracles of St. Demetrius", which describes the invasion of the Avars and Slavs and the siege of the city of Thessaloniki. The attackers, according to this work, produced from 50 to 150 "vices" per day, which they then left on the battlefield, not considering the guns to be of particular value. It is believed that the "vices" were borrowed through the Turks from the Chinese. Subsequently, they were adopted by the Byzantines. Well, when Byzantium fell into decline, and the kingdoms of Western Europe strengthened their power and became the center of engineering, the trebuchets migrated to Western Europeans.

For a long time, trebuchets were the most effective assault weapon in the feudal wars of Europe. Their design has improved significantly, acquired more suitable proportions, more powerful wall-beating characteristics, but by the 14th century, during the Hundred Years War, the effectiveness of the trebuchet was reduced. This was clear even before the advent of gunpowder weapons. It was about new types of fortifications that perfectly withstood the strength and power of the projectiles fired from this famous stone thrower. Well, when guns appeared, the meaning of trebuchets disappeared altogether.

The last known use of the trebuchet in combat occurred during the battle of Cortes with the Aztecs in 1521. Then Cortes did not want to waste gunpowder, so he ordered the creation of a trebuchet that could throw stones weighing 11 kilograms. The idea was unsuccessful: one of the shells flew vertically upward and destroyed the car itself.

5. Ramming

A battering ram, which is a log, the end of which is equipped with an iron or bronze tip. The design may vary. The simplest battering ram is equipped with side handles, which the warriors must hold on to. But there are pendulum structures, such rams act automatically, which greatly facilitates the assault on the fortress.

Staring like a ram at a new gate
- a saying, which, according to one version, owes its origin to a ram -

The ram is an ancient invention that was known to the Assyrians. The Romans themselves attribute the invention of the battering ram to the Carthaginians. With the help of him, the walls of Cadiz, the pearl of the Iberian Peninsula, were destroyed. Most often, rams were placed in a design that is known to us under the name "turtle". It was made of wood, on which the skins of bulls were attached. Such a canopy was great protection from arrows, stones and hot oil, which were thrown onto the besiegers from the walls. The Romans began using the battering ram during the Second Punic War, during the siege of Syracuse. Historical documents say that one of the two rams required about 6,000 legionnaires for its movement. Imagine the scale!

In 1861, the American engineer Robert Parker Parrot patented a new method for making gun barrels, which made them much lighter and stronger than iron castings common for those times. UnlikeThomas Rodman, who developed the complex cold-core casting method , the barrels of Parrott's guns were cast in the usual way, but at the same time they were much thinner and lighter than those of Rodman. To increase the strength of their breech, where the pressure of the powder gases during firing is maximum, forged iron "cuffs" were put on by hot fit, which protected the brittle cast iron from cracking.

In the same year, Parrot's guns were put into mass production at a number of arms factories and during the American Civil War - were widely used by both warring parties. In total, several thousand of these guns were produced, which were in service with the US Army and Navy until the end of the 1880s.

The calibers of the guns varied over a very wide range - from three to 10 inches (10 - 300 pounds in the then American system for determining the caliber by the mass of the projectile). Light field three-inch guns weighed 400 kg and fired at 4600 meters, while heavy siege and ship ten-inch guns weighed more than 12 tons and threw 140-kilogram shells over eight kilometers.

Parrot's guns were produced not only in the north, but also in the southern states. The southerners made small-caliber guns without any problems, but with larger ones there were difficulties due to the lack of powerful blacksmithing equipment for making forged iron rings of considerable thickness and large diameter, necessary for such guns. Solving this problem, naval officer and inventor John Mercer Brooke proposed making the "cuffs" composite, recruiting them from narrow rings, or putting relatively thin tubes on top of each other.

Brook's guns were successfully tested and produced during the Civil War years at the Richmond Steel Works and at the Selm Naval Arsenal. However, the production capacities of these enterprises were relatively small, so in three years they produced no more than a hundred rifled guns with a caliber of six, seven and eight inches, as well as 12 ten-inch smoothbore and several 11-inch guns.

The culture of production was also not up to par, which is why there was a high percentage of defects. For example, out of 54 Brook seven-inch guns made in Selma, only 39 successfully passed the tests, and out of 27 six-inch guns, 15. Nevertheless, Brook guns were considered very valuable weapons and were used at the most critical sites. In particular, two such guns were installed on the first battleship of the southerners "Virginia". Two more guns were received by the battleships Atlanta, Columbia, Jackson and some other ships of the Confederate fleet.

On the screen saver - Brook's gun from the battleship "Jackson" in the US Naval Museum.

Loading a 300-pound Parrot gun. To lift the projectile, a folding block is used in a rope loop, mounted on the barrel.

Parrott's 20-pounder on the deck of the Constellation sloop.

On the left is the muzzle of a Parrot gun with factory markings. The rifling is clearly visible in the bore. On the right is a patent drawing of Parrot's high-explosive fragmentation projectile with a leading copper "skirt", which expanded when fired and ensured the movement of the projectile along the rifling.

Parrott's unexploded ordnance, found at the battlefields of the Civil War.

American reenactors in Confederate uniforms demonstrate shooting from the Parrott field 10-pounder.

Parrott's gun on the deck of the northerners' steam-sailing frigate "Wobash".

Coastal battery of northerners, on which Rodman's smooth-bore 15-inch "bottle" and Parrot's 10-inch rifled flaunt nearby.

Parrott's 30-pounder long-barreled battery, which bombarded Confederate Fort Pulaski on April 10-11, 1862. As a result of the shelling, the fort received significant damage, and almost all of its guns were disabled. Two days after the start of the bombardment, the fort garrison capitulated.
This combat episode clearly showed the ineffectiveness of fortifications built to withstand "nuclear" guns against rifled artillery.

Damage to Fort Pulaski from shelling. The thick brick walls of the casemates were pierced right through in many places.

Due to casting defects that were not discovered in a timely manner, Parrott's cannons sometimes exploded when fired, like this 10-inch siege gun. According to official data from the US Navy, out of 703 guns of this design, which stood on warships and coastal batteries during the Civil War, 21 exploded. On average, one accident occurred in 500-600 shots.Approximately the same statistics were in the army artillery.

It's called "bombing"! Eight-inch Parrott, whose breech was knocked out when fired.

A drawing of a Brook cannon with two thin rings placed on top of each other.

Brook's eight-inch in shore position. Looking closer, you can see that the outer shell of the barrel is made up of three rings adjacent to each other.

Brook's 10-inch smoothbore captured by the Unionists at Richmond after the Confederates surrendered.

Brook's tools that have survived to this day.

FORTRESSES AND SIEGE GUNS

In the 1240s. in Southwestern Russia, multi-tiered stone towers up to 30 m high were built to protect the approaches to the gates. These towers were erected in such a way that their defenders could shoot at enemies, even if they managed to capture the rest of the fortress. In fact, these towers served the same task: firing at the enemy from a long distance. Similar towers were erected in Western Russia in the second half of the 13th century; 15 such towers are mentioned, although their true number seems to have been much higher even in one Volyn principality. Similar structures were erected in villages and temporarily captured cities, presumably to repel the raids of the Mongol detachments. They proved to be so effective as "fire bases" that in ser. 14th century began to appear in the principalities of Northern Russia.

Completely stone fortresses appeared later, although already in 1259 Prince Daniel Romanovich built his new capital city of Kholm from this material.

In the XIII-XVI centuries. Russian princes waged wars mainly with the aim of seizing foreign territory, therefore fortifications acquired special strategic importance. In every third of the 460 military campaigns conducted between 1228 and 1462, the Russians either besieged cities or defended them. During the Mongol period, various methods of protecting the territory were used depending on local conditions; this was reflected in the use of fortifications. In the years that followed the invasion of Batu Khan's troops, Tatar detachments avoided the use of bulky and heavy vehicles and siege weapons and rarely attacked cities. If the detachments were small, they were content to plunder the rural outskirts, but if their numbers were sufficient, they could try to take the fortress by cunning or overcome its garrison in open battle.

On the northwestern and western borders of the Russian lands, where the Teutonic knights and Lithuanians actively used siege equipment in the storming of cities, the situation was the opposite. From the end of the XIII century. here, special attention was paid to the construction of fortifications and the creation of numerous stone-throwing machines. Following the strengthening of the capital cities in 1302–1309. the inhabitants of Pskov and Novgorod built many fortresses, especially along the frontiers. As they became obsolete, wooden and earthen fortifications were replaced by more reliable stone structures. In strategically vulnerable regions, new fortress cities were created, such as Koporye, Korela, Oreshek, Izborsk, Yam (Yama) and Porkhov.

Between 1382 and 1426. During the siege and defense of fortresses, the Russians began to use firearms along with the existing siege machines. Fortress walls and towers were built so that their defenders could freely shoot from squeakers, bows and crossbows, but only in the second quarter of the 15th century. the use of firearms led to real changes in military architecture. This first manifested itself in 1430, when the walls of the fortress city of Porkhov were thickened, followed in 1448 by the restructuring of Yamgorod.

The eastern wall with a peal and the corner tower of the Koporye fortress, built in the middle of the 15th century. (Photo by V.V. Kostochkina)

In the 2nd floor. In the 15th century, which coincided with the formation of the Muscovite state, the artillery became so powerful that now the cannons could break stone walls. For the first time in Russian history, this happened in 1481 during the siege of the German fortress of Fellin in Livonia. The next stage in the development of Russian military architecture was the construction in 1492 in Ivangorod of a strictly quadrangular fortress - the first such structure in Russia. But since the Russians followed Western European models in the construction of fortresses, the Ivangorod fortress without corner towers already at the time of construction was an outdated structure even for that time. This architectural flaw became fully apparent when Swedish troops easily took over the new fortress just 4 years after it was built. After that, Ivangorod was re-fortified and modernized in order to fully meet the modern requirements of military operations, when the siege of fortresses was entirely assigned to artillery.

Painted wooden figurine of George the Victorious, Russia, XV century. (Local History Museum, Yuryev-Polsky)

In subsequent years, there has been an intensive development of military architecture in Russia, especially in the south of the country, as a result of which it becomes one of the most developed countries in Europe in this respect. It is not for nothing that these changes are taking place at a time when the Russian principalities are uniting into a single state. They also clearly show that the outcome of hostilities is now determined not so much in battles in the open, but in sieges and the defense of cities.

Wooden fortifications

Original Russian fortifications reached the pinnacle of development in the 16th-17th centuries. The sizes and shapes of Russian cities were determined, of course, by walls, towers, church buildings and the general terrain. Until the 13th century any inhabited place protected by a fence was called a "city", but other special names gradually began to appear. These included: tyn, denoting a fence or palisade, gorodnya, taras, prison, denoting special types of wooden structures.

Tyn, or stockade, was the simplest and most ancient type of wooden fortification. It consisted of a moat and a rampart, which could reach a considerable height. To strengthen the palisade, logs were used, the pointed ends of which protruded out of the wall - they were called "needles". Polati, or scaffolds, were erected on the inside of each wooden wall. Such walls, where a palisade and similar connecting structures were combined, were much stronger.

In the prison, the pointed logs were tilted inward, presenting a smooth and difficult to climb surface, and the wall was supported by a low earth embankment and special internal goats, or scaffolding, attached close to the wall. The most obvious advantage of such wooden fortifications was the speed and ease of their erection. A significant drawback was that the lower ends of the logs quickly rotted.

The same thing happened with frame structures called city, gorodnya or tarasy, which are stronger and more complex varieties of wooden fortifications. Their walls are usually twice as high as those of a simple palisade or palisade, and their thickness, as a rule, is equal to the height of the latter. In fact, the city, gorodnya or taras appeared in response to the emergence of firearms, especially cannons. All these designs are slightly different from each other. Taras consist of two parallel walls with an impressive opening between them, these walls are connected at certain intervals by means of crossbars. Some of the resulting niches were filled with cobblestone, but other, wider niches were left empty and used as defensive positions by members of the garrison. Each of these niches usually had two loopholes and a door.

Gorodnya consisted of separate frame structures, closely attached to each other. One of the disadvantages of such a structure was that at the joints, the structures began to quickly rot, and the walls loosened. In addition, their construction required much more time and building materials. Additional loopholes were also cut through in such walls.

Rogatin of Prince Boris Alexandrovich, Russia, c. 1450. The sleeve is decorated with an artistic engraving depicting an archer (below). (State Armory Chamber, Moscow)

(1) Battle axes found during excavations in Ipatiev Lane in Moscow in 1969. (2, 2a) Battle axes from Novgorod, 14th–15th centuries.

(3) Battle ax from Vladimir, XIV-XV centuries.

(4) Battle ax from Novgorod, XIV-XV centuries.

(5) Axe, 14th–15th centuries

Up to the XIII century. towers were not built inside such fortifications; they appeared along with firearms. In medieval Russian fortresses, wooden towers of many varieties were erected, depending on their purpose and design. The main ones were: a vezha, an archer, a fire and a pillar, and the word “tower” itself came into use only in the 16th century.

Such structures included a corner tower with a gate, a round tower, a quadrangular tower, a two-tiered tower, a blind tower in the center of the wall, and others. Such towers differed in shape, purpose, number of tiers and the wood from which they were built.

The number of towers and their size depended on the size of the fortress and its position. If the latter was based on the terrain, then round towers were usually built. If the fortress was geometrically correct, quadrangular towers were built, which were more easily connected by walls and provided a wider angle of fire.

The towers were also used to store supplies, for housing, as churches and chapels. Almost in every large fortress above the main gate there was a hanging chapel - it was not only more convenient to defend the gate from it, but it itself served as a defender of the most vulnerable site of the fortification. The largest towers were equipped with sentry boxes with a window on each of the four sides, as well as galleries surrounded by railings, from which the surroundings were well observed.

The fortifications were usually divided into two groups. The first included defensive systems that are directly included as components in the main defensive structure, such as oblams (see below), loopholes, and the like. The second group included additional structures, such as embankments, ditches, etc., which were usually used to protect cities and prisons.

The oblam was another type of wooden structure erected above the bottom of a wall or tower, although sometimes the lower part of the frame wall itself could be called an oblam. On the towers, the oblam was usually built over its lower part along the entire circumference, while on the walls there were oblams only from the outside. The loopholes were in the form of small windows through which the defenders could shoot, their size depending on the type of weapon used. However, they were usually about 8-10 cm wide. From the outside, their lower and side edges were made beveled, which provided a larger angle of fire. When cannons began to be used through them, these embrasures naturally became wider and sometimes reached 30–40 cm.

(1) Saber from the Kuban, XIV century. (State Historical Museum, Moscow)

(2) Sword from Ridomlya (Volhynia), XIV- beg. 15th century (State Hermitage, St. Petersburg)

(3) Sword from Vodichka (Khmelnitsky region), XIV-XV centuries. (Historical Museum, Kamenetz-Podolsky)

(4) Sword from Kyiv, XTV–XVee. (location unknown)

(5) Sword from Sebezh, XV century. (State Hermitage, St. Petersburg)

(6) The so-called "sword of Dovmont", ser. 13th century (Historical Museum, Pskov)

(7) The so-called "sword of Vsevolod Mstislavich". (Historical Museum, Pskov)

(8) Scabbard attachment method

During the VIII-X centuries. an integral part of the fortifications were deep ditches with steep edges, but starting from the 10th century. and further, more importance was given to earthen embankments, which eventually began to reach a height of 10–16 m.

The richly decorated "sword of Vsevolod Mstislavich" was made for a Russian prince in Central Europe, possibly in the end. 14th century

(A and B) Two sides of the pommel

(C and D) Two sides of the cross

(E, F) Outer sides of scabbard rim

(G) Tip

One of the best preserved medieval sabers, discovered during excavations near the city of Nizhyn; dates from the 12th-13th centuries. The Arabic script and the inscription on the saber indicate its eastern origin. (State Historical Museum, Chernihiv)

At the end of the XV century. the entire northern part of Eastern Europe, up to the Arctic Circle, became part of the Russian state.

The devastating raids of the northern tribes on the cities and villages of Pomorye forced the Russians to build fortresses even on this distant land. In addition to large fortifications, monasteries, small prisons and graveyards, or administrative units, were built here in considerable numbers - all of them together formed a powerful echeloned defense system along the banks of the northern rivers.

Knives. Some still have wooden handles and decorated leather scabbards. Novgorod. 12th-15th centuries (Kremlin Museum, Novgorod)

Ostrog on Kola was first mentioned in the 13th century, since then it served as the northernmost strategically important outpost of Russia, and its fortifications were rebuilt several times. But even in this case, the walls of the fortress continued to be built of wood until the 18th century, using, as a rule, such wooden structures as gorodni and taras. Empty niches were formed in the walls of such fortifications, which were intended for storing food and other supplies, in the same way it was done in Siberian fortresses. At the same time, most of the towers in these northern lands were built in the form of an irregular hexagon with double outer walls.

Ustyug was the second most strategically important of the northern fortified outposts. It first appears on the map of Russia in the middle of the 12th century, and by the 17th century. already represents a large fortress, consisting of two parts, known as Gorodische and Veliky Ostrog. This fortress had 24 towers and walls made of pointed logs with internal defensive galleries; Ustyug was defended from an attack from the northeast by a wide ditch 3.5 m deep.

Another characteristic feature of the fortifications in the Russian North was that many fortresses with inner stone walls had wooden outer walls. An example of such a fortress-city is Novgorod. Standard blanks were used to speed up construction, and in most Russian cities there were markets where ready-made elements for building fortifications were sold. An example of a city built using the technology of standard blanks is Polotsk.

Fortresses in Southern Russia were built on the most vulnerable sections of the border, where, over time, continuous lines of defensive structures arose. In the XIV-XV centuries. Russian exploration of Siberia began. Here, small fortresses were built to protect the newly acquired lands and repel enemy raids. The number of such prisons, as well as settlements, or fortified winter camps, constantly increased. In the XVIII century. they turned into military or administrative and commercial centers.

Among all types of fortifications, the most widespread in Siberia were prisons, the simplest of which were ordinary camps surrounded by a palisade of logs. Subsequently, wooden towers were added to many of them.

Russian Persians from Pronsk, Sakhnovka, Khmelnya and Zvenigorod: (1–3, For) XIII century; (4–5) XIV c.

Siege weapons

The first Russian attempts to use siege weapons date back to the campaign against Byzantium in 968–971, after which this type of military equipment was not mentioned in Russian chronicles for several centuries. However, in 1237-1240. the Mongols, when taking more than ten large Russian cities, used siege engines of Chinese or Central Asian origin, known as vices. Without a doubt, thanks to the Mongol conquerors in the second half of the XIII century. these guns were so widespread in Russia and became indispensable both in the siege and in the defense of city walls. For example, in the annals of Southwestern Russia they are mentioned under 1245 and 1260, and in Northern - under 1268 and 1301. In the XIV century. stone-throwing machines were in service with the troops and were stored in the military arsenals of the largest Russian cities; in Moscow, such machines were in 1382. In the XIV century. the use of stone-throwing vices reached its highest point, they continued to be used for many more years along with artillery pieces. However, during the first decades of the XV century. vices appear less and less often under the walls of besieged cities, and by 1450 they are completely forgotten.

Donors in the temple. Men are dressed in rich clothes of late medieval Russia, as well as the woman standing on the right.

Crossbow and bow arrowheads found in Novgorod. (Museum of the Novgorod Kremlin, Novgorod)

The power of throwing machines could increase in proportion to their size, as well as by strengthening the throwing element by means of a tight connection of several elastic wooden trunks. According to the most reliable evidence, a stone-throwing machine could reach a height of 8 m, weigh 5 tons and throw stones weighing 60 kg or more. To service the largest machines of this type, from 50 to 250 people were required.

The disadvantage of such machines was their fragility, therefore, in order to remain suitable for serious operations, they had to be constantly updated and repaired. Special specialists - vicious masters - supervised their assembly; to build a stone-throwing machine, the master had to have sufficient knowledge of mathematics necessary for accurate calculations. Moreover, he had to know the special artillery teams, as well as be able to keep the vehicle in good technical condition. Such machines were built, repaired and maintained in the capitals of many principalities, which required a large number of qualified specialists.

In Russia, various types of stone-throwing machines were used, and over time, more and more efficient and accurate throwing tools appeared here. These included trebuchet - stone throwers with a movable counterweight, which became very popular. However, despite their ever-increasing power and accuracy, stone-throwing machines proved powerless in the face of stone fortifications and were supplanted by much more effective firearms.

author

From the book God of War of the Third Reich author Shirokorad Alexander Borisovich

From the book God of War of the Third Reich author Shirokorad Alexander Borisovich

From the book Secrets of Russian Artillery. The last argument of the kings and commissars [with illustrations] author Shirokorad Alexander Borisovich

From the book Intellectuals in the Middle Ages author Le Goff Jacques

Tools In the great factory called the universe, the intellectual must find his place, that is, use his own abilities, applying them to creative work. He has no other tools than his own mind, but he can attract books that also serve to

the author Fort Paul

Throwing Weapons The crossbow is actually an advanced bow. The ancients called it "eutiton", because the bow is "stretched in the forward direction" along a wooden forearm with a guide, the lower end of which is equipped with a semicircular handle. Two arms of a bow from a horn,

From the book Daily Life of the Army of Alexander the Great the author Fort Paul

Siege towers In the “Treatise on War Machines” that has not come down to us, Dyad of Pella, engineer and mechanic of Alexander the Great, recommends himself as the inventor of siege towers, mobile and collapsible. Almost all the information we know about it comes from

From the book Daily Life of the Army of Alexander the Great the author Fort Paul

Naval guns One of the major innovations of Alexander's fleet, which operated in 332 in conjunction with the land army, was the use of naval projectile guns. This year, the commander of the fleet ordered that powerful catapults be installed on the ships besieging the city of Tyre.

From the book Everyday Life in Greece during the Trojan War the author Fort Paul

Siege wars Several fragments of a silver vase found on the Mycenaean acropolis in the fourth burial ground are engraved with naked slingers and archers defending a small fortress on the seashore. She is attacked by the Aegean fleet. This is believed to be an attack on

From the book Daily Life of the Etruscans by Ergon Jacques

Agricultural tools Etruscan agricultural tools are widely represented in the exposition of the Museum of Florence. These are iron tools from the Moon and Telamon, as well as objects found there, brought as a gift to the gods in 225 BC. e. on the occasion of the victory of the Etruscans and Romans over

From the book Prison Notebooks [Selected] author Gramsci Antonio

LOGICAL TOOLS OF THINKING Methodology of Mario Govi.Sm. Mario Govi, Fundamentals of Methodology. Logic and epistemology. Turin, 1929, 579 p. Howie is a positivist and in his book attempts to renew the old classical positivism by creating neo-positivism. In general, for Govi ​​the concept

From the book History of Byzantine Wars author Haldon John

SIEGE WARS IN THE BYZANTINE PERIOD The art of defending fortresses and cities from attack and the siege of enemy strongholds was an important aspect of Byzantine military science. Even from the Hellenistic and Roman authors, a complex science was inherited, embodied in treatises on

From the book Secrets of the origin of mankind author Popov Alexander

Tools and weapons For example, many scientists of the 19th century more than once found tools and weapons in the sediments of the Early Pleistocene, Pliocene, Miocene, etc. This was even openly discussed at scientific conferences and in specialized journals. But today these finds are betrayed

From the book Lend-Lease Tanks in the Red Army. Part 2 the author Ivanov S V

T48 self-propelled guns (SU-57) In 1943-1944, 650 T48 self-propelled guns were delivered to the Soviet Union, which received the designation SU-57 here. These self-propelled guns were distributed among the troops as follows: 16th. The 19th and 22nd self-propelled artillery brigades were attached to tank armies

From the book SS - an instrument of terror author Williamson Gordon

88-MM GUNS Good, and possibly bad - it all depends on which side you look at - the excellent 88-mm guns, designed as anti-aircraft guns, but well-proven in the fight against tanks, earned fame: Flakl8, Flak36 and Flak37. Modification of the 88 mm gun,

From the book Chronicle of Muhammad Tahir al-Karahi about the Dagestan wars in the period of Shamil [The brilliance of Dagestan checkers in some Shamil battles] author al-Qarahi Muhammad Tahir

The chapter on the capture of the fortress of Gergebil, the siege of the fortress of Temir-Khan-Shura and other things After the imam returned from this glorious campaign, he remained [at home] in order to break the fast for several days of Shawwal. Then he set out and stopped at the Gergebil fortress. He fought those

Mashikuli (fr. machicoulis, from the medieval fr. mache-col, “to hit in the head”) - hinged loopholes located in the upper part of the fortress walls and towers, designed mainly for vertical shelling of the enemy storming the wall with arrows or handguns, dropping stones pouring boiling water and resin.

In Russian serf architecture, the following terms were used: “oblique battle loopholes”, “mounted battle”, “mounted archers”, “varnitsa” and, accordingly, “varov battle” (from var, boiled resin, boiling water).

The episodic use of machicolations is known in the ancient world (nuraghi of Sardinia, fortresses of Central Asia). But everywhere they entered the fortress architecture in the Middle Ages: in Europe, the Middle East, the Caucasus. In Western Europe, well-developed stone machicules were also preceded by a kind of machicules - loopholes with sloping floors, which, however, did not allow shelling at the very foot of the walls.

Therefore, there were built only for the duration of the siege in front of the parapet (sometimes on both sides) walls or towers of wooden galleries - gurdicia or chords with hinged loopholes. At the same time, the inclined loopholes of the parapet itself did not overlap and could also be used. Gurditsia were built in the XII-XIII centuries. Often they were combined with stone machicolations, which began to be built after the Crusades and in the XIV century. replacing gurditsii.

In Russia, for shelling the soles of wooden fortresses, there were long slots under the upper combat platform protruding outward or parapet - fence (fence, oblam).

In the construction of stone fortresses in Russia, mashikuli were brought at the end of the 15th century. Italian architects.