age of European chivalry, are to be ascribed some of the most lordly castles, amongst which a great part of that of Chepstow ranks; and Carnarvon castle, which was both a garrison and a palace, was built by Edward I after his return from the Crusades. A peculiarity exists in this latter case in the system of fortifying the entrance; it has three portcullises, and some additional plans for pouring engines of destruction from the soffit. Of later date may be cited the works at Southampton circa 1377. 'Throughout Europe the fortified places bore a strong resemblance to each other. To the holy wars, to which every country contributed its chivalry, may be attributed this unity. By many it has been considered that the architecture of our castles is of oriental character. 66 "Perhaps the most magnificent specimen of medieval fortification was that at Constantinople, rendered the more interesting from the fearful siege to which it was subjected by Mahomet II in 1453, and in which the older siege implements were aided by the novel ones incident to the discovery of gunpowder. Among these was a piece of brass ordnance, cast at Adrianople by Urban, of stupendous and almost incredible magnitude; a measure of twelve palms was assigned to the bore, and the stone bullet weighed above six hundred pounds. Although it is possible, and I believe was so in fact, that this monstrous piece of artillery did not perform the marvels expected, yet we read that fourteen batteries, each containing one hundred and thirty guns, thundered at once on the more accessible places. It must be remembered, however, that it was considered good work to discharge these cannon seven times in the day. The land side of Constantinople was protected by a double wall and a ditch one hundred feet deep. This line of fortification, which was from three to four English miles in length, was attacked by the artillery, together with all the old engines that could be brought to bear. We read of the Turks pushing their approaches to the edge of the ditch, and attempting to fill the enormous chasm and build a road to the assault; the struggle was in filling and clearing the ditch by the besiegers and besieged respectively. Mining the walls in the olden way was attempted, but the application of gunpowder to this purpose was not yet known. Throughout, this memorable siege is distinguished as the transition in the science of war between the ancient and modern method. "Gibbon, in his description of the siege, remarks that the cannon were mingled with the mechanical engines for casting stones and darts, the bullet and battering-ram were directed against the same walls; nor had the discovery of gunpowder superseded the use of the liquid and unextinguishable fire. A wooden turret was advanced on rollers: this portable magazine of ammunition and fascines was protected by a threefold covering of bull's hides; incessant volleys were securely discharged from the loop-holes; in the front, three doors were contrived for the alternate sally and retreat of the soldiers and workmen. They ascended by a staircase to the upper platform, and as high as the level of that platform a scaling-ladder could be raised by pulleys to form a bridge, and grapple with the adverse rampart.' This may probably be regarded as appertaining to the history of one of the most memorable sieges on record, and as descriptive of the most vigorous attack to which fortifications were at this, æra subject. "As the manufacture of gunpowder improved, and the implements to which it was applied became better adapted to their work, it was found that an entirely different system of fortification was necessary, and instead of depending for success against attack by the height of the walls, it was found desirable to increase in width and adopt the ramparts of moderate elevation, so that a besieger might be kept at a greater distance by outworks. "This, during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, appears to be all that was done to improve existing strongholds. As the engines of destruction, however, still improved, it was ascertained that the old towers at the angles were insufficient to protect the wall between them, and it was found that new arrangements must be made, effectually to resist an attack aided by the new implements. The modern system of fortification was now introduced, and had been in vogue on the continent some time prior to its introduction into England. The most eminent engineer in connexion with this art was the marshal de Vauban, who, in the reign of Louis XIV (circa 1650), practically introduced the new system of fortification by means of bastions and ravelins, the bastions occupying the place of the former towers, the space between them being known as a curtain, while the ravelin and space in advance of the curtain were introduced for the purpose of fortifying the approach. All the works were made to mutually defend and support each other. All without the great fosse was known as outworks, while the bastions and all within were called the enceinte. This system of improved fortification would at first appear to have been impregnable, but that the same genius that contrived it also designed a method of attack based on the same mathematical calculations, by which, instead of attacking in front as of old, the guns were brought to bear on the angular line of the covered way, and raking them in their length, dislodging the guns and rendering the line powerless. This defect was obviated by altering the construction of the outworks, by adding redoubts at the angles of the covered way. "This, in few words, was the system of Vauban, improved and modi fied to suit different localities and circumstances. It was subsequently added to and improved with complicated outworks, and lines within lines. The plan was very systematic, arranged at angles at which every point could be commanded, and the distance between the bastions such that the artillery could do execution. The greatest authorities now look to VOL. X. 39 detatched forts and powerful outworks, as of greater importance than the enceinte. "In the early fortifications the advantage was infinitely in favour of the besieged; as, shut up within their powerful walls, they could at their ease hurl offensive weapons and discharge their arrows at the soldiers below, who were obliged to come close up to the walls to work their rams, to make their mines, or to wheel their galleries; and when at last a breach was made and the rampart gained, the struggle was not equal between troops hitherto employed in comparative ease upon the walls, and the besiegers, fatigued and harrassed by the exposure to which they had been so long subjected. It then required an overwhelming force successfully to attack a stronghold, and was a work prodigal of life and of long duration. The modern system is, on the contrary, in favour of the besiegers, the attack being made by means of approaches, technically called parallels, by which a besieging force, first throwing up a covering bank at a distance, gradually, by zig-zag approaches, gain their end, impeded, as far as lays in the power of the besieged, by means of defensive mines or galleries made to intercept the enemies' approaches; but I believe it is now the opinion of high military authorities, that it is only an affair of time and courage, to ensure the fall of any fortification by means of modern siege operations; that of course skill and courage on the one side or the other will lengthen or shorten the time, but that eventually a stronghold once regularly besieged must fall.” Mr. Whichcord concluded by remarking that time would not permit of making allusion to other matters which might fairly be considered as belonging to the subject of medieval fortification, especially the fortified bridges, amongst which he classed Monnow bridge, over the river of that name, where it joins the Wye at Monmouth, fortified by gates and towers, and worthy of inspection by the members of the Association. A discussion in relation to several points embraced in Mr. Whichcord's observations, terminated the business of the evening. THURSDAY, AUGUST 24. By an early train the Association quitted Chepstow, to proceed to an inspection of Llandaff cathedral, now undergoing extensive repairs with a view to restoring it to its former condition. The company having assembled in the prebendal house adjoining the cathedral, the very rev. Dr. Conybeare, dean of Llandaff in the chair, Mr. E. A. Freeman, who has devoted much time and attention to this edifice and published an excellent work upon it,' delivered a lecture to the Association, which he commenced by congratulating the Society upon being the first English body 1 Remarks on the Architecture of Llandaff Cathedral; with an Essay towards a History of the Fabric. Lond., 1850. 8vo. |