Wooden fortresses of Russia. Sumy and Bratsk prisons

Vyacheslav Kolesnik

In the 16th and 17th centuries, between Russia and the Crimean Khanate, as well as the Caucasus, a vast, almost deserted steppe, called the Wild Field, stretched. Here, on the southern outskirts of the Muscovite state, in order to get rid of the arbitrariness of the landowners and bondage, masses of fugitive people began to rush in those days. The steppe, rich in fertile black soil, free life attracted them to these parts. They settled along the banks of rivers, in dense forests. Thus began the formation of the Cossacks. It was possible to live here freely, but at the same time it was dangerous, since numerous detachments of Tatars were constantly scouring the steppe with the aim of robbing and capturing prisoners. For a long time, the people who inhabited the territory of the modern Belgorod region were the first to take the blows of the robbers, they were the only force that stood in their way.

In those distant years, three robber roads - Tatar sakmas - ran here. These sakmas were called Izyumskaya, Kalmiusskaya and Muravskaya. The latter was also called Muravsky Way. This path was the main way for the Tatars to penetrate Russia. It ran a little to the west of modern Belgorod, in the area of ​​​​the current Tomarovsky airfield.

The cruel hordes of robbers spared no one and nothing on their way - the villages were burned to the ground, people were completely exterminated or taken away to the full. In the first half of the 17th century alone, over two hundred thousand captives were taken to Kafu (now Feodosia), to the main slave market.

And so, in order to more reliably shield its southern borders, the Moscow government decided to build here first several fortress cities, and then build a continuous fortified line - the Belgorod line. Its length was about 800 kilometers, of which 320 km fell on the territory of the modern Belgorod region. It consisted of earthen ramparts, forest notches, gouges, as well as natural barriers - deep rivers, swamps, ravines. The government determined the city of Belgorod as the military and administrative center of this barrier line, which is why the line was called Belgorodskaya. The basis of its combat power was made up of fortress cities built along the entire line.

From 1635 to 1658, 25 fortress cities were built, which formed the basis of the Belgorod defensive line. Ten of them were located on the territory of the modern Belgorod region: Yablonov (1637), Usyord (1637), Korocha (1637), Hotmyzhsk (1640), Bolkhovets (1646), Karpov (1646), Tsarev-Alekseev (1647), Verkhososensk (1647), Belgorod (1650), Nezhegolsk (1654).

Special mention should be made of Belgorod. As a southern outpost of the Moscow State the city was founded in 1593. The year 1650 is the time when the fortress was built already in the third, new place, in the system of the created defensive line.

Reconstructed typical fortress of the 17th century. The main material for the construction of such fortresses was earth and wood. A rampart surrounding the fortress was built from the earth, towers and buildings were built from wood. The height of the shaft reached 5 meters; for strength, it was covered with clay with a layer of about 70 cm, which was then fired with fire. In front of the rampart, on the outside, there was a deep ditch lined with oak. At the bottom of the moat, sharp oak stakes were strengthened.

Wooden walls with towers were built on the shaft - corner and private. In the towers and in the walls, along the entire perimeter of the fortress, there were loopholes for firing at the enemy. On the Moscow side there were the main gates. Above the gate, on the cantilever ledges, a “chapel on an overhang” with an icon was arranged, which provided patronage to the defenders of the fortress. In front of the gates there was a bridge that could be raised in case of danger. From the side of the Wild Field, from where the Tatars penetrated into Russia, a wall was built with deaf impassable towers, on the spiers of which the symbols of the Russian state - double-headed eagles - were visible from afar. This fortress wall was usually built on the steep bank of the river, which was an additional natural barrier. For a more reliable vulnerability of the enemy, logs “with a frequent oak nail” were flooded in the water.

The corner towers were about 25 meters high, which allowed guards from the observation tower to survey the vast expanses of the steppe.

The following buildings were located inside the fortress: a church, a voivodship office, a state cellar, a barn for weapons, a moving out hut under the same roof as a prison, a powder magazine, several spacious huts for service people. There were granaries and crates for supplies, as well as stables, carpenter's, shoemaker's, saddler's workshops, a shop with trading rows, and a smithy. There was a common soap and cookery. In case of a siege, several cages were provided for the service and peasant people. A message bell towered on the square - “flash”.

A prominent place was occupied by the yard of the governor. It was surrounded by a high palisade, inside the yard there were 2 huts, a stable, a cellar, a barn, a soap room, a kitchen. Nearby was the yard of the clerk, the second person after the governor. Here in some fortresses there was an "ambassadorial exchange", where the Russians redeemed their prisoners (from 15 to 100 rubles - "depending on the person"). There was a guest yard in the fortress - for messengers, sovereign ambassadors, foreigners, merchants. The Streltsy head, the Cossack ataman, the Pushkar and Dragoon heads, as well as the boyar children also lived in separate courtyards.

In an inconspicuous place was a cache - an underground passage through which it was possible to leave the fortress during the siege. A limited number of people knew about the existence of the cache.

There were about 400 people in the fortress. Most of them were archers, Cossacks, gunners, dragoons.

This military people tirelessly carried out the service of protecting the southern borders of the Moscow state, which contributed to a more active settlement and economic development of our rich region.

Sketches by V. Kolesnik: "Reconstruction of typical structures of the fortress of the notch line"

The center of any ancient Russian city was a small fortress, at different times called detinets, krom and, finally, the kremlin. Usually it was erected on a hill - on a hill or a steep bank of a river. The prince lived in the Kremlin with his retinue, as well as representatives of the higher clergy and city administration. A settlement grew around, inhabited by artisans and merchants, also surrounded by an external fortress wall. Traces of this ancient urban landscape in some places have survived to this day. We made a trip to some of the most iconic places.

Kolomna was founded in the middle of the XII century. At first, the city fortifications were wooden. The stone Kremlin was built in the second quarter of the 16th century by order of Vasily III to protect the southern borders of the Moscow principality. It is believed that it was designed by the Italian architect Aleviz Fryazin, and the Moscow Kremlin itself was taken as a model. Gradually, the borders of Muscovy expanded, the Kremlin lost its military significance. In the XVIII-XIX centuries it was gradually destroyed and repeatedly rebuilt. Fragments of the fortress wall of the 16th-17th centuries with towers and gates have survived to this day. On the cathedral square of the Kremlin there is the Assumption Cathedral, the Tikhvin Cathedral and the hipped bell tower. In the Novo-Golutvin Holy Trinity Monastery, adjacent to the square, Catherine II stopped. It is believed that it was here that she first tasted the local delicacy - Kolomna marshmallow. Dmitry Donskoy got married in a small Resurrection Church. Today, most of the Kremlin is occupied by private residential areas of the XIX-XX centuries.

The first fortifications on the territory of Kazan appeared in the 10th century. The modern appearance of the Kremlin was formed after the conquest of the city by Ivan the Terrible. The white-stone fortifications and buildings mainly date from the second half of the 16th-17th centuries. However, construction continued until the end of the twentieth century. The Kremlin includes a complex of defensive structures, the Annunciation Cathedral, the Transfiguration Monastery, the governor's (khan's) palace with the palace church and the Syuyumbike tower, government offices, a cannon yard, a cadet school and the Kul-Sharif mosque.

The city was founded in 1221 on a high bank at the confluence of the Oka and the Volga. The stone Kremlin was erected at the beginning of the 16th century. The fortress, unique in military and technical terms, withstood many sieges, and was never captured by the enemy. The mighty wall connecting thirteen towers has been perfectly preserved to this day. Today, thematic museum expositions are organized in separate towers. Also on the territory of the Kremlin are the Cathedral of the Archangel Michael with the ashes of Kozma Minin, the palace of the military governor, the house of the vice-governor, the cadet corps, the buildings of the garrison barracks and military memorials.

Pskov, first mentioned in 902, is rightfully considered one of the oldest Russian cities. After joining the Moscow principality, it was the most important defensive center on the northwestern borders. The first stone fortifications appeared in the middle of the 13th century. In the XV-XVI centuries they were reinforced with towers. As a result, the Pskov fortress became one of the best Russian fortresses. It consisted of several defensive rings. Three have survived to this day. Actually Krom was erected at the mouth of the Pskov and Velikaya rivers. On the territory of the Kremlin is the Trinity Cathedral with a majestic bell tower.

The city arose, presumably, in the second half of the 13th century as the winter headquarters of the Mongol khans. The stone Kremlin was erected in the last quarter of the 16th century, after the conquest of Astrakhan by the troops of Ivan the Terrible. Fragments of fortress walls and towers have survived to this day. Also, the historical and architectural ensemble of the Kremlin includes the majestic Assumption Cathedral, the complex of buildings of the Trinity Monastery, the house of the senior cathedral clergy, the Prechistenskaya bell tower, an artillery yard with a torture tower, officers' rooms.

The foundation of Pereyaslavl Ryazansky (the city has been called Ryazan since 1778) is attributed to the end of the 11th century. Three centuries later, the city became the capital of the Ryazan principality. Until the beginning of the 16th century, the princely court was located on the territory of the Kremlin, then the residence of the bishop. However, until the 18th century, the Kremlin continued to function as a fortress that protected the southern borders of Russia from the raids of the Crimean Tatars. The Kremlin ensemble in its present form was formed during the XV-XVIII centuries. Among the architectural monuments are the Assumption Cathedral with a multi-tiered bell tower, the Archangel, Spaso-Preobrazhensky and Nativity Cathedrals, the cozy Church of the Holy Spirit, Oleg's Palace (the largest civil building of the Kremlin) with a carved facade and a white stone porch, the Singing Building, the walls and towers of the Spassky Monastery and various outbuildings.

Rostov was founded in 862. In pre-Mongol Russia, this city was considered as significant as Novgorod or Kiev. No wonder he was called the Great. Here was the residence of the archbishop, and then the metropolitan. Actually, what is today called the Kremlin is a complex of buildings that includes the Metropolitan's Palace, the Assumption Cathedral and the famous Rostov belfry. In the 17th century, the buildings were surrounded by a stone fortress wall with loopholes, wide windows and rich decoration.

Tobolsk was founded in 1587. The only stone Kremlin in Siberia is located here. It differs from other structures of this kind in that it was built in an already existing city and was intended not for defense, but to house the administration. The fortress wall began to be erected only at the end of the 17th century, but at the end of the 18th century it was already partially dismantled. However, towers with fragments of fortifications have survived to this day. The modern appearance of the Kremlin was formed mainly in the XVIII-XIX centuries. Sophia-Uspensky and Intercession Cathedrals, the governor's palace, Gostiny Dvor, the Order Chamber, the prison castle and the provincial printing house are located on its territory.

Uglich on the right bank of the Volga was first mentioned in 1148. Since the 14th century, it has been part of the Moscow principality. The ensemble of the Uglich Kremlin was formed during the XV-XIX centuries. It includes the chambers of specific princes (a unique monument of civil architecture of the 15th century), the Church of Tsarevich Dmitry on Blood, the majestic Transfiguration Cathedral with a multi-tiered bell tower, the mayor's house and the Epiphany Winter Cathedral. A fragment of the moat has been preserved from the defensive fortifications.

Veliky Novgorod is one of the oldest cities in our country, the center of the birth of Russian statehood. The official date of foundation is 859. The first mention of the Novgorod Kremlin dates back to 1044. Fragments of the fortress walls of the citadel of the 13th century and nine towers built in the 15th century have survived to this day. On the territory of the Kremlin there is the Cathedral of Hagia Sophia - one of the oldest in Russia, the belfry, the Faceted Chamber, the Church of Andrei Stratilat, the Likhudov Corps and other buildings of the 11th-19th centuries. There is also a monument to the Millennium of Russia.

The Volok settlement on Lam was first mentioned in 1135. Thus, Volokolamsk claims to be the oldest city in the Moscow region. Detinets arose on a high hill in the 12th century. A century later, the city was completely burned down several times. Later rebuilt. The Kremlin was wooden and only partially built in stone. The remains of the ramparts and ditches of the XIV-XVI centuries have survived to this day. On the territory of the Kremlin today are the Resurrection and St. Nicholas Cathedrals and a five-tiered bell tower.

The city of Gdov was first mentioned in chronicles dating back to 1322. The stone Kremlin was erected in the second half of the 14th-15th centuries. It occupied an exceptionally important fortification position on the shores of Lake Peipsi and covered the approaches to Pskov from the north. Fragments of the fortress walls (on the southern and eastern sides) and earthen hills on the site of the destroyed towers have survived to this day. The Kremlin also houses the Dmitrievsky Cathedral.

The exact date of foundation of Vologda is unknown. The first mention refers to 1147. The construction of the stone Kremlin began in the second half of the 16th century under Ivan the Terrible. However, the fortifications were only partially erected. Later stone fragments were supplemented with wooden fortifications. By the first quarter of the 19th century, the fortress had completely fallen into disrepair and was destroyed. Of the ancient walls, only the southwestern tower and the remains of the ramparts have survived. Today, the name "Kremlin" is assigned to the Bishop's Palace, surrounded by a mighty wall. The Kremlin ensemble includes St. Sophia and Resurrection Cathedrals, government cells, various buildings and chambers.

The first mention of Tula dates back to 1146. It is believed that the settlement (probably in the form of a prison) was originally of a military nature, intended for the garrison of the Ryazan prince, and later was of great strategic importance for the defense of the southern borders of the young Muscovite state. The Tula Kremlin has never submitted to the enemy. Stone fortifications were erected in the first decades of the 16th century by order of Vasily III. Then, over the course of two centuries, they were completed and rebuilt. Today, the historical and architectural complex combines buildings of the 16th-20th centuries and includes powerful fortress walls connecting nine towers, the Holy Assumption and Epiphany Cathedrals, shopping arcades and the building of the first city power plant. The towers house thematic museum expositions.

The first buildings in the bend of the Kamenka River appeared in the 10th century. A full-fledged wooden fortress with earthen ramparts arose about a century later. In fact, the Suzdal Kremlin remained so until the beginning of the 18th century, when a strong fire destroyed all the wooden buildings. The shafts are still preserved. In addition to them, the Kremlin complex includes the Nativity Cathedral of the XIII-XVI centuries and the Bishops' Chambers of the XV-XVIII centuries. In the western part of the Kremlin today there is also a wooden St. Nicholas Church built in 1766. It was transported in 1960 from the village of Glotova, and installed on the site of the lost Church of All Saints.

An urban settlement on the Osetr River arose in the 11th century. The stone Kremlin, as in other southern Russian cities, was founded in the reign of Vasily III. In subsequent years, he was repeatedly raided by the Crimean Tatars, but successfully defended himself. When the boundaries of the Moscow principality expanded, the fortress lost its military significance. The Zaraisk Kremlin is almost completely preserved. A powerful wall connects eight towers. Inside are St. Nicholas and St. John the Baptist Cathedrals, as well as various buildings of the XVI-XX centuries.

The settlement of Porkhov at the confluence of Shelon and Dubenka was founded by the will of Alexander Nevsky in 1239 as part of the defensive system of the Novgorod land. The stone fortress in the form of a pentagon dates back to the end of the 14th century. It retained its military significance until 1764. The walls (currently restored) and three towers have survived to this day. Inside the Kremlin is St. Nicholas Church built in 1412.

The Alexander Kremlin (Aleksandrovskaya Sloboda) is the oldest suburban residence of the Moscow sovereigns. The stone fortress with a luxurious palace and cathedral was erected at the beginning of the 16th century and immediately became the place of regular stay of the sovereign's court. Under Ivan the Terrible in 1564-1581, the capital of Russia was actually located here. The historical and architectural ensemble of the Alexander Kremlin today includes the Trinity Cathedral, Crucifixion, Sretenskaya, Pokrovskaya and Assumption churches, hospital and private buildings.

Post selection

... Military architecture is to make a city such that people can sit in a small city, and so that people can harrow the city and themselves from that city from many troubles.
(N. Obruchev. Review of handwritten and printed monuments relating to the history of military art in Russia until 1725)

Defense architecture has a special place in the history of Russian architecture. Numerous fortresses and monasteries that arose in the scattered lands of Russia contributed to the protection of borders, the rise and strengthening of the spirit of the Russian people, and then the unification of these lands around Moscow and the creation of a multinational Russian state.

The fortifications of Ancient Russia not only played a huge role in the historical life of the country, but also represented magnificent works of architecture. Having no practical significance today, the monuments of defensive architecture reflect the heroic past of the Russian people, linking times and generations, and remain the most valuable cultural heritage. The further we go forward, the longer the distance between the present and the past becomes, and breaking this distance means turning the past against you, because, as the eastern wisdom says, “if you shoot at the past with a pistol, the future will shoot at you with a cannon.”

All our ideas about fortified wooden architecture have developed thanks to chronicle sources, archaeological excavations and studies of rare examples of fortified wooden structures that have survived to this day. The most famous of them - the towers of the Siberian prisons, as well as the passage tower of the Nikolo-Karelsky Monastery - date back to the second half of the 17th century. Fortresses of an earlier time are studied mainly on the basis of materials from archaeologists, ancient engravings, drawings and images on icons. The pictorial material gives, although quite visual, but still a conditional idea of ​​the nature and construction of wooden fortresses.

Ancient Russians began to build wooden fortresses a long time ago. Already in the period of Kievan Rus, the fortified cities on the steppe outskirts of this Slavic state were united into a defensive system, called the "Snake Walls". The art of erecting wood-and-earth fortifications of this period originates from the time of the collapse of the tribal system and the stratification of society, when, according to the apt expression of F. Engels, “war and organization for war are now becoming regular functions of people's life ... War ... becomes a constant trade. It is not for nothing that formidable walls rise around the new fortified cities: in their ditches the grave of the tribal system gapes, and their towers already reach civilization.

Evidence of this stratification of society is the surviving remains of ancient settlements in different countries. Quite primitive in their design, the first fortifications relied to a greater extent on the protective properties of the relief of the area on which they arose. The ability of Russian town-planners to choose places for their settlements was a distinctive feature of their work. These places, as a rule, were not only well protected by nature itself, but also convenient, beautiful, and strategically advantageous. Such a tradition of choosing places using the protective properties of the terrain dates back, as noted by the well-known historian of urban planning A.V. Bunin, to the ancient Greek cities, but in Russia it was not only further developed, but also interpreted.

Using the protective properties of the terrain during the construction of cities, Russian urban planners did not lose sight of its artistic merits. The relief, landscape environment, river or lake - all these natural components not only protected the settlements, but also enhanced the expressiveness of their appearance. Even the Eastern Slavs chose hilltops, river bends, islands and other aesthetically expressive areas of the terrain for their settlements.

The construction of fortress cities accompanied the entire historical process of the formation and development of the Russian state. Conquering various tribes, the Russian princes set up fortified cities designed to collect tribute. With the advent of one city, others soon arose nearby. Already by the 13th century, many ancient Russian fortresses had reached such a level of development that they aroused the admiration of contemporaries. However, their further improvement was suspended for a long time by the avalanche of the Mongol-Tatar invasion. Like a hurricane wind, the wooden fortress cities of the Ryazan and Vladimir principalities were swept off the face of the earth in 1237, and three years later Batu, after a short rest, appeared at the walls of ancient Kiev. And this city, despite the steadfast protection of the townspeople, was betrayed by fire and sword.

The Russian fortified cities offered strong resistance to Batu's army. Unparalleled in its kind and truly heroic was the defense of wooden Kozelsk in 1238. For seven weeks the Tatars could not take him. Enraged Batu, bursting into the fortress, ordered to destroy all life, drowning the city in blood. But the people's memory is strong. Many centuries later, already in the second half of the 18th century, when the coat of arms of the newly revived Kozelsk was approved, the long-standing feat of its heroic defenders was reflected in the coat of arms: “In the scarlet field, signifying bloodshed, there are five silver shields with black crosses, expressing the courage of their defense and the unfortunate fate » .

Unfortunately, history has not conveyed to us information about what the fortifications of Kozelsk were from the time of its legendary defense. True, a description of the wooden city made in 1678, when Kozelsk was part of the Zasechnaya line, has been preserved. By the design of its fortifications, it did not differ much from other wooden fortresses of the 17th century.

Vitality and perfection of many wooden fortresses were tested during the Mongol-Tatar invasion. Russia was enslaved, but not broken, not overthrown. Like a phoenix, wooden cities were reborn from the ashes. In the Pskov and Novgorod lands, where the hordes of Genghis Khan and Batu did not reach, they forged swords and gathered squads, Russian people flocked here from the occupied lands. New fortresses were built, the will was tempered, and the spirit of the Russian people rose, and no avalanche of invasion could break this upsurge.

The centuries-old experience of building fortresses was passed down from generation to generation - from grandfather to grandson, from father to son. All the best accumulated over the centuries was embodied in Russian cities. This experience was once summarized in a handwritten book compiled by Onisim Mikhailov at the beginning of the 17th century and called "The Charter of military, cannon and other matters related to military science." The "Charter" consists of six hundred and sixty-three articles and is a kind of set of rules on the construction and equipping of fortresses, on the organization and provision of engineer troops. All previous multifaceted experience in the development of Russian military-technical thought was reflected in this unique document. The regulation of the requirements set forth in the "Charter" concerned literally all aspects of military engineering. An amazing, absolutely amazing document in terms of its impact! The clarity and clarity of the requirements, the unambiguity and persuasiveness of its provisions - these are the qualities that have made the "Charter" vital for almost two centuries.

In the complex and diverse chain of cultural heritage, architecture occupies perhaps the most leading place, but some of its sections, including fortified wooden architecture, still remain poorly understood. Time has mercilessly wiped off the face of the earth the works of Russian town-planners, ordinary peasants who equally skillfully wielded a carpenter's ax, a warrior's weapon, and a peasant plow. The lack of study of this problem is largely due to the lack of material remains of wooden fortresses. So, until recently, no more than a dozen fortress towers, remnants of defensive architecture, were known to a wide range of researchers. Most of them are in Siberia. Currently, there are five surviving towers: two Bratsk and one each - Ilim, Belsky and Yakutsk prisons. However, even at the beginning of our century, five towers and two strands of a wooden wall, chopped with taras, were preserved from the sixteen-tower Yakut fortress. In 1924, the only tower of the Lyapinsky prison in the north of the Tyumen region burned down, perhaps the earliest of all the remaining ones - it lasted more than three hundred years. Somewhat earlier, in 1899, also from a fire, a watchtower in the village of Torgovishche in the Perm region, which stood for more than two centuries, died. True, at the beginning of the 20th century it was cut down again and at present it is nothing more than a life-size model, so its historical value and significance are greatly reduced. In 1914, the Omsk ethnographer I. N. Shukhov saw among the ruins of the ancient Mangazeya, located beyond the Arctic Circle, one dilapidated tower with loopholes.

Information about these remains of wooden fortresses is recorded in the literature and complements our understanding of the external appearance and design features of defensive architecture. These ideas can be expanded through field study not only of the surviving remains of fortresses, but also by searching for new, unknown archival sources, as well as by archaeological excavations at the sites of former fortresses. How effective such studies and searches are is evidenced by the excavations carried out at the site of Mangazeya in 1968-1973, where almost the entire planning structure of the city, which has been preserved since its abandonment in 1672, was studied in the most detailed way.

In 1969, on the Kazym River (Berezovsky district of the Tyumen region) in the remote taiga, the ruins of the Yuilsky prison were discovered and examined in detail for the first time, from which the log cabins of two fortress towers, a dilapidated barracks hut, several barns and traces of more than a hundred other residential buildings, were quite well preserved, economic and religious purposes.

The survey and excavations carried out in the same 1969 at the site of the Zashiversky prison in the north of Yakutia also revealed the planning structure of the wooden fortress of the 17th century, from which the magnificent architecture of the Savior-Zashiverskaya hipped church has been fairly well preserved.

All of these finds and studies help to complete the bright page of Russian fortress architecture and make a tangible contribution to the treasury of ancient Russian culture. Moreover. they make it possible to visualize the appearance of the fortresses and cities, about which archival sources provide the least information. They also make it possible to clarify their design, reveal features and trace common features that are characteristic not only for the serfs, but also for the entire wooden architecture of Ancient Russia. And, finally, and most importantly, on the basis of archival and archaeological research and analysis of the surviving remains of the fortresses, perform a graphic reconstruction as separate elements of the fortresses (towers, walls). and their appearance in general.

The question of what ancient Russian cities looked like is not an idle one. He occupied the minds of many enlightened people. Suffice it to recall at least the artists, the most famous among whom was A. M. Vasnetsov, who dedicated more than a hundred paintings and drawings to Moscow alone in the 12th-17th centuries. Everything that this master has done is based on his deep knowledge of historical documents. It is also known that he repeatedly took part in archaeological excavations. The veracity of A. M. Vasnetsov’s paintings is such that it allows them to be used as graphic analogues in the reconstruction of the architectural appearance of other ancient Russian wooden fortresses.

The study of defensive architecture is very important for historical and architectural science. As I. E. Zabelin, a prominent connoisseur and brilliant researcher of Russian history, culture and life, noted at the end of the last century, “we have the right to start the history of our architecture” from wooden fortresses. Indeed, all the first ancient Russian cities were entirely wooden, and the level of development of military art and technology in the 10th-13th centuries was such that, in the absence of firearms, wooden fortress walls, together with earthen ramparts and ditches filled with water, served as reliable protection for city residents. .

The further development of military equipment and the appearance of firearms led to the need to improve the fortifications. If initially the settlements were only protected from attacks by a wooden wall or just a rampart, then from the middle of the 13th century, combat towers were included in the fence system, located in the most vulnerable places of the fortress, and later - along its entire perimeter.

Thus, we can say that the chronology and main stages in the development of ancient Russian fortresses were most closely connected with the stages in the development of military equipment and methods of warfare. The thunder of the first cannons became a signal to replace the log walls with more perfect and powerful ones - wood-earth and stone. But for a long time, until the beginning of the 18th century, when firearms were used everywhere, wooden fortifications continued to be built, especially on the northern borders of the state and in Siberia.

The history of wooden Russian fortresses is not only the history of the development of military art and technology, it is the history of the centuries-old struggle of the Russian people with numerous enemies who tried to enslave Russia. And although today there are no witnesses of this struggle - wooden fortresses, but the tenacious folk memory has forever preserved their majestic image in legends and epics.

The book offered to the reader does not claim to complete the disclosure of the history of the development of wooden fortress architecture. To do this today in the required completeness, perhaps, is no longer possible. The author made an attempt to show only separate fragments of the centuries-old history of defense architecture. For obvious reasons, most of the materials refer to the fortresses of the XVI-XVII centuries. But precisely because the methods and traditions of construction in Russian wooden architecture have been stable and often unchanged for hundreds of years, the remains of fortresses of the 17th century make it possible to judge the architectural appearance of fortresses of an earlier time.

defensive walls

The walls not only performed protective functions, they also determined the parameters of the city, served as a kind of backdrop for civil and religious buildings. Deprived of decorative elements, the fortress walls, thanks to a clear and strict rhythm of divisions (tyn, gorodni and taras) * achieved great architectural and artistic expressiveness. The emotional sound of the whole composition was enhanced by the towers. They further emphasized the rhythmic structure of the long wooden wall.

Until the 13th century, in chronicle sources, any construction of the fence had the same name - the city. This characteristic feature was noticed by Sigismund Herberstein: “... for everything that is surrounded by a wall, fortified by a fence or fenced in another way, they call a city.” In the same sense, this term was used throughout the subsequent time, almost until the beginning of the 18th century. At the same time, other terms are common in the written sources of the 17th century: “tyn”, “gorodny”, “tarasy”, “fort”, meaning a specific and specific type of wall construction. The term "city" in the sense of a fortress wall is used as a generalized concept, it means both a zaplot (lying city) and a tynovaya wall (standing city), and not just a log structure.

Tyn is the simplest type of wooden fortress wall and, perhaps, the most ancient (ill. 2, 3). Tyn walls surrounded the city, tyn was arranged in a moat and on ramparts. Depending on the setting of the tyna, its height also changed. Naturally, the highest wall was in the event that it was placed on a flat area, and the smallest height was a tyn, set on a high, steeply sloping earthen rampart. Here he rather played the role of a parapet, rather than a wall in the sense of a fortress fence. Shooting with such a device of the wall was carried out over the tyna.

2. Tynovaya wall of the fortress in Svisloch. 17th century Reconstruction by S. A. Sergachev

The high tyn required additional fastenings, since the lower part of the logs, which was in the ground, quickly rotted and the wall collapsed. So, the Verkhoturye governor in 1641 reported that the prison in Verkhoturye was “set by a tyn, and Tarasov and oblams and no fortresses, and that prison was completely rotten and fell down in many places, and those who were spinning and standing, and those on both sides on supports". It must be assumed that supports in the form of inclined logs were placed immediately when the walls were erected. Often they protruded outward with a sharp end and were called "needles". This was done in order to prevent the enemy from overcoming the fortress wall. Apparently, just such a wall was made in 1684 in Tyumen. Here, instead of a chopped one, they put up a wall of a different design - "on beam needles from a leg and outlets." Something similar can be seen on the plan of Tobolsk at the end of the 17th century (ill. 1). The existence of special props is also evidenced by the description of the year 1703 of the Ilim prison, the walls of which were 333 fathoms long, and around the entire prison there were 2961 tynins “with pillars and crossbars”.

3. Fragment of the tynovy wall of the Bratsk prison. 17th century

the functions of props were also performed by "flooring", arranged along the walls inside the fortress. At the same time, they were used to organize defense from the "upper battle". Such beds were simple in design, comfortable and therefore quite common. Mentions of them are found in the painted lists of cities on the northern, southern borders and in Siberia. A wall was much more durable, in which the tyn was combined with elements of the log structure in different variations: the tyn and transverse chopped walls, on top of which the flooring was arranged; a log solid wall of small height, covered with earth and stones, and on top of it - a tyn of small height; a log wall of small height and close to it - a tyn of ordinary height; log cells, covered with earth with stones and placed close to the wall, and on top of the cells - flooring.

A wide variety of combinations of tyn and log elements emphasizes the wide distribution of tyn walls in Russian fortresses, which was also facilitated by the speed and simplicity of tyn construction. Among the varieties of stave walls, the “oblique prison” is of interest, in which the logs pointed at the top had an inclined position. Such a wall was supported by a small embankment from inside the fortress, special "goats" or a platform attached to the wall. It is known that the Okhotsk Ostrog, which was originally called the Oblique Ostrog, was surrounded by walls of this design.

Along with the tyn, the log construction of the wall, known under the names "city", "gorodny" or "tarasy" (ill. 4), became widespread in wooden fortress architecture. It was a much more perfect structure both in terms of strength and architecture, originating from the log house - the foundation of the foundations and the constructive and architectural and artistic expressiveness of wooden architecture. The appearance of gorodnyas and taras in Russian fortresses instead of single-row tynovy walls was a logical response to the appearance of firearms, and in particular artillery. The cells of the log walls, as a rule, were filled with earth and stones. Such walls continued to be used until the end of the 17th century.

6. Fragment of the log wall of the Nikolo-Karelsky Monastery. 17th century

Here is how the chronicler describes the walls of one of the fortresses of the Kozelsko-Stolpitskaya notch in 1635: doors cut through in the cells, walk around the city. Here, log cabins filled with earth and stones are called “bulls”. The bulls are connected by a single-row chopped wall, and on top of the bulls a flooring is arranged, on which the wall is already chopped in two rows with transverse cuts. Moreover, there is no gallery on the wall, and all the cells have a communication between themselves through the doors.

In the 15th century, a two-row log wall became widespread. It becomes the main type of construction of the fortress wall. In written sources, such a design is called "taras". In it, not all cells were filled with earth and stones. Usually the fence consisted of two parallel walls, one and a half to two fathoms apart from each other and interconnected by cuts at intervals of one or two fathoms. The narrow cells were filled with "cartilage", while the wide ones remained hollow. They were intended for the defenders of the fortress. Each of them usually had two loopholes and a door.

The definition of taras and gorodnyas was first classified by F. Laskovsky and then accepted by all researchers. Gorodny, according to Laskovsky's terminology, are separate log cabins placed close to each other. Such a construction of the wall, as noted by the researcher, had a significant drawback - the junctions of the log cabins were more exposed to atmospheric precipitation and decayed faster. In addition, the wall received an uneven draft of log cabins, as a result of which it was bent and drops appeared in the flooring and roofs. In other words, the construction in the form of a gorodni harmed the strength of the wall.

In the wall, chopped with taras, this design flaw was absent. Actually taras, according to Laskovsky, was a section of the wall (cell) between two walls (cuts).

The construction of log walls took much longer and required a significant amount of building material. Often, therefore, when choosing a place for a future fortress, its founders took into account the protective properties of the area as much as possible and did not put walls on the most protected sides. So, in 1598, the builders of the city on the Tura River reported to the tsar that “from the river from the Tura along the bank of the steep stone of the mountain from the water upwards with a height of 12 and more, and not measured by sazhens, and that mountain is steep, a cliff, and there are places along The tour along the river along the very bank is 60 sazhens large, and according to the estimate for that place, the city wall is not needed, because that place is good strong, no deeds can climb ... that place is stronger without the city walls of any city, except for that order the place to put the mansions in a row, what is the city, but to do the huts, and put the yards to the walls.

The surviving written documents give some idea of ​​the size of the fortress walls. Comparison of the inventories shows that the height of the walls in most of the logged cities was two and a half - three fathoms with minor deviations in one direction or another. The width of the walls, as a rule, was not less than one and a half fathoms, but usually did not exceed two fathoms. Comparison of descriptions of fortresses in the Russian North (for example, Olonets, Opochka) and southern and Siberian fortresses shows the identity of their main dimensions. The height of the tynovy walls usually ranged from one and a half to two fathoms, and only in rare cases did it reach three or more fathoms.

Wooden chopped walls had a gable roof, the truss structure of which was supported on the outer wall and on pillars from the inner side of the city. The pillars rested on the releases of the upper logs of the transverse walls-cuts. An illustrative example of such a covering is the surviving part of the wall with the passage tower of the Nikolo-Karelsky Monastery (ill. 6). Wings are usually “two tesa”, less often - “one tesa”, but in the latter case, shreds were placed under the tesa or flashings were nailed on top. In 1684, voivode Matvey Kravkov, taking Yakutsk from his predecessor, noted in his unsubscribe that "the walls near the city and the tower are covered in one block, without flashings."

A characteristic feature of the fortress chopped walls was the arrangement of upper, middle and lower battlements in them. For this purpose, loopholes for shooting were cut through in each cell of the lower wall and the upper tier. The same loopholes were “cut through” in the fortified walls, but there they were located not along the entire wall, but in special “outcomes”. The shooting of the upper battle was carried out, as already noted, on top of the tyna.

The defensive walls of Russian fortresses, performing their main functions, served as a reliable cover for the defenders. The architecture of the fortress walls embodied the advanced achievements of Russian building art; in the conditions of a long struggle, various combinations of structural elements were developed, but the best achievement of the architecture of the defensive walls, no doubt, remains a powerful chopped fence structure, a vivid example of which can be the remains of the Yakut prison (Fig. 5).

*For explanations of these and other terms, see the glossary.

fortress towers

The defensive architecture of Ancient Russia up to the 13th century was characterized by the absence of towers in the fortresses. Sometimes single towers stood inside the forts, acting as watchtowers and watchtowers, and, as a rule, did not take an active part in the defense. Directly in the fortress walls, the towers began to be arranged with the advent of artillery. The most common terms that meant a tower were "vezha", "strelnitsa", "bonfire", "pillar". Moreover, these terms were not equally common throughout Russia. So, in the Pskov and Novgorod lands, the tower was called the word "fire", and in Moscow - "strelnitsa". All of them served as observation posts. Passage towers were more common, but they were almost always called "gate towers". They can be seen on the drawings attached here (ill. 9).

The term "tower" appeared later, only in the 16th century, and since that time it has been found everywhere. Since the end of the 16th century, chronicle sources not only record the term itself, but also give a description of the structural arrangement of towers of various types, their size and number in the system of defensive structures of the fortress. Material remnants have come down to us from the 17th century - the fortress towers of some prisons. For the most part, they have undergone some changes during such a long existence, affecting mainly such elements as roofing, interfloor ceilings, stairs and gates. At the same time, numerous descriptions preserved in the painted lists make it possible to trace the nature of the constructive structure of the towers, as well as their individual elements and forms.

In the 17th century, the term "tower" became so common that it no longer covered the whole variety of these structures, which differed from each other in their constructive structure, functional purpose and location in the system of defensive fortifications. It was on these grounds that the towers in the painted lists began to be called: passing, gate, corner, deaf, round, quadrangular, two-tier, guard, beam, and so on (ill. 7-10). Among the various names, separate groups are clearly traced, from which types of towers emerge, differing from each other in the main features: the shape of the plan, the purpose, the method of felling, the number of tiers.

Most of the towers of wooden fortresses were quadrangular in plan, or, as they wrote in the annals, "chopped into four walls." Round, or polygonal, towers, although they were less common, they almost always played the role of the main travel towers. These towers not only differed in the shape of the plan, but were also larger. So, for example, at the end of the 17th century, the passage tower of Novaya Mangazeya rose to a height of 24.9 m, and the octahedral tower of the Tobolsk Kremlin in 1678 rose from the ground to completion by almost 50 m.

Depending on the size and significance of the fortress, the number of towers and their sizes varied. When and what types of towers were taken as a basis - it is difficult to identify, and sometimes impossible. For example, all sixteen towers of Yakutsk were quadrangular, and in Tobolsk, out of nine towers, four were quadrangular, four corner towers were hexagonal, and one was octagonal. In Novaya Mangazeya, only one passage tower stood out, and four corner towers had a square base in plan. Round towers were more common in the Russian North. So, in Olonets, according to the inventory of 1699, there were ten hexagonal and only three quadrangular towers. In Kholmogory in 1623, out of eleven towers, there were seven hexagonal ones, and in the Kola Fortress, all five towers had the same form of plan.

An important advantage of polygonal towers was that they protruded beyond the line of the city wall with three, four or five walls, which significantly increased the field of view (fire). It can be assumed that round towers were more often used in complex configurations of fortress plans. Towers with six and eight walls, in contrast to the quadrangular ones, made it possible to connect the walls of the city not only at right angles. Where fortresses had a plan shape that followed the contours of the terrain, there were more round towers, and, conversely, in fortresses with a geometrically correct plan configuration, quadrangular towers were more common. Round towers have not been preserved, although their images are found on some drawings. According to the type of round towers in cult architecture, free-standing bell towers were built. It is the bell towers, having taken the form of towers, that today can give us an idea of ​​them (ill. 11). Most often round towers were ten hexagonal and only three quadrangular towers. In Kholmogory in 1623, out of eleven towers, there were seven hexagonal ones, and in the Kola Fortress, all five towers had the same form of plan.

An important advantage of polygonal towers was that they protruded beyond the line of the city wall with three, four or five walls, which significantly increased the field of view (fire). It can be assumed that round towers were more often used in complex configurations of fortress plans. Towers with six and eight walls, in contrast to the quadrangular ones, made it possible to connect the walls of the city not only at right angles. Where fortresses had a plan shape that followed the contours of the terrain, there were more round towers, and, conversely, in fortresses with a geometrically correct plan configuration, quadrangular towers were more common. Round towers have not been preserved, although their images are found on some drawings. According to the type of round towers in cult architecture, free-standing bell towers were built. It is the bell towers, having taken the form of towers, that today can give us an idea of ​​them (ill. 11). Most often, round towers were multi-tiered. In the uppermost tier there was an attic - a cage, or guardhouse. The tents of the towers and watchtowers were covered with boards. The ends of the tesin were sometimes decoratively processed in the form of teeth or feathers (spears). Both quadrangular and round towers had different ways of cutting corners - both “in the paw” and “in the oblo” (“with the remainder”).

The towers, in addition to their main ones, also performed other functions. They were used as barns, housing, bell towers or chapels were arranged on them. For example, on the Spasskaya tower of the city of Krasnoyarsk there was a chapel in the name of the Savior and a bell tower on which a bell hung. At the very top there was a guardhouse with a bypass gallery, fenced with railings. At the request of the service people, a clock was arranged on the bell tower, because "it is impossible to be without a clock, Krasnoyarsk is a fortified city, we stand on the wall guard incessantly, day and night." Towers were used even more effectively in fortresses in territories where military clashes took place. So, in Albazin, under the main travel tower there were gates, in the tower itself there was a command hut, and at the top - a guardhouse. The other two towers served as housing for the Cossacks.

In the residential towers, the entrance to the upper tier was carried out by external stairs (with the back walls of the fence) or through the entrances from the level of the breaks of the fortress walls at their junction with the tower (with the log walls). The insulation of the lower and upper tiers was done in order to keep the heat in the residential part. The interfloor ceiling was made of solid flooring, insulated with a layer of clay and earth. In addition, a layer of moss was laid between the crowns of the residential part of the log house of the tower. It is this feature that both surviving towers of the Bratsk prison have.

11. Bell tower from the village of Kuliga Drakovanov. XVI(?)-XVII centuries.

A characteristic feature of the towers of some fortresses was the presence of hanging balconies-chapels above the entrance gates. Such are the surviving towers of the Ilim and Yakut prisons (ill. 12).

12. "Chapel on the overhang" of the travel tower of the Yakut prison. 17th century

The clarity and severity of forms, the unity of the constructive system, the combination of the monumentality of the volume of the watchtower itself and the romanticism in the lighter and more elegant chapels - all this makes it possible to attribute these monuments to the most valuable examples of Russian fortified wooden architecture.

Some researchers ruled out the cult purpose of hinged balconies and entirely attributed their appearance to the task of strengthening the defense of the entrance gate of the fortress. This assumption, however, is not supported either by archival sources or by specific surviving monuments. From the very beginning, overhanging balconies were arranged as chapels, which can be confirmed in archival historical documents. The description of the Ilimsk prison by the governor Kachanov in 1703 shows that the fortress had three towers with "chapels on the overhang". At the Spasskaya Tower, one chapel was "outside the prison, and the other in the prison." The Epiphany tower opposite the Spasskaya had one chapel - "behind the guarded wall". The cult purpose of the chapels is indicated not only by their name, but also by the description of the design and individual forms (“it is made with a barrel, and on top of the barrel is a poppy with a cross, soldered with white iron, and the barrel and poppy are upholstered with a plowshare”), as well as a list of the main icons with a description their content. With a "chapel on the overhang" facing outside the prison, there was the third travel tower of the Ilimsk prison - Vvedenskaya.

The arrangement of chapels above the travel towers was not accidental. As the weakest point in the system of defensive structures, the gate towers received the "patronage" of the saints. Mounted chapels were arranged to accommodate icons. It can also be noted that icons were often placed directly above the gates. In addition to religious chapels, they also had aesthetic functions, introducing picturesqueness into the strict architecture of the towers, complementing the silhouette of the fortress, discharging the monotony of the extended walls and reducing some of the monotony of the silhouette of the towers. The constructive device of such chapels was quite simple and at the same time durable. On the surviving tower from Yakutsk, one can see quite clearly the entire structure of the connection between the tower frame and the cantilever outlets above the gate for the construction of chapels on them. For this purpose, the longest and most durable logs were used, passed through two opposite walls of the log house. Console issues consisted of three rows of logs, reinforced at the ends with a horizontal strapping. Racks at the ends of the outlets and at the walls (on the outer sides) of the tower formed the frame of the chapels. From above, the frame also had a strapping and a “two-slope” truss structure. The fencing of the chapels was taken "in the Christmas tree", and the entrances to them were carried out directly from the towers, from the second tier (bridge).

13-16 Watchtower types

Watchtowers were a functionally necessary element of most of the largest towers of wooden fortresses. They sat on the tents of the towers and in turn were also covered with small tents. The towers were, as a rule, cut from timber or represented a frame structure, fenced on all sides with railings. Deaf (without doors) booths had windows facing in all directions, and bypass galleries with railings (ill. 13-16). The structural arrangement of such observation towers can be seen on the preserved towers of Belsky, Bratsky. Yakut prison and on the travel tower of the Nikolo-Karelsky monastery.

It is impossible not to say about the importance of the towers in the overall composition of the fortress. The towers not only enriched the silhouette of the wooden Kremlin and served as dominants, but also revealed planning features, actively contributing to the appearance of the fortress city. The combination of defensive, economic, cult and emotional-artistic functions in the towers made them universal structures, occupying the main position in the compositional structure of the fortified wooden city.

17. Gates of ancient Minsk. Reconstruction by E. M. Zagorulsky.

Oblams, loopholes and other elements of fortresses

Even in ancient times, using the protective properties of the terrain, the builders of settlements thought about their additional protection. The most common during the 8th-10th centuries were deep, with steep slopes, ditches, and from the 10th century along with them ramparts also become of great importance. Their height reached ten meters, as, for example, in Old Ryazan, and in Kiev of the time of Yaroslav the Wise and even more - sixteen meters. Further development and improvement of this defensive system led to the appearance inside the shaft of a log frame structure in various variations. Thus, the huge ramparts of Kiev, built in the 11th century, had wooden log cabins filled with earth inside. The same constructive system of fortress walls was in ancient Belgorod (ill. 19).

18. Type of oblam

The effectiveness of ditches and ramparts in the defense system of fortresses is evidenced by the fact that they were widespread until the 18th century. But in Siberia, due to the freezing of the soil in most of its territory, ditches and ramparts were rarely built, with the exception of fortresses located in more climatically favorable regions, especially along the southern borders and in the east.

19. Srubnaya wall in the system of earthen ramparts of ancient Belgorod. Reconstruction by M. V. Gorodtsov and B. A. Rybakov

Among the wide variety of elements of fortresses, two groups can be distinguished: the first includes protective devices directly on the defensive structures (oblams, loopholes, fences), the second is additional "all sorts of fortresses" arranged around fortresses and cities. This includes earthen ramparts, ditches, “garlic”, gouges, fliers, particles and other devices.

The most common protective device in wooden fortification architecture was oblam. It is, as it were, a second, low-rise, frame, supported by cantilever outlets of the last crowns of the main frame of the tower. Annalistic sources also call the upper part of the log wall a bummer. In this case, this is only one external wall with cuts - a kind of buttresses. Thus, the oblam of the tower and the oblam of the log wall differ from each other. In the tower, it is arranged, as a rule, around the entire perimeter, and on the wall - only on one side. In the first case, it is called a circular bummer and applies only to towers.

Some sources of the 17th century do not call the entire upper frame as a bummer, but only one of its walls. Moreover, it could not necessarily be a log structure. Fences in the form of tess walls were widespread on the towers, which were arranged only on three sides of the tower (from the outer and two side). The fourth side, facing the inside of the fortress, could be completely open or had a parapet. Such an oblam looked more like a parapet or fence. Its height usually did not exceed two meters, and it was either a low parapet, up to the chest of a person, or a wall up to the very roof, for the entire height of human growth.

20-23. Types of crashes

The broken part of the towers and log walls was separated from the walls of the lower log house by 15-25 cm, forming a gap along the entire perimeter of the towers or along the wall strands. Through these cracks they hit the enemy, who came close to the wall. Circular obmas became more widespread in wooden fortresses from the middle of the 17th century. The height of such an oblama most often did not exceed one sazhen, and the frame usually consisted of five to eight crowns of logs. In all the surviving towers, the structural arrangement of the log buildings is of the same type (ill. 18, 20-23). This is also confirmed by the painted lists of Mangazeya, Yeniseisk, Krasnoyarsk, Olonets, Opochka and other fortresses. In some archival sources, instead of oblams, another term is used - “rozvals”. For example, in Selenginsk in 1665 a prison was built, and in the corners - "four towers from the roof and from the tower are covered." However, there was no fundamental difference between them.

24-27. Loopholes of squeaky battle

Small holes-loopholes for shooting at the enemy were “cut through” in the walls of the bummers. On all the surviving towers, the loopholes are the same not only in design, but also close in size. As a rule, they corresponded to the weapons used by the defenders. The dimensions of the holes (almost square in shape) were in the range of eight to ten centimeters. Outside, the lower and side planes of the loopholes were beveled for ease of shooting and increasing the front of view and shelling (ill. 24-27). For cannon fire, larger loopholes were cut through, and their dimensions were usually 30x40 cm. The loopholes must necessarily correspond to the “outfit” (ill. 28, 29). There is a known case when the governors, having arrived at the service in 1599 in Berezov, noted that, among other things, "the windows on the towers were cut out of order." They immediately ordered “to cut through the windows at the towers as much as possible” and made new machine tools for the cannons, for which they subsequently received royal gratitude.

The location of the loopholes in the towers and walls was uniform. The upper, middle and lower battles corresponded to the tiers of the towers. Access to them was carried out by stairs arranged inside the towers. The design of such stairs has been preserved in some towers. The staircase consisted of two chopping blocks (strings) with steps cut into them.

A significant addition to the fortifications were all kinds of locking devices. During the construction of fortresses, they counted not only the number of logs, planks and draperies needed for towers and walls, but also how much "what kind of iron fortresses would be needed in the passing towers to the gates and in the small gates of locks and bolts and hooks and breakdowns" .

28, 29 Cannon battle loopholes

Wooden fortresses themselves were powerful defensive structures. But along with them, according to royal orders and letters, "all sorts of fortress fortresses" were also set up. As a rule, the city planners were charged with the duty not only to set up a prison, but also "to dig ditches, and make gouges and strengthen all sorts of fortresses." During the transfer of the city during the shift of the governor, not only the inspection of the walls, towers and outfit in them was necessarily carried out, but it was also noted how many “ditches and other great fortresses are near the prison”. So, when inspecting Tyumen in 1659 by governor Andrei Kaftyrev, it was found that “the ditch from the city crumbled, and others were clogged, and the sharpened der from the steppe was covered with manure in places, and there were no fortresses” . In response to the voivodship's reply, a royal decree followed, which ordered "to clean out the ditch behind the prison and make fortresses." Moreover, it was recommended to do all this in the summer, “not at a business time, so that the plowed peasant alone would not have to face great hardships and taxes.”

Apparently, such work was a burden for the inhabitants of the cities, since the ditches often slipped and clogged, and the wooden gouges rotted. In the same Tyumen, another voivode, Mikhailo Kvashnin, inspecting the fortifications of the city in 1679, found that the prison had rotted in many places, “there are no gouges, and the ditch is not dug.” And so it was in many Russian cities.

The term "all sorts of fortresses" meant artificial protective devices in the form of ditches, earthen ramparts, gouges, "garlic" (ill. 30, 31). In combination with each other, they all represented quite significant and often impregnable artificial obstacles. Such a system of additional devices is shown in great detail in Onufry Stepanov’s reply about the attack of the Bogdoy troops in 1655 on the Komarsky prison, around which a ditch was dug, “and the circle of that ditch was beaten with wooden garlic, and the circle of that wooden garlic was beaten with an iron arrow hidden ... and in the prison there were underwear and upper battles, and inside the prison wall they were covered with cartilage from the lower battle to the top from the cannon battle. In the event of a “bulk attack”, a “high ship plank tree” was attached to the prison, for the construction of stairs, and rollers were “laid” on the prison. The Bogdoys, proceeding to the attack, “they put up shields at that wooden garlic, and on that iron garlic many Bogdoy people were stabbing and could not go to the prison from that iron garlic to the wall.”

Artificial obstacles were erected not only around the fortress walls. In Russian fortified wooden architecture of the 16th-17th centuries, they were widely used in the system of notches that connected separate fortifications, guard posts and redoubts. The size and scale of artificial obstacles testify to their importance in the overall system of defensive structures. They were fortified lines on the approaches to the borders of cities and the Russian state as a whole. The art of their arrangement was as high as the construction of the fortresses themselves.

Let's see what we have in line in . Here is a thread from darkwinq : " Castles and fortresses of Russia. (in the northern part, St. Petersburg and the surrounding area) there are a lot of them ... "

Agree, a very extensive topic, only in the Kaliningrad region there are a lot of castles and fortresses, such non-specific topics for the order table are not quite convenient. LJ post frames are physically limited to a rather small volume. There are many forts near St. Petersburg, some of which I described under the FORTS tag. It is not entirely clear whether the author intended to mention them or not. What format should I choose to submit this material? We will consider something interesting, perhaps not even limited to the northern part of Russia. If I miss something worthy of attention, you will add me. And if something in this short story interests you, indicate it in the next order table and we will consider it in more detail.

So let's start:

Pskov Kremlin

The Pskov fortress was the best in Russia in the 16th century. The territory of 215 hectares was protected by 4 belts of stone fortifications with a length of 9 km. The power of the fortress walls was strengthened by 40 towers. Communications were provided by 14 gates, wall, tower and underground passages. An overview of the area from the north was given by the Naugolnaya Varlaamskaya tower, from the south - by Pokrovskaya. The water gates were controlled from the High and Flat towers at the Lower lattices, from the Kosmodemyanskaya and Nikolskaya towers at the Upper lattices. The attacks were stopped by artillery fire. Undermining was determined by special wells - rumors.

The Pskov fortress consisted of five rings of fortress walls. The first wall, which included Pershi (Persy), protected the Trinity Cathedral and the veche square of Pskov. Otherwise, this ring is called Krom or Detinets. To date, the name Krom includes the territory that was closed by the second fortress wall - Dovmontov (named after Prince Dovmont). The third fortress wall was erected by the Pskovites in 1309 and was named after the posadnik Boris. Almost nothing has survived from this wall; it ran along the line of modern Profsoyuznaya Street and rounded off to Krom at the Church of Peter and Paul from Buy. The townspeople themselves gradually began to dismantle the wall of the posadnik Boris already in 1375, when they built the fourth wall of the Roundabout City. The last fifth wall closed the so-called Field (Polonishche) and part of the Pskov River inside the fortress, which made the city almost impregnable. The Pskovites, who shut themselves up in the fortress, were not threatened by either thirst, or hunger, or epidemics - the Pskov River provided the townspeople with fresh water and fish.

After Moscow and Novgorod in the 16th century, Pskov was the third city in Russia. There were 40 parish churches and 40 monasteries in it and in the district. There was a settlement outside the fortress. About 30 thousand people lived in the city and in the suburbs. There were 40 trading rows at the Big Market of the Round City. In addition, there were fish rows at the mouth of the Pskov - in Rybniki and meat rows in the northern and southern parts of the city - in Zapskovye and Polonishche. There were 1,700 outlets in total, including 190 bakeries. The main means of protection for the city were the fortress walls, initially made of wood and earth, built on ramparts, later replaced by stone ones.

The walls and towers were built of limestone using lime mortar. The secret was that the lime itself was extinguished for many years in special pits, and a small amount of sand was added to the finished solution. In modern construction, the binder solution is cement, which appeared in the 19th century. Often two parallel walls were built, and the space between them was filled with construction debris, and in the section the wall turned out to be three-layered. This method was called "backfilling".

In addition, the walls were plastered, in today's language, plastered. The coating technique was called "under the mitten". This was necessary, first of all, for greater strength of the walls, which did not collapse so quickly in the humid and windy Pskov climate. Thanks to the light limestone mortar with which the walls were plastered, the city looked solemn and elegant.

Old Ladoga fortress

STAROLADOGSKAYA FORTRESS (the village of Staraya Ladoga, on the banks of the Volkhov River at the confluence of the Ladoga River). She covered the Novgorod lands from attacks from the north, from Sweden. According to chronicle data, the first trees. fortifications appeared in 862 under Prince. Rurik. The first cam. castle of the prince Oleg refers to approximately 900. The remains of the walls and the rectangular watchtower are made of limestone slabs without mortar. Destroyed, presumably, during the attack of the Vikings in 997. The second cam. the fortress (1114) was founded by the Ladoga posadnik Pavel under Prince. Mstislav Vladimirovich. Save base of south walls on the crest of the rampart and east. a wall along the bank of the Volkhov (under the butt of the 15th century) with a combat platform and a trading hatch for lifting cargo. In the courtyard of the fortress is c. George the Victorious Great Martyr (XII century). In the pre-fire period, the fortress remained impregnable for the attacks of the Emi, Swedes and Germans. In 1445, under the Novgorod archbishop.

Euphemia carried out its reconstruction. The third cam. the fortress was rebuilt under Ivan III in the 1490s, possibly under the hands of. foreign fortifiers. In two years, approx. 20 thousand cubic meters m stone. The walls and towers are made of kr. boulders on lime mortar and lined with masonry of hewn limestone slabs. From the south side, the builders left the rampart with a wall of the 12th century. and ditch. The thickness of the walls at the sole is 7 m, the height is 7.2-12 m. The walls have rhythmically arranged loopholes of the sole fight with cannon chambers. Five three-tier towers (height 16-19 m, width base 16-24.5 m) are placed along the defense perimeter. The tiers had a system of loopholes for conducting fan (frontal and flanking) shelling of the area.

The entrances to the towers were in the second tiers, coinciding with the surface of the courtyard. The platforms of the fighting passages of the walls were connected through the third tiers of the towers. The entrance through the first tier of the rectangular Gate Tower was L-shaped in plan; In the first tier of the semicircular Secret Tower (not preserved) there was a well. Klimentovskaya, Strelochnaya and Raskatnaya towers were round in plan.

There were up to 70 cannon and 45 rifle embrasures in the walls and towers, however, according to the inventories of the 17th century. the armament of Ladoga consisted of only 9 guns, squeaked and "mattresses" that fired shot. In the XVI century. the fortress escaped attacks, but during the Time of Troubles it was captured by a detachment of Swedes. mercenaries. After the Swede During the occupations of 1610-11 and 1612-17, dilapidated sections of masonry during repairs were replaced with taras (chopped wooden structures filled with earth). In the XVIII century. lost military. meaning. The fortress was explored in 1884-85 N.E. Brandenburg, in 1893 V.V. Suslov, in 1938, 1949, 1958 expedition of V.I. Ravdonikas (S.N. Orlov, G.F. Korzukhina), in 1972-75 A.N. Kirpichnikov, in 1979-83 N.K. Stetsenko. In the 1970s, restorations were carried out. work under the direction of A.E. Ekka. Since 1971, the Staraya Ladoga Historical, Architectural and Archaeological Museum-Reserve has been operating.

Fortress "Oreshek"

If you don't remember, we've already discussed The Nut in great detail. Remember...

Fortress Koporye

The Koporye fortress is located on the northwestern tip of the Izhora plateau, 13 kilometers from the Gulf of Finland. This place dominates the coastal lowland, and in good weather it can be seen from the Gulf of Finland. This claim is, in fact, difficult to verify. Every time I arrived in Koporye, the weather did not allow me to see the sea, but the view to the north from the fortress wall is still very beautiful. The fortress does not stand on the crest of a range of hills, but on the edge, above the very cliff. Therefore, if you drive up to it from the south, then it becomes visible only at close range. The aforementioned lowland is covered with dense forest, stretching as far as the eye can see, while the hills, on the contrary, are fields and arable land. Around the once formidable outpost of Russia in the north-west, the village of the same name is spread, at the foot of the ridge there is a railway, and everything is the same as 700 years ago (during the foundation of the fortification), the somewhat shallow river Koporka, which gave the fortress its name, runs.

In the 40s of the 13th century, in the places we are describing, the struggle between the German knights and the Russian states, primarily Novgorod, intensified. The Germans were heading east and north, while the Novgorodians, on the contrary, wanted to strengthen their western borders. According to chronicles, in 1240 the knights built a fortified point on the mountain, but the very next year Alexander Nevsky destroyed the buildings and drove their owners away. In 1279, Alexander's son Dmitry founded first a wooden and then a stone fortress. But the Novgorodians, grateful for their care, expelled the prince and, apparently for greater persuasiveness, destroyed his fortress, despite the fact that it was located in an "enemy" direction. Realizing their short-sightedness, already in 1297 they began to build their own fortress, parts of which are still visible today, despite later reconstructions. In 1384, another fortress, Yamgorod, was built about 40 kilometers to the southwest, as a result of which the importance of Koporye fell (Yamgorod occupied an important position near the Narva-Novgorod road).

In 1520-1525 the fortress was rebuilt, but by Moscow masters. This takes into account the development of artillery. The further history of the fortress is also "happy". In 1617 the fortress was handed over to the Swedes (according to the Stolbovsky Treaty), and in 1703, under Peter, without a fight, it returned to Russian rule. Such a "non-military" fate of the fortress predetermined its high safety.

What can be seen in the fortress today? Two towers - North and South - guard the only entrance, where a stone bridge leads high above the ground. The distance between the towers is only fifteen meters. When I first came to Koporye in 1994, the entrance was very difficult. The bridge was not restored to the end, and just before the entrance it was necessary to wade along the logs lying at a height of several meters. This, by the way, also corresponds to the ancient descriptions, which state that the bridge ended in a failure, which was closed by the lowering door of the drawbridge (an element not very common in Russian architecture). Today the bridge has been brought up to the wall and the entrance to the fortress is free. The southern and southeastern walls of Koporye wind in an arc along the very edge of the hill above a very steep cliff. Fragments of an ancient wall (1297) have been preserved here, while other walls are newer. You can get to the wall from the corner tower, but walking on it is really scary. In some places it is only two bricks thick. The height of these walls reaches 7.5 meters, and the thickness is up to 2. The magnitude of the cliff (up to 30 meters) should be added to the indicated height. In a word, it is better not to look down.

The north side is closed by a new wall (16th century) and guarded by two towers (excluding those that defend the entrance). The towers have five tiers of loopholes, and the wall is five meters wide. This side of the fortress was considered more vulnerable, and therefore the fortifications here are more powerful. Restoration work is underway on the towers, the same applies to the wall, in which inclusions of masonry dating back to the twentieth century are visible. The fortress had two secret passages designed to provide the besieged with water (see diagram). One of them was built in the 13th century and is considered the oldest of the known similar structures, the other - during the modernization of the fortress in the 16th century.

The inner courtyards of the fortress leave the feeling that under the mounds overgrown with grass there is still a lot of interesting things. Roughly in the middle rises the small Church of the Transfiguration, also built in the 16th century. And finally, I recommend climbing the Naugolnaya Tower, from where a grandiose view of the green massif of the forest extending beyond the horizon opens up.

Nizhny Novgorod Kremlin

As the chronicle testifies, in 1221 the Grand Duke of Vladimir Yuri Vsevolodovich Nizhny Novgorod was founded, which was protected by wooden and earthen fortifications - deep ditches and high ramparts that surrounded the city and its suburbs.

The first attempt to replace a wooden fortress with a stone Kremlin dates back to 1374, to the era Nizhny Novgorod-Suzdal Grand Duchy(1341 -1392). At this time the prince Dmitry Konstantinovich founded the Kremlin, but its construction was limited to only one tower, known as Dmitrovskaya tower, which has not come down to us (the modern tower was built later).

Under Ivan III, Nizhny Novgorod played the role of a guard city, having a permanent army and serving as a military gathering place during Moscow's actions against Kazan. In order to strengthen the defense of the city, work on the fortress walls begins again. The construction of the stone Nizhny Novgorod Kremlin began in 1500 in the coastal part of the city Ivanovskaya tower, but the main work began in 1508 and in a short time - by 1515 - the grandiose construction was completed. The main work on the construction of the Kremlin was carried out under the guidance of an architect sent from Moscow Pietro Francesco(Pyotr Fryazin). The destruction of the old defensive structures - oak walls - was facilitated by a huge fire in 1513.

The two-kilometer wall was reinforced by 13 towers (one of them, Zachatskaya, near the banks of the Volga, has not been preserved). "Stone City" had a permanent garrison and a solid artillery armament. The new Volga fortress was created by the Muscovite state as the main stronghold against Kazan Khanate and for her military service withstood repeated sieges and attacks. And not once in all this time has the enemy been able to take possession of it.

With the fall of Kazan, the Nizhny Novgorod Kremlin lost its military significance, and later it housed the authorities of the city, principality and province.

During Great Patriotic War the roofs of the Tainitskaya, North and Clock towers were dismantled and anti-aircraft machine guns were installed on the upper platforms.

January 30, 1949 issued an order of the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR on the restoration of the Nizhny Novgorod Kremlin

Smolensk Kremlin

The Smolensk fortress wall is now represented by surviving wall fragments and several towers. Despite the later mention of the construction of these structures, scientists suggest that the city was fortified already in the initial period of its existence. This is evidenced by the introductory part of The Tale of Bygone Years.

The walls were built so skillfully that they became a reliable defense to the city. Smolensk is called the "key-city", the road to Moscow. The Smolensk fortress played an important role not only for the Smolensk region, but for the whole of Russia. This wall has endured many sieges and wars.

On September 13, 1609, seven years after the completion of the construction of the fortress, the Polish king Sigismund 3 approached Smolensk with a huge army and laid siege to it. For more than twenty months, the defenders of the city, all its population, selflessly held back the onslaught of a well-armed army of invaders.

In the summer of 1708, the troops of the Swedish king Charles 12 approached the southern borders of the Smolensk land, it was through Smolensk that he threatened to pass to Moscow. But Peter I arrived in the city, the most energetic measures were taken to repair the fortress and meet the enemy at the distant approaches. Having come across well-equipped fortifications, having suffered several major defeats and almost being captured, Charles 12 realized that it was impossible to break through to Moscow through Smolensk, turned south, to Ukraine, where the famous Battle of Poltava took place (1709).

The ancient city increased its military merits in the Patriotic War of 1812. On Smolensk land, two Russian armies joined - M.B. Barclay de Tolia and P.I. Bagration. This destroyed the strategic plan of Napoleon to break them apart. On August 4-5, 1812, a major battle took place near the walls of the Smolensk fortress, in which the French troops suffered heavy losses, and the Russian army was able to carry out a strategic maneuver and maintain its combat capability. When the city was abandoned, a guerrilla war unfolded in its vicinity throughout the entire Smolensk land. By this time, 38 towers remained in the fortress wall. At the end of the war, during the retreat of Napoleon, his army blew up 8 towers.

The hardest trials fell on the lot of Smolensk during the Great Patriotic War. On the far and near approaches to the ancient city, on its streets and squares, throughout the surrounding land, the largest battle of the initial period of the war thundered for two months - the battle of Smolensk, which destroyed Hitler's plans for a "blitzkrieg". When the city was under temporary occupation, the population remaining in it continued to fight the enemy. September 25, 1943 Smolensk was liberated.

The ruins of buildings, mountains of crumbled bricks, charred trees, brick chimneys on the site of former dwellings were seen by the soldiers of the Red Army when they entered the city. A new heroic feat was required to overcome devastation, to revive life in the ashes and ruins. And this feat was accomplished.

Today's Smolensk is one of the most beautiful cities in the country. In it, gray antiquity coexists with modern buildings, revived buildings delight the eye with their architectural appearance. History here reminds of itself either as an earthen defensive rampart, or as an ancient temple, or as a fortress tower... Smolensk residents are proud of their heroic past, building a new life.

Zaraisk Kremlin

The Zaraisk Kremlin is considered an architectural monument of the middle of the 16th century, although during its existence it was repeatedly repaired and reconstructed. In this regard, the Kremlin has lost to some extent its original appearance. At the same time, numerous minor changes over the centuries have created a unique look for this pearl of the architecture of Old Zaraysk.

The Kremlin was built by decree of the Sovereign and Grand Duke of Moscow Vasily III at the same time as the first stone St. Nicholas Cathedral in 1528-1531. This was preceded by a series of events set forth in the final parts of the Cycle of Stories about Nikola Zarazsky. The name of the architect who supervised the construction is unknown, but back in the 19th century it was believed that he was Aleviz Fryazin Novy. The Kremlin bears clear features of Italian influence in Russian fortress architecture and is one of three completely regular medieval fortresses in our country.

For a century and a half, he defended the borders of the Russian state. The fortress was part of a single line of fortifications that connected such large centers as Kolomna, Pereyaslavl Ryazansky, Tula and others. large detachments under the leadership of the Tatar princes.

At the beginning of the 17th century, the Zaraisk fortress fell under the blows of the Polish interventionists under the leadership of Colonel Alexander Josef Lisovsky. In memory of his victory, he ordered all the defenders of Zaraysk to be buried in one grave and a barrow was built over them, which is still preserved.

After the Poles left the city, a new governor was appointed to it. They became Prince Dmitry Mikhailovich Pozharsky. Under the influence of the prince, as well as the archpriest of the Nikolsky Kremlin Cathedral, Dmitry Leontiev, Zaraysk was one of the few surrounding cities that opposed the supporters of False Dmitry II.

The territory of the Kremlin is now decorated with two stone cathedrals - Nikolsky and John the Baptist. The first one was built in 1681 by decree of Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich. Until now, the traveler can admire the magnificent view of its five domes rising above the walls, crowned with ancient gilded crosses.

The second cathedral was built at the beginning of the 20th century. on the initiative of an outstanding public figure, headman of the Kremlin cathedrals, mayor, deputy of the State Duma N.I. Yartsev and at the expense of the famous philanthropist A.A. Bakhrushin.

On the territory of the Kremlin there is also a monument to the legendary Ryazan princes Fedor, Evpraksia and their son John Postnik, whose names are associated with Zaraisk from time immemorial.

The majestic walls and towers of the Kremlin rise above the old part of the city, creating together a unique and rare view for the central regions of Russia, which opens from the left bank of the river. Sturgeon.

Largely due to this, the Kremlin has always been a visiting card and a striking feature of Zaraysk, which was certainly noted by all travelers who have been here.

Kolomna Kremlin

The Kolomna Kremlin was built in 1525-1531. at the direction of the Grand Duke of Moscow Vasily III. It took only 6 years for artisans to build "a building brought to perfection and worthy of the viewer's surprise," as the famous Syrian traveler Pavel Aleppsky estimated it 100 years later. The Kolomna brick and stone Kremlin turned out to be a reliable defender of the city.

At the beginning of the sixteenth century, following the Moscow Kremlin, the construction of which was completed in 1495, the Grand Dukes of Moscow strengthened the borders of the state - they built impregnable stone fortresses in cities of strategic importance. Such a city in the south-east was then Kolomna. In 1525, Grand Duke Vasily III issued a Decree containing the lines: "make a stone city in Kolomna." On May 25 of the same year, the builders began grandiose work, to which many residents of Kolomna and the surrounding villages were involved.

The Kremlin existed in Kolomna before. But the predecessors of the "stone shirt" under construction suffered a sad fate. The trouble is that the defensive walls being built were wooden. Kolomna, the first of the Russian cities to join Moscow (in 1301), had a difficult fate - to be a border town in those years. Horde raids repeatedly devastated Kolomna. The result of these ruinous visits of uninvited guests were fires, from which the wooden citadel also suffered.

The stone wall was built along the outer perimeter of the old wooden fortifications, which were destroyed as the work progressed.

Many believe that the Kolomna Kremlin was built under the guidance of the Italian architects Alevizov - Bolshoy and Maly - who are the author of the towers and walls of the Moscow Kremlin. This assumption is based on the great similarity of the Kremlins. And the period of construction (six years) of the Kolomna Kremlin suggests that the designers of the fortress had a lot of experience: a construction comparable in scale in the capital lasted more than ten years. In terms of area, length and thickness of the walls, the number of towers, the Kolomna and Moscow fortresses differ little from each other.

The Kremlin loses its direct purpose

In the sixteenth century, the enemies never managed to take the Kolomna Kremlin by storm. And during the Time of Troubles, the Polish interventionists and detachments of the “Tushino thief” ended up in Kolomna not as a result of the assault on the fortress, but due to the indecision and treacherous mood of the temporary workers, who were completely confused in the change of royal persons. Thus, the Kremlin of Kolomna fulfilled its purpose with dignity. But by the middle of the seventeenth century, Kolomna was losing its former military and defensive significance. The city is gradually turning into a major industrial center, the Kremlin, having lost its functional purpose, begins to collapse.

Part of the walls and some towers of the Kremlin were restored in the second half of the nineteenth century.

Vyborg Castle

The castle was founded in 1293, which preceded the founding of the city. Marshal Thorgils Knutsson is considered the founder of the castle.

Reliable information about the original appearance of the Vyborg Castle has not been preserved. In all likelihood, a thick-walled square tower of gray granite was built on the elevated rocky plateau of the island and surrounded by a defensive wall. The garrison is believed to have been housed in the tower, with living quarters on each floor. The roof was a flat area surrounded by a parapet. The tower was named after Saint Olaf. The base walls were 1.6 to 2 meters thick. The height was at least 7 meters. The castle complex itself was gradually formed on them and around them.

of the highest flourishing Vyborg Castle reached in the 40s of the XV century, during the reign of Karl Knutsson Bunde. During this period, there was a lot of construction work going on in the castle. The third floor was rebuilt and became residential - the combat floor of the main building, built on and became the fourth floor. In this building there were luxurious chambers in which the governor himself lived, kings, important persons of the civil and military departments of Sweden stayed.

During the first centuries of its existence, the castle, as an outpost of the Swedish kingdom and the Catholic Church, was repeatedly attacked by Novgorod and Muscovy. In addition, it was the site of internecine strife within the Swedish kingdom itself. Many times its towers and walls came under artillery fire. In 1706 and 1710 Vyborg and Vyborg Castle were bombarded by artillery Peter the Great. In 1710, Vyborg was taken, and thus the castle passed into the hands of the Russian military authorities.

Izborsk fortress

Izborsk fortress on Zheravya Gora is an amazing monument of Pskov defense architecture. During the construction of the fortress, to enhance its defensive qualities, the ancient fortifiers made the most of the terrain. From the north, the fortress is protected by a deep cliff, from the south - by a ravine, from the east by the Smolka River. From the western, attacking side, two lines of ditches were dug and four towers were erected. Six towers of the fortress have survived to this day: Lukovka, Talavskaya, Vyshka, Ryabinovka, Temnushka and Kolokolnaya. The fortress has the shape of an irregular triangle with two exits from the northern and southern (main) sides. The area protected by the fortress walls is 2.4 hectares, the total length of the stone walls reached 850 meters, the height was from 7.5 to 10 meters, and the average thickness was about 4 meters.

The fortress is the ancient city of Izborsk, with which many heroic pages of our country are associated. Inside the fortress there were the court of the governor, state and judicial huts, barns, cellars, the courtyard of the Pskov-Caves monastery, the huts of the townspeople, the garrison and trading shops. The so-called siege huts were also built here, in which the inhabitants of the settlement lived during the siege of the city.

Porkhov fortress

The first mention of the Porkhov fortress in the Novgorod chronicle dates back to 1239, when the Novgorod prince-governor Alexander Yaroslavovich (who is also the future Nevsky) strengthened the waterway along the Shelon from Novgorod to Pskov by building small wooden "blockposts", one of which was Porkhov. The first wood-and-earth fortifications were built on an elevated cape on the right bank of the Shelon and consisted of 2 rows of ramparts and ditches, and the height of the highest of the ramparts reached more than 4 meters with a log wall on top.

In 1346, the great Lithuanian prince Olgerd invaded Novgorod and took the fortresses of Luga and Shelon on a shield, and besieged Opoka and Porkhov. The fortress withstood its first Lithuanian siege, although the "black forest" (indemnity) of 300 rubles still had to be paid. The reason for the war was the rudeness of one Novgorod posadnik, whom the Novgorodians themselves later "beat" in Luga, so as not to loosen their tongues.

In 1387, at a distance of just over a kilometer from the old fortress, on the right high bank of the Shelon, a new stone fortress with four towers was built from local limestone. The thickness of its walls was 1.4-2 m, the height was about 7 m. The towers, 15-17 meters high, had from 4 to 6 combat tiers with wooden ceilings, protruded beyond the line of the fortress walls and could effectively flank the fences. All construction work was completed in one season.

In July 1428, Porkhov was besieged by the Lithuanians under the command of Prince Vitovt. They could not take the fortress, but during the 8 days of the siege they managed to pretty much damage it with cannons. This assault is remarkable in that it was one of the first in Russia, in which artillery was massively used.

The damage inflicted by the Lithuanians was significant, and therefore in 1430 "the Novgorodians put a stone wall against Porkhov's friend", i.e. reinforced the walls of the fortress with thick stone butts, increasing their thickness in the most threatened areas to 4.5 m.

Since that time, the fortress was no longer disturbed by enemies, because after the conquest of Novgorod in 1478 and Pskov in 1510 by Moscow, Porkhov was far from the restless western borders. It quickly lost its military significance and thanks to which its ancient fortifications have survived to our time, completely undistorted by later reconstructions and rebuildings.

Poison with the fortress arose a settlement, which continuously grew, despite the usual disasters of that time - regular fires, famine, pestilence, Polish devastation in 1581 and 1609. and the Swedish occupation of 1611-1615, during which there was an uprising of Porkhovites against foreign rule (1613).

In 1776, Porkhov became the county center of the Pskov province. In 1896 - 1897, a branch of the Dno - Pskov railway passed through it and the development of the city received a powerful impetus. The fortress gradually dilapidated and collapsed, until in 1912 restoration work began in it, during which some repairs were made to the walls and towers.

And still, the post did not fit into the LiveJournal framework, read the ending on INFO-EYE -

The vigorous urban planning activity of the Russian state, due to the need to protect and advance its borders, caused shifts in planning technology. Throughout the 16th century these shifts affected mainly the fortified elements of the city - kremlins, prisons.

Previously, during the period of feudal fragmentation, the fortifications of the city were usually aimed at protecting the population and its wealth, concentrated within the walls. Fortresses thus played a passive role in the defense of the country. Now new fortresses are being built, and the old frontier towns are again being fortified as strongholds for sentry and stanitsa service and for accommodating troops, who, at the first signal, rush to the enemy who appeared near the border. The center of gravity of the defense is transferred from the fortress to the field, and the fortress itself becomes only a temporary shelter for the garrison, which needs protection only from a sudden attack.

In addition, the fortresses were not the objects of attack by the nomad robbers, whose main goal was to break through in any gap between the fortified points to the territory of peaceful settlements, plunder them, take away the prisoners and quickly hide in the "wild field". The steppe nomads could not and never tried to conduct a proper siege or destroy cities. However, quite often they dug a shaft in some place, cut through gouges and in other similar ways tried to get inside the fortress.

The rounded shape of the fortress with passive defense and primitive military equipment gave a number of advantages. It provided the largest capacity for a fortified point with the smallest defensive fence line and, therefore, required a minimum number of defenders on the walls. In addition, with a rounded shape, there were no so-called "dead" angles of fire.

With the transition from passive to active defense, with the development of firearms, with the device of peals and towers for flank shelling, the rounded shape of the fortress fence loses its advantages and preference is given to the quadrangular shape of the fortification, and with a significant size of the city - polygonal (polygonal). Although the configuration of the fortress is still greatly influenced by topographic conditions, now in each case the choice of a specific configuration is already a compromise between them and a quadrangle (or polygon), and not a circle or an oval, as it was before. At the end of the XV - beginning of the XVI centuries. the shape of a rectangle (or a regular polygon) is already clearly expressed in Russian urban planning.

In 1509, Tula, which had shortly before passed to the Muscovite state, was rebuilt and re-fortified as an important strategic point on the outskirts of Moscow. The former fortified place on the Tulitsa River was abandoned, and on the left bank of the river. Upa, a new fortress was laid in the form of a double oak wall with cuts and towers. The new wooden fortress in general took the form of a crescent, leaning on its

ends on the river bank. But already five years later, in 1514, following the model of the Moscow Kremlin, the construction of an internal stone fortress was completed, which was completed in 1521.

If the fortress wall of 1509 was only a fortified bypass of a populated area, then the stone fortress, in its clear, geometrically correct form, quite clearly expressed the idea of ​​​​a fortified container of the garrison, the idea of ​​\u200b\u200ba structure that has its own regularity and does not depend on local conditions. However, in the internal planning of the fortress, the rectangular - rectilinear system did not receive a complete development. This can be seen on the plan of its restoration (Fig. 1, appendix 1), this can also be judged by the different position of the gate in the longitudinal walls.

The geometric method of construction is more clearly expressed in the Zaraisk fortress (built in 1531), where not only the external configuration, but, apparently, the internal layout was subject to a certain mathematical design. In any case, the location of the gate along two mutually perpendicular axes makes us assume the presence of two corresponding highways (Fig. 2, Appendix 1). Samples of regular fortresses, only slightly deviating from the mathematically correct form, we see on the plans of some other cities. So, for example, a fortress in the form of a relatively regular trapezoid is visible on the plan of the city of Mokshan (now the district center of the Penza region), built in 1535 (Fig. 3, Appendix 1); a large trapezoid fortress is shown on the plan of the city of Valuyki (now center of the Kursk region), built in 1593 (Fig. 5, appendix 1). From the cities of the Volga region of the XVI century. the most regular shape (in the form of a rhombus) was obtained by the fortress of Samara (now the city of Kuibyshev), shown in fig. 4, appendix 1.

These few examples show that already in the first half of the 16th century. Russian town builders were familiar with the principles of "regular" fortification art. However, the construction of the fortresses of the Tula defensive line in the middle of the XVI century. carried on for the most part according to the old principle. The need to strengthen many points in the shortest possible time caused a desire to maximize the use of natural defensive resources (steep slopes of ravines, river banks, etc.) with a minimum addition of artificial structures.

As a rule, in cities built or reconstructed in the 16th century, the subordination of the form of a fortress to topographic conditions still dominated. The fortifications of Sviyazhek also belong to this type of fortresses, encircling a rounded “native” mountain in accordance with its relief (Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 Appendix 1).

Historical and social conditions of the XVI century. influenced the planning of the “residential” part of the new cities, i.e. for the planning of settlements and settlements.

It should be emphasized that the state, building new cities, sought to use them primarily as points of defense. The restless situation in the vicinity of cities prevented the creation of a normal agricultural base, which was necessary for their development as settlements. Cities on the outskirts of the state had to be supplied with everything necessary from the central regions.

Some of the new cities, such as Kursk and especially Voronezh, due to their favorable location, quickly acquired commercial importance, but, as a rule, during the 16th century. the new cities remained purely military settlements. This does not mean, of course, that their inhabitants were engaged only in military affairs. As you know, service people in their free time were engaged in crafts, crafts, trade, and agriculture. The military character of the settlements was reflected mainly in the very composition of the population.

In all the new cities we meet an insignificant number of so-called "residential" people - townspeople and peasants. The bulk of the “population was made up of service (i.e. military) people. But unlike the central cities, the lowest category of servicemen prevailed here - “instrument” people: Cossacks, archers, spearmen, gunners, zatinshchiks, collars, security guards, state blacksmiths, carpenters, etc. In an insignificant number among the population of new cities there were nobles and children boyar. The predominance of service people in the composition of the population of the lowest rank should undoubtedly have been reflected in the nature of land ownership.

The supply of service people with everything necessary from the center made it extremely difficult for the treasury, which sought, wherever possible, to increase the number of "local" people who received land plots instead of salaries. As the advanced positions moved south, the previously built fortresses spontaneously overgrown with settlements and settlements. If the construction of the fortress itself was the work of state bodies, then the building and settlement of the settlements in the 16th century. occurred, apparently, as a result of local initiative on lands allocated by the state.

From the surviving orders to the governors-builders of the late 16th century. it can be seen that the military people went to the newly built cities only for a certain period, after which they disbanded and were replaced by new ones.

Even much later, namely in the first half * of the 17th century, the government, carried out, did not immediately decide on the forcible resettlement of military people “with wives and children and with all their bellies” to new cities “for eternal life”. From this it is clear why in the cities built in the 16th century there is still no regular planning of residential areas. In almost all these cities, at least in the parts closest to the fortress, the street network developed according to the traditional radial system, showing a tendency, on the one hand, to the fortified center, and on the other hand, to the roads to the surroundings and neighboring villages. In some cases, a tendency to the formation of ring directions is noticeable.

Carefully considering the plans of new cities of the 16th century, one can still notice in many of them a calmer and more correct outline of quarters than in old cities, the desire for a uniform width of quarters and other signs of rational planning. The irregularities, kinks, and dead ends encountered here are the result of the gradual unregulated growth of the city, in many cases - adaptation to difficult topographic conditions. They have little in common with the bizarre capricious forms in the plans of the old cities - Vyazma, Rostov the Great, Nizhny Novgorod and others.

New cities of the 16th century almost did not know the remnants of the land chaos of the period of feudal fragmentation, which so hampered the rational development of old cities. It is also possible that the governors, who monitored the state of the fortified city, to a certain extent paid attention to the planning of the settlements that arose in new cities, as a rule, on lands free from development, to the observance of some order in the tracing of streets and roads that had military significance. The distribution of plots near the city was undoubtedly to be regulated by the governors, because the organization of the border defense covered a significant territory on both sides of the fortified line.

The foregoing is confirmed by the plans of the cities of Volkhov, first mentioned in 1556 (Fig. 8, Appendix 1), and Alatyr, the first reliable information about which dates back to 1572 (Fig. 9, Appendix 1).

In these plans, immediately from the square adjacent to the Kremlin, a slender fan of radial streets is visible. Some breaks in them do not in the least interfere with the clarity of the overall system. In both plans, groups of quarters of uniform width are noticeable, which indicates a certain desire for standardization of estates. We see a sharp change in the size of the quarters and a violation of the overall harmony of the planning system only on the outskirts of the suburbs, where the settlements developed, apparently, independently and only later merged with the cities into a common array.

In the plans of these cities there are streets, as if revealing a desire to form quadrangular quarters. A similarity of a rectangular-rectilinear layout is more definitely expressed in the fortified settlement of the city of Tsivilsk (built in 1584), where the desire is clearly visible to divide the entire, albeit very small, territory into rectangular quarters (Fig. 10, appendix 1) p. The planning of this settlement was associated, as an exception for the 16th century, with an organized settlement of a certain group of people.