Historic Research of the Defence Systems in Europe
between 18th and 20th century
A reasoned analysis of characteristics, state of the art, future developments
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction – Foreword by the Work Package Leaders........................................................ 4
Background description.......................................................................................................... 5
Objectives of the work package ............................................................................................. 6
1. Objectives of this historic research ................................................................................ 7
2. Brief History of the Defence systems in Europe during the 18th to the 20th century ..... 8
2.1.
THE 18TH - 19TH CENTURY INVASION WARS ........................................................... 8
2.2.
THE FIRST AND SECOND WORLD WARS .................................................................. 8
2.3.
LATE 20TH CENTURY DEFENCE SYSTEMS ................................................................ 8
3. Brief description of the main identified groups of Defence systems ............................. 9
3.1.
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS ................................................................................... 9
3.2.
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS................................................................................ 10
3.3.
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS ...................................................................................... 10
3.4.
DEFENCE SYSTEMS - FORTIFIED TOWNS ................................................................ 11
4. List of defence systems by EU country, described as follows: .................................... 12
4.1.
Type of defence system........................................................................................ 12
4.2.
Brief description of its history, use and extension ............................................... 12
4.3.
Present state of conservation and present use ...................................................... 13
4.4.
Owner and/or present curator............................................................................... 13
Austria .................................................................................................................................. 14
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 14
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 14
Belgium ................................................................................................................................ 15
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 15
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................. 15
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS ................................................................................................. 16
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 16
Bulgaria ................................................................................................................................ 19
Czech Republic .................................................................................................................... 20
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 20
BOHEMIAN LINE ................................................................................................................ 20
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 20
FORTRESS OF JOSEFOV ...................................................................................................... 20
TEREZIN – THERESIENSTADT............................................................................................. 21
Cyprus .................................................................................................................................. 22
Denmark ............................................................................................................................... 23
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 23
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................. 23
Estonia.................................................................................................................................. 25
Finland.................................................................................................................................. 26
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 26
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................. 27
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 28
1
France ................................................................................................................................... 29
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 29
MAGINOT LINE .................................................................................................................. 30
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................. 30
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 31
Germany ............................................................................................................................... 33
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 33
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................. 34
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 34
INGOLSTADT...................................................................................................................... 36
KOBLENZ........................................................................................................................... 36
SPANDAU .......................................................................................................................... 36
GERMERSHEIM .................................................................................................................. 37
Greece................................................................................................................................... 38
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 38
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 38
Hungary................................................................................................................................ 40
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS/RIVER DEFENSE SYSTEM .................. 40
Ireland................................................................................................................................... 41
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................. 41
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .................................................................................................. 41
Italy....................................................................................................................................... 42
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 42
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................. 43
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS ................................................................................................. 43
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 44
Latvia.................................................................................................................................... 46
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................. 46
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .................................................................................................. 46
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 46
Lithuania............................................................................................................................... 48
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 48
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 48
Luxembourg ......................................................................................................................... 50
Malta..................................................................................................................................... 51
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 51
Netherlands........................................................................................................................... 52
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 52
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................. 53
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 53
Poland................................................................................................................................... 55
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 55
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .................................................................................................. 56
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 56
Portugal ................................................................................................................................ 58
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 58
SAGRES ............................................................................................................................. 58
Romania ............................................................................................................................... 60
2
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 60
Slovakian Republic .............................................................................................................. 61
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 61
Slovenia................................................................................................................................ 62
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 62
Spain..................................................................................................................................... 63
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS.............................................................................................. 63
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................ 64
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 65
Sweden ................................................................................................................................. 69
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 69
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 69
United Kingdom ................................................................................................................... 71
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 71
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................. 71
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS .................................................................................................. 73
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS ........................................................... 73
Summeryzing table and statistics ......................................................................................... 74
Some examples of good practices in re-use ......................................................................... 75
Purposes, objectives and conclusions............................................................................... 76
Brief Glossary .................................................................................................................. 77
3
INTRODUCTION – FOREWORD BY THE WORK PACKAGE LEADERS
This project, in fact, through the sharing of the experiences of 7 European Partners (UK,
France, Spain, Germany, Sweden, Italy and Greece) has shown on a large scale the exchange
experience on a wide geographical scale of the needs for a conservation and valorisation of
the abandoned and dismissed defence systems and military architectures.
In particular, during the Third Day working group in Utrecht related to the International
Network within the framework of the ASCEND Extension, partners came to the agreement to
develop a working scheme draft on the future researches on European Defence Systems with
an Historic, Social and Economic Dimension based on comparative studies. The target was to
create conditions for a common platform of research that could develop the ASCEND Project
into a more geographically ambitious opportunity, based also on an enlarged network.
The objective of creating an enlarged network of local and regional authorities that could
contribute to this commitment requires their coordination as well as the admission of an
important issue that exists on a continental framework. A common platform required basic
tools to be integrated by all partners step by step with clear criteria and standards.
This historic research should be considered as a fundamental starting work not only for the
promotion of this specific issue and its connected developments, but also to the establishment
of the future network itself. It will be complementary to the other research on socio-economic
potential of military heritage in Europe, scheduled to be completed on December 2007.
4
BACKGROUND DESCRIPTION
European Defence Systems, as walls, forts, ensemble of fortresses and bunkers, defence lines,
fortified ports and rivers, etc. constitute the objective of the European INTERREG IIIC
project called ASCEND, acronym for “Achieving the Socio-Economic Re-Use of Former
Military Land and Heritage/Fortification, Arsenals, Dockyards”. This project started in March
2004 and was planned to end on December 2006, having obtained an extension in view of its
purposes to create a network for development of this rich field of research.
The aim of the project was providing institutions, local and regional authorities, associations
and owners with strategic models to maintain and conserve, as well as valorise, this unique
kind of heritage which did not yet enter into the common people attention. In particular, the
project was identifying in this heritage various values and potentials as a tool for sustainable
local, regional and national development, as much as an instrument for nations
communication, cooperation and friendship.
Defence Systems Architectures have been deeply investigated by historians and passionate
researchers and a huge quantity of information can be found on the various information
sources as bibliographies, museums, internet, etc. Nonetheless this material did not find at
present a common platform of discussion being considered as marginal and often non-usable.
Therefore, there is a urgent need to create conditions for experts and interested authorities to
exchange experiences and ideas, as well as informations, to give back to this heritage its
appropriate dimension as instrument for sustainable regional development.
We should not forget the immense significance these place have in the people imaginary,
being still living witnesses for many and unknown relicts for others. Defence systems have
been the icon of discrepancies and fights: through this project and the activities of all those
involved in their conservation and valorisation they could become holders of communication
and peace.
5
OBJECTIVES OF THE WORK PACKAGE
The INTERREG IIIC ASCEND Project is demonstrating how international cooperation can
work for the development of important networks of ideas and best practices examples
exchange. This Work Package, extension of the ASCEND Project together with the socioeconomic analysis of defence systems re-use, aims at establishing a common platform of
discussion in this field, both by creating a general historic categorizing framework and
defining enlargement potentials of the partnership.
In particular the definition of a common tool for cooperation, given by a reasoned analysis of
the state of the art of European Defence Systems between the end of 18th to the 20th century,
could offer light and easy preconditions for an real integrated work. This research has a
common general structure and is to be considered un-complete by all partners of the present
and of the future.
The attempt by this Work Package to create a common platform for ideas exchanging, was
imagined as general as possible through specific definition criteria, to be implemented
regularly, integrated by each partner, by experts in the field, by institutions. This platform
aims at recognising the main categories of defence systems in Europe in this mentioned
period and identifying specific cases in each of the 27 European Countries. In addition, it was
aiming at pointing out interesting examples from other EU neighbouring countries that could
be assimilated to this definitions in order to create conditions for potential future partnership.
Once this platform will be shaped, it will serve to collect EU and Non-EU partners, share
experiences and practices, identifying potential methodologies as well as working closely
connected to contribute to each partner problematic. The platform will also offer to all those
experts and interested researcher an easy way to collect information and get in touch with
institutions involved.
6
1. OBJECTIVES OF THIS HISTORIC RESEARCH
In the view of creating a platform of exchange and establishing the conditions for a durable
partnership for military heritage preservation, maintenance and valorisation in Europe and
abroad, this specific research was targeting the categorization of military defence systems in
Europe and identifying their location in each different country.
To this aim, it has been considered essential to sit down around a table and focus on the most
frequent defence systems in Europe. The period, from the end of 18th to the 20th century, was
defined in order to catch the less attractive segment of this heritage, which is often getting
people attention if linked with medieval and ancient productions. In addition, it has been
chosen for this first step to identify only defence systems, living aside the thousand single
monuments spread on the European territory. Defence systems in our mind were those
systems being originated by a general defensive idea, both for the protection of urban realities
and for the safeguarding of entire national territories.
The research has been important to fix some ideas and point out categories. This should be
considered as a starting point. Once the Defence Systems have been divided into categories it
has been much easier to distinguish them, also in those cases that were merging different
kinds of military heritage.
However, this distinction will be methodological and will not be fundamental for the
definition of potential exportable strategies for re-use and valorisation. This research will be
important to compare different typologies and valorise their peculiarities in this perspective of
valorisation: this should not be meant merely for tourism, but also for educational and
occupational purposes. The investigation on possible re-use is thus fundamental and
extremely exciting for its perspectives and involve many discipline ranging from economics
to architecture, from sociology to planning.
7
2. BRIEF HISTORY OF THE DEFENCE SYSTEMS IN EUROPE DURING THE 18TH TO
TH
THE 20 CENTURY
Few lines should be added on the historic development of defence systems in Europe during
this period. This will permit a reasoned analysis of the events and the strategic solution
adopted to respond to the progressive introduction of new ways of fighting.
2.1.
THE 18TH - 19TH CENTURY INVASION WARS
2.2.
THE FIRST AND SECOND WORLD WARS
2.3.
LATE 20TH CENTURY DEFENCE SYSTEMS
8
3. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE MAIN IDENTIFIED GROUPS OF DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The analysis permitted to point out four different types of Defence Systems:
•
Border Defence Systems;
•
Coastal Defence Systems;
•
River Defence Systems;
•
Urban Defence Systems and Fortified Towns.
For each country has been made and analysis of existing military witnesses, knowing that
some of them could have been part in the past of a broader concept crossing different nations
(soo much that, for example, Austria has much less than other countries due to the fact that
between the 18th and the 20th century the Austro-Hungarian Empire territories were much
more extended than today).
Few information on other neighbouring countries have been added to permit the future
partnership to be wider and cooperative.
3.1.
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Border Defence Systems were conceived to protect a national territory from invaders.
They can be identify easily due to the fact that there linear development was following the
one of the border between different states or empires and were characterised by the same
typological architectures. In the European context we could enlist the most famous, the
Maginot Line, as well as the Alpine Line, both built during the Second World War, or the
Sigfried Line made by Germans during the First World War.
These works were conceived to protected once national territory but in some cases their
architectures went into other national territories due to the subdivision of land after
conflicts resolutions. This is the case for example of a border system connecting the
9
present territories of Italy, Austria and Slovenia, one belonging to the Austro-hungarian
Empire.
3.2.
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Coastal defence systems were imagined to protect those countries overlooking the sea and
easily reachable from the coast. Also in this case these defensive lines can be considered
very easily recognisable cause their location is in proximity of coasts and belonging to
specific national realities. In some cases these defence systems were connecting different
nations/empire, while on other cases they were including other types of defence systems
as fortified towns or border defence lines.
The most important example in this category is the Atlantikwall, built by Germans and
their occupation forces during the last years of the second World War along the coasts of
France, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany and Norway, reaching the border/coast of Spain.
3.3.
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
River Defence Systems have been distinguished to identify those sites that have been
protected along rivers although their uniqueness should not be considered as given. River
defence systems in fact are often very concentrated in specific area and could be
assimilated or unified to other defence systems. Until the end of the 19th century and the
beginning of 20th century in fact, rivers were considered as a difficult natural barrier
although permitting infinite point of access to a territory. At the same time river have been
representing one of the main elements for the success of cities and regions and have been
thus fundamentals as economic resources linked to the provision of water and trade.
However, in the 19th century and the introduction of new ways of transportation created
new routes, vanishing in part the role of rivers. In this view, river defence systems can be
often considered an extension of fortified towns or part of a border defensive line.
The most important example in this category is the Atlantikwall, built by Germans and
their occupation forces during the last years of the second World War along the coasts of
France, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany and Norway, reaching the border/coast of Spain.
10
3.4.
DEFENCE SYSTEMS - FORTIFIED TOWNS
The category named Urban Defence Systems and Fortified Towns should be considered
somehow the most difficult to classify cause, due to the different dimensions of each
fortified reality, could be placed it either singularly or in the context of one of the previous
categories. Fortified towns in fact were often conceived singularly and during the middleage or renaissance period, to be then included in broader systems, along border lines on
coastal fortification or along rivers. In many cases however, fortified regions were linked
to an intentional project based on the protection of cities conceived as a network. Urban
defence systems should be considered those ones made of big fortified city surrounded by
satellite fortifications of villages or single fortresses, while fortified towns should be
considered those cities standing alone as fortifications. The most interesting examples in
this sense could come from the Venice fortification system, which can be actually
considered being both coastal and urban defence system, and the Belgian cities of
Antwerp, Liège, Namur, Diest. And Brussels.
All these categories and examples are very different each other, among categories of
course and within the same category, due to the different periods of conceptions, the
climatic conditions, the purposes they were made for. This is why border lines in Finland
can be considered as similar to the ones in Greece, although there characteristics in terms
of outline, materials, dimensions, etc. are far different. This makes all this cultural
heritage resources peculiar and let them express different potentials for socio-cultural
enhancement of their regions.
11
4. LIST OF DEFENCE SYSTEMS BY EU COUNTRY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Along with this section we will be enlisting in a reasoned but brief way the different selected
fortified systems in Europe in the period considered. This list should not be considered as
strict, cause many sites could be mentioned in different categories and because many other
omitted could be integrated in the future.
We should also notice that many EU countries do not present a long list of fortified sites or
defensive systems, while some other neighbouring Non-EU countries could enlist many
interesting sites that made the history of European contemporary age. We should not forget
for example the defence systems of the former Russian block, which partly determined the
present asset of Europe. Their future inclusion in this historic analysis is recommended and
could be envisaged within the framework of a coming cooperation project.
4.1.
Type of defence system
Within each national reality it will be enlisted the name of the site and its classification
according to the categories above stated. Those sites that could be considered within two
different categories (as Venice) will be duplicated, as well as those that were unique and are
now spread on different national territories: for both cases peculiarities will be made explicit
and put into emphasis.
4.2.
Brief description of its history, use and extension
This section will serve to explain the main outlines of the defence system. The main purpose
is to describe the historic process that brought to the typological and territorial development
of the defence system, including those cases in which the origin dates back much earlier than
the period considered: it happened very often in fact that medieval fortified settlement have
been developed, modified and adapted to modern exigencies for protection.
12
On the same section it has been proposed to give indications on the old use of the defence
system until our period.
Last but not least the extension of the site, which can be considered as a characteristic for
comparing analysis within future projects of conservation and valorisation.
4.3.
Present state of conservation and present use
A very important information that should be integrated to this study is the state of
conservation of the defence system and its present use. This information could be very
complicated to be collected cause it also depends on the extension and dimension of the
defence system. In particular it would be valuable to understand if there is a plan for
conservation and management of the site (or different sites) and if this plan is comprehensive
of the entire extent of it. Concerning the use and projects already designed for its re-use.
4.4.
Owner and/or present curator
For the establishment of new partnerships for the research, protection and valorisation of this
military resources an additional essential information concerns the ownership of the sites of
the defence system. In particular could be fundamental:
•
Firstly to understand if the site and its parts are under public or private ownership;
•
Secondly which is the management structure and organisational form used for the
protection and “exploitation” of it.
•
Thirdly it would be fundamental to understand if sites are already part of a network of
sites or defence systems.
•
Fourthly, understand if there is a network of experts and researcher that are developing
information on the sites and their re-use.
13
AUSTRIA
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Würzenpass – Carinthia (Austria)
During the Cold War between East and West Austria
installed a secret network of bunkers and fortifications
and barrages meant to save the neutral country from
attacks especially on its borders as for example on the
Würzenpass in Carinthia. It’s here that one can find the
bunker station itself set in a museum area of more than
11.000 square metres. Constructed between 1963 and 1995 this fortification is fitted with
original equipment (tank turrets, command, control compartments, guns etc.). The visitors are
accompanied by competent guides and everything is meant to prevent people from forgetting
the past.
Contact and info: www.bunkermuseum.at
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
Lienz
At the end of the 18th century, to prevent attacks from the Napoleon troops converging to
confluence of the rivers Danube and Traun, Archduke Maximilian decided protect the city of
Lienz and stop the passage along the Danube river by fortifying the city of Lienz. The
construction made was extremely innovative for its kind, which would have been repeated in
the next century. Instead of encircling the city with continuous wall with, he shrank the
defences to a circle of single, independent low towers, with artillery fires in between. The
construction of the fortress started in 1828 until 1836, however becoming immediately
obsolete due to the disappearance of foreign armies in the region for a long period.
14
BELGIUM
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The KW-line
The KW line is considered to be the main defence
line built by Belgium to protect its territories against
possible German invasions directed to the centre.
This defence system was also known as the Dyleline (Dijle-line) or Iron Wall and was requested by
the Belgian Ministry of Defence at the beginnings
of the Second World War, then built between 1939
and 1940. The KW line covered Brussels and
connected the PFA, Position Fortifiée D’Anvers,
with Namur. It ran from the fort of Koningshooikt
closed to the city of Antwerp to Wavre (hence the
name: KW) along the marshy Dyle valley, a natural
barrier against tanks. A total of 235 pillboxes were built there in the winter of 1939-1940. The
KW bunkers were all medium-type machine gun bunkers. The line extended 60km and was
hidden in order to seem a series of barracks and small houses.
Contact and info: http://niehorster.orbat.com/021_belgium/forts/_forts-part_02.htm
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Atlantikwall
The Atlantikwall was built by the German occupation forces in the period 1941-1944 along
the coasts of France, Channel Islands, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Norway and Denmark
and should be considered the the last major defence system of the 20th century.
The Atlantikwall was aiming at preventing allied landings on the coasts of the European
border countries. During this period a total of 14.000 heavy, concrete bunkers were built
15
The Belgian side of the Atlantikwall, in particular in the
Raversijde Domain, is particularly well preserved and is
dedicated to the education of the population and tourists.
There is one museum in Ostende: Openluchtmuseum
Atlantikwall.
Contact and info:
http://www.cultuurweb.be/CNETPortal/DetailOffer.aspx?id_event=71
EEB206-0E25-7218-6DE60C7EE78F263B&language=nl&locale=nl-nl
The Nieuwpoort-Knokke Coastal Defence
This coastal defence system was built during the Second World War, in particular during the
year 1940. Namely from the sites of Nieuwpoort to Knokke, the Belgian government ordered
the construction of a line of about 13 bunkers armed with the French APX-2B tank. These
defence system was actually very small and dismantled soon when the Belgian government
decided not to have offensive armaments.
Contact and info: http://niehorster.orbat.com/021_belgium/forts/_forts-part_02.htm
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The defensive line of Namur/Dinant-Liège
In 1940 the defence line along the river Meuse was constituted by small forts located along
the left bank of the river between the sites of Nemeche and Engis. These fortifications had the
functions to protect each other and to impede the occupation of the river between the
fortification of Liège and Namur.
Contact and info: http://www.fortiff.be/ifb/index.php?p=654
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
Antwerp
The city of Antwerp had entered into a fortification system since 1830-31 being inserted into
the Wellington barrier, together with other cities as Charleroi, Ostende, Gant, Luxembourg,
Maastricht, etc. In 1859 it had been considered as part of the defence system of Belgium,
16
together with Liège, Namur, Dest, etc. so to be considered in the border fortification system
conceived around 1859-1885.
Contact and info: http://www.fortiff.be/ifb/index.php?p=1
At the beginning of the 20th century and at the
beginning of the World Wars, two concentric rings of
defences protected the strategically important port of
Antwerp. The new defence system was named Position
Fortifiée d’Anvers, PFA. The Inner ring, at the edge of
the city, consisted of an earth wall and a moat flanked
by nineteenth century brick and mortar forts. The
Outer ring formed a 94 km long arc around Antwerp
about 15 km out. It was made of a string of forts and
redoubts armed with artillery in steel turrets. Most
works were built between 1906 and 1914 and were
made of unarmed concrete. Three forts in the bends of
the river downstream from Antwerp protected the city from a naval attack.
Contact and info: http://niehorster.orbat.com/021_belgium/forts/_forts-part_02.htm
Liège
Since 1887 the Belgian government has been
developing a fortification system around the city of
Liège to be protect it and the national territory
against possible attacks from Germany. The
construction of this fortification lasted four years
and was designed by the General Brialmont as the
one of made for Namur.
During the first World War the city was surrounded by 12 forts at 8 km distance from the
main centre. During the Second World War additional 4 forts were built at 18 km distance
from the centre.
Contact and info: http://www.fortiff.be/ifb/index.php?page=a1
http://www.geocities.com/~brialmont/forts.html
17
Namur
During the reign of Léopold II (1865-1909) the city
lived a new cycle of constructions, with new concrete
forts with iron domes, the same imagined by general
Brialmont as for the previously mentioned plan for
Liège. Namur, as well as Antwerp and Liège, became a
new fortified location.
This fortification , dating back to the XV and XVI, this city had been loosing its fortified
appearance being almost totally dismantled by Napoleon and the French invaders.
Contact and info: http://www.namurcitadelle.be/index.php?lng=fr
http://www.fortified-places.com/namur_image7.jpg
18
BULGARIA
Bulgaria has an outstanding heritage of military nature, but its origin dates back to a period
that is earlier than the one considered.
19
CZECH REPUBLIC
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
BOHEMIAN LINE
The Bohemian line, at the border with Poland, should be
considered a specific manifestation of the Maginot Line,
constructed in France by Maginot. The Czechoslovak
government built a system of border fortifications between
1935 and 1938 to prevent its territory against the rising threat
of Nazi Germany.
The Munich Agreement of 1938, which forced the country to relinquish a large part of
territory to Nazi Germany, put an end to the construction project; hence, the country lost its
system of fortifications.
Today part of the relics stay along the Polish border being accessible to the public. They are
conceived as a open-air museum showing the original equipment meant for the nation’s
defence.
http://www.east-bohemia.info/military-history/
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
FORTRESS OF JOSEFOV
The fortress of Josefov was built from 1780 to 1787 under
Josef II emperor of the Austrian Empire, to defend the
empire against Prussia. It was located close to 2 rivers, the
Elbe and the Metuje. The fortress was also designed to
function as a town. The town was never involved in any
fighting, so in 1888 it lost its official status as a military
fortress.
20
During the World War I many prisoners of various nationalities were kept there. During the
World War II German troops were stationed there. Nowadays only a little military personnel
is located. In 1948 it became a part of the Town of Jaromer. The town is comparable to
Terezin, Peschiera, Verdun, Konigstein.
The underground defence system was the most powerful means of defence with its system of
corridors which enabled the defenders to place underground mines.
The military status was suspended in 1888. Gates were destroyed, some fortifications
removed but the walls were left intact.
Contact and info: www.pevnostjosefov.wz.cz
TEREZIN – THERESIENSTADT
Terezín was established at the end of the 18th century as
a fortress; still surrounded by its massive ramparts, the
town lies at the confluence of the rivers Labe (Elbe) and
Ohře (Eger). The Main and Small Fortresses at Terezín,
although the modern for their period, gradually became
obsolete, and having lost their military function fell into
disregard.
Only in the relatively recent past has Terezín once again entered the worlds public
consciousness as a tragic symbol of war.
After Hitlers occupation of Czechoslovakia, the Nazis recognised the advantages of the Small
Fortress, and in June 1940 opened a police prison within it. Czech and Moravian patriots,
members of numerous resistance groups and organisations, were sent here by various
branches of the Gestapo.
On the initiative of the newly created Czechoslovak government, in 1947 the National
Suffering Memorial was opened on the site of the suffering of tens of thousands; it was later
on renamed the Terezin Memorial.
Contact and info: http://www.pamatnik-terezin.cz/showdoc.do?docid=164
21
CYPRUS
Cyprus has an outstanding heritage of military nature, but its origin dates back to a period that
is earlier than the one considered.
22
DENMARK
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Danevirke
The Danevirke means "Danes' works" and is an important linear
defensive earthwork which was constructed across the neck of the
Jutland peninsula during Denmark's Viking Age. It was last used for
military purposes in 1864. Archaeological excavations in 1969-75
established, with the help of dendrochronology, that the main structure
of the Dannevirke had been built in three phases between 737 and 968
AD. The line has been however used for its last military purposes the
Second War of Schleswig in 1864
References: http://www.graenseforeningen.dk/artikel/3303
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Atlantikwall
The Atlantikwall was built by the German occupation forces in
the period 1941-1944 along the coasts of France, Channel
Islands,
Belgium,
Netherlands,
Germany, Norway
and Denmark and should be considered the the last major
defence system of the 20th century. The Atlantikwall was
aiming at preventing allied landings on the coasts of the European border countries. During
this period a total of 14.000 heavy, concrete bunkers were built. Alone in Denmark were
nearly 1800 larger and countless smaller bunkers built.
As Norway it is a magnificent place to conduct Atlantikwall research. A large number of
bunkers have a monumental status. There are several museums explaining the significance of
23
the Atlantikwall in Denmark, as The Museum center of Hanstholm and the M.K.B. of Tirpiz,
near Oxby
Contact and info: http://museumscenterhanstholm.dk/oplev_museet/dokumentationscentret/?&setlanguage=2
http://www.atlantikwall-denmark.net/index.php?l=en
24
ESTONIA
Estonia has an outstanding heritage of military nature, but its origin dates back to a period that
is earlier than the one considered. The city of Tallin is a typical example as the name itself
indicates (referring to Castel)
25
FINLAND
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Slpa Line
The Finnish Salpa-line fortification is one of the
largest construction sites in the history of the
Scandinavian countries. its official name is Suomen
Salpa (Finland's Bolt) is a bunker line on the
eastern border of Finland. It was built during the Interim Peace between the Winter War and
the Continuation War. The fortification extends itself from the Gulf of Finland to the Sallaarea in the Finnish Lapland. From Salla the field fortifications continue as far as the Arctic
Ocean. Salpa can be translated as "a lock" in English, and as such, the Salpa-line was
designed to be the final lock of the Finnish defence in the 1941-44 Continuation War.
Salpalinja is 1200 km long from the Gulf of Finland to Petsamo in Northern Finland.
The fortifications of the Salpa-line have become a popular tourist attraction during the last
few decades for those who are interested in the fairly recent military history of Europe.
Contacts: http://www.miehikkala.fi/index.php?&id=405&mid=6&aid=36&bid=2558
Mannerheim Line
The Mannerheim Line was a defensive fortification line on
the Karelian Isthmus built by Finland against the Soviet
Union, around 1918. It became afterwards the VKT Line.
The history of the Mannerheim Line dates back to the days
of the Finnish civil war (also known as the War of
Independence) when the Finnish Commander In Chief of
the White Army, General C.G.Mannerheim, began to make plans about the defense of the
Karelian Isthmus (also in the text as just "Isthmus") against Russia. On May 7th 1918,
26
Mannerheim gave an order to investigate and make preliminary plans for defensive positions.
A preliminary plan was made by two
wedes, Lt.Col. A.Rappe and Major K. von Heijne. It
was finished and delivered to Mannerheim’s HQ on June 1st 1918
References: http://www.mannerheim-line.com/
http://www.nortfort.ru/mline/index_e.html
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Suomenlinna
The Suomenlinna, Sveaborg, started in 1748. Located
on islands off Helsinki, Suomenlinna is a unique
historical monument and one of the largest maritime
fortresses in the world. Its history is closely entwined
with that of Finland and the Baltic region. Helsinki
can also thank Suomenlinna for its early growth and
prosperity. The 250-year-old fortress, which has been preserved intact because of its military
use, is today part of the world heritage. In 1991 it was included in UNESCO’s World Heritage
List.
Suomenlinna belongs to the state of Finland and is Governed by the Governing Body of
Suomenlinna, under the Ministry of Education. Suomenlinna has civilian government except
in the "Pikku mustasaari" island, where the Naval Academy operates.
The Suomenlinna is open to visitors year round and is visited by over 600 000 people yearly.
There are six museums in the fortress and many restaurants and cafés, some also open during
the winter.
References: http://www.suomenlinna.fi/index.php?menuid=3&lang=eng
The Atlantikwall
The German Atlantikwall, one of the last major defense lines of this century. It was built by
the German occupation forces in the period 1941-1944 along the coasts of France, Channel
27
Islands, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Norway and Denmark. The main goal was to
prevent allied landings on the shores of these countries.
During this period a total of 14.000 heavy, concrete bunkers were built
A tiny part of Finland was part of the Atlantikwall. Their main goal was to defend it against
approaching Russian troops
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
Hamina
In 1743 Hamina was surrendered to Russians, after the Russo-Swedish War, 1741-1743, and
the town of Loviisa was the next Swedish candidate for an Eastern-Finnish trade centre.
Hamina became a Russian frontier town, for which a fortress was desirable.
The corners of the fortress form six bastions, named after towns in Finland. The Central
Bastion was added at the end of the 18th century, and is currently used for cultural events.
References: http://www.hamina.fi/
28
FRANCE
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Hindenburg Line
The H.L. was a vast system of defences in northeastern
France during the World War I, constructed by the
Germans in winter 1916-17. The line stretched nearly
160 km from Lens near Arros to the Aisne river near
Soisson. The decision to build the line was made during
the final stages of the 1st Battle of the Somme.
The withdrawal to the line began in February 1917 and the territory between the old front and
the new line was left devastated as the German army employed the scorched earth tactic. The
line was subdivided into 5 areas from north to south. The Germans command believed the
new line was impregnable. However it was successfully breached at the Battle.
Contact and info: http://battlefields1418.50megs.com
Séré de Rivières System
The defence system of Séré de Rivières is an ensemble of
fortification desinged by the General Séré de Rivières,
built since 1874 until the beginning of the First World
War along the borders and the coasts of France.The
system was created to reinforce the north-east and
making the strongholds more modern in accordance with
the new battle techniques.
Around 1880, when construction works were already in a good state of advancement, the
general Seré de Rivières was removed, although continuino the project. During the First
World War and particularly in the year 1917, a huge number of underground works has been
carried out, anticipating the new trend in combats, also achieved by the Maginot Line.
References:
http://www.fortiff.be/iff/
29
http://lpracht.free.fr/sdr/fortif.htm
MAGINOT LINE
The Maginot Line (IPA: [maʒi'no ], named after French
minister of defence André Maginot) was a line of concrete
fortifications, tank obstacles, artillery casemates and machine
gun posts and other defences which France constructed along its
borders with Germany and with Italy, in the light of experience
from World War I, and in the run-up to World War II.
he line stretched from Switzerland to Luxembourg, although a
much lighter extension was extended to the channel sea after
1934.
After the war the Line was re-manned by the French and underwent some modifications.
However, when France withdrew from NATO's military component (in 1966) much of the
Line was abandoned. With the rise of the French independent nuclear deterrent by 1969 the
Line was largely given up by the government, with sections auctioned off to the public and
the rest of it left to decay
References: http://www.lignemaginot.com/menu12/indexen.htm
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Atlantikwall
The German Atlantikwall, one of the last major defense
lines of this century. It was built by the German occupation
forces in the period 1941-1944 along the coasts of
France, Channel
Islands,
Belgium,
Netherlands,
Germany, Norway and Denmark. The main goal was to
prevent allied landings on the shores of these countries.
During this period a total of 14.000 heavy, concrete bunkers were built.
30
There are several museums in France, as:
The Message Verlaine Museum, http://www.museedu5juin1944.asso.fr/ ;
Blockhaus d'Eperleques, http://www.leblockhaus.com/modulosite2/welcome-gb.htm ;
La Coupole, Wizernes, http://www.lacoupole-france.com/ ;
Musée de la guerre de Calais, http://museeguerrecalais.free.fr/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=1
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
Charente-Marittime, La Rochelle – La Pallice
In 1864 the “Bassin à Flot” of the harbour of La
Rochelle was the site for the maiden dive experiments
of the first mechanically powered submarine in the
world, Plongeur which dived to 9 metres.
During the World War II Germany established a
submarine naval base at La Pallice, the commercial
port of La Rochelle.
The base was an enormous bunker to contain the 3rd
flotilla of U-boots. The construction began in 1941 and ended in 1943. The bunker occupied
3,5 hectares, it was 19 metres high and 165 metres large and was constituted of 10 alveolus
with armoured doors. It was occupied for a long time by the national navy but nowadays it is
abandoned except for the honours quay, between the alveolus 7 and 8, that holds some boats.
Now the building is closed to prevent intrusions and for precautionary measure due to
collapse dangers. The entry is forbidden except for the people working in the port.
Its military heritage in public ownership is constituted by 48 fortifications in total. The
remainder belong to either the Coastal Conservation Department, the Ministry of Culture or
the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure. Nine fortifications are in private ownership.
Lille
31
Lille began to be fortified under the Dukes of Bourgogne and
when it was taken by the French in 1668 the fortification
consisted of a basic bastioned wall with bulwarks. During the
centuries other forts, gates, ditches were added. The
fortification were dismantled at the end of the 19th century
with the exception of the pentagonal citadel and the gates.
Which are recently restored and now in good conditions. The interior is still occupied by the
military.
Contact and info: www.fortified-places.com/lille
Paris
The entrenched camp of Paris was based on previous
fortifications that date back to the ancient and medieval
period. In specific, around 1785, under the direction of
architect Ledoux, started the works for the second ring
of walls that correspond to the second ring of present
boulevards. We should mention as example the sites of
Charonne, la Villette, Belleville, Menimoltant, La
Chapelle, Clichy, etc. A ring encircling 3370 hectars.
This second circle of wall was destroyed during the expansion of Paris of 1860.
In between 1841 and 1844 it was constructed the third circle of walls, which corresponded to
the present boulevard de Maréchaux, up to the boulevard de la Périphérique, including more
than 7800 hectars and being extended more than 30 km with 94 bastions, 17 gates, 23
barriers, 8 gates for the railway, 5 gates for canals. This third circle of walls was destroyed
between 1919 and 1929.
32
GERMANY
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Siegfried Line
The Siegfried Line (Siegfriedstellung) was the name given by Allied Troops to fortifications
erected before World War II along Germany’s western frontier. It was begun in 1938 as a
short belt of fortifications opposite France’s Maginot Line but later it was extended to the
Swiss and Dutch frontiers and was 630 km long.
The line was neglected following German Victory over France in
1940 but in September 1944 Hitler decreed that it had to be held.
The line was pierced along its full length only in early spring of
1945. Many of the defences stile remain today.
At the beginning small bunkers were set up with three embrasures
towards the front. They provided no protection against poison gas.
Hitler ordered to strengthen fortifications on the western German
border. In 1938 bunkers were built more strongly.
There was no major combat at the Siegfried Line at the start of the
campaign. The bunkers were used for storage.
With the D-Day landings in Normandy (1944) was in the west broke and on August 24 Hitler
ordered a renewed construction but it all ended in failure as a result of Allied air superiority.
During the post-war period many sectors were removed using explosives.
Since 1997 an effort was begun to preserve remains of the Siegfried Line as a historical
monument- It is still controversial whether or not it’s right to do it. Nature conservationists
consider the remains as a chain of biotopes where rare animals and plants can reproduce.
The katzendopf (1937-39) was the second and northernmost positioned fort and is still
visitable today.
33
During the French occupation in 1947 it was damaged. In 1976 volunteers started its
preservation. Since 1979 they have preserved on the “Westwallmuseum” an interesting
collection of World War II weapons and photos.
References: http://www.westwall-museum.de
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS
THE ATLANTIKWALL
The Atlantik wall. The German Atlantikwall, one of the last major defense lines of this
century. It was built by the German occupation forces in the period 1941-1944 along the
coasts of France, Channel Islands, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Norway and Denmark.
The main goal was to prevent allied landings on the shores of these countries.
During this period a total of 14.000 heavy, concrete bunkers were built.
There is not much left of the German part of the Atlantikwall. The treaty of Potsdam, declared
that all war-related structure should be destroyed
There are several museums as:
The Das Bunker Museum, http://www.bunkermuseum.de/ ;
the Wrackmuseum, http://www.wrackmuseum.city-map.de/city/db/010203040100.html ;
the Fort Kugelbak museum, http://www.cuxhaven.de/cuxhaven_930.php .
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
After Napoleon’s defeat on June 18, 1815 at Waterloo the
Deutcher Bund was founded under the chairmanship of
Austria. To secure the new confederation of states against
attacks, military installations were necessary. Fortress had to be
built. Besides the new Regional fortresses (Ingolstadt,
Koblenz) federal fortress of Mainz, Rastatt and Ulm were built.
Ulm was supposed to become a basis for operations against
France.
34
Ulm
Outstanding features are the long straight wall and
barrier courses which meet blunt-angularly and
give the form of a polygon and the powerful,
multi-storey buildings. The fortress was put on a
bridge-head on the Danube so troops could cross
the rivers covered. Completed in 1859 the fortress
was one of the largest and most modern plants in
Europe. During the early years of 20th century
there were many works of reinforcement because of further technology developments. The
fortress status of Ulm was waived in 1938. It remained the fortress of the garrison town until
today.
Meaningful helps secure building maintenance for the future.
Mainz
Mainz is a city in Germany located on the
river Rhine across from Wiesbaden. The
fortress was constructed in 1660. From 1816
to 1866 Mainz was the most important fortress
in the defence against France and had a strong
garrison of Austrian and Prussian troops.
The troops used the fortress as barracks and
even in 1914 a double company barracks was erected. During World War I and II the citadel
was used as prisoner – of – War camp. According to the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 the
military history of the citadel ended. After World War II the French army seized the premises
until 1955.
Today the citadel is owned by the city and we can still see some buildings or names of the
ancient fortress.
Contact and info: http://www.austro-hungarian-army.co.uk/oobmainz1866.html
35
INGOLSTADT
Ingolstadt is a fortified town of Germany on the left bank of
Danube. In 1880 the French took the town and dismantled the
fortifications rebuilt later under King Louis I. In 1826 Ludwig I
determined Ingolstadt as location of the new royal-Bavarian
main fortress important for as attack from both France and
Austria.
KOBLENZ
The castle of Ehrenbreitstein is a fortress on the right side of
the Rhine opposite the Town of Koblenz. It was built by
Prussia between 1817 and 1832, the fortress was never
attacked. After the defeat of Napoleon and the Congress of
Vienna in 1815 the fortification of Koblenz area became a
military Prussian priority. It represented the largest military fortress in Europe save for
Gibraltar and remained in service until 1890.
During World War I the fortress was used as a military headquarters. During World War II it
served as a place of safekeeping for archives and cultural objects. After the war it was used by
the French army and then handed over to the State of Rhineland-Palatinate. Today it includes
also a youth hostel, museum and archive.
Contact and info: http://www.festung-koblenz.de
SPANDAU
The slavic settlement of Spandowe grown up on a small island at the confluence of the Spree
and Havel rivers came under German rule in the 12th century. In 1559 Spandau’s fortifications
were improved. In 1594 the citadel was finished and had now essentially the form that can be
seen today.
In 1806 the garrison’s commander easily surrendered to the French Napoleon’s troops. But in
1813 Russian and Prussian troops laid siege to Spandau and quickly put an end to the
garrison’s defence. The rest of the 19th century saw vast military projects and fortification
were expanded. This period saw also extensive work at the citadel.
36
Spandau lost its status as a fortress in 1903 and the defences
were gradually demolished to make way for urban expansion.
The citadel was occupied by the army so it wasn’t
demolished. After World War II it was part of the British
Occupation zone in West Berlin and the Spandau Prison was
used to house Nazi War criminals and later destroyed by the allied powers. After the war it
was briefly occupied by the British army before restoration work started in the 1960’s.
Today the citadel is in excellent condition, concerts and large art exhibition take place and its
museums are always visited.
Spandau is now a suburb of Berlin easily reached with U-Bahn line and trains.
Contact and info: www.zitadelle-spandau.de
GERMERSHEIM
Germersheim, a fortified town of Germany in Rhenish
Bavaria existed as a Roman stronghold, it was conquered by
Austria in 1622, then by France till 1650, then again joined to
Germany and again claimed by the French. At the end of the
French were defeated. In 1835 the present fortifications
began. The inside of the city was enclosed by the so-called main enclosure on a length of
3200 metres. The fortifications were arranged in the city arrangements and 10 forts.
The building of the fortress was substantially completed in the October of 1855 and finally in
1861. After the World War I according to the Versailles contract parts of the fortress were
cleared away and only 2 gates and some buildings remained.
Contact and info: http://www.burgenwelt.de/germer/gehochb.htm
37
GREECE
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Metaxa line
The Metaxas Line was a chain of fortifications constructed
along the line of the Graeco-Bulgarian border, designed to
protect Greece in case of a Bulgarian invasion during World
War II. It was named after Ioannis Metaxas, the then
dictatorial ruler of Greece, and chiefly consists of tunnels that
led to observatories, emplacements and machine-gun nests.
The constructions are so sturdy that they survive to this day,
some of which are still in active service. Some of them are
open to the public.
The Metaxas Line fortifications consisted of 22 independent
clusters, the largest of which is the Roupel Fortress as it covered 6.1 out of the 155 km of the
full line and had been constructed at a height of 322 m. Illumination was initially mostly
provided by oil-lamps, although generators were also installed. (Currently, the fortifications
are supplied with public electricity, but they are also equipped with generators). Ventilation
was achieved both naturally and artificially. Water was supplied via water-mains. The
fortification works lasted four years.
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
The Eptapyrgion fort
The Eptapyrgion fort, the last refuge of the city’s defenders, has not been dated precisely. The
fort consists of ten towers, three-sided and four-sided, and the walls which join them. The five
outer towers form part of the Acropolis walls and belong to the first phase of construction,
while the inner towers are of a later date. The range period of contruction is 9th to 15th
38
century. Since the Ottomans conquered
the city, the Eptapyrgion was used as the
headquarters
administration.
of
the
No
Ottoman
large-scale
modifications have yet been identified
from the period of Turkish rule, although
investigation continues.
The construction of the prison complex must have begun in the 1890s. A map of the prison
was already in existence at that time. No systematic historical account of this latter period is
yet available. In 1989, a joint ministerial agreement transferred the Eptapyrgion complex to
the Ministry of Culture and the 9th Ephoreia of Byzantine Monuments Service (a
governmental authority) took over the maintenance and restoration of the monument.
39
HUNGARY
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS/RIVER DEFENSE SYSTEM
Komaron
In the middle of the 19th century in Europe more and
more such fortress systems were built which can be
classified among the so called belt-castle systems. The
function of the belt-castle systems or otherwise the fortbelts was staving the besieging artillery off the inner
defence buildings. The radius of the fort-belt depended
on the range of the artillery’s gun and in this way it
could be composed of several, roughly concentric belts,
the forts could be even in a 3 000 steps distance from the
centre. The first belt of the fortress system, which was
reinforced even with advanced battery emplacements, coerced the enemy’s ordnance to
display themselves apart. The certain fortress elements well-appointed with gunnery were in a
firing liaison with each other, two neighbouring fort’s cannons could keep under fire each
other’s foregrounds averting the invasion of the enemy.
The fortress system of Komárom was built on a similar conception. In conformity with the
plans they wanted to construct – besides the already existing Star-Fort – on the right bank of
the river Danube the fortresses of Sand-Hill (Monostor) and Igmánd, which would have been
bounded with a contiguous wall. They wanted to create a fortress-line on the bank of the
rivers Vág-Danube and on the bank of the rivers opposing the bank of the Old Fortress a new
bridge-head was planned. The most significant element was the Monastery Fortress (Fortress
of Monostor), which was planned as the most enormous element of the whole belt-system and
was to be established on the Sand-Hill.
References: http://english.fortmonostor.hu/
40
IRELAND
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Martello Towers System
A number of Martello towers were built around the coast of Ireland,
especially along the east, from Millmount to Bray, around Dublin Bay
but also around Cork Harbour on the south coast. Martello towers (or
simply Martellos) are small defensive forts built in several countries of
the British Empire during the 19th century, from the time of the
Napoleonic Wars onwards. They stand up to 40 feet (12m) high (with
two floors) and typically had a garrison of one officer and 25 men
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Shannon Estuary
Following a petition from the Limerick merchants
on the lack of defences to protect shipping in the
Shannon Estuary in 1781, a battery of eight 24pounders had been constructed by 1783 at Tarbert
Island, but it appears that this was a temporary
work, abandoned or dismantled over the following ten years. War with France early in 1793
renewed the need for defence of the estuary here, where a large number of vessels were able
to anchor south-east of the island, sheltered from westerly and north-westerly winds.
References:
http://www.clarelibrary.ie/eolas/coclare/history/fortifications/chap1_shannon_fortifications.htm
41
ITALY
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Adolf Hitler Line
The Adolf Hitler Line was a German defensive line
in central Italy during the Second World War. The
strong points of the line were at Aquino and
Piedimonte. The line was re-named the Dora Line at
Hitler's insistence to minimise any propaganda
significance should it be penetrated. It was located a
few kilometers north of the Gustav Line. The line
was breached on May 24, 1944 on the British Eighth Army front by 1st Canadian Infantry
Division and 5th Canadian (Armoured) Division attacking with II Polish Corps on their right.
The Polish Corps captured Piedimonte on May 25 and the line collapsed. The next German
line was the Caesar C line as this line was part of numerous ones prepared by Germans in
central Italy (see picture)
The Gothic Line
The Gothic Line, also known as Linea Gotica, formed Field Marshal Albert Kesselring's last
major line of defence in the final stages of World War II along the summits of the Apennines
during the fighting retreat of Nazi Germany's forces in Italy against the Allied Armies in Italy
commanded by General Sir Harold Alexander.
Hitler had concerns about the state of preparation of the Gothic Line: He feared the Allies
would use amphibious landings to out-flank its defenses. So, to downgrade its importance in
the eyes of both friend and foe, he ordered the name, with its historic connotations, changed,
reasoning that if the Allies managed to break through they would not be able to use the more
pretentious name to magnify their victory claims. In response to this order, Kesselring
renamed it the "Green Line" in June 1944.
42
The Gothic Line was breached on both the Adriatic and the central Apennine fronts during the
autumn of 1944, but Kesselring's forces were consistently able to retire in good order, and no
decisive breakthrough was achieved.
The Alpine front
The Alpine Front (or the Italian front) was an essentially stationary line of defences and
trenches running along the border of Austria-Hungary and Italy from 1915 to 1917, dividing
the Entente territories to the south of the line from Central Powers territories to the north of
the line.
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The entrenched camp of Messina
It was built between 1883 and 1902 o resist to debarquements of the French troops, moving to
Tunisia for its colonial purposes.
The entrenched camp of Genova
Genova had been a long history in terms of coastal defence due to its success on sea trade. In
particular, during the 19th century, under the guidance of Ing. D'Andreis, director of Genio, a
huge number of fortifications were built between 1817 and 1827 connected each other in a
homogeneous way. In a detailed plan he proposed the construction of 12 new towers inspired
to the english Martello Towers, already mentioned.
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Isonzo Front
The Alpine Front (or the Italian front) was an essentially stationary line of defences and
trenches running along the border of Austria-Hungary and Italy from 1915 to 1917, dividing
43
the Entente territories to the south of the line from Central Powers territories to the north of
the line. In particular we should underline the Isonzo Front, along the river Isonzo
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
The Entrenched Camp of Rome
The Entrenced field of Rome. It was built under the
supervision of Durand de la Penne, after the opening of
Porta Pia in 1870. It has been conceived to protect the
unified State and several studies were made.
There
is
an
ongoing
research
for
its
reutilisation:
http://www.campotrinceratoroma.it
Verone entrenched field.
Historically speaking, the first town wall in Verona was
built by the Romans (Ist-IIIrd centuries) and during the
period of the medieval communes (XIIth-XIIIth
centuries). Cangrande I of the Scala family added a hill
city wall which was later included in the following
fortification works. The Venetian period saw a radical
transformation of the pre-existing defences during the
15th and 16th centuries. It was between 1520 and 1578
that Michele Sanmicheli built the three monumental urban gates “Porta Nuova” (1535),
“Porta San Zeno” (1538-40) and “Porta Palio” (1547-57).
However, it was during the Habsburg era (1814-66) that the deepest changes were made
regarding the defensive system of Lombardy and Veneto. The Habsburg military architects
planned new works in order to replace the ones destroyed by Napoleon’s army. The military
works, of which Franz von Scholl was one of the main architects, were aimed at transforming
Verona in a depot area for the Imperial army. Von Scholl reinforced the town wall and
44
designed a project of twelve external forts; in addition, after 1859, eight more forts were built.
With all these military works Verona became the main stronghold and depot of the
Quadrilateral.
References:
http://www.veronafortificata.it/index.php?option=com_content&task=section&id=9&Itemid=34&lang=eng ;
http://www.fortegisella.it/page6.html
Mestre/Venice
Built at the end of 1800, the entrenched field of
Mestre is composed of a system of defensive
works which pivot around Fort Marghera in
order to defend Venice harbour and its
important Arsenal from possible attacks by land.
According to the original plans, it should have
been composed of six forts set around Mestre
like the spokes of a wheel. Fort Marghera, built in the Napoleonic Age, was no longer able to
defend Venice from a possible bombing because of the increase in gun range. The exorbitant
cost of this original plan drove the Committee of Defence, which had to build the work, to
decide for the construction of three parts only: Carpenedo, Gazzera and Tron, set in
defence of the access lines respectively from north-east (Trieste and Treviso), west (Bassano
and Castelfranco) and south-west (Padova and Chioggia). Built in polygonal form, the three
forts are identical and they are set at regular distances (between 3500 and 4000 metres) in
reference to Fort Marghera, in order to ensure the mutual defence on the basis of the artillery
range of that time.
Because of its unforeseen inadequacy, the entrenched field of Mestre was further fortified by
a curtain of seven more external and modern forts built around 1912: Fort Bazzera at
Tessera, Fort Rossarol between Tessera and Favaro, Fort Cosenz at Dese, Fort Mezzacapo
at Zelarino, Fort Sirtori at Spinea and Fort Poerio between Oriago and Gambarare.
http://www.artsystem.it/Forti_Mestre ;
http://www.marcopolosystem.it/marcopolo_ing.htm
45
.
LATVIA
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Coastal defence system at Liepāja (Libau)
This defence system was made by Russians for protection of naval base in 19th/20th century.
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Daugavgrīva
(Dünamunde,
Neumünde)
Fortress
at
Daugava
estuary, was a strong fortress commanding the mouth
of the Daugava, hence its name. Since 1959,
Daugavgrīva has been a district of Riga in Latvia.
The Russian government renamed the fortress, where
only Russian soldiers were living, to Ust-Dvinsk in
1893.
They
had
its
fortifications
completely
reconstructed prior to World War I. During the war Ust-Dvinsk was bombarded by the
Schütte-Lanz Airship SL 7 of the German Army. After the fortress was taken by Imperial
Germany, it was inspected by Emperor Wilhelm II in 1917. The Latvian government,
however, demolished much of the fortifications several years later. During the Cold War UstDvinsk was a base for Soviet troops. The site is now known in Latvian as Daugavgrīva.
There is a functional lighthouse at Daugavgrīva which was originally built in 1818. It was
rebuilt in 1863, 1920, and after World War II.
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
Riga
Medieval Fortifications replaced by bastions and working until 1700
46
Daugavpils Fortress
The construction of the fortress was started in 1810
(engineer J.F.Hekel). WH Site since 2005.
Daugavpils fortress is stylistically monolithic Classicism
style ensemble, reflecting the urban construction ideas of
the time. Monumental fortification system consists of
ramparts, bastions, ravelins, dungeons with massive brick
arches and other elements. The construction of the fortress was started in 1810 (engineer
J.F.Hekel). The foundation forms a fortified town, where the territory is divided into quarters.
There was an angular square in the middle part and the Jesuit cathedral was located at one
side (1737 - 1746) vertical dominant of the ensemble (destroyed in 1944). A detail plan for
the fortress was drafted in 1816 after the design of architect I. Truzson.
It is well maintained and gives an overall impression of the civil engineering achievements of
the time. The fortress influenced the development of quality military architecture all over the
Daugavpils city, developed as well in the classicism style on the iron-grid based urban layout. In 1860 there the St. Petersburg- Warsov railway line and the railway bridge over
Daugava were completed. In that way the fortress lost its military significance and was turned
to the complex storage building and prison and partly still serves for those purposes.
47
LITHUANIA
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Molotov Line
The so-called Molotov Line was a system of
fortifications built by the Soviet Union in the years
1940-1941, along its new western border after it
annexed the Baltic States, Eastern Poland and
Bessarabia. This territorial expansion was the direct
result of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, signed on
the Soviet side by Vyacheslav Molotov, hence the
name Molotov Line. The name is informal and has
come into use relatively recently. It was popularised
by the writings of Viktor Suvorov, notably by his book Icebreaker.
The line stretched from the Baltic Sea to the Carpathian Mountains. It was made up of 13
fortified regions, most covering about 100 km of the border. It was a part of the larger Soviet
defence network along its western borders, stretching from the Arctic Ocean to the Black Sea.
Each fortified region (in Russian ukreplennyi raion, or UR) consisted of a large number of
concrete bunkers (pillboxes) housing machineguns, antitank guns and artillery. The bunkers
were built in groups for mutual support, each group forming a centre of resistance. A
dedicated military unit was permanently assigned to man each region.
In Lithuania Molotov line consisted of four fortified districts:Telshiai (Palanga to Judrenai),
Shiauliai (Pajuris to Jurbarkas), Kaunas (Jurbarkas to Kalvarija) and Alytus (Kalvarija to the
current border with White Rusia)
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
Kaunas
48
Russian military fortifications throughout the city. Since
half of the 19th century.
On the 7th of July 1879 the Russian Emperor Alexander II
approved a proposal from the Russian military leadership to
build the fortress in Kaunas. The initial general layout of
the Fortress was prepared by Obruchev, the adjutantgeneral of main headquarters, together with generals
Zverev and Volberg. The layout configured the city's encirclement with a ring of seven forts
and nine interjacent gun batteries, equipping the central fortification, laying of roads, erection
of a military railway station on the left bank of the Nemunas river (in Freda), workshops, food
warehouses, ammunition magazines etc.
The Forts and gun batteries of the Fortress extended in a circle at the approaches to the city at
more or less even distances (every 2 - 2.5 km.), almost in a regular oval shape. The fortress
was divided into four defensive sections.
49
LUXEMBOURG
Luxembourg has an outstanding heritage of military nature, but its origin dates back to a
period that is earlier than the one considered. The city of Luxembourg is a typical example as
the name itself indicates (referring to Castel)
50
MALTA
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
In the case of Malta the fortifications erected during the 19th century should be considered at
the same time border defense system and coastal defence system, being the country an small
Isle
In 1798, the Knights capitulated Malta to the
French. In the book The French in Malta,
Carmel Testa makes it clear that the French
invasion was supported by some of the Knights
and a small number of Maltese. However, the
French effective rule on the Island lasted only 3
months as by September 1798 they found
themselves locked up in within the major fortifications since the Maltese insurgents
outnumbered them.
During the 19th century fortifications were built in the framework of the realization of the
Victoria Line. During the XXth century some additional fortifications, as pilloboxes were
added
51
NETHERLANDS
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The New Dutch Waterline
After the final defeat of Napoleon in 1815 at the Battle of
Waterloo, the United Kingdom of the Netherlands was
formed. Soon after king William I decided to modernise the
ancient waterline. This New Water Line was partly shifted
east of Utrecht. In the next 100 years the main Dutch defence
line would be the new water line which was further extended
and modernised in the 19th century with forts containing
round gun towers reminiscent of Martello towers. The line
was mobilised but never attacked during the Franco-Prussian
war in 1870 and WW I. At the advent of the Second World
War most of the earth and brick fortifications in the Water
Line were too vulnerable to modern artillery and bombs to
withstand a protracted siege. To remedy this a large number
of pillboxes were added. However, the Dutch had decided to
use a more eastern main defence line, the Grebbe line, and
reserved a secondary role for the Water line. When the
Grebbe line was broken on May 13th, the field army was
withdrawn to the Water Line. However, modern warfare
could circumvent fixed defence lines (cf. the French Maginot
line). While the Dutch army was fighting a fixed battle at the Grebbe line, German airborne
troops had captured the southern approaches into the heart of "Fortress Holland" by surprise
— the key points being the bridges at Moerdijk, Dordrecht and Rotterdam. When resistance
did not cease, the Germans forced the Dutch into surrender by aerial bombing of Rotterdam,
and threatening the same for Utrecht and Amsterdam. Therefore, during the Battle of the
Netherlands in May 1940 there was no fighting at the line itself.
52
After the Second World War, the Dutch government redesigned the idea of a waterline to
counter a possible Soviet invasion. This third version of the waterline was erected more to the
east, at the IJssel in Gelderland. In case of an invasion, the water of the Rhine and the Waal
were set to divert into the IJssel, flooding the river and bordering lands. The plan was never
tested, and dismantled by the Dutch government in 1963.
Today many of the forts are still more or less intact. There is renewed interest in the waterline
for its natural beauty. Bike tours and hiking paths are organised with the line as theme. Some
of the forts are open for bikers/hikers to stay the night. Others have a variety of uses, for
example Utrecht University houses its botanical garden in Fort Hoofddijk. Due to the unique
nature of the line, the Dutch government is considering to nominate the whole defensive line
as a UNESCO world heritage site, as they did with the ring of fortresses around Amsterdam.
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Atlantik wall
The German Atlantikwall, one of the last major
defense lines of this century. It was built by the
German occupation forces in the period 1941-1944
along the coasts of France, Channel Islands,
Belgium,
Netherlands,
Germany, Norway
and Denmark. The main goal was to prevent allied
landings on the shores of these countries.
During this period a total of 14.000 heavy, concrete bunkers were built.
There are several museums in the Netherlands, as:
Museum 1939-1945, http://www.museum1939-1945.nl/ ;
Kornwerderzan, http://www.euronet.nl/%7Eidi_bark/museum/Kornwerderzand.htm ,
Stichting Zeeland 1939-1945, http://www.borsele.net/i_oorlogsmuseum.htm ;
Stichting Bunkerbehoud, http://www.bunkerbehoud.nl/
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
53
The Defence Line of Amsterdam
The Defence Line of Amsterdam is a circular defence
around the capital Amsterdam which was built by the
Ministry of War between about 1885 and 1914. It
consists of flooded areas (inundations) and thirty six
forts, two coastal forts, two fortresses, three batteries
and two coastal batteries. Additionally many more
inletsluices, secondary batteries and depots were constructed. This was all done to defend the
National Keep, the last line of defence, of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
The defence line is presently a World Heritage Site and is in very good condition of
conservation.
References: http://www.stelling-amsterdam.nl/english/index.htm
54
POLAND
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Międzyrzecz Fortification Region
(German: 'Ostwall or Festungsfront im Oder-Warthe Bogen', Polish: Międzyrzecki Rejon
Umocniony) is a fortified military defence line in Western Poland, between Oder and Warta
rivers.
Built in 1934-1938, it was the most technologically advanced fortification system of Nazi
Germany, and remains one of the largest and the most interesting systems of this type in the
world today. It consists of around 100 concrete defence structures partially interconnected by
a network of underground tunnels. Some of the forts and tunnels are available for visiting.
The most interesting part is the central section, which begins in the south with the so-called
Boryszyn Loop near the village of Boryszyn and extends about 12 km to the north. In the
central section the bunkers are interconnected with an underground system of tunnels, 32
kilometres long and up to 40 metres deep. In the underground system there are also railway
stations, work shops, engine rooms and barracks.
It is also the largest European underground bats refuge, giving shelter to some 32,000 bats of
12 species in the wintertime.
The Molotov Line
The so-called Molotov Line was a system of fortifications built by the Soviet Union in the
years 1940-1941, along its new western border after it annexed the Baltic States, Eastern
Poland and Bessarabia. This territorial expansion was the direct result of the RibbentropMolotov Pact, signed on the Soviet side by Vyacheslav Molotov, hence the name Molotov
Line. The name is informal and has come into use relatively recently. It was popularised by
the writings of Viktor Suvorov, notably by his book Icebreaker.
The line stretched from the Baltic Sea to the Carpathian Mountains. It was made up of 13
fortified regions, most covering about 100 km of the border. It was a part of the larger Soviet
defence network along its western borders, stretching from the Arctic Ocean to the Black Sea.
55
Each fortified region (in Russian ukreplennyi raion, or UR) consisted of a large number of
concrete bunkers (pillboxes) housing machineguns, antitank guns and artillery. The bunkers
were built in groups for mutual support, each group forming a centre of resistance. A
dedicated military unit was permanently assigned to man each region.
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Vistula line
Fortifications of the 19th century were enlarged with new
fortifications during the 20th century, creating the so-called
vistula line along the Vistula river. This line was including
several fortresses, as: fortresses Torun - Thorn, ChelmnoCulm, Grudziadz, Malbork-Marienburg and Wisloujscie
Gdansk-Danzig .
References: http://www.fort.torun.pl/_portal/;
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
Przemysl
On the day of the outbreak of the First World War
the fortress of Przemyśl consisted of varied
fortification complexes from different periods of
time.
Beginning
entrenchments
with
from
the
the
obsolete
mid-19th
artillery
century,
throughout artillery forts from the 1880s, to modern
armoured forts from the turn of the 19th century.
This was the result of a long duration of the construction of the fortress as well as the
development of technology and engineering during that period and consequent modification
of the art.of fortifications
56
The first plan of having Przemyśl fortified took place at the beginning of the 19th century.
Since 1810 different ideas of fortifying the San crossing had been introduced. While thinking
about taking advantage of the city walls, the project of creating a small, ring-shaped fortresses
and an entrenched camp was considered.
References: http://www.austro-hungarian-army.co.uk/przemysl.html
Grudziądz.
The building of a railway bridge in the period 1876-1879 stimulated the formation of such an
elaborate defense system. Grudziądz suddenly turned out to be an ideal site for erecting
depots of supplies and a main point of resistance to force back the Prussian army in the
forthcoming conflict with Russia. Therefore, in 1889 the construction of a set of defenses
around the city was decided upon.
References: http://www.grudziadz.pl/portal.php?aid=111693831042932046b444e
Gdansk.
New fortification systems were built in 1814 and 1870 and renovated around 1910.
57
PORTUGAL
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
Lines of Torres Vedras
The lines of Torres Vedras were lines of forts built in
secrecy to defend Lisbon during the Peninsular War. They
were ordered by the Duke of Wellington. After his
troubling Spanish experience, he had decided to strengthen
Portugal with a system of fortifications blockhouses, cuts
of natural relief etc. The lines were constructed (by
Portuguese
workers)
between
November
1809
and
September 1810 to stop Massena’s forces who were forced to a retreat to Spain in November
1810. Efficiency and cohesion were based on five points:
-
Redoubts of specialized artillery.
-
Military roads on the rear of the lines for a great mobility of forces
-
A Semaphore system introduced by the British Navy in order to send messages around
the lines in 7 minutes
-
Secrecy: everything about the building of the lines was preserved as a secret
-
The scorched earth policy: everything north of the lines was collected, hidden, deserted
and burnt.
The four lines of Torres Vedras had forts placed on the top of hills controlling the roads to
Lisbon and using also the natural obstacles of the land. Substantial portion of the lines still
survive today.
SAGRES
58
The fortress was built in the 16th century and rebuilt in the 17th
and 18th centuries. A bulwark-like fortress, Sagres was much
reformed in the second half of the 18th century but a 16th century
turret is still present. The fortified perimeter includes the whole
Sagres Cape some former buildings and ruins, the cistern tower
and some barracks. In the 90’s last century the architectural intervention to improve the
fortress included the construction of a module for temporary exhibitions and a multimedia
centre plus some cultural shops. The outside repairs include the recovery of the early ruins
and the 18th century bulwarks.
Contact and info: http://www.ippar.pt/english/monumentos/castelo_sagres.html
59
ROMANIA
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
Bucharest
The capital of Romania was subject to a project of fortification
starting from 1882 imposed by its king. The Belgian General
Brialmont was invited to make up a project for a girdle of 18 forts
and 18 internal works. After the introduction of high explosive
shells the project was arrested to test new cupolas. From ths
moment on different types of forts were introduced with different
defending characteristics.
60
SLOVAKIAN REPUBLIC
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
Komarno
Komárno is a town in Slovakia at the Danube and the Váh rivers. Komárno is the larger part
(the part on the left river bank) of the former town of the Kingdom of Hungary situated on
both banks of the Danube. Following World War I, the border of the newly created
Czechoslovakia was set along the Danube which divided the northern and the southern parts
of the city. The smaller part, based on the former suburb of Újszıny (on the other river bank),
is in Hungary (present-day town of Komárom). Komárno and Komárom are connected by a
bridge.
The fortress system of Komárom was built on a similar conception. In conformity with the
plans they wanted to construct – besides the already existing Star-Fort – on the right bank of
the river Danube the fortresses of Sand-Hill (Monostor) and Igmánd, which would have been
bounded with a contiguous wall. They wanted to create a fortress-line on the bank of the
rivers Vág-Danube and on the bank of the rivers opposing the bank of the Old Fortress a new
bridge-head was planned. The most significant element was the Monastery Fortess (Fortress
of Monostor), which was planned as the most enormous element of the whole belt-system and
was to be established on the Sand-Hill.
61
SLOVENIA
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Rupnik Line
After Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy had forged an alliance, the Kingdom of Yugoslavia felt
increasingly threatened. In 1935, construction of a line of fortresses along the borders –
mostly on the border with Italy – was commenced, initially staffed by 15,000 men but
increased to 40,000 by 1941. As Rupnik was charge with their completion, the 'Rupnik Line'
became the common name for these fortifications. The fortifications were built following the
French (Maginot Line) and Czech models, adjusted to local conditions. By the time
Yugoslavia was attacked during World War II, few of them were ready and the German
Wehrmacht campaign quickly rendered the line obsolete.
Walking tours of the Rupnik Line are now possible.
References: http://www.slovenia.info/?pohodnistvo=706&title=Along+the+Rupniks+line
The Alpine Line
The fortifications (bunkers) part of the so-called Vallo Alpino were built by the Italian Fascist
regime the protect the country against potential enemies as France, Switzerland, Austria and
Yugoslavia, a few years bifore the second World War.
Along with the Yugoslavian border the line extended for 220 km. It is now visible in many
places as Bovec, Idria, Studena, etc.
The Eastern Vallo Littorio or Vallo alpino begun north-west of Pontebba, facing Austria and
than continued along the Rapallo Border with Yugoslavia, across the present day Republic of
Slovenia to the port of Rijeka (Fiume, Reka), now in Croatia.
62
SPAIN
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Line “P” or Linea Gutierrez
"Linea Gutierrez" was built by Franco’s army between
1939 and 1953. It is a line of casements, similar to the
Maginot Line or the Siegfried Line, but not as strong and
with less armament. The line was made up of hundreds of
casements and extends 40 km between Llançà and Maçanet
de Cabrenys in the IV° Military Region. From Maçanet, it
continues under the name "Linea de los Pyreneos" ("Linea P.") and passes over the chain of
the Pyrenees to A Hendaye - Irun. On the whole, between 5.000 and 10.000 casements were
built in the Pyrenees. The goal was to protect Spain against an invasion from the Allied forces
during and after the Second World War. During the Second World War, Spain was on the side
of the Axis (Germany, Italy and Japan). The Gutierrez Line was comprised of observation
posts, bunkers for infantry equipped with machine-guns, artillery bunkers, bunkers with
mortars, the bunkers with anti-aircraft guns and the large shelters for soldiers on a second
level… This line from Maçanet de Cabrenys extends towards Darnius, Pont de Molins,
Peralada, Garriguella and Llançà. The line was built under the control of the Spanish army,
employing its recruits like "soldados picadores" and "soldados aguadores." Some of the
construction work was by forced labour by Republicans prisoners of the Civil War. A
beautiful example is on the top of the "Montperdut" (327 m), where the prisoners had cut into
the stone galleries and a 360° observation post. This site is worth visiting -- take the path from
Valleta (between km. 22 and 23 of the road between Llançà and Figueres - not far from the
ruins of the castle of Quermanço). To visit two other representative sections of Linea
Guitierrez, one can look at the area near the road between Peralada and Garriguella between
km 50 and 52 (surroundings of Mas Socarrat) and the road (on the left-hand side) between
Biure (Pont de Molins) and km 10 on the road of Darnius.
63
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS
El Ferrol
Ferrol bacame a leading naval centre under the Bourbons, very important for the defence of
the Spanish Colonial Empire in America. The difficulties of disembarking troops on its
precipitous coast were heightened by its protecting line of fortresses. The naval shipyards of
A Grana and Ferrol were built between 1726-1783. A British Fleet in 1800 landed troops to
take the Castle of San Felipe but the fleet had to withdraw. The fortress later remained
abandoned and was occupied by the French in 1809. Ferrol became “a dead” town. 10 years
later the Maura Government hired to the Spanish Naval society the shipbuilding yards and
docks. Till 1925 all the technicians were British, then the management was taken over the
Spanish engineers.
Batteries of the coast
To prevent an Allied invasion from the sea,
Franco’s army had decided to strengthen the
beaches with casements and to place batteries
around the bay.
One can still see two casements for machineguns on the baluard Sant Joan of the Citadel of
Roses, but they were built by the Republicans
for the Civil War. At the north, the bay was
protected by the powerful battery N° 8 from Punta Falconera. This battery was equipped with
four 15 cm Vickers/Reinosa guns within a casement. After 1993 the enormous guns were cut
into scrap and the metal was sold. Today, one can still admire the camouflaged casements, the
observation posts and telemetry and the remainder of the barracks. To visit the site, it is
necessary to take the Roses Road in direction of Canyelles Grosses and then take the military
path, which leads out in top towards the battery.
There are still secondary batteries at "El Far" and on the hill of "Castell de Trinitat". This
battery N° 7 of four 10 cm Garcia Lomas guns can be visited starting from the road which
64
leads to the castle. It is necessary to take the path on the glacis southern side of the hill. One
finds three gun casements on line. The entry of the fourth gun is between the road and the sea.
It is necessary to pass the metal door and the gallery which leads to the position of the gun.
The other coast of the bay was protected by four enormous 15 cm Vickers/Reinosa guns from
the battery N° 5 from Punta Milà in Escala. They are on a concrete open site. The site can be
visited starting from the very straight way (GR-92), which leaves the coastal road between
Escala and Estartit. At the end of the motor road, one still finds some concrete sites of the
secondary batteries.
A secondary battery is also in La Clota beside of the marina of L’Escala. To arrive there, one
takes the road of the port until the end and then one climbs the hill and continues by foot to
the four casements of the battery for the 10 cm Garcia Lomas guns. At the side of the entry of
a casement one can still see the armouring of a gun which came from a Spanish cruiser from
the end of the XIX° century!
On the hill that dominates Cala Montgó in L’ Escala, beside the Torre de Montgó are still
some machine gun casements, a site and a building to place a headlight on a revolving unit to
illuminate part of the bay during a possible night attack.
To protect from a landing on Platja of Ribera, close to Port to Selva, Franco’s forces built on
the Cap "Punta de ' S’Arnella" a battery with four 10 cm Garcia Lomas guns. This battery
forms the point hinge with the Linea Gutierrez and could control the sea to the French border.
One can visit the four casements and the telemetry and observation post (the last is in the
bush) from the military way, which leads from km 3 of the road from Llançà to Port de la
Selva to the headlight of S’Arnella.
Contact and info: http://www.cbrava.com/fort/fort_uk.htm
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
Gipuzkoa – Irun
At the western end of the Pyrenees, close to the bay of Biscay, the landscape makes it easier
for an invading army to cross the Franco-Spanish border to Gipuzkoa. The series of civil wars
in Spain in the 19th century and the defence plans led to the building of many fortifications in
the north-east of Gipuzkoa.
65
The fortifications of I Carlist War (1832-1839)
The fortifications built on the hill overlooking Gipuzkoa were called forts, batteries, redoubts
or blockhouses. A fosse was generally dug around these fortifications. Various urban nuclei
were fortified. San Sebastian still had its 16th century defensive bastions. Now practically no
remains can be seen.
The fortifications of the last Carlist War (1872-1876)
The forts erected by Liberal Troops during the 19th century were stronger than those of the
First War. Some were large, defended by a fosse and a drawbridge. They had barracks,
cisterns, latrines, etc. Significant fortifications were also built around the urban centres of
other towns (besides S.Sebastian, Tolosa, Hermain…) and important remains of some forts
are still standing.
The Endarlatsa – Erlatz fortified line
This line consisted of 5 fortified elements aligned in a SE-NW direction. The armoured
redoubt of Endalaza was rectangular, 3 metres high, raised on stone pillars but it was
demolished in 1903. Nothing remains now of the Erlazt tower. In 1891 began the work of the
Erlazt fort. The enclosing walls are still standing.
Pagogana fort is the most important on the line but it was badly damaged during the Spanish
Civil War (1936-39) and only few remains can be seen.
The entrenched camp at Oiartzun
When the III Carlist War ended the military authorities began to reorganize the defence of the
French border, the town of San Sebastian and the port of Pasaia.
In 1876 the Engineering Corps formed a committee and in 1877 it decided to build forts in the
hills in Gipuzkoa.
In the meantime other committee studied the defence of the Pyrenees in Gipuzkoa. The result
was a design of a set of fortifications but the only ones to be built were the forts of St.Mark,
Txoritokieta and Guadalupe. The forts of the entrenched camp of Oiartzun were all polygonal
with a fosse flanked by double caponiers. Access was by means of a drawbridge.
Special care was gives to ammunition.
The Guadalupe fort was garrisoned by 500 infantry and 100 artillery men. The fortifications
were surrounded by a fosse mainly defended by the flanking batteries at the angles. The three
forts had external auxiliary batteries which had to complement the artillery and defend the
surrounding area.
66
The Txoritokieta fort was the first to be decommissioned in 1953, the others two were taken
out of active service in the 1970’s.
The fortifications of the Spanish-American War
In 1898 war was declared between Spain and the United States. Coastal defences were
reinforced to keep at American navy for away and prevent any possible landing. The most
significant construction was the Mompas Battery. It consists of 4 pits. The complex had a
small barracks with accommodation for a garrison of 20 soldiers, a command post, a
rangefinder station.
Contact and info: www.bertan.gipuzkoakultura.net
The Fortress of Isabel II
The fortress was built between 1848 and 1875 because
the British were threatening to return to the island and use
it in their defensive operations against the French. These
two powers were disputing naval control in the
Mediterranean. But before the fortress was finished it
became out-dated owing to important evolutions in
artillery Technology. So instead of mounting all the common emplacements within the
fortress, in 1896 a series of coastal batteries were set up away from the walled fortifications
and capable of detaining all types of enemy ships.
Contact and info: www.fortalesalamola.com
Cartagena
In 1878, an enormous hole was excavated in the slope of
the hill called Concepción, opening the valley to the sea
front. With the outbreak of civil war in 1936, the grounds
became air-raid shelters,
excavated by the inhabitants of Cartagena to protect
themselves from the heavy bombing that destroyed the city.
Cartagena was one of the main targets of Franco’s airforce,
since Cartagena was the headquarters of the Republican Fleet and the port received all
67
armaments and provisions for the defence of Madrid. Due to this, inhabitants were forced to
create shelters in different enclaves of the city. In particular, one of these shelters, owned by
Cartagena City and used by Cartagena: Port of
Cultures, became in April 2004 the seat of the Museum of Civil War Shelters. This shelter
was one of the largest in the city, with room for c.5,500 people.
68
SWEDEN
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Boden Fortress
(Swedish: Bodens fästning), is a modern fortress consisting of several major and minor forts
and fortifications surrounding the city of Boden, Norrbotten, in northern Sweden.
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
Karlskrona
During the latter part of the 19th century, several so-called farms, similar to those earlier
established on outer Wämö in Karlskrona, grew up on inner Wämö. One of these farms was
Gräsvik, which became a storage place for raw sewage. The sewage was kept in stone basins
and was dried to be used as fertiliser by farmers and gardeners in the area. Between 19021906, the treatment of sewage was moved away from Gräsvik and instead barracks and other
buildings were built to house a Grenadier regiment, led by lieutenant colonel J. C. Lemchen.
During late summer 1904, the northern barracks came into use and during the following year
the eastern barracks were prepared. In 1906, the regiment was complete - diet staples
purchased this year included 145,000kg of bread, 100,000 litres of milk, 60,500kg of
potatoes, 3,000kg of cheese and 6,000kg of butter and margarine.
The new Grenadier regiment was originally organised in two battalions, consisting of four
companies. In 1914, it was increased by one battalion. In the 1920s, after the peace treaty in
Versailles, and after the foundation of the League of Nations, the Swedish army started an
extensive disarmament programme, and two thirds of the regiments within the Swedish army
were closed down. The Grenadier regiment in Karlskrona was one of these, closed in 1927.
In January 1928, the defunct Grenadier regiment was replaced by a detachment from the
Kronoberg regiment, which in turn was disbanded in 1936. Three years later a final closing
down ceremony was conducted at Gräsvik. However, due to the worldwide situation, the need
for military installations significantly increased over coming years, and between 1940-1942
69
the area once again had a military function - this time as a camp for veteran reserves in
Blekinge. One year later, in 1943, Karlskrona coast artillery, KA2, was installed at Gräsvik.
70
UNITED KINGDOM
BORDER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Coquet Stop line
The Coquet Stop Line, which runs from Amble in
Northumberland up the valley of the River Coquet,
formed part of the defences constructed to meet the
threat of a German invasion during World War II. It
was intended to slow the advance of the German army
from the North in order to provide time for the
assembly of a field army on the Tyne Stop Line
which lies around thirty miles to the South.
The Coquet Stop Line is made up of a string of pillboxes, which seem to have a common
shape that has been referred to as the Coquet line type. To their front tends to lie open ground,
often the river or its floodplain, while to the rear, where the entrance is situated, efforts were
made to provide cover for a retreating force.
COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS
Medway, The Historic Dockyard, Chatham:
Chatham Dockyard played a crucial role in support of the Royal
Navy for over 400 years. For much of this time, Britain depended
almost solely on the Royal Navy for her defence and for the
protection of her interests and trade. In turn, the Royal Navy
depended on Royal Dockyards like Chatham to design, build and
repair the ships of the fleet, maintaining their readiness for sea in
both peace and war. In 1984, the dockyard closed with the loss of
5,000 direct jobs and many more indirectly. The closure was a
71
serious blow to the economy of North Kent as the dockyard had been the main source of
employment for the Medway area for several hundred years. Its closure also came at a time
when the economy of North Kent, based on engineering and manufacturing (cement and
paper), was restructuring, with further significant job losses. At the time of its closure,
Chatham Dockyard occupied 162 hectares at the heart of Medway. Included within this large
land holding was a 32 hectare site
that encompassed a range of buildings erected between 1704 and 1855 to support the Navy of
the ‘Age of Sail’. The remainder of the site, taken into naval ownership from1855, supported
extensive shipbuilding and repair facilities for the steam navy and an early 20th century naval
barracks.
The site is in very good conditions and is presently used partly as tourist attraction.
The Martello towers
(or simply Martellos) are small defensive forts built in several countries of the British Empire
during the 19th century, from the time of the Napoleonic Wars onwards. They stand up to 40
feet (12m) high (with two floors) and typically had a garrison of one officer and 25 men.
Between 1804 and 1812 the British authorities built a chain of towers based on the original
Mortella tower to defend the south and east coast of England, Ireland, Jersey and Guernsey to
guard against possible invasion from France, then under the rule of the Emperor Napoleon. A
total of 105 Martello towers were built in England, set at regular intervals along the coast
from Seaford, Sussex, to Aldeburgh, Suffolk. Most were constructed under the direction of
General William Twiss (1745–1827) and a Captain Ford.
Three Martello towers were built in Scotland, two at Hackness and Crockness near Longhope
in the Orkney Islands. They were constructed between 1813 and 1815 to guard against the
threat of French and American raiders attacking convoys assembling offshore.
The Atlantik wall
The German Atlantikwall, one of the last major defense lines of this century. It was built by
the German occupation forces in the period 1941-1944 along the coasts of France, Channel
72
Islands, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Norway and Denmark. The main goal was to
prevent allied landings on the shores of these countries.
During this period a total of 14.000 heavy, concrete bunkers were built.
There are several museums:
Batterie Dollmann, Batterie Pleinmont, HKB Pleinmont 15/1265; La Valette Underground
Military Museum; German Occupation Museum, Les Houards/Guernsey; Channel Island
Military Museum, St. Ouen/Jersey; The Noirmont Command bunker, Noirmont Point/Jersey;
Noirmont Observation Tower, Noirmont Point/Jersey; The La Corbière 10,5cm Casemate
Bunker, La Corbière/Jersey; The La Corbière M19, La Corbière/Jersey; St. Peters Bunker
War Museum, St. Peter/Jersey; The German Undergrond Hospital, Occupation Museum, St.
Hélier/Jersey; The German Military Underground Hospital and Ammunition Store, St.
Andrew/Guernsey; Resistance Point La Carriere, La Carriere/Jersey; Resistance Point
Millbrook, Millbrook/Jersey; Fort Hommet
RIVER DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Maunsell Sea Forts
These fortification systems were small fortified towers built in the Thames and Mersey
estuaries during the Second World War to help defend the United Kingdom. They take their
name from their designer Guy Maunsell. After they were decommissioned in the late 1950s
they were used for other activities and one became the famous Sealand "micronation".
URBAN DEFENCE SYSTEMS AND FORTIFIED TOWNS
GHQ Line
Over 50 defensive lines were constructed around England, the GHQ Line being the longest
and most important, designed to protect London and the industrial heart of England.
73
SUMMERYZING TABLE AND STATISTICS
74
SOME EXAMPLES OF GOOD PRACTICES IN RE-USE
75
Purposes, objectives and conclusions
76
Brief Glossary
Barracks
A building for the accommodation of soldiers.
Bastard System
A mixture of the bastion and polygonal fort-building systems.
Bastion
Fortification work, usually four-sided, situated in the corners of a wall, for active defence and
flanking fire.
Battery
Any place where guns or mortars are mounted.
Caponier / Caponnière
Covered communication leading to outworks. Also a casemated work projecting into or across a
ditch to provide flanking fire.
Casemate / Casement
Bombproof vaulted chamber in the walls of a fortification, providing an emplacement for a gun, or
barrack room.
Citadel
Self-contained fortress, usually within a town's fortifications.
Classified Monument
A building that has been either scheduled or listed, i.e. protected by national law. In France, the
highest degree of statutory protection.
Cluster
Geographically close, interconnected companies and suppliers within specific business fields that
work and co-operate together, as well as being competitors.
Curtain Wall
Stretch of wall between two towers.
Echaugette
Sentry box, projecting from the angle of a bastion at parapet level.
Embrasure
Opening in a wall for gun fire.
Entrenched Camp
Protected area for the assembly / regrouping of an army.
Ephoroeia
A Greek governmental authority.
Forbidden Circles
The prohibited areas around fortifications where building was banned, owing to the need to
maintain an open line of fire.
Fortalice
A small fort or defensive structure.
The Lines
An abbreviation for 'lines of defence'.
Listed Building
A building of particular architectural or historical importance, on a list of structures that cannot be
demolished or altered without government permission.
Lunette
A half-moon shaped space, either masonry or void.
Pillobox
A Pillbox is a concrete machine gun emplacement that took various shapes.
Polygonal System
77
A fort bounded by five (or more) sides.
Postern
A small entrance into a fortification, often with a tunnel approach.
Ravelin
Fortified structure in a ditch to defend the curtain wall.
Redoubt / Reduit
Small detached independent outwork.
Sustainability
Ensuring that activity / development meets the needs of the present generation
Triple helix
Describes the interaction between business, universities and local government.
Valorisation
The processing of assessing the historical significance of a site or building.
World Heritage Site
One of (currently) 812 sites which form part of the cultural and natural
78