György Domokos: The Life and Work of Ottavio Baldigara An Italian Master Castle-Builder in Hungary in the Second Half of the 16th…

Teljes szövegű keresés

156György Domokos: The Life and Work of Ottavio Baldigara
An Italian Master Castle-Builder in Hungary in the Second Half of the 16th Century
English summary
The second half of the 16th century – Ottavio Baldigara’s time – was a significant period of the age of the Turkish Rule in Hungary. Suleiman’s army captured Buda by contrivance in 1541, but did not stop there. Within just quarter of a century, until 1566, when Szigetvár and Gyula, were captured, owing to their tactical superiority, inexhaustible reserves of troops, and brilliant supplies system, the Ottomans were able to conquer the central third of the country and make Transylvania bend into vassalage. Even the 1568 Adrianople Peace Treaty was unable to thwart the process of the conquest, and further territories fell to their hand. On account of the fact that Hungary lacked an adequate Christian field army, the Ottoman advance could only effectively be halted by the country’s border fortress system. A project to create this system was launched immediately after 1541, but it only really was given an impetus when the Hofkriegsrat (War Council) has been set up in 1556. The Hofkriegsrat then invited to Hungary and gave commissions to large numbers of Italian master builders who had experience in fortress building.
Applied by these Italian masters, the so-called Italian Fortification System dates back to the end of the 15th century. Laying claim to his dynastic heritage, King Charles VIII of France launched an attack on Naples in 1494. During the campaign, due to their more mobile and effective artillery, the French were able to take the Italian fortresses one after the other. In answer to the challenge posed by the French, Italian military engineers relatively quickly – within just a few decades – developed a fundamentally new method of fortress design; one that would be able to resist the increased artillery power. The main features of the trace italienne, as it has been named in the international special literature after its “inventors,” were the exclusive application of straight wall sections, by which dead areas could be eliminated, and the invention of pentagonal defence works – bastions – which afforded adequate protection and free firing range for the guns and provided opportunity for flanking fire. In Italian-system fortresses the defenders were able to hold every point of the foreground under crossfire. The Italian system rapidly spread throughout Europe from the 1530s. Its initial version has been termed Old Italian System, the later and improved one New Italian System.
The role of this fortification system in Hungary is a field that has been researched to some extent. In this paper I would like to challenge the tripartite classification instituted by previous research, and consider the establishment of the 157border fortress system as a continuous architectural development process that lasted until the end of the 16th century.
During the period between 1548–1592, after the Italian System has been systematically applied, many existing Hungarian castles underwent major modernisation (e.g. Ecsed, Eger, Gyula, Kassa, Kisvárda, Patak, Szigetvár, and Tata), while many new fortresses were also built (Érsekújvár, Gyõr, Kálló, Kanizsa, Komárom, Sárvár, Szatmár, Szendrõ, and Várad). Mostly Italian master builders, commissioned by the Hofkriegsrat oversaw the more or less methodically accomplished construction project. Unfortunately, despite the modern facilities, Szigetvár and Gyula fell to the Turks in 1566. Before the end of the Fifteen Years War Eger (1596) and Kanizsa (1600) were also captured, together with Gyõr (temporarily, 1594–1598), Várad (1660) and Érsekújvár (1663). Of Hungary’s major fortresses only Komárom held out and remained in Christian hands throughout the age of the Turkish Rule, while many of the smaller castles changed hands more than once during the century and a half period. One reason for this was the overwhelming superiority of the Ottomans in man- and firepower, underpinned by their well-known, highly effective logistic system. Inadequately organised defence frequently made matters even worse. However, what the Christian defenders lacked the most, in almost every instance, was help from relief forces. Without external aid, no matter how well designed and constructed the new fortresses were, the balance of advantage in a siege lay with the attackers. Notwithstanding it is to be stressed, that the structural deficiencies of a fortification never accounted for lost sieges alone, though incomplete defence lines certainly did contribute to losing a fortress to the Ottomans.
Strategically speaking, however, it has to be said for the Italian System fortresses, that their size and intricate construction often put off besiegers, and as a result, the Christian armies were able to retain huge areas. The number of Christian troops deployed in these areas, however, never reached an adequate level, often not even when Turkish attacks were imminent, nor the Ottoman forces, stationed on the Hungarian seat of war, had enough power to take on Italian System fortresses. Therefore, they besieged these fortresses only during the great wars between the two empires. It always took the entire force of the Ottoman army to occupy them, and even then, it was not an easy job. In many cases the Ottomans, having taken a fortress, were ultimately forced to give up the strategic aims of the given campaign.
Unable to face the military challenge in power, the Hapsburg government sought to exploit the Hungarian border fortress system – and especially the Italian System fortresses – in an attempt to compensate its strategic and tactical shortcomings. As a result, it successfully halted the Ottomans’ charges on Vienna and the Austrian provinces. On the Hungarian side, the same border fortress system, partially reinforced by the Italian System fortresses, was able, at least, to prevent the country from being wholly occupied.
Ottavio Baldigara (c. 1540/45–1588), a Triest master builder, played an important role in the development of the Hungarian border fortress system. Two Hungarian fortresses, Eger and Érsekújvár, in particular owe much to him. 158Baldigara designed both two, and spent the better part of his life – at least twenty years – overseeing the construction of these forts. He worked in Eger from 1568 to about 1580, and in Érsekújvar from 1580 until his death in 1588.
The plans to fortify Eger according to the Italian System (only partially accomplished, unfortunately) are undoubtedly Baldigara’s own. We know for certain that Emperor approved his ideas in 1572. This was preceded, however, by a serious debate, because Eger’s disadvantageous geographical conditions caused several problems. The medieval castle and the later inner bail had been built on a plateau in order to control the road running below. The semi-circular western side of the plateau descends steeply to the valley 30 metres below, making the castle unattackable from that side. However, the hills towering over the eastern side made the castle extremely vulnerable to attack. In order to eliminate this shortcoming, one option was to sectionalise the defence. This could be achieved by dividing the castle into an outer and an inner bail. Some ground plans illustrating the problem have come down to us. The greatest difficulty was how to connect the outer and inner bails and where to erect the three western bastions of the inner bail. The large differences in level, and the constraint of having to keep the old walls, added to the complexity of the problem. In one of his plans Baldigara omitted the outer bail altogether, and gave the inner bail a regular pentagonal form. He precisely indicated on his drawings the problems the defence would face during an attack. In another plan, he devised a relatively simple, but highly ingenious, solution to connect the outer and inner bails, but even this failed to address the disadvantages posed by the heights on the eastern side.
There is but indirect evidence to suggest that Érsekújvár actually was built by Baldigara. The Triest master builder, however, was sent to Érsekújvár just some months before the final plans have been accepted, and a contemporary ground plan, attributed to him, shows the plan of the fortress that was accomplished later. His reports indicate that he was acutely aware of the geographical conditions. Érsekújvár, with its regular layout and six, hexagonal bastions with orillons, was perhaps the most modern fortress in Hungary during the entire time of the Turkish Rule.
Not only did Baldigara plan these two fortresses, but he also oversaw their construction. Bearing contemporary conditions in mind, that must have been a serious undertaking; requiring much expertise, organisational skills, political prowess, patience, and nerves of steel. Baldigara’s job as an inspector mostly involved correspondence with assorted principals. He needed to raise funds to keep the construction works going, and obtain building materials, but his applications were frequently rejected. In his letters he also made suggestions regarding the construction, in which he voiced his ideas about organisation and economisation. His submissions reveal that he had a clear mind, and was fully aware of Hungarian conditions. Apart from his organisational duties he also oversaw the entire construction work, sorted out the finances, communicated with contractors, ordered building materials, worked out the logistics, organised villein services, managed socage revenues, and saw to every detail of the job one could possibly think of. Consequently, he had to be versed in many fields that were only marginally related 159to fortress building. And, as if that was not all enough, he was repeatedly forced to prove his honesty in spending the funds allocated for the project. Not only did he have to account for his own financial situation, but also deal with the construction clerk’s fraudulent misuse of funds. He was even subjected to physical threat: the Captain of Érsekújvár, Ferdinand Samaria, was ordered to protect Baldigara and the construction works from the soldiers’ aggression.
Fortresses apart, Baldigara also built bridges and civilian buildings. His best-liked work was the bridge over the River Tisza at Tokaj, for which he received a special honour from the Emperor. Later, he was involved on many occasions in the construction of bridges in Wolfsbruck and Tabor, Austria.
Baldigara proved to be an invaluable architectural expert in the Viennese court. Early in his Eger years he was commissioned to survey the castles of Upper Hungary, on the occasion of which he was made Oberungarischer Baumeister (Master Builder of Upper Hungary). He visited Tokaj, Kassa, Szendrõ, and Ónod. The same border region included the fortress of Kálló, which he completed a detailed drawing for, in 1573. He proposed several alterations to this fortress, and gave ideas to reinforce the incomplete building. Up to the present time this is the only case what documents such kind of his activity. On another occasion, he was sent to Kanizsa, which belonged to a different generalate. When Érsekújvár replaced Eger as Baldigara’s principle “workplace” after 1580, his district of supervision changed, too. From then on, he surveyed the castles of the Generalate of the Mine District. In 1583 he was sent to inspect the damaged bastions of Vienna, and in 1584 he visited Várad two times.
Baldigara spent most of his life on the road. The frequency of his missions attests to his professional esteem. For example, István Báthori, Ruling Prince of Transylvania, invited him to Várad, and various military leaders frequently sought his advice in construction matters. His huge responsibility cannot be ignored, owing to the fact that his advices and reports evidently had impact on the process of construction. Baldigara’s frequent survey trips also suggest that the Hofkriegsrat either lacked sufficient numbers of proficient and experienced fortress-builders, or held him to be a one-and-only expert on the fortress-building scene.
Baldigara received a regular salary from the court, which, however, he usually received late, and only after several letters of complaint. Whenever the central government ran out of funds, they bestowed estates on him instead. Exploiting the fact that he was considered priceless, frequently he only agreed to return to his post provided the court paid at least some of the money it owed him. The same thing happened with his travel expenses that were habitually withheld by the Hofkammer [Royal Chamber], always pressed for money. It often only paid up at the express command of the Emperor.
Evidently, then, Ottavio Baldigara assumed a significant role in the development of anti-Turk border fortress system. Much information has come down to us about his activities as an architect–builder. Sources about his private life are in short supply, however, but at least his will is available. Even this, however, remains silent on his date of birth. Nevertheless, we do know that he married twice and died on 15 January 1588. His first wife was called Camilla, the second 160Violenta. We know the date of one of his weddings (1573), because he needed a permit to attend it. The source speaks of a son and a daughter, and his daughter’s children.
Baldigara’s relatives, too, served the Hapsburgs. His father, Caspar, worked as a shipbuilder in shipyards in Triest and Vienna. His brothers, Giulio and Marco Antonio, and a certain, vaguely related, family member called Cesaro, were fortress-builders, like himself. Cesaro is accredited with having built the pentagonal, five-bastion fortress of Szatmár, which, presumably after Cesaro’s death, was finished by Giulio.
The question arises why Ottavio Baldigara embarked on such a difficult career? The answer is complex, on account of the fact that relevant information is scanty.
Baldigara himself once noted that only fortresses would be able to keep the Ottomans at bay. If indeed he was acutely aware of that, presumably he was also convinced that his work would contribute to the reinforcement of the fortification system. Also, he was evidently aware of the significance of his person and work. His reports also attest to the fact that not only was he well-versed in military subjects, but understood the underlying issues, too. He sharply criticised the means by which villein services and various taxes were levied and allocated for the construction of the border fortresses, and also spoke of the negligence and bad organisation in the supplies system. However, not only did he pass judgements on the system, but also came up with ideas to improve it. He viewed matters from the inside, and was always aware of the current course of events.
It is not easy to assess his work as an architect. Attesting to awareness, conscientiousness and creativity, his plans and reports reveal the development he underwent during the decades. Frequently his ideas did not comply with the most modern standards of his times, but it is impossible to ascertain today whether this is accounted for by a lack of knowledge, the slow flow of information, or the circumstances hindering his development as an architect. His oeuvre, however, was to become a significant part of Hungary’s anti-Turk border fortress system.
Vidor Pataki, the first Hungarian historian who attempted to pass under review the role of Italian System fortress-building in Hungary, enumerated hundreds of master builders, but only commented on Ottavio Baldigara: “In place of a well-deserved biography...” The present work seeks to meet that long-felt want.

 

 

Arcanum Újságok
Arcanum Újságok

Kíváncsi, mit írtak az újságok erről a temáról az elmúlt 250 évben?

Megnézem

Arcanum logo

Az Arcanum Adatbázis Kiadó Magyarország vezető tartalomszolgáltatója, 1989. január elsején kezdte meg működését. A cég kulturális tartalmak nagy tömegű digitalizálásával, adatbázisokba rendezésével és publikálásával foglalkozik.

Rólunk Kapcsolat Sajtószoba

Languages