In the sixteenth century, chronic wars and a high concentration of towns made the Low Countries one of Europe's prime laboratories for innovations in military architecture and urbanism. The 1553 inspection tour of the region by engineers Giovanni Maria Olgiati and Sebastian van Noyen marked the assimilation of “Italian-style” fortifications into Netherlandish practice and the transition there from defenses with bastions to proper bastioned systems. Olgiati and Van Noyen's joint tour is well documented through a dozen design drawings now held at the Vatican Library, Turin's Archivio di Stato, and Madrid's Palacio Real, as well as a closely related atlas in Turin and complementary archival records. As Pieter Martens discusses in Planning Bastions: Olgiati and Van Noyen in the Low Countries in 1553, these materials, including many hitherto unknown plans, provide new insights into the design process, offer a unique panorama of the Low Countries' border defenses at this critical moment, and illuminate the genesis and spread of bastioned fortifications in Europe.

Although not well known today, Giovanni Maria Olgiati (ca. 1494−1557) was one of the most important military architects of the sixteenth century.1 From about 1535 until his death in 1557, he worked on the fortifications of at least seventy towns and fortresses, mainly in Northern Italy. From 1541 he was the chief engineer of the Duchy of Milan, but he was also active in Piedmont, Liguria, Corsica, and Tuscany. Among his most prominent achievements are the fortifications of Genoa, at which he worked from 1536, and the new bastioned city walls of Milan, which he designed in 1549.2 By the middle of the century he enjoyed recognition as one of Europe's preeminent engineers. In 1553, by order of Emperor Charles V, and much against his will, Olgiati was summoned from Italy to the Low Countries to work on fortifications there.3 His mission consisted of inspecting and improving the main strongholds along the border with France and was coordinated by the central government in Brussels under the command of the governor of the Low Countries, the emperor's sister, Mary of Hungary.

Olgiati's stay in the Low Countries was brief—he returned to Italy after six months—but it has great significance for the history of military architecture and town planning. To start with, a dozen drawings from Olgiati's tour of inspection have been preserved. They are among the earliest documents of their kind to have survived. With the exception of three drawings by Alessandro Pasqualini from the 1540s, they are the oldest fortification drawings known to have been made by an Italian engineer in the Low Countries, predating the well-known series of manuscript town plans created by Jacob van Deventer in the years 1558–72. For several towns the earliest known plans are those made by Olgiati. Moreover, Olgiati's drawings show both the existing situations and his proposed modifications, so the evidence they offer is threefold: an exceptional record of the state of the Low Countries' fortifications around the middle of the sixteenth century, a unique testimony of the engineer's design method, and a demonstration of the rapid evolution of military architecture in this period. Indeed, many of the fortifications Olgiati proposed to alter were new; designed by others a few years earlier, they were often not yet finished. Still, Olgiati introduced fundamental improvements that constituted the concluding stage of the development of the bastioned system.4 

New drawings and other sources pertaining to Olgiati and his work have recently come to light. These complete the hitherto fragmentary picture of his activities in the Low Countries and greatly clarify his working method and legacy. This article offers a fresh analysis based on varied and widely dispersed documents.5 Besides building accounts and correspondence, these include a dozen drawings in three different collections: Olgiati's long-known plans in the Vatican Library and in Turin's Archivio di Stato are now complemented by an important but unstudied set of plans held in Madrid's Palacio Real.6 Close scrutiny of these drawings allows a new interpretation of another group of plans preserved in an atlas in the Biblioteca Nazionale in Turin (hereafter referred to as the BNT atlas). This atlas contains more than twenty unidentified and undated plans of fortifications in the Low Countries, most of which were unknown until now. They are closely related to Olgiati's tour of inspection and crucial to understanding his working method. They also enable us to sketch a broader picture of the fortifications along the southern border of the Low Countries in the early 1550s—an area that, because of its high density of towns and chronic wars with France, was one of Europe's prime laboratories for innovations in military architecture and town planning.

Bulwarks, Bastions, Bastioned Systems

Capable of resisting artillery and applied for three centuries to countless towns and forts throughout the world, the bastion was, in the words of English historian Sir John Hale, “the most significant of all architectural forms evolved during the Renaissance.”7 The conventional view is that the bastion originated in Italy in the period 1450–1535 and then spread across Europe as Italian engineers were employed by foreign rulers. Yet recent research has revealed independent experiments with similar defensive structures in other parts of Europe and made clear that the long and gradual evolution of the bastioned system was not an exclusively Italian affair.8 This article focuses on a key stage of this development outside Italy.

Before the universal adoption of the bastion, the enceintes (defensive perimeters) of towns and fortresses were equipped with other types of defensive works—such as artillery towers at the corners and bulwarks (or boulevards) in front of the gates—that varied greatly in plan (round or polygonal), building material (stone or earth), and makeup (solid or with gun chambers inside). The bastion crucially differs from both the artillery tower and the bulwark in being a solid, earth-filled platform projecting from the walls, with a pointed polygonal plan to eliminate blind spots in the defensive fire plan. Guns mounted on its faces fire outward, while guns on its flanks sweep the adjacent curtain walls. Here the term bastioned system will be used only for those bastioned enceintes that are designed in such a way as to enable neighboring bastions to defend each other through reciprocal flanking fire. This implies that the bastions are not too far apart and that each one has its two faces precisely aligned with the gun positions in its neighbors' flanks.

From Bono to Van Noyen

Prior to Olgiati's visit in 1553, most fortifications in the Low Countries were designed by Donato de Bono (d. 1556), a native of Bergamo who was possibly an apprentice of Michele Sanmicheli. After his move to the Low Countries in 1540, Bono became the emperor's principal engineer there and the author of nearly all new fortifications. Between 1540 and 1553 he worked on more than thirty sites, for which he designed some seventy-five bastions. His record includes two citadels (Ghent, Cambrai), a fortress town (Mariembourg), a fortified castle (Renty), a coastal fortress (Rammekens), and the famed city walls of Antwerp (Figure 1). In addition, Bono partially modernized the walls of at least twenty towns. He was neither the first nor the only Italian engineer in the Low Countries in this period, but he was by far the most productive, and although several bastions had been built there in the 1530s, it was Bono's work of the 1540s that embodied the spread of the new fortification method throughout the Low Countries. When Olgiati arrived in 1553, his task was not just to plan new fortifications but also to review the ones built by Bono.

Figure 1

Virgilius Bononiensis, view of Antwerp, 1565, detail showing the Emperor's Gate and bastion designed by Donato de Bono in the 1540s (© Museum Plantin–Moretus/Print Cabinet, Antwerp–UNESCO World Heritage).

Figure 1

Virgilius Bononiensis, view of Antwerp, 1565, detail showing the Emperor's Gate and bastion designed by Donato de Bono in the 1540s (© Museum Plantin–Moretus/Print Cabinet, Antwerp–UNESCO World Heritage).

Olgiati was entrusted with another task as well: to initiate a local architect into the art of fortification design. New evidence reveals that during his tour through the Low Countries, Olgiati was always accompanied by Sebastian van Noyen (1523–57). Van Noyen was a young architect from Utrecht, recently engaged as engineer by the central government. Until 1553, Van Noyen had worked as architect for Antoine Perrenot de Granvelle (1517–86). Granvelle, bishop of Arras (and later cardinal), was the powerful secretary of state to the emperor and a distinguished art patron. Upon Granvelle's instigation, Van Noyen visited Rome around 1550, where he made a meticulous survey of the Baths of Diocletian; his drawings were subsequently turned into a monumental set of etchings published by Hieronymus Cock in Antwerp in 1558—the first systematic record of such a building to appear in print.9 Van Noyen was also the likely architect of Granvelle's palace in Brussels. Designed around 1551 and modeled in part on the Palazzo Farnese in Rome (drawing particularly on Michelangelo and Vignola's recently built courtyard arcades and windows), this was one of the earliest and most purely Roman Renaissance–style buildings in the Low Countries.10 

In December 1552, Van Noyen participated in the ill-fated siege of Metz by the imperial army and thereupon entered the service of the central government as a military architect. He had little experience in fortification, however, so the authorities arranged for the best available expert to teach him the latest fortification methods. Not coincidentally, the emperor sent for Olgiati at the same moment he engaged Van Noyen as engineer, in February 1553. Thus, it was from Olgiati that Van Noyen soon received his training in fortification design.

Van Noyen's familiarity with Italy, his expertise in surveying large-scale buildings, and his connections (through Granvelle) at the Brussels court made him an ideal intermediary between Olgiati and the Netherlandish master builders and government officials. Following Olgiati's return to Italy, Van Noyen became Charles V's (and, after 1555, Philip II's) chief engineer in the Low Countries. He designed all the major fortifications of the mid-1550s, including the new fortress towns Hesdinfert, Charlemont, and Philippeville, which brought him praise from Lodovico Guicciardini and Giorgio Vasari.11 Sebastian van Noyen's career ended abruptly in 1557 with his unexpected death at age thirty-four. He was succeeded by his nephew Jacob van Noyen, who was supposed to undergo the same initiation as his uncle before him: Jacob, too, was a novice in fortification design at the start of his government employment and was likewise expected to be trained by an accomplished Italian engineer—in his case, however, this never happened.12 

Olgiati's tour in the Low Countries was not exceptional in itself. At least twenty Italian engineers are known to have worked there between 1533 and 1559, and most stayed only for short periods—often less than a year.13 Almost all came from Northern Italy, and several were recruited, like Olgiati, from the Duchy of Milan, which belonged to the Habsburg realm. Tours of inspection featuring an Italian engineer and a local architect were common practice. Precedents include Jacopo Seghizzi (alias Frate da Modena) and Jehan Lartésien in Hainaut and Artois in 1533–34, Baldassare Avianello and Marcelis Keldermans in the Utrecht region in 1540, Donato de Bono and Lartésien along the entire southern border in 1540–41, and Bono and Willem van Noort in Hainaut in 1546.14 

Among these, however, the tour by Olgiati and Van Noyen in 1553 stands out, not only because it is so well documented but also because it marked a turning point. The fortifications designed after Olgiati's visit differed profoundly from those built before and were, moreover, authored by Netherlandish rather than Italian engineers. After 1553, Bono, whose work came in for serious criticism, did not receive any more important commissions. All the big projects now went to Sebastian van Noyen, and the fortifications he designed in the mid-1550s owed much to his mentor, Olgiati (Figure 2). Even in the 1560s, Sebastian's successor Jacob van Noyen still worked in the manner of Olgiati. Only in 1567, with the arrival of the Duke of Alba and the erection of the Antwerp citadel by Francesco Paciotto, was there a notable change in fortification practice. The development of military architecture in the Low Countries during these crucial decades can therefore be divided into a “Bono period” (1540–52) and an “Olgiati/Van Noyen period” (1553–67). The shift between the two is examined here.

Figure 2

Sebastian van Noyen, bastion designed according to Giovanni Maria Olgiati's principles, mid-1550s, detail of Figure 20 (Atlas 71.5.G.25, fol. 83, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Rome; © Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Roma).

Figure 2

Sebastian van Noyen, bastion designed according to Giovanni Maria Olgiati's principles, mid-1550s, detail of Figure 20 (Atlas 71.5.G.25, fol. 83, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Rome; © Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Roma).

Olgiati and Van Noyen's Tour: A Reconstruction

Available evidence allows us to reconstruct Olgiati and Van Noyen's tour in the Low Countries in unprecedented detail (Figure 3). This helps explain their working method and use of drawings. It also elucidates how Italian engineers and local architects collaborated—a key mechanism of transcultural exchange in Renaissance Europe.

Figure 3

Map showing the southern border of the Low Countries, with towns included in the BNT atlas and towns known to have been inspected by Giovanni Maria Olgiati and Sebastian van Noyen in 1553 (author's drawing).

Figure 3

Map showing the southern border of the Low Countries, with towns included in the BNT atlas and towns known to have been inspected by Giovanni Maria Olgiati and Sebastian van Noyen in 1553 (author's drawing).

Charles V held Olgiati in high esteem and had long wanted to employ him in other parts of his empire. The emperor likely became familiar with Olgiati's work during his stay in Genoa in 1536 and his visit to Milan in 1541.15 In the late 1540s, the governor of the Duchy of Milan, Ferrante Gonzaga, regularly informed the emperor of Olgiati's whereabouts and sent him drawings and reports in Olgiati's hand. But Charles's repeated requests to send Olgiati on missions further afield—to Vienna in 1547, to Sardinia and the Balearic Islands in 1550—met with refusals from both Gonzaga, who objected that Olgiati's expertise would be missed in Milan, and Olgiati himself, who complained that he was too old and worn-out to be making long journeys outside his homeland.16 

In June 1551, Charles's son Philip (then Duke of Milan, later King Philip II of Spain) visited Milan. He was taken on a guided tour of the city walls and expressed his admiration for Olgiati's project for the new enceinte. Philip asked for and was given a copy of the closely guarded plan of these new fortifications.17 It is unlikely that Philip and Olgiati (then with the army in Parma) met on this occasion, but the episode amplified Philip's and Charles's esteem for Olgiati's work. A few months later, following his return to Madrid, Philip wrote to Gonzaga that he wanted Olgiati (or, if need be, another engineer of similar merit) to come to Spain. Olgiati again refused, and it was his junior collaborator, Giovanni Battista Calvi, who left for Spain in 1552.18 Calvi stayed on the Iberian Peninsula until his death in 1565 and had a successful career as an engineer in service to the Spanish crown. His work was fundamental for the development of military architecture in Spain; in fact, Calvi's role in Spain was comparable to that of Olgiati in the Low Countries.

In February 1553, Gonzaga and Olgiati finally received an order they could not refuse. At the insistence of Mary of Hungary, Charles V ordered Gonzaga to send Olgiati to the Low Countries immediately.19 This directive was provoked by the raging border wars against France, in which the emperor had suffered heavy territorial losses, and was motivated also by the central government's dissatisfaction with Bono's recent work.20 Gonzaga and Olgiati had no choice but to comply, and by the end of March the engineer was ready to leave for the Low Countries.21 

Olgiati arrived in Brussels on 26 April 1553.22 After paying a visit to the Venetian ambassador, he presented a letter of recommendation to Granvelle, who then introduced him to Mary of Hungary. She informed Olgiati that his mission would involve inspecting border towns. On 5 May Olgiati was still in Brussels, but soon after he left for Luxembourg and Thionville.23 Both cities were in urgent need of fortification, as one year earlier three nearby strongholds (Yvoix, Damvillers, and Montmédy) had been lost to the French. At the time, Sebastian van Noyen was working in the Luxembourg area, where he had been since February.24 This was his first mission as engineer.25 He met up with Olgiati, and the two set off together for six months. Olgiati's plan for Luxembourg has been preserved, but nothing is known of his contribution in Thionville.26 

From Luxembourg, Olgiati and Van Noyen next went to Maastricht. The plan Olgiati drew there is dated 18 May (Figure 4).27 His assistant, Evangelista (brought from Milan), broke his leg in Maastricht and was replaced by another assistant for the remainder of the tour.28 Building accounts indicate that Van Noyen was with Olgiati in Maastricht and that the fortification plan they made there amended an earlier design by Bono.29 The two engineers stayed in Maastricht until early June. On 4 July, the Maastricht city council affirmed that all works on its fortifications were halted because a certain “master of works” sent by Mary of Hungary (Olgiati or Van Noyen) had made a new plan, which needed to be approved in Brussels.30 

Figure 4

Giovanni Maria Olgiati, plan for the fortification of Maastricht, 18 May 1553 (Codex Barberinianus Latinus 4391, fol. 43 [XLII], Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana; © 2019 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, reproduced by permission of Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, with all rights reserved).

Figure 4

Giovanni Maria Olgiati, plan for the fortification of Maastricht, 18 May 1553 (Codex Barberinianus Latinus 4391, fol. 43 [XLII], Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana; © 2019 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, reproduced by permission of Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, with all rights reserved).

The arrival in the Low Countries of the illustrious Milanese engineer, also a renowned artillery officer and expert in siege techniques, reached the ears of the imperial army, which was then laying siege to Thérouanne, in Artois.31 The Spanish soldiers, who described Olgiati as “the best man in the world,” begged Mary of Hungary to send the engineer to their camp so that he could advise on the difficult siege works.32 Mary replied that she could not send Olgiati to Thérouanne, as he was busy in Maastricht.33 He would not have arrived in time anyway, for Thérouanne fell the next day.

By mid-June Olgiati was back in Brussels. He once more complained of being too old for constant travel, and he asked Mary of Hungary if he might return to Italy.34 But the engineer was immediately sent off again with Sebastian van Noyen, this time on an extensive tour of inspection along the southern border starting with Mariembourg. On 13 July, Olgiati and Van Noyen received a laissez-passer from the emperor giving them unhindered access to all fortifications in the border region.35 Additionally, Mary of Hungary wrote personal letters to the local governors and captains to announce the engineers' arrival and emphasize the importance of their mission.36 By around 23 July, Olgiati and Van Noyen were in Mariembourg, where they criticized Bono's design and drew up a plan showing their amendments (Figure 5).37 

Figure 5

Giovanni Maria Olgiati and Sebastian van Noyen, plan of Mariembourg, 1553 (Architettura Militare, vol. IV, fol. 16, Archivio di Stato, Turin; © Archivio di Stato di Torino).

Figure 5

Giovanni Maria Olgiati and Sebastian van Noyen, plan of Mariembourg, 1553 (Architettura Militare, vol. IV, fol. 16, Archivio di Stato, Turin; © Archivio di Stato di Torino).

After Mariembourg the engineers visited nearby Fumay, a small town occupying a strategic position near the French border, in a bend of the Meuse. Because of the war, this was dangerous territory, and the captain of Mariembourg had to accompany the two engineers to Fumay with an armed escort.38 Fumay lacked modern fortifications, so here for once Olgiati and Van Noyen were tasked not with improving existing works but with designing a new fortress. The result of their excursion to Fumay is not known.39 

From the Sambre and Meuse region Olgiati and Van Noyen set off westward toward Hainaut and Artois. After Fumay they possibly visited Avesnes, Landrecies, and Le Quesnoy. By 12 August they were at work in Mons, where they changed, in situ, the layout of the bastion at the Porte de Nimy. The first stone of this new bastion, designed by Bono, had been laid barely two months earlier. Using sticks and ropes, Olgiati and Van Noyen “remedied the badly begun bastion” by tracing a new outline on the ground.40 Van Deventer's later plan of Mons confirms that the bastion built at the Porte de Nimy bore the stamp of Olgiati, not Bono.41 The plan that Olgiati and Van Noyen drew up in Mons is lost, but it was probably comparable to the later plan by Mario Brunelli (discussed below).

After Mons, the engineers visited Valenciennes, Bouchain, and Cambrai in quick succession. Olgiati's plans of these three places are dated 20, 22, and 24 August, respectively (Figures 6 and 7).42 They next went to Bapaume, Arras, and Aire (Figures 8, 9, and 10).43 Around 9 September the engineers arrived in Renty (see Figure 7).44 They probably also visited Saint-Omer, Bourbourg, and Gravelines around this time.

Figure 6

Giovanni Maria Olgiati, plan for the fortification of Valenciennes, 20 August 1553 (Map 416, fol. 39, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; © Patrimonio Nacional).

Figure 6

Giovanni Maria Olgiati, plan for the fortification of Valenciennes, 20 August 1553 (Map 416, fol. 39, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; © Patrimonio Nacional).

Figure 7

Giovanni Maria Olgiati, plans of the citadel of Cambrai, 24 August 1553 (left), and the fortified castle of Renty, 9–12 September 1553 (right) (Architettura Militare, vol. IV, fols. 13 and 18, Archivio di Stato, Turin; © Archivio di Stato di Torino).

Figure 7

Giovanni Maria Olgiati, plans of the citadel of Cambrai, 24 August 1553 (left), and the fortified castle of Renty, 9–12 September 1553 (right) (Architettura Militare, vol. IV, fols. 13 and 18, Archivio di Stato, Turin; © Archivio di Stato di Torino).

Figure 8

Plan for the fortification of Bapaume, after Giovanni Maria Olgiati, 1553 (Map 416, fol. 40, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; © Patrimonio Nacional).

Figure 8

Plan for the fortification of Bapaume, after Giovanni Maria Olgiati, 1553 (Map 416, fol. 40, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; © Patrimonio Nacional).

Figure 9

Giovanni Maria Olgiati and Sebastian van Noyen, plan for the fortification of Arras, 1553 (Map 416, fol. 38r, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; © Patrimonio Nacional).

Figure 9

Giovanni Maria Olgiati and Sebastian van Noyen, plan for the fortification of Arras, 1553 (Map 416, fol. 38r, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; © Patrimonio Nacional).

Figure 10

Giovanni Maria Olgiati and Sebastian van Noyen, unfinished plan for the fortification of Aire, 1553 (Map 416, fol. 38v, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; © Patrimonio Nacional).

Figure 10

Giovanni Maria Olgiati and Sebastian van Noyen, unfinished plan for the fortification of Aire, 1553 (Map 416, fol. 38v, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; © Patrimonio Nacional).

While Olgiati and Van Noyen were crossing Hainaut and Artois, the imperial field army was still campaigning there. The army had just completed two successful sieges: on 20 June Thérouanne was captured, and on 18 July, Hesdin. Both strongholds were subsequently razed. Thérouanne's fortifications were dismantled in July and its last remains destroyed by gunpowder mines in mid-August. The castle of Hesdin was similarly destroyed during the first days of August.45 When Olgiati and Van Noyen passed through the area at the end of August, the demolition in these places was finished. They possibly visited the smoldering ruins of Thérouanne or Hesdin along their route, but, unlike Bono, sent to Thérouanne in early July to advise on the destruction of its fortifications, they cannot have played a significant role in the demolition work. It is possible, however, that Olgiati made a first design for the new fortress town that was to replace Hesdin.46 

That Olgiati and Van Noyen were in the middle of a war zone helps to account for their fast pace: French troops were approaching. Indeed, the engineers had only just left Cambrai and Bapaume in late August when these two border towns were threatened with siege. Early in September, French troops led by Henry II marched on Bapaume and Cambrai and then on to Bouchain and Valenciennes. Neither a siege nor a battle developed, however, and three weeks later the French withdrew again.47 

At the end of October, Olgiati traveled to Namur, again accompanied by Sebastian van Noyen, who brought a drawing of the castle of Namur with him.48 Early in November Olgiati and Van Noyen returned to Brussels to present their design for the castle's fortifications to the Council of Finance.49 Shortly afterward, Olgiati returned to Italy. He was back in Milan around December 1553.50 

Thus, between May and November 1553, Olgiati and Van Noyen inspected at least fourteen sites in the Low Countries, and they almost certainly visited still more places along their route (see Figure 3). For ten places extant drawings can be linked to their visits, and five of these are signed and dated by Olgiati; for eight places his intervention is substantiated by other archival documents. With the exception of Maastricht, Olgiati and Van Noyen's expeditions concentrated on the southern border, their route dictated by the ongoing military campaigns. The pervasive threat of a French attack imposed a high work rate, and this in turn helps explain the engineers' particular use of drawings. To save time they made extensive use of existing plans. Understanding their working method is essential to interpreting these documents correctly.

The Use of Drawings and the Plans in the Turin Atlas

Olgiati's drawings all share the same formal characteristics. First, he outlined the plan of the existing fortifications in red, and then he superimposed his own project in black (or dark brown) ink.51 Typically, he showed only a ground plan, his drawing of Valenciennes being the only one to include a vertical section of the planned ramparts (see Figure 6). He annotated his drawings copiously, with measurements, technical remarks, and topographical comments. Two of the plans not signed by Olgiati (Mariembourg and Arras) contain notes in Dutch and French as bastardized by a Dutch speaker; these can be attributed to Van Noyen. The plan of Luxembourg, on the other hand, has Italian inscriptions not in Olgiati's hand—possibly a copy made by his assistant. That such copies were made is proven by the plan of Cambrai, of which both Olgiati's original and a copy survive. Likewise, the anonymous plan of Bapaume is evidently a simplified copy of a lost Olgiati original. Important here is not the distinction between original and copy or the issue of authorship but the fact that all these drawings share certain characteristics. All are artifacts of the same working method.

When the engineers arrived at a site, their first task was to inspect the existing fortifications. One way of doing so is illustrated by a previously unknown drawing of Saint-Omer held in the Vatican Library, the result of a survey made on-site (Figure 11).52 On one side of the sheet are several profile views of the town walls, and on the other is an accurate plan of the circuit of the walls. The contours of the fortifications are drawn in a simple line; additional hatching indicates the earthen ramparts while watercolor accentuates the water in the ditches and rivers. All lines are executed in the same brown ink, without color coding. Measurements indicating widths of ditches, heights of ramparts, and lengths of walls were likely made on the spot. Both the ground plan and the profile views bear inscriptions, all in Dutch, describing in detail the site's topography and the state of the fortifications.53 There is no indication of any planned works; this is purely a record of the existing situation, datable to the early 1550s.54 Dating and inscriptions connect the drawing to Sebastian van Noyen, who possibly made it during his tour with Olgiati in 1553.55 

Figure 11

Sebastian van Noyen, survey of the fortifications of Saint-Omer, ca. 1553, details (Codex Barberinianus Latinus 4391, fol. 52r–v [XLIX], Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana; © 2019 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, reproduced by permission of Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, with all rights reserved).

Figure 11

Sebastian van Noyen, survey of the fortifications of Saint-Omer, ca. 1553, details (Codex Barberinianus Latinus 4391, fol. 52r–v [XLIX], Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana; © 2019 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, reproduced by permission of Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, with all rights reserved).

Carrying out such a survey took time, while evidence indicates that the two engineers traveled fast, staying no more than a couple of days in each place, a single day in some cases.56 Although it is not certain that they drew and dated all plans in situ, it is clear that Olgiati and Van Noyen inspected many sites within a short time span. This fast pace implies that they themselves did little time-consuming surveying work on-site. Yet the outlines of existing fortifications, drawn in red on their plans, are without exception accurate, indicating that they had reliable plans of the current fortifications at their disposal.57 Olgiati could then simply copy those plans onto his sheet before adding his own modifications and comments.58 

The plans given to Olgiati by the central government were likely Bono's. Not one of Bono's drawings has been preserved, however, and none of the plans given to Olgiati and Van Noyen survives. But it now appears that copies of these lost plans do exist in an atlas in the Biblioteca Nazionale in Turin.59 Among the many unidentified fortifications in the BNT atlas are those of at least twenty-two different places in the Low Countries—mainly fortified towns along the southern border (see Figure 3). The plans show only the defensive perimeters, drawn in red, without any indications of streets, buildings, or topographical elements. Most of the plans include scale bars and compass crosses, but they lack inscriptions—even the place-names have (with two exceptions) been omitted. The places can be identified, however, through comparison with later fortification plans and with Van Deventer's town plans.

The plans in the BNT atlas have two important characteristics: first, most represent the state of fortifications around 1552; and second, they correspond exactly with the red outlines on Olgiati's drawings.60 In every instance the red outline on Olgiati's drawing matches up with the corresponding plan in the BNT atlas, to the extent that these plans must be copies (Figure 12).61 The red outlines on Olgiati's drawings and the plans in the BNT atlas were not copied directly from one another, however, but from common originals that are now lost. In some cases the copies have the same dimensions, but most of the plans were reduced or enlarged in the copying process: Olgiati's plans for the bigger cities—Maastricht, Valenciennes, and Arras—are much larger than the corresponding plans in the BNT atlas.62 The precision with which such rescalings were done is remarkable. When a plan was reduced or enlarged, its proportions were precisely preserved, and few or no details were lost. This points to the use of advanced drawing instruments.63 That the rescaling of such plans was current practice is illustrated by the drawing of Mariembourg (see Figure 5). This sheet confusingly shows the same ground plan twice, but on different scales: a neat copy in pen and brown ink and a smaller version in black and red chalk.64 As fortification plans were frequently copied, adjusted, and recopied, questions of authenticity, authorship, and dating of extant drawings must always be approached with circumspection.

Figure 12

The fortifications of Arras: detail of the plan in the BNT atlas, showing the round bulwark at the Porte Ronville and the polygonal bulwark at the Porte Saint-Nicolas (left) (ms. q.II.57, fol. 57, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino), and detail of Olgiati and Van Noyen's drawing (Figure 9), showing their design for a new bastioned enceinte superimposed onto a plan of the existing fortifications (right) (Map 416, fol. 38r, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; © Patrimonio Nacional).

Figure 12

The fortifications of Arras: detail of the plan in the BNT atlas, showing the round bulwark at the Porte Ronville and the polygonal bulwark at the Porte Saint-Nicolas (left) (ms. q.II.57, fol. 57, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino), and detail of Olgiati and Van Noyen's drawing (Figure 9), showing their design for a new bastioned enceinte superimposed onto a plan of the existing fortifications (right) (Map 416, fol. 38r, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; © Patrimonio Nacional).

The anonymous plans in the BNT atlas are not design drawings but records of the existing situation. They reflect, more precisely, the state of fortifications in the year 1552, or thereabouts. That makes this collection of plans the oldest of its kind, and for many of the towns concerned, the earliest plans yet known are those in this atlas. As such, these plans are a fundamental source for the study of urban history in the Low Countries, even if they show nothing more than the contours of the towns' fortifications. They are also relevant for the history of urban cartography, showing that by 1550 the central government possessed accurate, orthogonal plans of many towns (or at least of their defensive perimeters), and that if the need arose these could be rescaled and copied for other purposes. Consequently, the earliest town plans of the Low Countries—notably those of Jacob van Deventer, commissioned by Philip II in 1558—were not necessarily made from scratch, as is commonly supposed; rather, many were preceded by and possibly based in part on existing fortification plans.65 

A Panorama of the Low Countries' Border Fortifications ca. 1550

The plans in the BNT atlas offer a reliable and coherent picture of the state of the Low Countries' border fortifications in the middle of the sixteenth century. With two exceptions (Maastricht and Wageningen), the plans all concern towns along the southern border, mostly in the provinces of Artois and Hainaut. They reveal that around 1550 most of these towns, despite their vulnerable location near the French border and despite the large-scale fortification campaigns of the preceding decades, still relied mainly on their outdated medieval walls. Only four places already possessed fully bastioned enclosures: the little town of Bouchain, the fortress town of Mariembourg, the citadel of Cambrai, and the fortified castle of Renty (Figure 13). These were all small entities, and in each case the enceinte was a simple square with four corner bastions. In contrast, none of the larger towns had yet been equipped with modern fortifications around the entire perimeter. Instead, medieval walls were merely reinforced with bulwarks in front of the gates and a couple of bastions at the most. Only a few towns close to the border, such as Le Quesnoy, Avesnes, and Yvoix, already possessed four or more bastions (or bastion-like works). Most towns, including Gravelines, Bourbourg, Saint-Omer, Aire, Arras, Valenciennes, and Luxembourg, counted only one or two bastions, and some cities, such as Lillers, Mons, and Maastricht, had none at all (Figures 14, 15, and 16).

Figure 13

Plans of the fortifications of Bouchain (left) and the Cambrai citadel (right) (ms. q.II.57, fols. 77 and 32, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino).

Figure 13

Plans of the fortifications of Bouchain (left) and the Cambrai citadel (right) (ms. q.II.57, fols. 77 and 32, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino).

Figure 14

Plans of the fortifications of Le Quesnoy (left) and Avesnes (right) (ms. q.II.57, fols. 63 and 14, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino).

Figure 14

Plans of the fortifications of Le Quesnoy (left) and Avesnes (right) (ms. q.II.57, fols. 63 and 14, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino).

Figure 15

Plans of the fortifications of Aire (left) and Béthune (right) (ms. q.II.57, fols. 46 and 38, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino).

Figure 15

Plans of the fortifications of Aire (left) and Béthune (right) (ms. q.II.57, fols. 46 and 38, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino).

Figure 16

Plans of the fortifications of Douai (left) and Mons (right) (ms. q.II.57, fols. 45 and 48, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino).

Figure 16

Plans of the fortifications of Douai (left) and Mons (right) (ms. q.II.57, fols. 45 and 48, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino).

Thus, as of 1550, bastioned systems did not yet exist in any of these towns.66 It is often assumed that when a town's fortifications were modernized, medieval walls were replaced by a new enceinte with straight curtain walls and regularly spaced bastions. But this enormously expensive solution, as seen in Antwerp, was highly unusual.67 As the plans in the BNT atlas show, existing fortifications were usually not replaced in one fell swoop but adapted a little at a time. Such gradual, step-by-step transformation produced not a coherent whole but a heterogeneous amalgam of varied defensive works. The regular fortress cities that feature so prominently in the literature are not representative of the first generation of fortified towns realized after the birth of the bastion; almost all such towns had highly irregular plans that testify to the complicated development of their fortifications.

This is true not only for the enceinte as a whole but for the individual defensive works as well. The plans in the BNT atlas depict many strikingly irregular bastions. Their erratic shapes were sometimes caused by a town wall's irregular circuit, but more often they were the consequence of complex building histories. The first bastions in the Low Countries were rarely built entirely ex novo. Most were realized through the adaptation of preexisting structures such as gun towers or bulwarks, with substantial remains from the older constructions incorporated into the new work. It is therefore not always meaningful to make a sharp distinction between an old-fashioned bulwark and a modern bastion. Moreover, some of the defensive works conceived by local master builders in the first decades of the sixteenth century were typologically similar to the bastions that the Italian engineers designed in the 1530s and 1540s.68 The introduction of the bastion in the Low Countries was not a radical break with local tradition but a step in an already ongoing process. Tellingly, contemporaries continued to use the old term bulwark (bolwerck, boulevard, and so on) for the new variant, which only in the next century came to be called a bastion.69 

The group of plans in the BNT atlas also shows that there was no standard bastion type used everywhere as a passe-partout solution. In total, more than forty bastions (or bastion-like works) are recorded on these plans, and they display a bewildering typological diversity. The plan of Avesnes, for example, shows no less than six irregular bastion-like works, all different, each evidencing the transition from irregular bulwark to pentagonal bastion (see Figure 14). The plan of Bouchain depicts four bastions, but each with a different ground plan (see Figure 13): the somewhat anomalous Ostrevant bastion was already completed in 1534–39, probably to a design by Jacopo Seghizzi; the other three bastions were built in 1541–48 to designs by Bono, but even these bear significant differences among them.70 

By around 1550, most border towns were fortified with isolated, self-sufficient bastions that did not provide reciprocal flanking fire. Clearly, the architects aimed not to establish an overall defensive scheme but to remedy weak spots by adding solitary bastions to the walls nearby. Individual bastions operated as isolated units fending for themselves. Accordingly, the designs of such bastions were determined by their locations, not by their relationship to other bastions. This is obvious for towns with only one bastion, such as Arras and Bourbourg, but it holds also for towns that had two or three bastions, such as Aire and Béthune (see Figure 15). In each case the bastions were solitary installations defending only a section of the walls and not adjusted to one another.71 Not one of these town plans evinces any intention of creating an integrated defensive system, let alone a regular enceinte. Nowhere are the fortification works coupled with any urban expansion, or even with any adjustment of the existing circuit of the town walls.

Thus, by the early 1550s, two decades after the appearance of the first bastions in the Low Countries, the government's huge building campaign aimed at modernizing its border fortresses was still far from complete. The plans in the BNT atlas document not just the progressive spread of bastioned fortifications from the 1530s onward but also the survival of defensive works built in previous decades, of which other visual evidence is extremely rare (Figures 17 and 18). The plans are therefore an invaluable record of the typological evolution of these works, from the irregular bulwarks of the 1510s and 1520s through the protobastions of the 1530s to the mature bastions of the 1540s and early 1550s.

Figure 17

Plan of Valenciennes in the BNT atlas, details: the semicircular bulwark (1525–33) at the Porte d'Anzin (left) and the Cardon bastion (1533–36) and adjacent city gate (right) (ms. q.II.57, fol. 28, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino).

Figure 17

Plan of Valenciennes in the BNT atlas, details: the semicircular bulwark (1525–33) at the Porte d'Anzin (left) and the Cardon bastion (1533–36) and adjacent city gate (right) (ms. q.II.57, fol. 28, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino).

Figure 18

Plans of Maastricht (top), Douai (middle), and Saint-Omer (bottom) in the BNT atlas, each with a “mini-bastion” located midway between two gates or bastions, details (ms. q.II.57, fols. 56, 45, and 20, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino).

Figure 18

Plans of Maastricht (top), Douai (middle), and Saint-Omer (bottom) in the BNT atlas, each with a “mini-bastion” located midway between two gates or bastions, details (ms. q.II.57, fols. 56, 45, and 20, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin; © Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria di Torino).

Round bulwarks can be seen on the plan of Douai (see Figures 16 and 18). They were erected in front of the city gates and detached from the walls. Built in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, they all have a semicircular or horseshoe-shaped plan and remained virtually unchanged until the 1550s, by which time they were severely outdated.72 Yet even as late as the 1540s, such round bulwarks were still being commissioned: the plan of Maastricht shows the horseshoe-shaped ground plan of the Sint-Maartensbolwerk (1542–47), which for its time was a decidedly old-fashioned type of defensive work.73 Polygonal bulwarks appear on many plans. That of Arras includes two well-documented ones, built at the Porte Méaulens (1508–13) and the Porte Saint-Nicolas (1513–16) (see Figure 12). Both were transformed into bastions in the mid-1540s by having been filled with earth (while maintaining their function as city entrances); this plan shows that their original ground plan, known from an earlier drawing, was not changed in the process.74 

Several plans depict what look like mini-bastions (see Figure 18). These small bastion-like organs are actually moineaux or caponiers (small flanking constructions in the ditch) in the shape of bastions. Two examples can be seen on the plans of Maastricht and Douai; for both towns' fortifications, this feature is the only sign of modernity. Another small bastion-like moineau from around 1535 can be recognized on the plan of Saint-Omer, situated between two normal (and later) bastions.75 

The plans also depict some of the first bastions built in the Low Countries, probably to designs made by Jacopo Seghizzi in 1533–34. These include the Croÿ bastion (1533–34) in Le Quesnoy, the bastion de la Reine in Avesnes (1534–38), and the Ostrevant bastion (1534–39) in Bouchain (see Figures 13 and 14).76 The plan of Valenciennes reveals the irregular ground plan of the Cardon bastion (1533–36) (see Figure 17).77 Most of the other bastions recorded on these plans were built to designs by Bono between 1540 and 1552.

The plans in the BNT atlas compel us to revise the accepted dating and attribution of several bastions. For example, the four bastions seen on Van Deventer's town plan of Aire are commonly dated to the 1540s and attributed to Bono. Yet two of them are conspicuously absent on the BNT plans; this implies that these were actually begun after 1552 and must be attributed to Olgiati or Van Noyen.78 The same is true for the two bastions in Mons that appear on Van Deventer's town plan but not on the plan in the BNT atlas. In each of these cases this new dating finds confirmation in the general shape of the bastions: those begun after 1552 are all considerably larger than the ones built before then. Indeed, the small size of Bono's bastions was one of Olgiati's main criticisms of them.

Olgiati's Designs: From Defenses with Bastions to Bastioned Systems

Olgiati's proposals comprise both amendments to existing fortifications and designs for new works. His amendments mainly concern the shape and size of the bastions and the position of the gates. He found the existing bastions much too small, lacking space for the necessary guns in their flanks and up on their platforms.79 Other experts shared Olgiati's opinion. In June 1552 the Venetian engineer Giovan Tommaso Scala criticized two fortresses in the province of Luxembourg that had been easily captured by the French despite new fortifications; he proposed to enlarge the fortresses' bastions.80 Francesco de Marchi, too, considered the bastions of the 1540s too small. On a visit to Jülich in 1556 he praised Pasqualini's new citadel (1547), which he called a “beautiful and perfect square fortress,” but to his surprise the bastions were so small (“piccolini”) that they could barely support two pieces of artillery.81 From 1550 onward military architects realized that the bastions built thus far were not large enough.

Olgiati did not simply enlarge the bastions but drastically changed their composition so as to increase both their resilience and their firepower. He added round orillons to their sides in order to better shield the gun positions in the retracted flanks against enemy fire; he substituted the casemates (vaulted gun chambers) in these flanks for open-air terraces; and he added cavaliers behind the bastions—high earthen platforms on which additional guns could be deployed for long-range fire (Figure 19). These adjustments demonstrate Olgiati's awareness of the increasing impact of siege artillery. The first bastions had been an effective response to how sieges were conducted in the 1520s and 1530s, but by the 1550s artillery pieces had grown significantly in both number and effectiveness.82 Larger bastions were therefore needed, and optimal flanking became vital.

Figure 19

Giovanni Maria Olgiati and Sebastian van Noyen, plan of the fortification of Arras, 1553, detail of Figure 9 showing how the existing Rœulx bastion ought to be enlarged, equipped with open-air gun terraces behind round orillons, and backed by a cavalier (Map 416, fol. 38r, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; © Patrimonio Nacional).

Figure 19

Giovanni Maria Olgiati and Sebastian van Noyen, plan of the fortification of Arras, 1553, detail of Figure 9 showing how the existing Rœulx bastion ought to be enlarged, equipped with open-air gun terraces behind round orillons, and backed by a cavalier (Map 416, fol. 38r, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; © Patrimonio Nacional).

The location of gates was another critical matter. In Bono's designs a gate was always positioned next to a bastion, in a recess in the wall to conceal it from enemy fire. This arrangement was comparable to the traditional combination of gate and bulwark. Its disadvantage was that the gate was covered by one bastion only. Where possible, Olgiati therefore moved the gate to the middle of the curtain wall, so that it could be defended by two bastions.83 In this respect it is noteworthy that in May 1553 it was decided that the gate of the citadel of Ghent would be relocated because it was situated too close to the bastion.84 There is no evidence that Olgiati visited Ghent in this period, but this decision points to his influence.

Olgiati's principles for the design of new fortifications are most clearly illustrated by his drawings of those cities for which he planned new bastioned enceintes: Maastricht, Valenciennes, and Arras (see Figures 4, 6, and 9). All three designs employ the same precepts, which can be summarized as follows. To begin with, Olgiati does not combine the modernization of the city walls with any kind of urban expansion. He keeps the existing perimeter in place (or reduces it), although irregular sections in the circuit are straightened out as far as possible. Thus, about half to three-quarters of the existing circuit wall is retained to serve as the outer wall of the new ramparts, while the rest is marked for demolition to make room for new, straight sections.85 Olgiati also modifies the gates. He proposes to tear down the existing and often imposing gate buildings and adjacent defensive organs and to replace them with simple, unfortified entrances—little more than framed passages through the ramparts. The entrances to a city had always been among the most heavily fortified parts of the enceinte, but here their defense is left entirely to the adjacent bastions. (Olgiati does not change the position of the entrances, however; apparently he thought it a step too far to modify existing street patterns.) He then furnishes the rectified enceinte with new bastions. These he places more or less equidistant from each other, approximately 300 meters apart, within range of each other's artillery. A bastion is placed on every corner of the perimeter with additional ones between, resulting in a total of ten bastions for Valenciennes and twelve for Maastricht and Arras.

In all three drawings these new, large bastions have round orillons concealing deeply retired flanks with low-lying open-air gun terraces for flanking fire.86 The bastions' earthen mass functions as a vast artillery platform for long-range fire while supplementary cavaliers stand on each corner. Where possible, the bastions are furnished with underground countermine galleries.87 All of these bastions are similarly designed, yet they have different shapes because their ground plans are determined by concern for mutual flanking fire. This explains why the bastions on the corners of the perimeters all have sharp points, while the bastions in between have obtuse or flat fronts. A few bastions are of deviant design due to irregularities in the circuit of the walls; in other cases deviant forms result from the incorporation of preexisting bastions or bastion-like structures.

It is noteworthy that Olgiati preserves few of the existing works. In the plan for Arras, for example, he incorporates one of the five early sixteenth-century bulwarks into his new bastioned enceinte but eliminates all the others.88 He also keeps the one existing bastion (the Rœulx bastion, built in 1542–46 to a design by Bono) but substantially enlarges it: he retains only its faces, while its flanks are to be rebuilt (see Figure 19). In the plan for Valenciennes, Olgiati integrates the two existing bastions into the new scheme, while removing all the gates and adjoining bulwarks.89 An even more radical change occurs in the westernmost part of the city, on the left bank of the Scheldt near the old Château-le-Comte—the most well-fortified part of the city. In 1525–33 a large horseshoe-shaped bulwark had been built there, in front of the Porte d'Anzin.90 Olgiati, however, proposes to cut off this quarter to improve the general layout of his fortifications, arguing that this part of the city is commanded by a nearby hill.

In sum, Olgiati's military architecture was fundamentally different from that of Bono. The difference lay not so much in the design of the bastions themselves but in how the bastions now flanked each other and formed part of an integrated scheme. Adding a few individual bastions was no longer considered enough to fortify a town; rather, an overall bastioned system was required. This was an altogether new concept of fortress building, employing a regular plan in which all bastions were linked within a larger whole. To function properly, this integrated system had to be realized in its totality, for any individual bastion could operate correctly only when it had two equally operational neighbors. This entailed a different approach to fortification planning. In the 1540s individual bastions were added where necessary, while the existing circuit of the walls remained unchanged. Olgiati's system, by contrast, demanded a regularization of the enceinte and the construction of several bastions simultaneously. This raises the question as to what extent Olgiati's plans were actually executed.

Outcome, Influence, and Significance

It is difficult to know whether many of the minor improvements Olgiati proposed for existing fortresses were carried out. The amendments he suggested in Cambrai, Renty, and Bouchain were largely ignored.91 The outcomes of his designs for large-scale new enceintes are easier to assess: these were far too ambitious and costly and were nowhere realized in their entirety, although in subsequent years a few bastions were added here and there in accordance with Olgiati's plans.

In Maastricht the implementation of Olgiati's scheme remained limited to the construction of one bastion. It was begun in 1554 and can be attributed to Sebastian van Noyen, but its location and its composition (with its large size, obtuse front, and retired flanks behind round orillons) correspond exactly to Olgiati's plan.92 After the completion of this first bastion, however, the works in Maastricht came to a halt for more than two decades. In Valenciennes not one of Olgiati's new bastions was executed; the works there were limited to completing the already begun Montois bastion. In Bapaume a more substantial part of Olgiati's plan was carried out: the Egmont bastion, erected on the northwest corner of the town wall, was probably begun in 1554 by Sebastian van Noyen; around the same time one of the existing bastions, built by Bono in the 1540s, was reinforced with round orillons; and later, the Lannoy bastion was added on the east side of the town.93 All three interventions correspond with Olgiati's plan.

In Arras the existing fortifications were maintained, although two bastions were added later: the Marles bastion in the west and the Saint-Michel bastion in the east. Begun around 1560 and completed in the 1580s, they can be attributed to Jacob van Noyen, yet in their location and ground plan they correspond to Olgiati's plan of 1553.94 Documents from 1560 confirm that the Saint-Michel bastion was built “according to the plans of the engineers Jean Mary [Olgiati], former collaborator of the late Sebastian, and Jacob van Noyen.”95 This proves that even several years after his visit, Olgiati's designs still served as master plans.

These examples demonstrate the immediate effect of Olgiati's visit: parts of his plans were carried out in subsequent years, especially by Sebastian van Noyen and, after 1560, Jacob van Noyen. But Olgiati's influence went beyond the works he planned himself; it also manifested itself indirectly in two ways. First, the new fortifications the Van Noyens designed after 1553 were clearly indebted to Olgiati's principles. Sebastian's plans of 1554–55 for the fortresses of Hesdinfert, Charlemont, and Philippeville all show similarities to Olgiati's manner, from the layout of the bastions and the cavaliers behind them to the disposition of the gates.96 These “Olgiatian” features are recognizable also on a newly discovered perspectival design drawing for Philippeville attributable to Sebastian van Noyen (Figure 20; see Figure 2).97 The same principles are adopted in a pair of alternative designs for the expansion of Thionville, attributed to Jacob van Noyen, dating from around 1561 (Figure 21).98 

Figure 20

Sebastian van Noyen, design for the new fortress town Philippeville, 1555 (Atlas 71.5.G.25, fol. 83, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Rome; © Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Roma).

Figure 20

Sebastian van Noyen, design for the new fortress town Philippeville, 1555 (Atlas 71.5.G.25, fol. 83, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Rome; © Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Roma).

Figure 21

Jacob van Noyen, two designs for the expansion and fortification of Thionville, ca. 1561 (left, Codex Barberinianus Latinus 4391, fol. 38 [XXXVII], Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana; © 2019 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, reproduced by permission of Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, with all rights reserved; right, Kaarten en Plattegronden in Handschrift, no. 446, Algemeen Rijksarchief, Brussels; © Algemeen Rijksarchief).

Figure 21

Jacob van Noyen, two designs for the expansion and fortification of Thionville, ca. 1561 (left, Codex Barberinianus Latinus 4391, fol. 38 [XXXVII], Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana; © 2019 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, reproduced by permission of Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, with all rights reserved; right, Kaarten en Plattegronden in Handschrift, no. 446, Algemeen Rijksarchief, Brussels; © Algemeen Rijksarchief).

Second, Olgiati's influence can be seen in the designs of at least two of the Italian engineers who worked in the Low Countries after Olgiati's visit. Francesco Thebaldi and Mario Brunelli both arrived in the Low Countries in 1554, shortly after Olgiati returned to Milan. Thebaldi (or Tibaldi) came from Mantua and was an assistant to Olgiati.99 Of Brunelli, neither his origins nor his relation to Olgiati is documented, but his familiarity with Olgiati's work is evident.100 Like Olgiati, Thebaldi and Brunelli worked mainly on the southern border fortresses. Thebaldi stayed in the Low Countries for eight months, from September 1554 to April 1555. His only documented work concerns Gravelines. After his return to Italy, he worked under Olgiati's direction in Novara and Cremona. Brunelli stayed much longer in the Low Countries, from April 1554 to October 1557, but little is known about his activities. He developed a plan to flood Mariembourg, recently captured by the French, and worked on the fortifications of Mons and Cambrai.101 Later he was employed to direct the construction of trenches and temporary field fortifications.

Both Thebaldi's plan for the fortification of Gravelines and Brunelli's for the fortification of Mons show striking similarities to Olgiati's drawings (Figure 22). In both cases the existing fortifications are shown in red outlines, which match with the corresponding plans of Gravelines and Mons in the BNT atlas. Brunelli's plan of Mons shows a vertical section through the rampart, just like Olgiati's plan of Valenciennes. Both Thebaldi's and Brunelli's projects conform to Olgiati's principles, from the overall defensive scheme to the composition of the bastions and the adjoining cavaliers. Thebaldi and Brunelli may have based their plans on drawings Olgiati made during his tour in 1553, or they may have created their own designs using the master's method. Either way, Olgiati introduced new design principles and practices to the Low Countries in 1553, and these were adopted by other engineers, locals as well as Italians.

Figure 22

Mario Brunelli, plan for the fortification of Mons, 1556 (no. 1141, Cartes et Plans, Archives de l'État, Mons; © Archives de l'État, Mons).

Figure 22

Mario Brunelli, plan for the fortification of Mons, 1556 (no. 1141, Cartes et Plans, Archives de l'État, Mons; © Archives de l'État, Mons).

Conclusion

After the arrival of Bono in 1540, Olgiati's visit to the Low Countries in 1553 marked a second turning point in the development of military architecture there. His designs differed fundamentally from Bono's and had a lasting effect on fortification practice. In the preceding two decades (1533–53), fortifying a town had involved little more than adding a few small, isolated bastions that did not link to form a defensive system. Bastions were simply attached to existing town walls, which remained otherwise unchanged. Often an older gun tower or bulwark stood on the spot where a bastion was required, in which case the existing structure was remodeled into a bastion-like structure, usually of irregular shape. This pragmatic approach gave the individual bastions and the fortifications as a whole a heterogeneous appearance. In this regard it must be emphasized that the regular bastioned enceintes of Bono's best-known achievements—the Ghent citadel, the Antwerp city walls, Mariembourg—were not representative of the many border towns he fortified in this period; their enceintes were disparate conglomerations of various defensive works, including only a few new bastions.

The bastions built after Olgiati and Van Noyen's tour were not only different in shape and size, but also their siting and layout were now interrelated so as to enable reciprocal flanking. It is only after this critical step that one can speak of a full bastioned system. Instead of merely modernizing existing fortifications, Olgiati provided master plans for the construction of entirely new, coherent, and uniform bastioned enceintes, proposing to relocate existing walls and gates as needed. Still, with only a few of his designs carried through to completion, most of the fortifications he worked on remained inchoate in form, seemingly comparable to Bono's piecemeal legacy. For Bono, however, the existing town wall dictated the location and form of each new bastion. For Olgiati, the envisaged bastioned system would reshape the existing urban fabric. This new, more comprehensive approach had a far greater impact on urban development than the modest cobbling together of defensive works practiced by Bono and others before the early 1550s. Indeed, scholarly debates on the origins of the bastion notwithstanding, this shift—from bastions to bastioned systems—was ultimately of greater significance for the history of urban planning than the appearance of the first bastions in the 1530s.

Notes

Notes
1.
This article derives from a chapter of my PhD dissertation (University of Leuven, 2009) and is based on a paper I first presented in 2003 at the Joint Doctoral Seminar in Theory and History of Architecture of the Universities of Leuven, Ghent, and Louvain. My research received funding from the Research Foundation Flanders and the Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique. The Belgian Historical Institute in Rome funded my research in Italy in 2004. I wish to thank Krista De Jonge, Charles van den Heuvel, and Marino Viganò for their generous help and advice. All translations in this article are my own.
2.
The best study of Olgiati's career is Silvio Leydi, Le cavalcate dell'ingegnero: L'opera di Gianmaria Olgiati, ingegnere militare di Carlo V (Modena: Edizioni Panini, 1989). See also Carlo Promis, “Gl'ingegneri militari che operarono o scrissero in Piemonte dall'anno MCCC all'anno MDCL,” Miscellanea di Storia Italiana 12 (1871), 515–22; Gianni De Moro, “Giovanni Maria Olgiati (1495–1557): Contributo alla riscoperto di un ‘inzegnero’ lombardo al servizio di Spagna,” in Architettura militare nell'Europa del XVI secolo, ed. Carlo Cresti, Amelio Fara, and Daniela Lamberini (Siena: Edizioni Periccioli, 1988), 149–206; Silvio Leydi, “Adeguamenti ‘alla moderna’ nell'opera di Gianmaria Olgiati,” in La città e le mura, ed. Cesare De Seta and Jacques Le Goff (Rome: Laterza, 1989), 206–26.
3.
On Olgiati's work in the Low Countries, see Charles van den Heuvel, “‘Capitaine Jehan Marie et maistre Bastien d'Utrecht’: Enige onbekende tekeningen van Giovanni Maria Olgiati en Sebastiaan van Noyen van Spaanse grensversterkingen in de Zuidelijke Nederlanden rond het midden van de zestiende eeuw,” Jaarboek Stichting Menno van Coehoorn (1986–87), 9–23; Charles van den Heuvel, “Papiere Bolwercken”: De introductie van de Italiaanse stede- en vestingbouw in de Nederlanden (1540–1609) en het gebruik van tekeningen (Alphen aan den Rijn: Canaletto, 1991), 28–29, 74–77, 155; Reynald Parisel, “Les villes fortifiées espagnoles en France au XVIe siècle: Étude de la constitution d'un ‘Pré-carré’ tourné contre la France, sous les règnes de Charles Quint et Philippe II (1530–1600)” (PhD diss., Université Paris I Panthéon–Sorbonne, 2002), 361–72, 842–49; Bernhard Roosens, “Habsburgse defensiepolitiek en vestingbouw in de Nederlanden (1520–1560)” (PhD diss., Universiteit Leiden, 2005), 357–63; Pieter Martens, “La défense des Pays-Bas et l'architecture militaire pendant la régence de Marie de Hongrie (1531–1555),” in Marie de Hongrie: Politique et culture sous la Renaissance aux Pays-Bas, ed. Bertrand Federinov and Gilles Docquier (Morlanwelz: Musée Royal de Mariemont, 2008), 90–105; Pieter Martens, “Militaire architectuur en vestingoorlog in de Nederlanden tijdens het regentschap van Maria van Hongarije (1531–1555): De ontwikkeling van de gebastioneerde vestingbouw” (PhD diss., University of Leuven, 2009), 175–207.
4.
The importance of Olgiati's visit for the evolution of bastioned fortifications in the Low Countries was first noted by Van den Heuvel in “Papiere Bolwercken,” 76.
5.
Most of the written evidence is known. I found additional documents in Brussels (Algemeen Rijksarchief) and Madrid (Palacio Real), but my research in Milan did not yield new information on Olgiati's activities in the Low Countries.
6.
Codex Barberinianus Latinus (hereafter Cod. Barb.) 4391, fol. 43 [XLII], Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana: plan of Maastricht. Architettura Militare, vol. IV (hereafter AM, IV), Archivio di Stato, Turin: plans of Cambrai (fol. 13), Mariembourg (fol. 16), Bouchain (fol. 15), Renty (fol. 18), and Luxembourg (fol. 31). For discussion of this group of six plans, see Van den Heuvel, “ ‘Capitaine Jehan Marie et maistre Bastien d'Utrecht’ ”; De Moro, “Giovanni Maria Olgiati”; Leydi, Le cavalcate dell'ingegnero, 69–74, 136–38; Van den Heuvel, “Papiere Bolwercken,” 74–77, 92–93. Further literature on individual plans is cited below. Map 416, Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid (hereafter PRM): plans of Arras (fol. 38r), Aire (fol. 38v), Valenciennes (fol. 39), Bapaume (fol. 40), and Cambrai (fol. 43). These five plans are unstudied. Their existence was brought to light by Fernando Bouza, “Aulcuns deseigns des places des Pays Dembas: El cardenal Granvela y una planta de Valenciennes, fechada en 1553, del ingeniero Milanés Giovan María Olgiato,” Avisos: Noticias de la Real Biblioteca 2, no. 5 (1996).
7.
John Hale, “The Early Development of the Bastion: An Italian Chronology c. 1450–c. 1534,” in Europe in the Late Middle Ages, ed. John Hale et al. (London: Faber and Faber, 1965), 466. See also Simon Pepper and Nicolas Adams, Firearms and Fortifications. Military Architecture and Siege Warfare in Sixteenth-Century Siena (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986).
8.
Nicolas Faucherre, Pieter Martens, and Hugues Paucot, eds., La genèse du système bastionné en Europe/The Genesis of the Bastioned System in Europe, 1500–1550 (Navarrenx: Cercle Historique de l'Arribère, 2014).
9.
On Van Noyen's Baths of Diocletian, see the contributions of Krista De Jonge and Peter Fuhring in Hieronymus Cock: The Renaissance in Print, ed. Joris Van Grieken et al. (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2013), 42–44 and 118–23; and Edward H. Wouk, “Antoine Perrenot de Granvelle, the Quatre Vents Press, and the Patronage of Prints in Early Modern Europe,” Simiolus 38, no. 1 (2015), 31–61.
10.
Krista De Jonge, “Le palais Granvelle à Bruxelles: Premier exemple de la Renaissance romaine dans les anciens Pays-Bas,” in Les Granvelle et les anciens Pays-Bas, ed. Krista De Jonge and Gustaaf Janssens (Leuven: Universitaire Pers Leuven, 2000), 341–87.
11.
Lodovico Guicciardini, Descrittione di tutti i Paesi Bassi (Antwerp, 1567), 101: “Sebastiano d'Oia d'Utrecht, grandissimo Architettore di Carlo Quinto Imperatore, & del Re Filippo, il quale con gran' laude & honore, disegnò & ordino Edinfert, Carlomont, & Filippovila terre di frontiera fortissime.” Giorgio Vasari, Le vite (Florence, 1568): “Nell'architettura e scultura i più celebrati fiaminghi sono Sebastiano d'Oia d'Utrech, il quale servì Carlo V in alcune fortificazioni e poi il re Filippo.”
12.
Van den Heuvel, “Papiere Bolwercken,” 30; Pieter Martens, “Pierre-Ernest de Mansfeld et les ingénieurs militaires: La défense du territoire,” in Un prince de la Renaissance: Pierre-Ernest de Mansfeld (1517–1604), ed. Jean-Luc Mousset and Krista De Jonge (Luxembourg: Musée National d'Histoire et d'Art, 2007), 106.
13.
On Italian engineers in the Low Countries, see Van den Heuvel, “Papiere Bolwercken”; Philippe Bragard, “Les ingénieurs des fortifications dans les Pays-Bas espagnols et dans la principauté de Liège (1504–1713)” (PhD diss., Université Catholique de Louvain, 1998); Roosens, “Habsburgse defensiepolitiek”; Philippe Bragard, Dictionnaire biographique des ingénieurs des fortifications: Pays-Bas espagnols, principauté de Liège, Franche-Comté, 1504–1713 (Namur: Les Amis de la Citadelle de Namur, 2011); Pieter Martens and Dirk Van de Vijver, “Engineers and the Circulation of Knowledge in the Spanish Netherlands,” in Embattled Territory: The Circulation of Knowledge in the Spanish Netherlands, ed. Sven Dupré, Bert De Munck, Werner Thomas, and Geert Vanpaemel (Ghent: Academia Press, 2015), 73–106.
14.
On these tours, see Roosens, “Habsburgse defensiepolitiek,” 236–50; Martens, “Militaire architectuur,” 63–68, 105, 117, 149.
15.
In the summer of 1536 Olgiati was probably with Charles V's army in Piedmont. From 28 October until 15 November 1536, Charles V stayed in Genoa, where a few weeks earlier Olgiati had presented his project for the city's new fortifications. Charles no doubt witnessed the progress of these works during his subsequent visits to Genoa in 1538, 1541, and 1543. From 22 to 29 August 1541, Charles was in Milan, where a few months earlier Olgiati had been promoted to chief engineer of the Duchy of Milan. On Charles's travels, see Vicente de Cadenas y Vicent, Diario del Emperador Carlos V (Madrid: Hidalguía, 1992), 250, 285. On Olgiati, see Leydi, Le cavalcate dell'ingegnero, 13, 16, 77.
16.
Leydi, Le cavalcate dell'ingegnero, 22, 79, 89, 147; Nicola Soldini, “El gobernante ingeniero: Ferrante Gonzaga y las estrategias del dominio en Italia,” in Las fortificaciones de Carlos V, ed. Carlos José Hernando Sánchez (Madrid: Ediciones del Umbral, 2000), 380, 384–86.
17.
Leydi, Le cavalcate dell'ingegnero, 84; Henry Kamen, Philip of Spain (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1997), 48.
18.
Leydi, Le cavalcate dell'ingegnero, 26; Alicia Cámara, Fortificación y ciudad en los reinos de Felipe II (Madrid: Nerea, 1998), 43; Soldini, “El gobernante ingeniero,” 384; Damià Martínez Latorre, “Giovan Battista Calvi: Ingeniero de las fortificaciones de Carlos V y Felipe II (1552–1565)” (PhD diss., Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, 2002), 65–72.
19.
Draft letter from Mary of Hungary, to be signed by Charles V, addressed to Ferrante Gonzaga, datable to the end of February 1553, leg. 505, fol. 73, Estado (Flandes), Archivo General, Simancas: “Porque para cierto effecto importante a nuestro servicio ay aqui necessidad de la persona del ingeniero Ju.o Maria [Olgiati]… le ordeneis que se ponga en camino para aca por la posta o como mejor pudiere … para que visite y reconozca las fortificaciones d'estos estados.” See also Maurice van Durme, Les archives générales de Simancas et l'histoire de la Belgique, IXe–XIXe siècles (Brussels: Académie Royale, 1964), 1:14; Roosens, “Habsburgse defensiepolitiek,” 390, 459.
20.
In June 1552 the French had conquered several border fortresses in the province of Luxembourg, and the emperor's subsequent siege of Metz failed disastrously. Two of these fortresses, Damvillers and Yvoix, were supposed to be among the strongest of the entire border, fortified at great cost with new bastions by Bono (1545–52). That both fortresses were easily captured by the French helps to explain why the authorities now wanted to engage another engineer. On these campaigns, see Martens, “Pierre-Ernest de Mansfeld” (2007), 80–81, 100–105; Martens, “Militaire architectuur,” 150–69.
21.
On 25 March 1553, Gonzaga sent a letter of recommendation of Olgiati to Charles V. A few days later Olgiati commenced his journey, crossing the Alps via Trento. See Promis, “Gl'ingegneri militari,” 519; Leydi, Le cavalcate dell'ingegnero, 69–70.
22.
Giovanni Maria Olgiati to Ferrante Gonzaga, from Brussels, 5 May 1553, cart. 355, Militare, parte antica, Archivio di Stato, Milan: “Con la gra[tia] di Dio sono gionto in Brusselli alli 26 d[e]l m[ese] pasato, et abio apresentato le litere a mons[eigneu]r daras (Granvelle) il qualle il terso di mi fese parlar alla regina Maria (Mary of Hungary) la qualle mi dise che la caoza che la m[ae]sta s[e]r[enissim]a mi avia a V[ostra] E[cce]ll[enz]a richiesto era p[er] che io dovese andare a vixitare le terre et presidij d[e]lle frontere et cossi expetto la expedicio[n] p[er] andare.” See also Promis, “Gl'ingegneri militari,” 520–21; Van den Heuvel, “Papiere Bolwercken,” 182n27.
23.
See the Venetian ambassador's letters from Brussels, dated 29 April and 6 May 1553, in Leydi, Le cavalcate dell'ingegnero, 145–46. Granvelle's papers now in Madrid (Palacio Real) contain several letters related to Olgiati's visit to the Low Countries, but these provide little information on his activities there.
24.
On Van Noyen's mission, see the following documents in Algemeen Rijksarchief, Brussels (hereafter AR), Audiëntie (hereafter Aud.) and Rekenkamer (hereafter RK). On 25 February he was sent to Luxembourg and Thionville with designs by Bono (letters of Mary of Hungary to Charles de Berlaymont, governor of Namur, and Bernard de Schauwenberg, governor of Thionville, AR, Aud. 106, fol. 246; Aud. 1659/1, fol. 133; Aud. 1664/4, fols. 124–25). In mid-April he designed new fortifications at Arlon (Maarten van Rossem, governor of Luxembourg, to Mary of Hungary, 14 and 15 April 1553, AR, Aud. 107, fols. 149 and 163). In early May he was in Luxembourg (Van Rossem to Mary of Hungary, 8 May 1553, AR, Aud. 1664/3, fol. 92v). In the period 1552–54 both Bono and Van Noyen supervised construction works in Luxembourg (accounts of the fortifications of Luxembourg, AR, RK 27167, fols. 11–14).
25.
In February the authorities still referred to Van Noyen as “Granvelle's architect,” but from July onward he was always called “engineer of the emperor.” For the introduction of the term engineer in these years, see Pieter Martens, “Ingénieur (1540), citadelle (1543), bastion (1546): Apparition et assimilation progressive de termes italiens dans le langage de l'architecture militaire aux Pays-Bas des Habsbourg,” in Les mots de la guerre dans l'Europe de la Renaisssance, ed. Marie Madeleine Fontaine and Jean-Louis Fournel (Geneva: Droz, 2015), 105–40.
26.
AM, IV, fol. 31: plan of Luxembourg (“Lucinborgo”). This plan is clearly linked to Olgiati's visit, although the inscriptions are not in his hand. It is dated not 11 May (as stated in the literature) but 2 May (“ali ij magio” [without year]), which would imply that Olgiati drew the plan in Brussels, before he left for Luxembourg. The plan's content matches with a later account of Olgiati and Van Noyen's work in Luxembourg (Van Rossem to Mary of Hungary, 6 August 1553, AR, Aud. 1664/3, fol. 152). See also Paul Margue, “Wallmauern, Plattformen und Bollwerke: Wie die Stadt Luxemburg zur Festung wurde,” Hémecht 45, no. 1 (1993), 46–49; Marcel Watelet, Luxembourg ville obsidionale: Cartographie et ingénierie européennes d'une place forte du XVIe au XIXe siècle (Luxembourg: Musée d'Histoire de la Ville de Luxembourg, 1998), 34–35; Pieter Martens, “Pierre-Ernest de Mansfeld et les ingénieurs et architectes militaires,” Hémecht 56, no. 4 (2004), 487; Martens, “Pierre-Ernest de Mansfeld” (2007), 103–5.
27.
Cod. Barb. 4391, fol. 43 [XLII]: plan of Maastricht (“Mastriche”), signed by Olgiati and dated 18 May 1553. See also Cornelis Koeman and Marco van Egmond, “Surveying and Official Mapping in the Low Countries, 1500–ca. 1670,” in Cartography in the European Renaissance, ed. David Woodward (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007), 1282.
28.
Giovanni Maria Olgiati to Charles de Berlaymont, undated (October 1553), AR, Aud. 1673/3a, fol. 167. See also Leydi, Le cavalcate dell'ingegnero, 74n25; Bragard, Dictionnaire biographique, 295.
29.
Accounts of the fortifications of Maastricht, 1552–55, AR, RK 26453, fol. 5v. See also L. J. Morreau, Bolwerk der Nederlanden: De vestingwerken van Maastricht sedert het begin van de 13e eeuw (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1979), 129; Roosens, “Habsburgse defensiepolitiek,” 359–60.
30.
Morreau, Bolwerk der Nederlanden, 57.
31.
On the siege of Thérouanne, which had just begun when Olgiati arrived in the Low Countries, see Pieter Martens, “La puissance de l'artillerie de Charles Quint au milieu du XVIe siècle: Le siège de Thérouanne en 1553,” in Artillerie et fortification 1200–1600, ed. Nicolas Prouteau et al. (Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 2011), 119–42; Martens, “Militaire architectuur,” 249–81.
32.
Captain General Bugnicourt to Mary of Hungary, from the army camp outside Thérouanne, 15 June 1553, AR, Aud. 1662/3, fol. 183–84: “Les Espaignols regrettent fort ung nom[m]é Jehan Marie [Olgiati] qu'ils disent estre nouvellement venu d'Italie. S'il plaisoit a V[ost]re Ma[jes]té l'envoier icy, on luy pourroit monstrer l'ouvraige pour en avoir aussi son advis.” Enclosed in this letter was the petition of the Spanish commander: “Suplico … de escrevir a la Reyna que enbie y mande venir aca a Juan Maria ingeniero, por que es el mayor onbre del mundo y servyra mucho en esta jornada.”
33.
Mary of Hungary to Captain General Bugnicourt, 19 June 1553, AR, Aud. 1662/3, fol. 199. Thérouanne was captured on 20 June.
34.
Leydi, Le cavalcate dell'ingegnero, 146.
35.
Letter of Charles V to all the lieutenants, governors, and captains of the towns, forts, and castles along the borders, from Brussels, 13 July 1553, AR, Aud. 957, fol. 235.
36.
Draft versions of two letters by Mary of Hungary to Philibert de Martigny, captain of Mariembourg, and to Charles de Lalaing, governor of Hainaut, from Brussels, 14 July 1553, AR, Aud. 1635, unfolioed.
37.
AM, IV, fol. 16: plan of Mariembourg (“Mariien boerchge”). The plan is unsigned and undated but evidently related to this visit, and thus datable to 15–25 July 1553. Van den Heuvel and Leydi attribute it to Olgiati, while Roosens attributes it to Van Noyen. The inscriptions, in Dutch and bastardized French, are almost certainly Van Noyen's. Martigny's report of this visit, dated 25 July 1553 (AR, Aud. 1663/4, fol. 40), states that Olgiati and Van Noyen found the entryways to the bastions and their gun chambers too narrow and vulnerable, the gates poorly protected, and the water supply system of the ditches ineffective. See Van den Heuvel, “Papiere Bolwercken,” 92, 198n8; Charles Van den Heuvel, “Mariembourg,” in Maria van Hongarije: Koningin tussen keizers en kunstenaars 1505–1558, ed. Bob van den Boogert et al. (Zwolle: Waanders, 1993), 159; Bernhard Roosens, “Neue Festungsstädte in den alten Niederlanden zur Zeit Karls V. und Philips II. Mariembourg, Hesdinfert, Charlemont und Philippeville,” in Festungsbau: Geometrie, Technologie, Sublimierung, ed. Bettina Marten et al. (Berlin: Lukas Verlag, 2012), 138.
38.
Mary of Hungary to Martigny, 14 July 1553.
39.
Fumay is depicted on a slightly later manuscript map of the region (AM, III, fol. 62v [formerly 79v]), but the attribution of this map to Olgiati in 1553 (in Van den Boogert, Maria van Hongarije, 125) is mistaken. The inscriptions are not in Olgiati's hand, and the map shows two fortresses, Charlemont and Rocroi, that were founded in 1554–55, two years after Olgiati's return to Italy.
40.
“Planté paissons pour remedyer au boluwercq de la porte de Nimy mal encommenchié,” quoted in Henri Léonard, “La ville de Mons en 1550: Essai de reconstitution en vue perspective et textes à l'appui,” Annales du Cercle archéologique de Mons 63 (1957–58), 179. See also Bragard, Dictionnaire biographique, 296.
41.
Three versions of Van Deventer's plan of Mons survive. See Wouter Bracke, “Jacob van Deventer e l'atlante di città dei Paesi Bassi,” in Le città dei cartografi: Studi e ricerche di storia urbana, ed. Cesare De Seta et al. (Naples: Electa, 2008), 40–41; Christine Gobeaux, “Mons au XVIe siècle: Catalogue descriptif des vues, plans et sièges,” Annales du Cercle archéologique de Mons 81 (2011), 361–84.
42.
Map 416, fol. 39, PRM: plan of Valenciennes (“Valensiena”), signed by Olgiati, dated 20 August 1553. See also Justa Moreno Garbayo, “Mapas de la época de Carlos V,” Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos 64 (1958), 731, no. 27. AM, IV, fol. 15: plan of Bouchain (“Bossain”), signed by Olgiati, dated 22 August 1553. See also Martens, “La défense des Pays-Bas,” 104; Alain Salamagne, “Philippe II de Croÿ et la fortification des villes de Hainaut: Avesnes, Bouchain, Le Quesnoy, trois chantiers renaissants de la décennie 1530,” in Villes et villages: Organisation et représentation de l'espace, ed. Alain Dierkens et al. (Brussels: Le Livre Timperman, 2011), 689 (with wrong dates, however). AM, IV, fol. 13: plan of the citadel of Cambrai (“citadella de Canbrai”), signed by Olgiati, dated 24 August 1553. See also Philippe Bragard, “La citadelle de Cambrai et les ingénieurs des fortifications aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles,” in Le château et la ville: Conjonction, opposition, juxtaposition, XIe–XVIIIe siècle, ed. Gilles Blieck et al. (Paris: Comité des Travaux Historiques et Scientifiques, 2002), 311. The anonymous plan of the Cambrai citadel, without inscriptions, in Map 416, fol. 43 (unpublished), PRM, appears to be a simplified, scaled-down, and slightly modified copy of Olgiati's original.
43.
The plans of these three towns are unpublished. Map 416, fol. 40, PRM: plan of Bapaume (“Bappami”). This is probably a simplified copy of a lost original by Olgiati. It is not in his hand, but its content is analogous to Olgiati's autograph drawings. The inscription “tolto la pianta ali 18 octobre” possibly means that this copy was made on 18 October (1553); it seems unlikely that Olgiati was in Bapaume that day. Map 416, fol. 38r, PRM: plan of Arras (“La vile de Arras”), unsigned and undated, but unmistakably in the style of Olgiati, with inscriptions in Dutch, probably by Van Noyen. See also Pieter Martens, “An Early Sixteenth-Century Drawing of Two Bulwarks at Arras,” Fort 27 (1999), 82. Map 416, fol. 38v, PRM: plan of Aire (“De aras et err”), unsigned and undated. This schematic plan, on the verso of the plan of Arras, is unfinished but clearly identifiable as Aire-sur-la-Lys.
44.
AM, IV, fol. 18: plan of the fortified castle of Renty (“castello de Ranti”), signed by Olgiati, dated 9 and 12 September 1553. See also Bernhard Roosens, “The Transformation of the Medieval Castle into an Early Modern Fortress in the 16th Century: Some Examples from the Southern Border of the Low Countries: Gravelines, Renty and Namur,” Château Gaillard: Études de castellologie médiévale 18 (1998), 198.
45.
Pieter Martens, “La destruction de Thérouanne et d'Hesdin par Charles Quint en 1553,” in La forteresse à l'épreuve du temps: Destruction, dissolution, dénaturation, XIe–XXe siècle, ed. Gilles Blieck et al. (Paris: Comité des Travaux Historiques et Scientifiques, 2007), 63–117; Martens, “Militaire architectuur,” 211–387.
46.
The building of Hesdinfert started only a year later, in September 1554, to a design by Sebastian van Noyen. The diary of Emmanuel Philibert of Savoy, who in mid-July 1553 joined the imperial field army as captain general, attests that he commissioned a design for the new fortress (“una traça … una nuova fuorça”) right after Hesdin's capture. See Emanuele Filiberto duca di Savoia, I Diari delle Campagne di Fiandra, ed. Elvira Brunelli (Turin: Società Storica Subalpina, 1928), 143–44. Later sources confirm that Emmanuel Philibert highly valued Olgiati's work. In 1556 he wrote from Ghent to the town of Cuneo to recommend Olgiati for its new fortifications (see Promis, “Gl'ingegneri,” 524), and it was through him that several of Olgiati's drawings ended up in the Savoy archives in Turin.
47.
The seriousness of this threat is shown by the fact that Charles V, who due to illness and depression had withdrawn from state affairs and not left Brussels for eight months, now traveled to Mons and Valenciennes (from 15 to 20 September) to be close to his army. Cadenas y Vicent, Diario del Emperador Carlos V, 382. The whereabouts of Olgiati and Van Noyen in this period are undocumented; they likely spent some time with the imperial army.
48.
Olgiati to Berlaymont, undated: “Vado a Namor in compagnia de ms Bastiano, il qualle portarà il disegno d[e]l castello.”
49.
Accounts of the fortifications of Namur, 1552–54, AR, RK 27257, fol. 263. The drawing is lost. Presumably this mission led to the relocation of the castle's entrance gate. See Philippe Bragard, “La construction de la première citadelle bastionnée à Namur et les ingénieurs Donato di Boni, Sébastien van Noyen et Gianmaria Olgiati (1542–1559),” Les amis de la citadelle de Namur 83 (1998), 5–21; Roosens, “The Transformation of the Medieval Castle,” 201.
50.
Leydi, Le cavalcate dell'ingegnero, 28, 73, 119.
51.
Olgiati specified the meanings of these colors on his plans: red for the present state, black for future works. For example, on the plan of Valenciennes (Map 416, fol. 39, PRM): “La linea rosa he como di preze[n]te sta la villa, la negra chomo si avera affare” (The red line is how the city is at present, the black one how it shall have to be done). The plans of Maastricht (Cod. Barb. 4391, fol. 43 [XLII]) and the Cambrai citadel (AM, IV, fol. 13) contain analogous statements.
52.
Cod. Barb. 4391, fol. 52 [XLIX]: plan (recto) and profile views (verso) of the fortifications of Saint-Omer (“La vile de Sant Tome”), anonymous and undated, attributed here to Sebastian van Noyen and dated to ca. 1553, pen in brown ink and watercolor on paper (425 × 572 millimeters), with numerous inscriptions in Dutch. Pricking holes in the paper prove that the plan was copied. The inscriptions are similar in handwriting and idiom to those on the plans of Mariembourg (AM, IV, fol. 16) and Arras (Map 416, fol. 38r, PRM), which I also attribute to Van Noyen.
53.
For example, on the site's topography: “Van hier tot aen dese sijde ist al lech lant, beemden, vijvers en vater / met deze rivieren doet men het laent onder lopen / hier is enen berrich di soe hoech is als de muer van stat” (From here to this side it's all lowland, meadows, ponds and water / with these rivers one can flood the land / here is a hill that is as high as the wall of the city). On the fortifications: “Hier en ist nijt gerampereert / hier ys de rampe acht voet leger dan de muur is / deze ramper is goet en bret genoch… sij en heft geen borstweer en daer staen veel mueren van hoven tegen de ramper dat men neer sau moeten verpen en traversen maken oep de ramper met een perrepet … en die bolverken en hebben noch geen perrepet” (Here it's not ramparted / here the rampart is eight feet lower than the wall / this rampart is good and wide enough … it has no parapet and there are a lot of garden walls against the rampart that ought to be pulled down, and make traverses on top of the ramparts with a parapet… and the bastions are still lacking a parapet).
54.
Both sides of the sheet show two bastions, the Beauverger bastion and the bastion at the Porte de Sainte-Croix (“bolverc sante croeis”); these were built in the years 1541–50. Between them lies the minuscule protobastion known as the Jambon, datable to around 1535. There is no sign yet of the Egmont bastion, which was begun in front of the castle in 1559. The plan of the fortifications corresponds exactly to the plan of Saint-Omer in the BNT atlas, which dates from around 1552 (see below).
55.
Hard evidence that Van Noyen and Olgiati visited Saint-Omer in 1553 is lacking, but it is likely, given that they passed through the region in September. Van Noyen visited Saint-Omer in August 1554; see Roosens, “Habsburgse defensiepolitiek,” 365, 457.
56.
Olgiati's autograph plans of Valenciennes, Bouchain, and Cambrai are dated 20, 22, and 24 August, respectively. Assuming they were all dated in situ, and taking travel time into account, this means he spent at most two days in Bouchain and finished his plan of Cambrai within two days of arriving there.
57.
When Van Noyen was sent to Luxembourg, he was given Bono's plan (“patron et desseing”) for the fortifications to take with him (Mary of Hungary to Berlaymont, 25 February 1553). When Olgiati went to Namur, he counted on Van Noyen to bring the drawing (“il disegno”) of the castle with him (Olgiati to Berlaymont, undated).
58.
That Olgiati worked in this way is confirmed by the pricking holes in his drawings; made to copy plans from one sheet to another, these occur only on the red outlines (existing fortifications), not on the black lines (Olgiati's modifications).
59.
Ms. q.II.57, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, Turin (BNT atlas): anonymous and undated atlas titled “Desseins de plans de villes, citadelles, et forts,” containing ninety manuscript plans of fortifications, mostly of sites in Italy (especially Piedmont) and the Low Countries. The BNT atlas comes from the collection of the dukes of Savoy; it probably belonged to Emmanuel Philibert. In contrast to the five well-known Architettura Militare volumes in Turin's Archivio di Stato, it is not a post-factum compilation of various plans with different origins, but an unfinished presentation atlas of plans with the same format and style. The drawings are all executed in a similar technique on paper of the same size (79 × 53 centimeters) and with the same watermarks. Pricking holes in the paper prove that the plans were copied. Most of the plans lack inscriptions and depict no more than the circuits of the stone walls. The atlas contains approximately sixty-five plans of fortifications in Italy (of which thirty-five are identified) and at least twenty-seven plans of fortifications in the Low Countries (of which only two are identified), in a random order. The plans from the Low Countries represent at least twenty-two different towns, including the following: fol. 14, Avesnes [a]; fol. 17, Yvoix; fol. 20, Saint-Omer; fol. 21, Luxembourg; fol. 23, Bourbourg [a]; fol. 24, Bouchain [a]; fol. 26, Mariembourg; fol. 28, Valenciennes; fol. 29, Cambrai citadel [a]; fol. 32, Cambrai citadel [b]; fol. 34, Bourbourg [b]; fol. 35, Avesnes [b]; fol. 38, Béthune; fol. 39, Lillers; fol. 43, Namur castle; fol. 45, Douai; fol. 46, Aire; fol. 48, Mons; fol. 51, Gravelines [a]; fol. 56, Maastricht (“Mastrich”); fol. 57, Arras; fol. 63, Le Quesnoy; fol. 77, Bouchain [b]; fol. 79, Renty castle; fol. 80, Gravelines [b]; fol. 82, Hesdinfert (“Edin”); fol. 86, Wageningen. Five towns are represented twice (here distinguished with [a] and [b]); in each of these cases the two plans are largely identical, although one version may be more finished than the other. For example, the plan of Gravelines [b] (fol. 80) shows only the circuit of the stone walls, in red; the plan of Gravelines [a] (fol. 51) shows exactly the same circuit but depicts also, in gray, the associated earthworks (including terrepleins behind the walls and bulwarks outside the gates) and, in blue, the surrounding ditches and waterways. It is important to understand that the latter plan does not reflect a more advanced state of the fortifications but merely a more advanced state of the drawing process. The unfinished state of the drawings must not be confused with the state of the fortifications. These plans were first discussed by Van den Heuvel, who identifies nine towns in “Papiere Bolwercken,” 53–57. Two more were published in Roosens, “The Transformation of the Medieval Castle,” 200; Martens, “Pierre-Ernest de Mansfeld” (2004), 484; and Martens “Pierre-Ernest de Mansfeld et les ingénieurs militaires,” 103. All the others are here identified and studied for the first time. The connection between this atlas and Olgiati's drawings has gone unnoticed until now.
60.
Two exceptions are the slightly later plan of Hesdinfert, the new fortress town founded in 1554, and the plan of Mariembourg, which appears to be based on Olgiati and Van Noyen's plan. Nearly all the other plans date from 1552–53. Hence, they are certainly not based on drawings by Francesco Paciotto (who first visited the Low Countries in 1558), as suggested by Van den Heuvel, “Papiere Bolwercken,” 53; and Hilary Ballon and David Friedman, “Portraying the City in Early Modern Europe: Measurement, Representation, and Planning,” in Woodward, Cartography in the European Renaissance, 687.
61.
I found only one discrepancy. It concerns the plans of Valenciennes: the bastion Montois is absent from the plan in the BNT atlas (fol. 28), while its outer contours do appear on Olgiati's red outline drawing (Map 416, fol. 39, PRM). The reason is that this bastion was begun in 1552–53, right after the BNT plan was made, but just before Olgiati's visit to Valenciennes in August 1553.
62.
These large city plans were scaled down to fit into the atlas. Plans of small fortresses, by contrast, did not need rescaling and were copied directly through a process of superimposing the sheets of paper and pricking through the plan. Thus, the plans of the Cambrai citadel in the BNT atlas (fols. 29 and 32) are both the same size as the red outline on Olgiati's drawing (AM, IV, fol. 13). Likewise, one of the plans of Bouchain in the BNT atlas (fol. 24, but not fol. 77) is the same size as the matching outline on Olgiati's drawing (AM, IV, fol. 15). I verified this by measuring each drawing; as they are kept in different collections, side-by-side comparison was not possible.
63.
The invention of instruments for enlarging or reducing drawings, such as the reduction compass and the pantograph, is usually dated to the late sixteenth century, but these plans suggest that such instruments were being used earlier.
64.
The plan was rescaled on the same sheet so that it could be transferred to another sheet with a different format. This is confirmed by a comparison of the Olgiati/Van Noyen sheet (AM, IV, fol. 16) with the corresponding plan in the BNT atlas (fol. 26): the latter is identical in terms of content to the large ink drawing on the Olgiati/Van Noyen sheet, but it is the same size as the smaller version in chalk.
65.
For the current state of research on Van Deventer's town plans, see Reinout Rutte and Bram Vannieuwenhuyze, Stedenatlas Jacob van Deventer (Bussum: Thoth, 2018). On urban cartography in general, see Ballon and Friedman, “Portraying the City.”
66.
Surprisingly, this seems to be true also for the square fortresses, such as Mariembourg and the citadels of Ghent and Cambrai. Although their corner bastions were in principle capable of flanking each other, the few available plans and archaeological remains suggest that the guns in their flanks were not aimed toward the faces of the neighboring bastions, but fired alongside the curtain walls.
67.
On the imagery of Antwerp's new fortifications, see Pieter Martens, “Hieronymus Cock's View of Antwerp (1557): Its Genesis and Offspring, from Antwerp to Italy,” Simiolus 39, no. 3 (2017), 171–96.
68.
At Avesnes, for example, the Galland bastion, originally a bulwark in front of a city gate, is very similar to the bastion de la Reine, newly built in 1534–38. Conversely, at Aire, the bastion at the Porte d'Arras, designed by Bono ca. 1543, was erected in front of a city gate, just like a traditional bulwark. On the transformation of bulwarks into bastions, see Martens, “An Early Sixteenth-Century Drawing.”
69.
On this terminological issue, see Martens, “Ingénieur,” 129–34.
70.
On the dating of these bastions, based on building accounts, see Parisel, “Les villes fortifiées,” 657, 689–93.
71.
The same is true for the partially preserved bastions of Utrecht (1543–58), which were not designed to flank each other. See Pieter Martens and Agnes Hemmes, “Le développement de la fortification bastionnée à Utrecht (1528–1559): La tradition locale face à l'innovation italienne,” in Faucherre et al., La genèse du système bastionné, 187–99.
72.
Alain Salamagne, Construire au Moyen Âge: Les chantiers de fortification de Douai (Villeneuve-d'Ascq: Presses Universitaires du Septentrion, 2001).
73.
Morreau, Bolwerk der Nederlanden, 125–27, 137–38.
74.
Martens, “An Early-Sixteenth Century Drawing.”
75.
This is the so-called Jambon. See Laurent Bocquillon, A la découverte des anciennes fortifications de Saint-Omer (Cambrai: Nord Patrimoine, 2001), 20, 23, 85.
76.
On these early bastions, see Alain Salamagne, “Inter se disputando? Maître Jehan Lartésien, le Frère de Modène et l'invention du bastion,” in Création artistique et conflits historiques dans l'Europe du Nord, ed. François Robichon (Villeneuve-d'Ascq: Université Charles de Gaulle Lille 3, 2000), 24–41; Parisel, “Les villes fortifiées,” 650–63; Salamagne, “Philippe II de Croÿ.”
77.
Compare with the plan of the Cardon bastion in Alain Salamagne, “L'entrée de Charles Quint à Valenciennes en 1540, politique et décor,” in Vérité et fiction dans les entrées solennelles à la Renaissance et à l'Âge classique, ed. John Nassichuk (Quebec: Presses de l'Université Laval, 2009), 40–42.
78.
The absent bastions are those at the Porte de Saint-Omer and Notre-Dame, of which there is no sign on the plan of Aire in the BNT atlas (fol. 46) or on Olgiati's red outline plan (Map 416, fol. 38v, PRM). Another example is the bastion Montois in Valenciennes, which some scholars date to the mid-1540s but was actually begun in 1552–53. Conversely, the speculative attribution to Olgiati of the bastion Galland in Avesnes is clearly wrong; as the plans in the BNT atlas (fols. 14 and 35) show, it was already finished by 1552 and also differs from Olgiati's manner. Tentative dates and attributions for all these bastions appear in Parisel, “Les villes fortifiées,” 683, 695, 848, 1250–56.
79.
As he noted on his plan of the Cambrai citadel (AM, IV, fol. 13): “Questi baluardi per esser picolli et debilli et avere poca piaza cosi per le case mate quanto per il cavalere” (These bastions are small and weak and lack space for both the casemates and the cavalier).
80.
Scala drew plans of the fortifications of Damvillers and Yvoix after witnessing the successful French sieges of both fortresses in June 1552. He found their bastions (built to designs by Bono in 1545–52) too small and added his own designs for larger ones. On the existing bastions he noted “pocha piaza” (not enough space) and described them as “pizoli, a pocho fiancho, pocha stanzia p[er] arteleria, pocha piaza di sopra, i[n] modo che p[er] tal efeto no[n] s'intende forteza” (small, with short flanks, not enough room for artillery, and not enough space on top, so that one cannot consider this a fortress). Ms Militare 377, fols. 37v-39r, Biblioteca Reale, Turin (Damvillers, Yvoix). Ms PD 255, unfolioed, Museo Correr, Venice (Yvoix). See also Martens, “Pierre-Ernest de Mansfeld” (2004), 483–85; Martens, “Pierre-Ernest de Mansfeld” (2007), 81, 101; Martens, “Militaire architectuur,” 166–68.
81.
“Una fortezza bella quadra perfetta … cosa da veder belissima, gran fabrica di muri, ma li baluardi restano piccolini, cosa strana, non li poteva stare due pezzi d'artiglieria sopra” (A beautiful and perfect square fortress… a most beautiful thing to see, a great construction of walls, but the bastions remain very small, which is a strange thing, two pieces of artillery could not fit on top). See Giuseppe Bertini, “Dalla Lombardia ai Paesi Bassi: Il viaggio di Margherita d'Austria e Alessandro Farnese nel 1556 descritto dal furiere Francesco de Marchi,” Archivio storico per le province parmensi 56 (2004), 554.
82.
On the effectiveness of mid-sixteenth-century siege artillery, see Pepper and Adams, Firearms and Fortifications; Martens, “La puissance de l'artillerie de Charles Quint.”
83.
As he stated on his plan of the Cambrai citadel (AM, IV, fol. 13): “In nel megio della cortine farli le porte” (Make the gates in the middle of the curtain walls).
84.
Reynald Parisel, “Mutation du réduit défensif en Flandre, Artois et Cambrésis sous le règne de Charles Quint,” in Blieck et al., Le château et la ville, 237.
85.
Olgiati drew a vertical section of these new ramparts on his plan of Valenciennes (Map 416, fol. 39, PRM), with an explanation of their structure: the outer wall is 8 feet wide at the bottom, slims upward to a width of 4 feet at the top, and is backed up by heavy buttresses supporting the parapet. The plan of Bapaume (Map 416, fol. 40, PRM) contains similar instructions.
86.
One consequence of this choice for open-air terraces rather than vaulted casemates is that the bastion's main platform is disconnected from the ramparts and therefore needs its own access ramp.
87.
These are mentioned only on the plan of Bapaume (Map 416, fol. 40, PRM): “Le contramine se fano al circuito delli baluardi nela fossa” (The countermines are made all around the bastions in the ditch).
88.
On these bulwarks, see Martens, An Early Sixteenth-Century Drawing, 82.
89.
Olgiati leaves the plan of the newly begun Montois bastion unmodified, but he regularizes the asymmetrical plan of the Cardon bastion (1533–36) by cutting off one of its faces: “Questo baluardo va tallgiatto p[er] non avere ad alteroar tanto la fosa esendo nette rocha” (This bastion must be trimmed to avoid having to alter the ditch too much, as it is pure rock). Map 416, fol. 39, PRM.
90.
Alain Salamagne, “Un château transformé en citadelle: Le Château-le-Comte à Valenciennes,” in Blieck et al., Le château et la ville, 141.
91.
In Cambrai it was not before 1609 that the citadel's bastions were enlarged and the gates relocated. See Bragard, “La citadelle de Cambrai,” 312. Renty was bombarded by French artillery in August 1554. The only known image of this siege offers no conclusive evidence on the bastions' shape; see Van Grieken et al., Hieronymus Cock, 334–35. The damaged fortifications were then repaired (see Roosens, “The Transformation of the Medieval Castle,” 197), but two later plans of Renty suggest that Olgiati's proposal to add round orillons to the bastions was ignored (see the anonymous plan in Codex iconographicus 141, fol. 145r, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich; and Pierre Lepoivre's plan of 1613–14 in ms. II 523, fol. 32v, PRM). In Bouchain, Olgiati recommended extending the fortress eastward by erecting a large hornwork on the other side of the river, but Pierre Lepoivre's drawing of the 1580 siege of Bouchain (ms. 19611, fol. 41, Royal Library, Brussels) shows that this extension was not realized.
92.
This was the Maria bastion, added in the east, on the right bank of the Meuse. In August 1554 Van Noyen was paid for having made two painted wooden models of a bastion in Maastricht; this must have been the Maria bastion. See Morreau, Bolwerk der Nederlanden, 125–38; Roosens, “Habsburgse defensiepolitiek,” 365, 457.
93.
Compare with the anonymous plan of Bapaume, datable to around 1560 (AM, IV, fol. 17). The Egmont bastion was dated 1554 on a stone in its countermine gallery. Parisel, “Les villes fortifiées,” 846.
94.
This explains the obtuse plan of both bastions: their faces are aligned with the adjacent corner bastions, which were never built. See also the survey of the Marles bastion by a French engineer, 1727, art. 8, Arras, no. 34, Archives du Génie, Service Historique de la Défense, Vincennes; Alain Salamagne, A la découverte des anciennes fortifications d'Arras (Cambrai: Nord Patrimoine, 1999), 20, 49–52.
95.
Two letters of Lamoral of Egmont, governor of Artois, to the captain of Arras, dated 1559 and 1560, paraphrased in Adolphe Guesnon, La surprise d'Arras tentée par Henri IV en mars 1597 et le tableau de Hans Conincxloo (Arras: Segaud, 1907), 52. The original documents in the Arras archives went up in flames in 1915.
96.
As noted by Charles van den Heuvel and Bernhard Roosens, “Los Países Bajos: Las fortificaciones y la coronación de la defensa del Imperio de Carlos V,” in Hernando Sánchez, Las fortificaciones de Carlos V, 584, 591. See also Roosens, “Neue Festungsstädte.”
97.
Atlas 71.5.G.25, fol. 83, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Rome. First published in Martens and Van de Vijver, “Engineers and the Circulation of Knowledge,” 90. This idealized view of Philippeville is clearly a pendant of Van Noyen's well-known plan for the same fortress in AR, Kaarten en Plattegronden in Handschrift, no. 2075.
98.
Cod. Barb. 4391, fol. 38 [XXXVII]; and AR, Kaarten en Plattegronden in Handschrift, no. 446. See Van den Heuvel, “Papiere Bolwercken,” 82–88; Martens, “Pierre-Ernest de Mansfeld” (2004), 488–90; Martens, “Pierre-Ernest de Mansfeld” (2007), 106–8.
99.
On Thebaldi, see Leydi, “Adeguamenti ‘alla moderna,’ ” 221; Leydi, Le cavalcate dell'ingegnero, 30, 67, 68n22; Van den Heuvel, “Papiere Bolwercken,” 79, 159; Parisel, “Mutation du réduit défensif,” 239–40; Roosens, “Habsburgse defensiepolitiek,” 369–73; Bragard, Dictionnaire biographique, 203–4, 384. For his plan of Gravelines (Cod. Barb. 4391, fol. 51 [XLVIII]), see also Roosens, “The Transformation of the Medieval Castle,” 195; Philippe Bragard et al., Gravelines en quête de mémoire (Gravelines: Musée de Gravelines, 1998), 14; Van den Heuvel and Roosens, “Los Países Bajos,” 585.
100.
On Brunelli, see Van den Heuvel, “Papiere Bolwercken,” 29, 81, 151; Roosens, “Habsburgse defensiepolitiek,” 363–82; Bragard, Dictionnaire biographique, 44, 339. For his plan of Mons (no. 1141, Cartes et Plans, Archives de l'État, Mons), dated 1 April 1555 (1556 n.st.), see also Christiane Pierard and Bruno Van Mol, “Mons: Une enceinte en mutation constante, de 1290 à 1865,” in Les enceintes urbaines en Hainaut, ed. Jean-Marie Cauchies et al. (Brussels: Crédit Communal de Belgique, 1983), 22–23, 43; Walter De Keyzer and Bruno Van Mol, “Les fortifications et les sièges de Mons, du XVIe au XIXe siècle,” in Images de Mons en Hainaut du XVIe au XIXe siècle, ed. Marie-Thérèse Isaac et al. (Brussels: Renaissance du Livre, 2006), 141, 161; Gobeaux, “Mons au XVIe siècle,” 358–61.
101.
In Cambrai Olgiati revised the citadel and presumably also the city walls. In the following years the Cambrai city walls were reinforced with two bastions in the style of Olgiati. These were probably designed by Brunelli, who visited Cambrai in 1554 and discussed his project with Sebastian van Noyen. The related plan of the Cambrai fortifications (Cod. Barb. 4391, fol. 48 [XLV]) should be attributed not to Olgiati but to Brunelli.