San Bartolomé Fort. Interpretation Centre for the Pamplona Fortifications

San Bartolomé Fort

Interpretation Centre for the Pamplona Fortifications

Proyecto1:Maquetación 1 29/3/11 18:09 Página 1



Libro Fortin_EUS 11.03.11 29/3/11 17:25 Página 1

Libro Fortin_EUS 11.03.11 29/3/11 17:25 Página 1

Libro Fortin Ingles 12.03.11 29/3/11 16:56 Página 2

San Bartolomé Fort




San Bartolomé Fort



San Bartolomé Fort


Publisher: Pamplona Town Council, Strategic PlanningAuthors: José Vicente Valdenebro García, José Ignacio Alfonso Pezonaga,

Marta Monreal Vidal, Miguel Monreal Vidal, Juan José Martinena Ruiz (The walled enclosure of Pamplona)

Coordinator: José Vicente Valdenebro GarcíaProduction: Formas de ProyectarTranslation: David Ronder (Architrad)Photography: Berta Buzunáriz, Luis Prieto, General Archive of Simancas (AGS),

Pamplona Municipal Archive (AMP), Institute of Military History and Culture (IHCM) and Army Geographical Service (SGE)

Printing: Litografía Ipar

ISBN: 978-84-95930-47-7D.L.: NA–827/2011

Publication © Pamplona Town CouncilTexts and photographs © their authors

Pamplona, March 2011

www.pamplona.eswww.murallasdepamplona.com

Printed on TCF paper free of acids and dioxins, biodegradable and recyclable.


Index

Introduction 9

The walled enclosure of Pamplona 11

Historical Evolution of San Bartolomé Fort 29

Restoration of the San Bartolomé Fort 49for use as the Interpretation Centre for the Pamplona Fortifications

A walk round the Pamplona Fortifications. 87Visual guide

Glossary 125

Route of the tour inside the back cover



9

Introduction

The history of San Bartolomé Fort – which today lies at the centre of our city – goes back to the17th century, when the walled enclosure of Pamplona underwent a significant set ofimprovements. Over the course of its history, the structure served as a defensive bastion andthe first line of defence of the reinforced stronghold.

Today, nearly 300 years later, 21st-century Pamplona inaugurates it, newly restored, as theInterpretation Centre for our city’s fortifications It is also to be the starting point for tours roundthe walled enclosure and, of course, a museum dedicated to this collection of cut stones thatdefines the structure and personality of our city.

Since 2006, Pamplona Town Council has been working on the restoration and improvement ofthe walled enclosure, with comprehensive cleaning and restoration operations on its structuresand the building of new infrastructures relating to the wall, such as the Labrit walkway andDescalzos lifts and San Bartolomé Fort itself.

In this sense, the 220 square metres of the Interpretation Centre for the Pamplona Fortificationsconstitute an exceptional platform for relaunching the walls of Pamplona as a cultural andleisure space, as much for visiting tourists as for us Pamplonans, presenting us with theopportunity to rediscover a dazzling part of our historical heritage.

The walled enclosure, as the municipal web site www.murallasdepamplona.com fullyacknowledges, is intimately connected with the development and evolution of Pamplona. It is aliving infrastructure which preserves the reflection of the passing decades and which,paradoxically, has progressed from defining the limits of the city to a place at the very heart ofthe modern metropolis.

The richness and history of the Pamplona walls, which were declared a National Monument in1939, should in future serve as the unshakable motivation for fostering their proper conservationand promotion so that the generations to come might have the opportunity to enjoy, as we havedone, this magnificent piece of our heritage.

For all these reasons, I hope that this publication and all the initiatives aimed at promoting thecultural wealth of Pamplona are welcomed by her citizens, and that we can continue to counton their participation. I am confident that this work will prove an excellent means ofdisseminating the rich history of Pamplona.

Yolanda BarcinaMayoress of Pamplona



The walled enclosure of Pamplona / 11

The walled enclosure of Pamplona[by Juan José Martinena Ruiz]

The walls of Pamplona are today one of the most interesting sets of defencesin Spain - and even Europe - as regards bastioned fortification. Built in the 16thand 17th centuries, and completed in the 18th, they remained intact until1920. One of their fronts having been demolished to allow for the secondenlargement of the city, the remaining part was declared a NationalMonument. Here we are not referring to the walls of the medieval boroughswhich made up medieval Pamplona, of which hardly anything remains to us.Nor to the artillery castle that Ferdinand the Catholic ordered to be built in1513, a year after the conquest of the kingdom by the Duke of Alba’s Castilianforces, and in the defence of which Jesuit founder Iñigo de Loyola would fallwounded in 1521; not the slightest trace of that fortress is left to us either.We will begin our historical tour in the reign of Charles V, from whose time theoldest part of the existing walled enclosure dates, an essential element inthe historic heritage of the city.

Works in the time of Charles V. The first bastionsThe reign of Charles I – Charles V once he became Holy Roman Emperor in 1520– saw the initiation of work to adapt the old medieval enclosure to the latestadvances in the art of fortification. Following the Franco-Agramontese siege of1521, the walls were repaired all the way round and several of the old towersdemolished as defensively useless, and in their place bastions were erected,designed in accordance with the new canons of military engineering. That same


12 / San Bartolomé Fort Interpretation Centre for the Pamplona Fortifications

year work took place on the one known as Caparroso – now the Labrit Bastion– and on the Tejería Gate, and in 1523 on the Tesoreria Tower – now the RedínBastion – and on the Francia or Abrevador gate. The Crown had to compensatethe owners of the houses and smallholdings that it was necessary to expropriate.It also had to demolish and move the convents of San Francisco and La Mercedinside; they were in La Taconera, outside the old gates of La Traición and SanLlorente, and were deemed detrimental to the fortification. In 1530 the Viceroyordered that the San Lorenzo Tower be scaled back, as its great height meantthat it was considered a padrastro (stepfather) - or point from which it would bepossible to harm the fortress.

Dating from 1535 is the master builder Guevara’s plan to build a bastion overthe Caparroso mill and another on the so-called Torredonda (Round Tower) nearthe corner of the Paseo de Sarasate and Calle Navas de Tolosa. Of these, theTorredonda barely stood for fifty years, while the Caparroso, with subsequentmodifications, has survived to our own time as the Labrit Bastion. A turret was

Pamplona in 1521. To the north, the Royal Palace, then occupied by the Viceroy; and to thesouth, Ferdinand the Catholic’s castle (model by Juan Mª Cía).



also built in front of San Lorenzo, making use of the materials left by thedemolition of the San Francisco convent. Around this time, the prestigious siegewarfare specialist Benedicto de Rávena passed through Pamplona and wrote areport on the city fortifications. In 1542 Captain Luis Pizaño came too, one ofthe best engineers of the age, to try and put the finishing touches to thefortifications with as little expense as possible.

Pizaño drew some plans of Labrit Bastion and the castle built by Ferdinand theCatholic which are kept in the Simancas Archive. The engineer proposed loweringthe towers of San Lorenzo, San Nicolás and San Cernin, as well as some fortifiedproperties and several of the Cathedral buildings. However, it seems that onlySan Nicolás Tower had its top lopped off, being the one closest to the fortress.In these years work continued on the Torredonda, on the San Llorente turret andon the garrison over the Caparroso mill.

Also remaining to us from the age of Charles V, along with the Redín and Labritbastions, is the Francia Gate. Over its innermost door, which preserves therunners the portcullis went down, a beautiful carved shield can be seen with thetwo-headed eagle and the imperial arms beneath an inscription which reads:

AÑO 1553 DUCE BELTRANOALBVRQVERQVE PROREGE

Another shield with the same inscription was on the vanished Rochapea Gate,demolished in 1914 and which also dated from 1553, when that same DonBeltrán was viceroy. In 1960 the shield was placed for ornamental reasons onone of the towers of the Nuevo Gate, the monumental arch built by Victor Eúsain 1950.

Philip II and the building of the citadelThe reign of Philip II marked the start of a new phase in fortifications work. In1560 the engineer Antonelli visited the city and informed the King that theconstruction of a new fortress in the modern style was of the greatest urgency.The monarch took heed and 1571 – the year of the Battle of Lepanto – markedthe start of construction of the Citadel to the design of Giacomo Palearo, knownas El Fratín. This engineer planned it in imitation of the Antwerp one, itself the work



of Paciotto de Urbino, laid out on a pentagon with five bastions at the angles, tobe baptised with the names San Antón, San Felipe el Real, Santa María, Santiagoand La Victoria.

The first stone was solemnly blessed on 12 July. The first keeper was the chiefinquisitor’s nephew Hernando de Espinosa, and the first garrison entered on 18October under the command of Captain Alonso de Cosgaya. The Italian-bornViceroy Vespasiano Gonzaga, a noted siege warfare specialist, took an active partin the new fortification, even though his excessive zeal often put him on a collisioncourse with the Navarrese. It would take many years before the new fortress,fundamental to the defence of the western Pyrenees, could be consideredcompletely finished. Above the main gate, which opens onto the present-dayAvenida del Ejército, a stone plaque can be seen with the following inscription:

Aerial view of the Pamplona Citadel.



THE YEAR 1571 BEING VICEROY AND FIE

LD MARSHALL IN NAVARREAND THE PROVINCE BESPASIA-

NO GONZAGA COLONA, DU-KE, MARQUIS AND COUNT

The construction of the Citadel entailed, around 1580, the laying down of a newline of fortifications to connect with those of the city. The line incorporated twofronts: one from the Citadel to the Labrit Bastion, which took in the new bastionsof San Nicolás (with the gate of the same name) and La Reina plus the TejeríaGate. This front would be demolished in 1918-21, to facilitate the SegundoEnsanche (Second Enlargement). The other front, which still survives with somemodifications, went from the Citadel to the Mirador (Lookout) and included theTaconera Gate, whose facade would be knocked down in 1906 and rebuilt in2002, and its eponymous bastion, along with that of the Gonzaga, near the NuevoGate. This expansion of the enclosure rendered the old medieval wall useless, inspite of very costly work having been carried out on it during the reign of CharlesV; it ran down the present-day Paseo de Sarasate, Calle Navas de Tolosa, Rincónde la Aduana, San Lorenzo, Plaza de Recoletas and Plazuela de la O. The layoutof the new walls, which took in the previously extramural Taconera field andincluded what is now the Paseo de Sarastre, defined what would be urbanPamplona until the construction of the Primer Ensanche (First Enlargement),approved in 1887, and even up till the demolition of the walls.

At first, these new fortifications were made throughout of earth or filler, withpalisades and moats dug in the ground. In 1581, García de Mendoza reported that“it is all of fascine and crumbling earth”. Three years later, Philip II wrote to theengineer Fratín about the need to knock down the old walls and fill in the moats;that was when the bastions of Torre Redonda and San Lorenzo were demolished.Also at around that time the Viceroy Marquis of Almazán ordered the laying downof the present-day Calle Nueva, filling in the moat that separated the boroughs ofSan Cernin and San Nicolás with the materials resulting from the demolition ofthe walls and medieval towers that were there. In 1585, the Council of War madethe case to the King for the need to carry on with Citadel works, leaving the old



castle standing until they were done. However, the lack of resources meant theyhad to demolish Ferdinand the Catholic’s fortress as they went, so they couldmake use of its materials in the new walls and bastions. El Fratín was denouncedto the King for just that - the denunciation accompanied by a curious drawing,kept today in the Simancas Archive, showing the state of works and how theywere being carried out. Such rivalries between the engineers marked the end ofthe 16th century. In 1592, Antonio de Herrera submitted a memorial againstVespasiano Gonzaga and El Fratín. In November of that year, Philip II visited theCitadel works, and seventy artillery pieces fired salvoes from its as yet unfinishedparapets.

Picture of Taconera Bastion and San Roque Ravelin.



According to a report by the engineer Francisco Fratín, in 1608 the new wall of theSan Nicolás and Taconera fronts was still “built and formed solely of earth, andit being so many years since it was done it has been falling and is in many placescollapsed...and oxen and other animals can get out, as the moats prove littleobstacle”. That same year, Philip III ordered that the citadel be surrounded witha stockade to prevent access to the moat, which lacked a counterscarp and wastwo thirds dry. The Viceroy Cardona had the good judgement to make hisopposition to this measure plain, arguing that it was better to spend the moneyon a permanent stone construction.

Reign of Philip IV. Completion of the enclosureDuring the reign of Philip IV, the works gained considerable momentum. Froman account sent by Dionisio de Guzmán in 1644, we know that work was thentaking place on the Taconera Gate and the half moon defending it. Another fourwere being built in the Citadel moats. That same year the Tejería portal wasfinished, on a flank of La Reina Bastion. It was situated on what is today Callede Juan de Labrit, next to the back of the Gayarre Theatre. It proudly bore onits facade the royal coat of arms and on both sides those of the Viceroy Countof Oropesa and Luis of Guzmán and Ponce of León. Following its demolitionin 1918, the three shields were placed on the gate to the Citadel.

In April 1646 Philip IV visited Pamplona, and among the engagementsmarking his stay in the city was a lengthy visit to the citadel. Velázquez’sson-in-law, Martínez del Mazo, painted a large commemorative canvas of thearrival of the royal procession at the main gate. That same year, during theviceroyship of Don Luis de Guzmán Ponce de León, the fortress’s new churchopened for worship; it would remain standing until 1890.

In 1665-66, under the Viceroy Duke of San Germán, the walled enclosure wasdeclared finished with the completion of the Taconera and La Reina bastions.The first of those bastions survives in the gardens of the same name, thougharound 1945 its embrasures were removed to prettify the walk. The second,knocked down around 1920, was situated roughly between the present-dayChurch of San Ignacio and the Telephone Exchange. On one of its faces thefollowing inscription can be read:



IN THE REIGN OF PHILIP IIIIAND BEING VICEROY AND FIELD MA-

RSHAL OF THIS KINGDOM AND OF GVIPUZCOA DON FRco TVTAVILA, DV-

KE OF SAN GERMAN. IN THE YEAR 1665

Reign of Charles (Carlos) II. New gates and external defencesIn 1666, with Charles II the Bewitched already on the throne and with the sameduke being viceroy, the two new gates of San Nicolás and Taconera were finished.The facade of the former, dressed and decorated with the royal arms of the Houseof Austria and of the Viceroy, is preserved today in the Taconera Gardens, whereit serves as a front for the Bosquecillo (Copse) that it was moved to in 1929. TheTaconera one, dismantled in 1906, was made almost identical to that of SanNicolás, though without the columns flanking the arch. It was faithfullyreconstructed on its former site in 2002. The inscription, like that on the SanNicolás Gate, says the following:

IN THE REIGN OF CHARLES II, AND RE-GENCY OF THE QUEEN HIS MO-

THER, AND BEING VICEROY AND FIELDMARSHAL OF THIS KINGDOM AND OF GVI-

PUZCOA DON FRco TVTAVILA, DVKEOF SAN GERMAN. IN THE YEAR 1666.

External works such as counterguards, half moons and ravelins dominated thelast third of the 17th century, completing the defence of the main wall. In 1678,under the Viceroy Count of Fuensalida, the Nuevo Gate, previously known asSanta Engracia, and representing the way into the city from the royal Vitoria road,had to be rebuilt. It was dismantled in 1906 to make it easier for vehicles topass, and acquired its present form in 1950. At this time the military engineersJuan de Ledesma and Octaviano Menni were working in Pamplona. In 1685, TheViceroy Prince of Simay proposed to the King their substitution by EstebanEscudero and Manuel Gasco. The former immediately developed a new plan forcarrying the works forward, for which the Viceroy asked Parliament the followingyear for a new donation. The city, he said, was “one of the main strongholds inSpain”, and yet did not have a defensive system appropriate to its border



situation. To raise funds, towns and cities were forced to mortgage their estatesand assets. The parapets were finished with the money, the lunettes and moatscarps faced with stone, and new half moons built for the Taconera, San Nicolásand Tejería gates.

The year before -1684 - a letter by the Marquis of Conflans on the lamentablestate of the Citadel resulted in the Kingdom’s contribution to financing thefortification works increasing to 30,000 ducats.

At that time, the fortress garrison amounted to only 50 soldiers. The following year,when Don Enrique Benavides was viceroy, another 10,000 ducats were given forthe external fortifications: the two ravelins of Santa Clara and Santa Isabel withtheir respective counterguards facing towards the Vuelta del Castillo (CastleSurround), already bearing some relation to the new defensive systems of Vauban,the engineer who revolutionised the art of fortification as it then was. Bothravelins, which replaced the old lunettes, have stone plaques next to the coat ofarms of the above-mentioned viceroy with the following inscription:

IN THE REIGN OF CHARLES II OFCASTILE AND OF NAVARRE

VICEROY AND FIELD MARSHALL OF THIS KINGDOM D. ENRIQUE

BENAVIDES I BAZAN, OF THE COUN-CIL OF STATE. IN THE YEAR 1685

In 1694, the engineer Hércules Torelli estimated a cost of 225,000 ducats for themost essential external works. In the main enclosure, work was carried out on theTrinitarios front – now the Taconera lookout – and on the Gonzaga Bastion. Areport sent to the Royal Historical Academy in 1801 says: “From the severalinscriptions that there are on the gates and walls of the City and Citadel, it isclear that they were built during the reign of Charles (Carlos) II, from 1666 to1696.” This statement is not accurate, for as we have seen, important workswere realised throughout the 16th century, first under Charles V and then aboveall Philip II. What was done in the time of Charles II was to finish off the essentialsof the enclosure. Even so, some things left a lot to be desired. In 1699 theMarquis of Góngora complained that livestock wandered freely over the parapets



and embrasures and the garrison was so paltry that there weren’t enough soldiersto guard the city’s six gates.

The House of Bourbon. The work of the new Corps of EngineersOnce the War of Spanish Succession was over in 1714, Philip V, the first monarchof the House of Bourbon, dedicated his special attention to Pamplona. In 1719,with the danger of war against France looming, work was undertaken at variouspoints of the enclosure. Some years before, in 1711, the same king had set upthe Corps of Army Engineers, in imitation of the one that Louis XIV had muchearlier established in France. Between 1720 and 1737 there was a period ofintense activity, preserving the greater part of the designs of the master engineerthe Marquis of Verboom, first director of the Corps, who we know maintainedcontact with Vauban from 1702.

Then began the improvement of the defences of the Redín and the Francia Gatewith the construction of the low bastions of El Pilar and Our Lady of Guadalupe,together with the Los Reyes Ravelin. This magnificent fortified complex survivesintact to the present and has been restored by the “Príncipe de Viana” Institute.The forts of San Bartolomé, San Roque and El Príncipe were also begun at thistime. The first of them survives perfectly intact in the Media Luna Gardens,behind the Plaza de Toros (Bullring). The second, now vanished, stood outsidethe Taconera wall, near to where the military swimming pools and the Larrainaclub are today. Part of the masonry plinth of the third one is still visible, on whichthe old junior school “Ruiz de Alda” was built around 1945, today the children’shome “Fuerte el Príncipe”.

Verboom also got involved, together with Don Ignacio Sala and other engineers,in several projects carried out in the Citadel. One of these was the new SocorroGate, which until then had stood up against a flank of the Santa María Bastion.On the facade, with its Tuscan order columns, the following (Latin) inscriptioncan be read beneath the quartered shield of Castile and Leon:

HAEC PORTA AUXILII SURGIT REGNANTE PHILIPOCERTA OBSESSORUM SPES PATRIAE QUI . . . S . . .US



A series of thirteen bomb-proof vaults was also built, and the so-called Sala deArmas (Weapons Hall) or Artillery Arsenal, which these days is used forconferences, concerts and exhibitions.

In 1752, in the reign of Ferdinand VI, fortification work was resumed on thefacade of the Francia Gate, and finished six years later with the construction ofthe sentry boxes at the angles of the new bastions; these are of the same typeas can be seen in various castles and forts in Cuba, Puerto Rico and other LatinAmerican countries that were once Spanish viceroyalties. In 1756, the Count ofAranda commissioned Don Jerónimo Amici to write a report on the state of thewalls of the city and Citadel of Pamplona. According to this engineer, theRochapea and La Magdalena fronts required most attention, having always beenneglected and trust put instead in their dominant position with the River Arga as

Low bastions of Our Lady of Guadalupe and El Pilar, with the Los Reyes Ravelin in the centre.



a natural moat, in contrast to the San Nicolás front, where the walls were sunkdown into the ground, leaving the city houses exposed.

That same year, General Don Juan Martín Zermeño wrote another report, in whichhe proposed getting rid of the Francia Gate as unnecessary and transferring theTaconera one to the Mirador side, away from the Citadel. None of these proposals

A view of the San Nicolás and Tejería fronts, which were demolished between 1918 and 1921,superimposed on urban Pamplona.



- not even the bomb-proof vaults - was adopted, without doubt because of thedifficulty the Royal Treasury would have meeting their considerable cost.

When war broke out against the French Republican Convention in 1794, smallprovisional forts were built and an entrenched line dug from El Príncipe toMendillorri. The military authority, licensed by a Royal Warrant from Charles V,ordered that all buildings situated less than 1,500 yards from the wall be pulleddown, a measure which affected several monasteries and chapels and manyhouses in the districts of La Magdalena, Rochapea, Santa Engracia, San Jorge,Trinitarios and San Juan. Protests were made to Parliament and the Town Hallby the thousand-plus people affected, but nothing came of it. As a result of thiswar, in which the enemy was at the gates of Pamplona, the engineers Heredia,Casanova, Masdeu, and Jiménez Donoso - and above all the lieutenant generalHurtado – drew up important fortification plans which, primarily for economicreasons, never came to be realised.

As for the Citadel, it needs to be said that during the 18th century and part ofthe 19th, it served as a state prison, much like the Bastille did for the Frenchcrown. Locked up in its cells were, among others, the Duke of Medinaceli in theWar of Spanish Succession, the Count of Floridablanca in 1792, Mariano Luisde Urquijo in 1801, Javier Mina in 1811 and the liberal poet Manuel JoséQuintana from 1814 till 1820.

Occupation of the Citadel by the French. Other sieges in the 19th centuryIt is a known fact that the French occupied Pamplona in 1808 without firing asingle shot. The city received them as allies before the start of the Spanish Warof Independence, and confounding the good faith of the Viceroy Marquis of Valle-Santoro, on 19 February General D’Armagnac’s soldiers, going to collect theirprovisions, took the Citadel by pretending to have a snowball fight. Pamplonasuffered five years of harsh military occupation until 1813, when it took a 128-day siege to regain her. Before surrendering, the French laid mines with theintention of blowing up the walls. When General Count de España heard aboutthis, he warned the French Governor that, if they did, his men would have knivesrun through them, which persuaded him to abandon the idea. Following recoveryof the city, Brigadier Palomino presented a budget in which the cost of the most



necessary repairs was calculated at 528,000 reals (real = an old Spanish coin,worth a quarter of a peseta).

In 1823, Franco-Spanish troops, largely made up of the so-called HundredThousand Sons of Saint Louis under the command of General Lauristón, laidsiege to the city, whose garrison had gone over to the liberals, in order tosubjugate it the authority of Ferdinand VII, whom they sought to restore asabsolute king. Brigadier Sánchez Salvador led the defence, and the blockadelasted for five months during which there were several bombardments. The Citadelwas shelled with eight 24-inch batteries, and capitulated on 17 September. Duringthe O’Donnell uprising of October 1841, the city was bombarded by the Citadel’sartillery, causing damage to the old medieval tower of San Lorenzo, which had tobe lowered by a third. In 1858, the military engineers Ortiz de Pinedo andRodríguez Arroquia developed a fortification plan that proposed the totaldestruction of the old enclosure raised by the House of Austria and replacing itwith a series of equal fronts, based on bastions with casemates on their flanks,three-level curtain walls and caponiers in place of the old half moons and ravelins.Its exorbitant cost meant that it never came into being.

After the last Carlist War, in which Pamplona suffered a lengthy blockade, thereach of modern groove-bore artillery was plain to see. Carlist missiles had shotacross the city from Mount San Cristóbal, flying over the houses. In view of that,doubts began to surface about the defensive efficacy of the walled enclosurewhich was also impeding the town’s expansion like a rigid corset. Followingconstruction of the San Cristóbal Fort, steps were taken towards securing theauthorisation to demolish them. That would be the overarching objective of thetown councils of the next forty years.

Mutilation of the Citadel and alteration of the gatesIn 1888 a Royal Order authorised the partial demolition of the Citadel bastions -San Antón and La Victoria – and the decommissioning of the moats separatingit from the city to enable construction of the Primer Ensanche (First Enlargement)and new barracks. These were in turn demolished in 1970, and today the Avenidadel Ejército runs down there. During the excavation works prior to the building ofthe current Auditorium and Conference Hall, the remains of the Santa Teresa



lunette came to light; it had defended the main gate, with its moats andcounterscarp, which were sadly destroyed. All that is left is part of the wall of themutilated San Antón Bastion, reassembled in one of the rooms of the new culturalcentre.

In 1905, another Royal Order allowed for the partial demolition of four of the sixgates, to give broader access to the city. That same year the Taconera wasdismantled, under the direction of the architect Julián Arteaga and in 1906 SanNicolás too. It had a new bridge built, aligned with the Avenida de San Ignacio,and its baroque facade was taken down, to be reconstructed in 1929 in theTaconera Gardens. Almost at the same time the Nuevo Gate was broadened, witha steel footbridge placed over it that lasted until 1950, when the currentmonumental gate was built, the work of Víctor Eúsa. In 1914 the Rochapea Gatewas also altered, its stone arch demolished. Of the other city gates, Tejeríasuffered not a single modification until it was knocked down in 1918, and Franciaor Zumalacárregui survive intact to the present.

Demolition of the walls and subsequent declaration as a National Monument Finally, on 7 January 1915, when Don Alfonso de Gaztelu was mayor, the RoyalOrder authorising demolition of the walled belt was obtained, allowing forconstruction of the Segundo Ensanche (Second Enlargement). The first stonewas pulled down, amid popular rejoicing, on 25 July of the same year. Thedemolition works, which lasted from 1918 until 1921, affected the southern frontof the city, and led to the disappearance of the San Nicolás and La Reina bastions,as well as San Nicolás and La Tejería gates. The fortifications to be knockeddown went from the Citadel to the Labrit Bastion, approximating to today’s Callede García Ximénez, Avenida de Roncesvalles and Bajada de Labrit. No-oneconsidered the possibility of laying out the new streets at a certain distance,respecting the walls and surrounding them with a green belt, as would be donehalf a century later with the Citadel and Vuelta del Castillo (Castle Surround).

The three quarters part of the walled enclosure that remained standing after1921, comprising the El Príncipe and San Bartolomé forts, Labrit Bastion, Rondade Barbazán, Redín Bastion with the low bastions of Pilar and Guadalupe,Rochapea and Descalzos fronts, the Mirador with La Taconera Bastion and the



San Roque Ravelin, was declared a National Monument By Order on 25September 1939. Around 1925 the Taconera Mirador was altered, with the oldGonzaga Bastion being pulled down and partially buried to widen the gardensand connect them with the Larraina area.

Cession of the Citadel to the cityThe Citadel with its buildings, moats and external structures was ceded to the cityby State Decree on 21 May 1964 for cultural and leisure pursuits. The ceremonymarking the taking of possession by the Town Council was held on 23 July 1966,when Juan Miguel Arrieta was mayor and General Ramiro Lago military governor.From 1971 the buildings inside it were demolished, with just the 1760guardhouse and the following buildings being spared: the late 16th-century oven;what was known as the pabellón de mixtos (gunpowder block), dating from the

View of the now-vanished parts of the San Nicolás Gate and La Reina Bastion. Inaugural actof demolition of the walls. 25 July 1915. A. Gª Deán. AMP



late 17th century and altered at the start of the 18th, which served as the oldstorehouse, granary and cellar; the magazine designed by Hércules Torelli in1694; and the weapons hall or artillery arsenal, designed in 1725. All wereskilfully restored.

The fortress was declared a National Monument by decree on 8 February 1973.Today it constitutes one of Pamplona’s most beautiful spots, a harmoniouscombination of walls and bastions with wide green spaces extending over theglacis and moats of the old fortification.

Ropemakers working in the moats of the now-vanished La Reina Bastion. c.1915. AMP



Historical Evolution of San Bartolomé Fort / 29

Historical Evolution of San Bartolomé Fort

From the moment Pompeyo set up camp in 74 BC around where theCathedral stands today, Pamplona acquired its status as a stronghold. Itsstrategic position giving it control over the western Pyrenean passes into theIberian peninsula towards Aragón and La Rioja meant that it came to beregarded as “one of the principal keys to Spain and its most secure bulwarkon this side of the border” (Madrazo, 1886). Since Roman times, therefore,and apart from on specific occasions when the walls were destroyed,Pamplona was always a fortified stronghold right up to the early years of the20th century.

From the first Roman settlement in what is today La Navarrería, the walledenclosure grew and was modified throughout the medieval period, when newboroughs were built in the vicinity of the city, distinguished from each otherby populations of different origin attracted by the improvements made tothe pilgrim road to Santiago de Compostela. From that time three distinctcities coexisted, each with their own different walls, and separated by moatsor “no man’s land”: the city of Navarrería (which until 1276 included theBorough of San Miguel), the Borough of San Cernin and the Town of SanNicolás. With the unification of the boroughs under Charles III in 1423 bymeans of the “Privilegio de la Unión”, these defences were adapted to forma single walled enclosure defending the whole city, joined to the existingpalaces and the medieval castle.



In 1513, after conquering the Kingdom of Navarre, Ferdinand the Catholicordered the construction of the Santiago Castle and set about modernising,widening and reinforcing the walled enclosure of the medieval city. Later,responding to advances in military engineering, Philip ordered in 1571 thata modern, functional citadel be built to replace the old castle, its pentagonalgeometry making it the first such construction on the Iberian Peninsula.

To do it, he had at his disposal the fortifications engineer Jacobo Palear “ElFratín” and Field Marshall Vespasiano Gonzaga y Colonna, Duke of Trajetto,Marquis of Sabioneda and Count of Fondi, who would end up beingappointed Viceroy of Navarre. Both had Italian backgrounds, where militaryengineering had progressed spectacularly in the previous decades. Takingthe Antwerp Citadel as a model, the Pamplona works began that same yearwith a dual purpose: to defend the city against external attack and to avoidpotential revolt within. They continued into the next century and aftersuccessive improvements to the fortification they were concluded in the18th century.

They layout of the citadel, rather further away from the city than was initiallyadvised by the experts, made it necessary to build two whole fronts of thecity defences anew, so that it joined up with the Old Castle. The southernand western fronts were thus rendered useless and were almost entirelydismantled. That meant pulling down on its southern side the old SantiagoCastle and San Antón bastion, two of the city’s most modern defences, ifnow falling behind the times with the advance or the new militarytechniques.

The new defensive line took in four new bastions on the western side:Gonzaga, barely recognisable today; Taconera, which can still be seen inthe gardens of the same name; and San Nicolás and La Reina, which weredemolished around 1920. Four new gates were also opened: Puerta Nueva,in 1675; Taconera and San Nicolás, in 1666; and Tejería, in 1640.

In 1685, during the reign of Charles II, construction began of five ravelinswhich contributed to the external defence of the city: Santa Clara, Santa



Isabel, Santa Ana, Santa Teresa (now vanished) and Santa Lucía. Of these,the first two were endowed with counterguards. The San Roque Ravelin,between the Taconera and Gonzaga bastions, also belongs to this era.

Later, during the reign of Philip V, the recently formed Corps of Engineerscarried out important external reinforcement work. The year 1726 marks asignificant milestone in the history of the Pamplona fortifications: theengineer Jorge Próspero de Verboom would present a general plan for theCity and the Citadel (the city enclosure) which would be followed throughoutthe 18th century.

Verboom, a disciple of Vauban (the French engineer who took 17th-centurybastioned fortification to its greatest height), designed a double enclosureof defences on the most exposed parts using advanced fortifications thatcould be defended from the main enclosure and which covered each other’sflanks. The work of the besieger was thus slowed down. With his plan, abalance was struck between the strategic importance of the city, theeconomic means at its disposal and the garrison necessary to defend it.

Around 1730, work began on reinforcing the Francia Front with theconstruction of the low bastions of Guadalupe and El Pilar and Los ReyesRavelin, and the advanced forts of San Roque, El Príncipe and SanBartolomé. Today only the latter is well preserved.

The first sketches for San Bartolomé FortThe first works related to the San Bartolomé Fort or, at least to a defensivestructure planned for the site, go back to 1641. That was when the engineer Juande Garay arrived in Pamplona with a mission to draw up a general plan for the cityand citadel.

This was to be of great importance for the fortification work of subsequentdecades: apart from including the whole system of half moons, it was the first topropose a hornwork on the site where the San Bartolomé Fort would subsequentlybe built, opposite the right face of the Labrit or La Merced Bastion1 (image 1).



In spite of that, and as successive reports on and plans for the City were issuedby engineers and viceroys [Amador de Lazcano (1669), Octaviano Meni (1683),Juan de Ledesma (1684), Viceroy Prince of Chimay (1685), Esteban Escudero(1686), De Tigné (1706), Viceroy Bournoville (1686), Hércules Torelli (1694),Alejandro de Rez (1720) the works never came to be realised. On 28 May 1726,the engineer Jorge Próspero Verboom sent for the king’s approval the plan thatwould guide improvement work on the fortified complex of Pamplona throughoutthe whole 18th century.

(1) SHM. Colec. Aparici, t. XII, fols. 384v-385. “The hornwork designed on the plan indicated bythe letter I with its 60 foot wide moat, and its covered way going around as it follows on fromthat of the city on such a scale that demonstrates that it will be necessary for many reasonsthat said expert is enagaged on this fortification...”

Image 1. Plan of the city and citadel fortifications of Pamplona. Anonymous. (n.d.). 1 June1645. AGS



Verboom’s planAmong other improvements, Verboom proposed building three small detachedforts at some distance from the city walls: San Roque, on the La Taconera side;El Príncipe, up on Goroabe and dominating the southern zone, and SanBartolomé.

The design of San Bartolomé Fort was similar to that of the little forts andlunettes created by Vauban, and even by Verboom himself in the Barcelonacitadel. It was situated opposite the right face of the Labrit Bastion, where theland had become less sloping, and revealed with its lights the land to the south-west. Its gorge closed off by a simple wall, and protected by its guardhouse andtambour, it had numerous embrasures; and inside, storehouses and bomb-proofvaults (image 2).

Image 2. Plan of San Bartolomé Fort with part of the fortified front of the city of Pamplona.Jorge Próspero Verboom. January 1726. AGS



In September of that year Verboom’s services were required at the siege ofGibraltar, so he was replaced as chief engineer by Pedro Moreau. In 1727,Moreau gave an account of the state of fortification works in various reports: atSan Bartolomé Fort they were getting on with construction of the covered way andthe esplanade, and working on its two exits to the moat and on linking thecovered way to the city (image 3).

One year later, Moreau sent a new account from Madrid of the works planned forthat year. It said there would be nothing done on San Bartolomé that yearbecause things were already very far forward2.

(2) AGS. GM. Leg. 3.453. “As regarding this building work has finished on its covered way, theesplanade and the facing of its parapet, as well as that of the low battery, the rest could bedeferred till next year.”

Image 3. Tejería Front. Labrit Bastion. Tejería Ravelin and San Bartolomé Fort. Anonymous.1723-1737. IHCM



In 1731 another report by Pedro Moreau (image 4) goes into the budget andspecific items in more detail. San Bartolomé Fort required masonry for the mainbody of the fort, counterscarp, parapets, shoulders and gorge; from which it isclear that, in spite of what the previous report said, the stone facing can hardlyhave begun. Carved stone and brick would also be used for cladding theparapets. On the other hand, some excavation was still necessary, and the earth

dug up would be used to form parapets, banquettes, shoulders and esplanades.The cross section drawings show how the fort dominated the land in front of theLabrit Bastion, and how the left-hand battery on the scarp, already finished,looked over the riverside (image 5).

Image 4. Plan of San Bartolomé Fort. Pedro Moreau. June 1731. SGE



In 1736 Jaime Sicre came to Pamplona as Pedro Moreau’s replacement, with thelatter heading for Salamancan and Extremeduran lands. A few months later, Sicrepenned a detailed report on Verboom’s plan, indicating what had been done,what still needed to be done, and the budget and materials required to carry outthe work described.

Regarding San Bartolomé Fort, he recounted that its main body was made ofearth, as were its terrepleins, the earth for which came from the excavation ofthe moat (image 6). The covered way was almost complete with the finishing

Image 5. Cross sections of San Bartolomé Fort in the city of Pamplona. Jaime Sicre. 1736.AGS

Image 6. Plan of the outlying bastion known as San Bartolomé Fort in the city of Pamplona.Jaime Sicre. 29 January 1737. AGS



touches to the masonry, and had been joined up to the city. The battery to its left,which looked over the river and stood on the covered way, was now finished andcould hold three artillery pieces. Nearly all the cladding and its foundations waslacking, although the parapets and cross-sections of the banquettes must alreadyhave been done.

Also still to do were storehouses, counterscarp, masonry for the main door andtambour to cover this, sentry box and eleven paved esplanades, in the fort aswell as the left shoulder of the covered way, which was already finished with agatehouse at the main entry.

Finishing off construction of the detached forts was lowest down the list ofpriorities. Even so, Sicre lauded Verboom’s plan for its advanced forts, whichstruck him as highly suitable for the defence of Pamplona3.

Antonio Hurtado’s improvementsThe two most important plans of the 18th century after Verboom’s are thoseby Juan Martín Zermeño, in 1756, and Antonio Hurtado, in 1796-1797.

Juan Martín Zermeño, one of the most prestigious engineers in the reign ofFerdinand VI, sent a detailed and meticulous report from which it can bededuced, from its resemblance to the one Jaime Sicre had written twenty yearsbefore, that in the intervening period not one improvement had been effectedon any aspect of San Bartolomé Fort.

It appears that the three years following the report saw great activity on thefortification works, leaving the Fort with the exterior geometry it has today,similar to that of the low bastions of Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe and La

(3) AGS. GM. Leg. 3.700. “…I find that on the land where it is proposed to put some otheroutworks, they are very suitable for such a situation, on the aforementioned land:as from themyou can cover the main gulleys of the many that surround the City and Citadel and they can actto hinder any enemy attempting a formal siege, because before beginning he would have toovercome the difficulty of being forced to dig in before said advanced fortifications, which wouldcause him much delay in his operations, and with such the besieger often finds his plans foiled,due to having to pospone similar attacks,...”



Virgen del Pilar, which date from the same period, and on which the sameengineers -and probably the same foremen, too- were involved.

The fort may have been defensively operational, but the War against theConvention (1793-1795) led to important modifications to its interior. Going bywhat is contained in the plan signed by Antonio Hurtado on 8 January 1796

Image 7. Plan of the city of Pamplona’s San Bartolomé Fort, situated to the south-west of itand by the River Arga. Plan and cross-section along the line 1.2.3. Antonio Hurtado. 8 January1796. SGE



(image 7), in which the work to be undertaken is explained by means ofextensive text, a plan and a cross section, these innovations can be summedup in the following points:

- Increase in the number of embrasures on the upper part of the fort.Going from the nine foreseen until then in all previous plans to twenty,distributed as follows: three on the north flank (closest to the River Arga);six on either side of the scarps; one on the main angle of the scarps;and two on the north-east flank (furthest away from the River Arga).

- Increase in the number of bomb-proof vaults: going from the two unitswhich first appeared in an anonymous plan c.1727-1737 to five (one onthe north-east side, one in the centre and three on the north-west side)4.Although they all have similar surface areas, the one described as amagazine is smaller.

- Creation of ramps to go up to the terrepleins, as well as the horseshoe-shaped space.

- Getting rid of the old guardhouse inside the fort.- Introduction of high and low loopholes (or portholes) for rifles in the twowalls facing the gorge to defend the fort’s access way from potentialattacks5.

The increase in the number of barracks bears some relation to the increase inembrasures, which required a greater number of artillery pieces inside and,therefore, of troops.

It is also worth viewing the plan in the light of Juan Ximénez Donoso’s 1795scheme for countermines (image 8). That studied their possible geometry and

(4) Although two more caserns ought to have been built on the flank of the riverbank, AntonioHurtado gave details in his 1796 plan of “one not having been made due to the pressure ofwar: all having to serve so that this essential position in the besieged outwork might have thenecessary equipment to withstand uprisings, along with storehouses and other things necessaryfor defence.”

(5) In spite of the fact that in an anonymous plan dated between 1727 and 1737, and in anotherby Pedro Moreau in 1731, the gorge was originally shown with a multitude of high loopholesalong its constituent walls, in the end what we know today was shown in Antonio Hurtado’s1796 plan: four high and four low ones on the two opposing walls.



trajectories, both in the City and the Fort area. Two of these countermines wereput in on the counterscarp of the latter area. Although their entrances werecovered over by the municipal works team around 1962, today they have beenopened up again as part of the recently concluded fort restoration works.

From the 19th century to our timesSan Bartolomé Fort would be the last important work undertaken for thedefence of Pamplona and is in addition one of the best preserved, in terms ofits original geometry. The building we have today faithfully represents the bestof those designed by Antonio Hurtado. (image 9).

Paradoxically, the city was besieged or blockaded three times during the 19thcentury - in 1813, at the end of the Spanish War of Independence, in 1823 withthe incursion of the Hundred Thousand Sons of St Louis, and in 1874 during

Development of San Bartolomé Fort. From the plan created by Jorge Próspero Verboom in1726 (left) to that of Antonio Hurtado in 1796 (right)



Image 8. Plan of the City of Pamplona with the design for countermines which was accompa-nied by a corresponding Discourse. Juan Ximénez Donoso. 19 February 1795. IHCM

Image 9. 1921. Aerial photo of San Bartolome Fort - Labrit Bastion. AMP



the Third Carlist War – just when the whole system of bastioned fortification wasin decline. That had not happened throughout the greater part of the 16thcentury or the whole of the 17th and 18th centuries, the apogee of that systemof fortification. The failure of the bastioned system in the face of howitzers andmortars, made especially apparent during the siege of Antwerp in 1832, put afull stop to a three-century history of striving to counteract advances in artillery.

The loss of its defensive function led to the abandonment of the fort andtriggered a process of degradation in it. There appears to have been a landslidein 1932 in the bank area, next to the river, causing the partial collapse of itswall and parapet. Although no traces remain today of any such collapse on theoutside walls of the Fort, tell-tale signs found on the inside would serve ascorroboration.

In 1932 a containing wall for the bank was built, which still stands today andin 1939 work began on the Medialuna Park, designed by Víctor Eúsa. Between1940 and 1942 the first restoration of the fort was carried out, in which theelements affected by the land slipping away from the bank were reconstructed.It even makes sense to think of the containing wall itself put up in 1932 ashaving been designed to stabilise the bank and avoid further landslides.

San Bartolomé Fort. A. Gª Deán. c.1910. AMP



The restoration work on the fort’s low battery that has been carried outthroughout this year in tandem with restoration of the fort itself has brought tolight problems with the stability of the bank, its foundations appearing to havebeen completely undermined. This fact reinforces the present theory as againstothers which seek to link the landslides to a possible attack on the fort.

Access to the Fort is via the gorge or rear part of the defence, situated in theprotected area of the attack front, worked with masonry. The latter is protectedon its sides by two narrow walls with high and low portholes for rifles. While theupper ones are made of ashlars (also constituting the top of the wall), the lowerones are of brick. The access door, originally wooden and “blind”, has beenmodified with the passing years. So, what was first designed to meet exclusivelymilitary needs has been “made over” with a grid of 7 x 4 squares per leaf,though the blind character of the lower part has been respected.

Once inside the defence, the attention is drawn by the central horseshoe spacewith ramps going up to the terrepleins (upper area of the Fort) on either side.In the straight wall of the horseshoe a door giving access to a casern (buildingwith a bomb-proof cannon vault built within the defence that was used toaccommodate staff and store provisions and materials) can be seen, and twin

San Bartolomé Fort. c.1900. AMP



stone gargoyles to the left and right of the door. There is one casern to the leftof this, close to the bank, and three to the right. These spaces were pavedwith large flagstones.

Of the five caserns, 4 are of the same size (5 x 10 m) while the last, furthestaway form the entrance, which was used as a gunpowder store, is somewhatsmaller (2.5 x 8 m). The rules stipulated opening vents and paving the floor “toprotect the gunpowder from the damp”, in addition to the door and window,which were originally to be covered with sheets of iron to take “all precautionsagainst potential fires”. Though flooring normally consisted of “boards, raisedone foot from the ground”, large flagstones were used in the case of the Fort.

In the upper parts, the emplacements for the artillery pieces corresponding toeach embrasure were made of large flagstones. On the scarp nearest to the

San Bartolomé Fort. J. Cía. 1944. AMP



bank, and given that the terreplein is on a slope, the flagstones form atrapezoidal figure in front of each of the embrasures. As these vary slightly inheight and the cannon had to be horizontal, the height difference was absorbedby terracing of the different emplacements. On the scarp furthest away from thebank, next to the river, the flagstones form a continuous platform. Theseemplacements also slope slightly towards the parapet, and the observationpoints are arranged among them. The artillery chief would go up these so hecould point out the exact direction of fire.

With regard to their construction, however, it is difficult to follow the logic: themixture of masonry and brick on the inside parapets follows no obviousscheme, except for the repetition of the brick pillars topped by special piecesof masonry that form the openings of the embrasures and the rowlock bricksthat top the little wall between them. The sides of the embrasures, also of

San Bartolomé Fort. R. Bozano. c.1950. AMP



brick, show no identifiable bonding system, the headers being irregularly mixedwith the faces, in spite of the fact that by that time there were already numeroustreatises on the “Art of Bricklaying” in existence, describing everything fromhow to build a brick factory to the most suitable bonds. The only constant inthe sides of the embrasures is their top pieces: bricks laid in rowlocks. It mightbe that their irregular construction was due to the haste with which themodifications to the Fort were implemented and the time that they were done(during the Convention War).

The image that we have today of the setting for the San Bartolomé Fort has littleto do with its original one. The development of the city led to its being integratedinto the Medialuna Park, to which it gives its name, and which came to be

San Bartolomé Fort. J. Cía. 1954. AMP



surrounded by buildings as the years passed. Its glacis was transformed intoa wooded area which, in a way, has resulted in this singular construction beinghidden from view to the majority of Pamplona’s residents.

It is some time since the fort was used as just another store for the city gardensservice located on the edge of town. The urban “breach” caused by the Labritslope had meant that the site of the San Bartolomé Fort was a remote andinaccessible space. Several developments that have been worked onconcurrently are making possible the creation of a key new space for theculture, tourism and leisure of Pamplona: the footbridge connecting theSegundo Ensanche with the old town, the urban lift that brings the river walkwaycloser to the city, the Sanfermines Museum and the Interpretation Centre forthe Fortifications housed in the fort itself. A place to see the finest examplesof the architectural, spiritual and natural heritage of the city of Pamplona: itswalled enclosure, San Fermin fiestas and riverside park respectively.



Restoration of the San Bartolomé Fort / 49

Restoration of the San Bartolomé Fort for use as the Interpretation Centre for the Pamplona Fortifications

Since 2005 Pamplona Town Council has been fostering an ambitiousConservation and Promotion Plan for its Fortifications, based on three mainprinciples: the conservation and restoration of the walled enclosure, functionalimprovements to its environment (in terms of housing, staff, public spaces andbetter mobility and accessibility) and the promotion and revitalisation of thewalled enclosure itself to disseminate its historical and architectural value. Therenovation of San Bartolomé Fort as the Interpretation Centre for the PamplonaFortifications has made it possible to work on these three principles in thesame part of the monument, while also making it both meeting place anddeparture point for a tour of walled Pamplona.

At the end of 2009 the fort was in a state of abandonment, overrun byvegetation. Its afflictions were many, though not serious, suggesting the needfor immediate action. The criterion applied to its restoration has been that ofcomplete respect for the monument, striving to maintain the historicinterpretation of the fort’s evolution, as reflected in its bonding, materials anddifferent modes of construction. The cleaning of its faces has not been deep,it has been done carefully using brushes and water, getting rid of accumulateddirt but allowing for the patina of age bestowed on the building by oxidation ofits stones to be preserved.

There has not been widespread substitution of materials, with only thoseelements that had lost their usefulness being replaced, such as a partially-



decapitated gargoyle or broken bricks or stones in an irretrievably poorcondition. In all other cases the existing material has been respected, wartsand all.

The new uses introduced have made it necessary to fit out the caserns asexhibition spaces. However, it is these new uses that have had to adapt to theexisting spaces, as the exhibition has been designed as a free-standingstructure, independent of the walls that house it. The diffuse light, low-leveland out of sight, reinforces the character of the vaulted rooms and brings outtheir rounded geometry.

The only new element introduced, for reasons of mobility, has been a doublestone staircase. The excessively steep slope of the existing terrepleins madeaccess to the upper area of the fort impossible. A simple and comfortablestaircase has been put in, which blends in with the building by using the sametype of stone, as well as moulding its course to the curvature of the walls it runsbeside.

Restoration work on San Bartolomé Fort

LENGTHS OF WALLThe structural condition of all the masonry walls making up the exteriorgeometry of the Fort was good. The odd section was out of place, due to thepressure of the trees, the pointing was gone in many places, allowing smallamounts of vegetation to grow, and the stone presented a blackish aspectfrom the build-up of environmental pollution, the flow of water seepingthrough the earth and the surface growth of moss and lichen.

The intervention was limited to cleaning all the stretches of wall and thepointing of all the surfaces, removing all the stonework that had beendisplaced, to be put back in its original position.



The stonework evinced a large accumulation of dirt, small amounts of vegetation and the lossof pointing.



INTERIOR WALLSThe old hill that was the origin and nucleus of San Bartolomé Fort was soonenclosed within its walls. Its historical evolution in terms of construction led tothe inside spaces we know today, achieved thanks to the construction ofsuccessive containing walls, vaults and the realisation of large infills of earth.Those containing walls were found to be in good condition, but with a largeaccumulation of dirt and small amounts of vegetation – and above all, a greatdeal of calcification produced by the slow deposit of the lime contained in theexcess water seeping through its joints.

The operation consisted of cleaning and pointing the faces, in large measurerespecting the existing calcifications, those involuntary witnesses to thepassage of time since their construction.





They evidenced small amounts of vegetation, dirt, loss of pointing and abundant calcification.



EMBRASURESThe embrasures were generally in quite a poor state, suffering from various ills:the abundant presence of large vegetation, the absence of adequate foundationsin many cases and the inclemencies of the weather had caused the brick wallsin the vast majority of cases to bow, with significant settling and degradation ofthe ceramic parts, above all those corresponding to the rowlocks on the crown.

Given the ruined state they were in, the brick walls had to be dismantled in manycases. The material recovered being in good condition, it was cleaned andstockpiled for later re-use.

As the project progressed, it became evident that many of the walls being workedon had previously been reconstructed on the base of others that had been pulled



down. The foundations of the embrasures over the caserns, created by means ofdischarging arches, were also exposed and recorded.

COUNTERSCARP AND COUNTERMINESIn the case of the counterscarp, the most unusual items restored were thecountermines, defensive tunnels dug in the earth that were left ready to beextended so as to make it possible to intercept and blow up the mines - tunnelsdug by the enemy to gain access to the moat. With the demolition of the walls

It was in a state ofruin in many cases,revealing slippage,collapse anddegradation ofmaterial.



blocking them off, their differing conditions could be assessed. The first ofthem, the one situated on the angle of the counterscarp, appeared to be in avery good general condition, its overall dimension, brickwork covering anddrainage system preserved intact.

In the second case, the countermine was flooded with water and there hadbeen some collapse. Due to its ruined state, the end was blocked, making itimpossible to see its total length.



The intervention was carried out in a very superficial manner, merely consistingof a clean up and clear out of the inside of the countermines, and the repairof the lintel at the shaft entrance, which had been obscured with the coveringover of the pitheads. The reconstruction was faithful to the remains that werefound, which gave a clear indication of the original configuration of the shaft.

CASERNSThe caserns were the bomb-proof buildings where the garrison was billetedand the gunpowder, munitions and provisions were kept. All of them had aventilation shaft and a small window over the door. They were paved withflagstones and their mortar cladding was of lime. Structurally they were in goodcondition, but the cladding was very degraded with the general dampness. The

With the restorationof the Counterscarp,access to thecountermines wasregained, and thus toone of the Fort’sdefensive elements.



The caserns or bomb-proof vaults showed signs of damp, dirt and sooty deposits on theground as much as on the walls.



flooring in some caserns had deteriorated greatly, and in others sinking hereand there. The restoration task consisted fundamentally in waterproofing thecaserns and putting the lime cladding back.

The original floors were respected in two of the caserns, while in the others theyhad to be replaced. Stone with a similar cut to the existing ones was used forthis, with the aim of preserving the character of the rooms.

FLOORINGThe interior of the Fort was unpaved, except for in the upper area designatedfor the placing of cannon, where there were flagstones up to 25 cm thick. Thatfloor was in large part hidden beneath the accumulation of earth and moss, andin some places it had been pushed up by the force of roots or had sunk downdue to settling of the earth filler. The floor in these areas was designed to slopetowards the embrasures, so that gravity might help counteract the recoil from

the shooting of the cannon. That made the proper draining away of waterimpossible, leaving it to collect at the bottom.

The restoration consisted mainly of cleaning and pointing the floors, re-layingdisplaced parts and putting in a drainage system that would enable the waterto run off properly. All of the flagstones that had to be taken up were numberedbeforehand and replaced in their original position. The rest of the fort surfacenever had flooring. That was why, during the restoration work, it was decidedto build a plinth of exposed pebbles that would meet the accessibilityrequirements of the caserns and would be easy to maintain, while reinterpreting



the continuous and natural character of the original earth floor. Given theexcessive slope of the ramps, a curved stone staircase was put in. It had aviewing platform on the upper landing, a high point enabling observation of thewhole fort and facilitating its spatial comprehension. The other areas,corresponding to the ramps and upper zone, were landscaped and provided witha watering system.

In the interior, the only flooring was inside the caserns and in the area where the cannonwere placed.



Notes of interest

As work progressed, a series of details came to light with a certain curiosityvalue, such as graphite drawings, a drainage system, building methods etc..

GRAPHITE DRAWINGSA series of “lines” and “strokes” was found inside the caserns6. It was difficultto make out the drawings with the naked eye due to their poor conservation,but the application of tangential light and digital filters made it possible topositively identify several of them.

Graphite drawings were found that had been done with two different techniques:using black paint and by incision in the plaster.

The exact chronology of the drawings is difficult to establish, but from thegraphology of some of the inscriptions it can be assumed that they were donebetween the end of the 18th century and the first half of the 19th. Surprisingly,not one of them bears a date.

It seems clear who the artists were7. The people occupying the enclosure werethe military, and the long hours that they had to spend in the caserns led toboredom on the part of the soldiers. The great number of circular marks thatappear on some of the walls was made by rifle barrels being pressed againstthem.

The height of many of them indicates that the person responsible was sittingon the ground, probably leaning against the wall opposite. It is a similar storywith many of the drawings nearer the ground which must, therefore, have beendone by someone sitting. In this case the complexity and perfection of someof the signatures precludes the possibility that a child could have done them.

(6) A graphite specialist was used to interpret them, Pablo Oscariz Gil, with a PhD in History.

(7) The subject matter of some of the drawings, a signature ending with the words Sold(ier),Inf(antry) and an inscription with the word Soldi(er)” confirm the artists as military personnelfrom the enclosure.



In other cases the strokes appear higher up, between one meter and one meterseventy off the ground.

Among all the graphite representations, several very complex and elaborate (ifdifficult to read) flourishes or signatures can be made out (image 1) 8, as canwheeled cannon at the moment of being fired (appearing within a more complex

Image 1

(8) One of the best preserved bears the name “Jose Antonio”. Among the inscriptions, it ispossible to make out the name “Jabier y [---] on one, and on another the above-mentionedwords relating to soldiers and infantry.



– but difficult to interpret – scene), several figures of birds (image 2), bulls andoxen (image 3), a drawing of a vase with flowers, or an architectural sketch ofwhat is probably the entrance arch of one of the caserns, having the samedesign and number of voussoirs. Three hanging scenes can also be made out(image 4), featuring both the condemned man and the executioner.

Finally, there are several decorative drawings, calculations, a cross, numbersand individual letters.

WATER DRAINAGEThe enclosure had a toilet built in the 20th century, situated by the loopholesfurthest to the north. When it was dismantled, a small shaft was revealed,which, after crossing the wall, ran down the hillside at a steep gradient. Itssituation corresponds to the lowest point of the fort and represents the onlychannel issuing from it. During restoration work its strategic location was usedto drain off rainwater from inside the enclosure.

Image 2

Image 3 Image 4



VENTILATION OF THE CASERNSAll the caserns had a ventilation system that used a multi-sectioned shaft. Inall but the central casern, the first of these goes up vertically until it clears thethickness of the vault, the second at an upward angle by the inside of theparapets and embrasures, to end up with a third section that goes down untilit opens out in the interior face of the parapet.

It cannot have worked very well, because alternative shafts complementing orsubstituting those described were uncovered. In the central casern, the

truncated base of whatappears to have been avertical shaft was found,and while in this casethere was also an initialvertical section and asecond at an angle, thelatter hardly extended anydistance.

WALL BUTTRESSESAt the back of three ofthe caserns robustmasonry corners can beseen.



These are the buttresses of the fort walls, which the building of the casernsbrought into their interior space.

UNUSUAL FOUNDATIONSWhen for various reasons there were problems with the foundations, a habitualpractice was to build arches to support the base of the walls, as that way it wasonly necessary to put in two foundation points, corresponding to the supporting



points of the arch. Inside the fort the existence of this type of foundation hasbeen noted in two places: the northern area of the Fort, where after excavatingthe casern floor, an arch was discovered that ran from buttress to buttress andon which the scarp wall was supported; and in the area above the caserns,where the side walls of the embrasures rest their weight on arches. In the latterinstance, the implementation of this type of solution was possibly designed toensure that the water did not collect at the base of the walls and could run offfreely towards the roof gutters.

LIME PLINTHSAlthough degraded and generally collapsed, lime plinths were found on all theembrasures, some of them really thick, and made to a low standard ofworkmanship.



San Bartolomé Fort as Interpretation Centre for the Pamplona Fortifications

San Bartolomé Fort, completely renovated, has definitively come to life sincebeing converted into the Interpretation Centre for the Pamplona Fortifications.Every new use of a historic building always presupposes a delicate balance

between what exists and what is added. In the case of the Fort, efforts have beenmade to minimise the impact of what has been added, avoiding the constructionof coverings or new enclosures and limiting the occupation to the defined spaceof the caserns. The spirit of the new Interpretation Centre is to strike up a dialoguewith the spaces it has been installed in, and to provide the visitor with content toaid their overall comprehension of the fort and walled enclosure of Pamplona.Not just from the architectural and historical point of view, but also from the pointof view of the intangible. The walls marked and conditioned the life of Pamplona,imprinting an indelible character on its streets and inhabitants. They continue todo so, although these days from a completely different perspective. Their militarycharacter has been gradually diluted to the extent of transforming them into theplaces for recreation, enjoyment and sociability that they now are.

The content provided is adapted to the profile of every visitor, to their differentages, backgrounds and interests, using a combination of diverse expositoryelements such as reading panels, audiovisual displays and interactiveinstallations, enabling progressive levels of approaching and deepeningknowledge of the subject, according to the interest of each person. The expositorycontent is divided thematically, one per enclosure:



THE EVOLUTION OF THE WALLS OF PAMPLONAThe main casern, situated opposite the entrance, is the starting point for thevisit. Inside it takes you through the history of the walled enclosure ofPamplona, noting its Roman origin and detailing its evolution from the medievalwalls of the 14th-15th centuries to the bastioned fortifications we have today.

Computer reconstruction of the walled enclosure. C15th




The parallel development of the city and the evolution of its walls are givenclear visual expression.





THE EVOLUTION OF THE FORTRESSES AND ARMAMENTS Owing to the continuous evolution of armaments of ever-increasing calibre andprecision, the fortresses had to redesign their defences in parallel, as much from

Computer reconstruction of the Cathedral of Santa Maria de Pamplona (Romanesque origin)

Computer reconstruction of the Church of San Cernin (C15th)



the point of view of geometry as construction. This space takes a comparativelook at the arms available in each period and the type of defence designed tocounteract them. The specific case of Pamplona is explained, the evolution of itswalls analysed in detail from the 15th century to the elements comprising thebastioned fortifications we can visit today.

Recreation of a section of the Citadel and its defensive structures.



THE HUMAN SIDE OF THE WALLSWalled cities accommodate hundreds of people and determine their lives; with thepassing of the centuries they came to feel protected or oppressed by defensivewalls which had become obsolete.

The strategic and military importance of Pamplona, its character as a stronghold,had a significant influence on its inhabitants, their occupations, customs andways of life. This was also a determining factor in its urban development,



Picture of a C19th female gatekeeper, one of the five period characters that can be seen inthe casern on “The human side of the walls”.



something it had in common with other cities, but in the case of Pamplona it wasexceptionally prolonged – up until 1915, when demolition of the walls began.

This casern guides you through the main social realities marking each century,with the help of dramatisations by five period characters: the Toulouse poetGuillermo de Annelier, witness to and narrator of the war between the threeboroughs in the 13th century; an infantry soldier from the 17th century, victim ofthe decline of imperial Spain; a 19th-century woman gatekeeper, a guardianwhose role had more to do with revenue than defence; Don Alfonso de Gaztelu yMaritorena, who was mayor of Pamplona between 1913 and 1916 and aprivileged spectator when demolition of the walls began; and an anonymouscontemporary person, symbol of the reconciliation and the renewed relationshipbetween the citizens of Pamplona and its old walls.

PAMPLONA AND THE WORLDTo be able to fairly judge the importance of a fortress, it is necessary tocontextualise it in its time and compare it with other similar ones. Pamplonacame to be a bastioned fortress of the first order. Its pentagonal citadel is theoldest in Spain, which means that when it was built, in the time of Philip II, it wasthe most modern and sophisticated of all existing defensive fortifications.

Those who came to the city to take up the work of building and improving thedefences were the best engineers and builders in the Europe of their day. On theother hand, the art of building as practised in Pamplona was a crucible of thesiege warfare expertise, both theoretical and practical, of the three Europeanschools of fortification: Flemish, Italian and French.

The Pamplona complex is the finest surviving example of the move from themedieval system of defence to Renaissance modernity in military engineering.





















BibliographyECHARRI, V., Las murallas y la ciudadela de Pamplona. Pamplona, 2000.

Gobierno de Navarra (Government of Navarre).MADRAZO, P., España. Sus monumentos y arte. Su naturaleza e historia. Navarra y Logroño, tomos I y II.

Barcelona, 1986. Cortezo.MARTINENA, J.J., Historias del viejo Pamplona. Pamplona, 2003.

Ayuntamiento de Pamplona (Town Council of Pamplona). QUINTANILLA, V y TORRES, J., Plan de actuación Fortificaciones de Pamplona. Pamplona, 2006.

Ayuntamiento de Pamplona (Town Council of Pamplona). Pamplona.ZAPATERO, J.M., El Real Felipe del Callao, Primer castillo de la “Mar del Sur”. Madrid, 1983.

Sources usedArchivo General de Simancas (AGS).Archivo Municipal de Pamplona (AMP).Instituto de Historia y Cultura Militar. Madrid (IHCM).Servicio Geográfico del Ejército (SGE).

List of acknowledgements

Sponsor: Town Council of PamplonaProject management: José Vicente Valdenebro García, José Ignacio Alfonso Pezonaga,

Marta Monreal Vidal y Miguel Monreal Vidal

Restoration project: José Ignacio Alfonso Pezonaga, Marta Monreal Vidaly Miguel Monreal Vidal

Health and safety: Lidia Martínez ZancajoInstallations: Proyectos y Promoción de Ingeniería S.L.

Content creationand development: Construcciones Aranguren, Construcciones Leache

y Construcciones Zubillaga [UTE Fortín de San Bartolomé ALZ]Content director: Víctor Echarri IribarrenCoordinator of historical content: Juan José Martinena RuizHistorical advisors: Luis Eduardo Oslé GuerendiainContent development: Código Alfa Soluciones S.L.

José Luis Los Arcos Sanz, Javier Olmedo Cruz, Alberto Guinea BelIsabel Elizalde Arretxea, Ignacio Olivera Martínez,Idoia Poza Undiano, Eduardo Sáiz MúgicaPatricia Martiartu Fernández, Raquel Domench VidalPedro Gurpegui Nausia, María Lusarreta BaztánLidia Gómez Sada

Contributors: Fernando Hualde Gállego, Luis Esquíroz Medina

Investment: 1.925.000 €Subsidy: Gobierno de España – FEILES

Coordination and continuity: José Javier López Rodríguez, José Vicente Valdenebro García, Enrique Maya Miranda, Silvia Azpilicueta Rodríguez Valdés,Teresa Lasheras Balduz



A walk round the Pamplona Fortifications. Visual guide 87

A walk round the PamplonaFortifications.

Visual guide


88 A walk round the Pamplona Fortifications. Visual guide

San Bartolomé FortInterpretation Centre for the Walls of Pamplona

Situated right in the heart of Pamplona, and following its restoration in 2010, ittoday houses the Interpretation Centre for the Walls of Pamplona. It is also thestarting point for a complete tour of the fortifications of the city-fortress ofPamplona.

Built in the 18th century, and gradually improved in several phases, it was meantto provide support to the main fortification. The hill it stands on was a weak

1



point, liable to enemy attack: the orography of the land hid the enemy advance,enabling him to reach as far as the actual base of the main walls. The Fort,perched on top of the hill, eliminated that weak point, strengthened the outerdefences and gave broad views over the fields where the enemy might lurk.

San Bartolomé, together with El Príncipe and San Roque, was one of the threedetached forts set at a certain distance from the city walls proposed by theMarquis of Verboom in his 1726 plan for improving the fortifications of the day.However, San Bartolomé is the only one of the three that survives in its entirety. It was also the final defensive structure to be completed in Pamplona.



Media Luna Park lift –Arga River Park

The site chosen for the locationof the lift tower lets residentsenjoy an environment with bothexceptional views and a handyconnection to San BartoloméFort.

The project was realised over thecourse of 2010. It fosters linksbetween the Old Town andSegundo Ensanche (SecondEnlargement), in the vicinity of thefort, and the Arga River Park andother outlying districts such asChantrea and Magdalena. Giventhe 21 metre drop and the widehorizontal separation between theentrance and exit points of the lift,a type of free-standing tower isused that links to the entrance viaa walkway over the existing wall.

An identical structural solutionserves both the shaft of the lift-tower and the access walkway:screens and Corten steel boxgirders which unify the wholedesign like a continuous outline.

2



Labrit walkway

As part of efforts to improve mobility promoted by Pamplona Town Council, thispedestrian walkway became operational at the end of 2010, making for easiercommunication between the Old Town and the city’s Segundo Ensanche (SecondEnlargement). It also enhances the continuity of the walk around the Pamplonawalls itself as, bridging the large breach caused by the Labrit slope that is oneof the city’s important access points, itconnects the San Bartolomé Fort with thesentry walk round the fortified enclosure. It is a simple Y-shaped Corten steel structurewhich, in a rather sculptural manner, spans adistance of over 70 metres between its end-points. It forms part of the new infrastructurerendering the walled enclosure’s nearly 5kilometres of perimeter (sentry) walkaccessible.

3



Labrit Bastion

Built around 1540, this was originally called the Cubo del Molino de Caparrosoor Caparroso Bastion; later the Merced or Labrit Bastion, and from 1669 it wasgenerally known as the latter. It is one of the oldest surviving parts of thefortification. From one of its flanks ran the now-vanished Tejería front, the loweredbase of which remains next to the Jito-Alai pediment. Only part of the platformthat surrounded its base survives, as the Chantrea road-widening works thatwere carried out around 1960 led to one of its fronts disappearing.

4



Ronda del Obispo Barbazán Magdalena front

Situated between Labrit and RedínBastions, this stretch of wall and the sentrywalk that runs parallel to it protects themost sacred part of the city: theArchbishop's Palace, the Barbazana Chapel,the cloister and the main front of SantaMaria Cathedral. The walk is named inhonour of Bishop Barbazán. Here theconstituent stretch or curtain of wall has noembrasures, though a couple ofcharacteristically mid 18th-century sentryboxes are still standing. This section doesnot have a moat, either, as the land’s naturalescarpment and the proximity of the riverArga render one unnecessary. It was openedto the public in 1960, its present conditionthe product of a recent restoration whichhas made it easier to walk through this area,one of the most beautiful in the city, offeringsuperior views of the surrounding area.

5



Cathedral of Santa María la Real

This was built during the 14th and 15th centuries on what was the site of aRomanesque church and before that the Roman settlement of Pompaelo. It wasalso the most important place in the medieval city of Navarrería. Its neoclassicalfacade hides a sober Gothic church. It is one of the most complete cathedralcomplexes in the world due to the fact that there were canons living there untilthe 19th century. The preservation of the greater part of its dependencies(kitchen, dormitories, refectory, library etc.) allows us to clearly understand howa medieval church worked.

In front of the presbytery is the tomb of King Charles III, architect of the union ofthe city in 1423, and his wifeEleanor of Trastámara. It isconsidered to be one of themost important sculpturalensembles in Navarre. 28figures of nobles and highclergy accompany those of therecumbent monarchs. Belowthe tomb is a sealed cryptcontaining the remains of thekings and princes buried in theCathedral.

The Barbazana Chapel,dedicated to the bishop of thesame name (1319-1355),

gives pride of place to La Virgen del Consuelo, a polychrome stone carving ofexceptional value. The Cloister is the jewel of the cathedral, and one of theworld’s outstanding masterworks in the Gothic style. It was built between 1286and 1472, and there are few European cloisters in its class.

6



Redín Bastion

Built around the year 1540, this is, along with the Labrit, the oldest bastion inthe walled enclosure.

It occupied roughly the site of the old medieval Tesorería tower. At first it wascalled Cubo de la Tesorería, Torreón de la Moneda and Bastión de la Magdalena.Since the eighteenth century it has been known almost exclusively as El Redín.

Recently restored, it is the highest point of the walled enclosure, making it thecity-fortress’s most attractive lookout over the river Arga.

7



Low Bastion of Our Lady of Guadalupe

Recently restored, the origins of the low bastion Our Lady of Guadalupe go backto the mid 18th century, when it was added to the Redín Bastion to increase itsdefensive capacity. While this new defence was made following new techniquesin the art of attacking and defending strongholds (also known as poliorcetics)pioneered by the celebrated engineer Vauban, the combination of both bastionsis truly harmonious despite the two centuries of difference separating them.They represent the union of the 16th with the 18th century through bastionedfortification and the evolution of technical advances in military engineering.

8



Los Reyes Ravelin

Recently restored, the Los Reyes Ravelin dates from the 18th century, a timewhen it was deemed necessary to improve the defences of the Francia Frontbased on the new military techniques developed by the celebrated engineerVauban.

It was to support the defence of the Redín and Abrevador bastions, so wassituated between the two low bastions (Pilar and Our Lady of Guadalupe) beingbuilt at the same time. That is why it is of the same type of construction.

9



Francia or Zumalacárregui Gate

Built by the Viceroy Duke of Alburquenque in 1553, this opens at the end ofCalle del Carmen, formerly Rúa de los Peregrinos. It retains a magnificentRenaissance heraldic carving with the imperial shield of Charles V and aninscription recording the name of its creator. It even still has the runners that theiron portcullis once went down, to close it after curfew.

In 1937 the gate was officially re-baptised with the name Zumalacárregui, inhonour of the brave Gipuzkoan general who, as a resident of Calle del Carmen,took that way out of the city one morning in 1833 to fight at the head of theCarlist army, in command of which he won some significant victories. The outergate, dating from 1753, proudly bears on its facade the simplified Spanish shield,with only the arms of Castile and Leon and the central escutcheon with theBourbon fleur-de-lis, and not including the shields of the kingdoms of Navarre andAragon: a similar heraldic composition to that on the Citadel’s Socorro Gate.

It also retains the only working drawbridge in the city, following recent preservationwork on the gate. Since 2008, with large crowds all around, it has been operatedevery Christmas to help the procession of the Three Kings cross over. Of the sixgates that went into the walled enclosure, this is the only one that has survivedintact.

10



Low Bastion of El Pilar

Built in the mid 18th century and recently restored, the low bastion of El Pilar isvery similar in appearance and features to the low bastion of Our Lady ofGuadalupe. Its purpose, as with the latter, was to boost the defensive capabilitiesof the bastion it surrounded - in this case, the 16th-century Abrevador Bastion.

While this new defence was made following novel techniques in the art ofattacking and defending strongholds (also known as poliorcetics) pioneered by

the celebrated engineer Vauban,the combination of both bastionsis truly harmonious despite thetwo centuries of differenceseparating them.

They represent the union of the16th with the 18th centurythrough bastioned fortificationand the evolution of technicaladvances in military engineering.

11



El Abrevador Bastion

Next to the Francia Gate stands the small El Abrevador Bastion, built in the16th century. Recently refurbished, it can be reached by the stairs next to theFrancia Gate.

Archivo General de Navarra

The renovated Capitanía building, a former palace whose origins go back to the12th century, has since 2003 been the headquarters of the Archivo General deNavarra (Navarre Public Records Office).

Over the course of its life, its uses have changed according to the needs of themoment. Thus, in the Middle Ages it was the residence of the bishops ofPamplona and the prerogative monarchs of the new kingdom. Around 1530 itcame to be inhabited by viceroys and from 1841 by field marshals. The MilitaryGovernment subsequently took up residence in its buildings.

The rehabilitation project is the task of the Navarrese architect RafaelMoneo and has two distinct parts to it. On the one hand, restoring the oldmedieval building, where the information and customer service areas are.On the other, building a spacious new modern building, capable of housingthe documentary archive. The building is equipped with technological toolsfor the classification, consultation and safekeeping of the documentary

12

13



heritage of Navarre. It has a capacity equivalent to 44,000 metres ofshelving and provides a reading and reference room; a large restorationworkshop able to meet the needs of all Navarre's public and private records;photo and microfilm laboratories; an assembly hall; a specialist library; andoffice space.

The building retains somefeatures of the original Gothicconstruction, and a twelve-storey tower (three belowground level) has beenadded to one of the vertexes.



Town Hall

The Town Hall or Casa Consistorial is the seat of the municipal government andthe iconic starting point for the San Fermín fiestas.Its location in the heart of theOld Town is not accidental. Until 1423, Pamplona comprised three independentboroughs: Navarrería, San Cernin y San Nicolás. That year King Charles IIIdecided to merge them into a single city, with just one Town Hall.

It was decided to build the first Casa Consistorial at the place where the bordersof the three boroughs converged, as a symbol of union and peace between them.The seat of municipal government and representation would not move from there,although its appearance would certainly change. This first Casa Consistorial wasdemolished in 1752, having been declared a ruin. Eight years later, the newbuilding was inaugurated on the same site. Only its facade survives. In 1951,everything else was knocked down to make way for the current buildings.

14



Parma Bastion

This became the point where the fronts known as Francia and Rochapea met. Itwas originally a large ravine between La Navarrería and the borough of SanCernin. With the unification of the boroughs of Navarrería, San Cernin and SanNicolás that followed the Privilege of Union promulgated by Charles III in 1423,it was filled in and a common wall created. This area, which came to be occupiedby what were known as the Santo Domingo Orchards, is now flanked by theArchivo General de Navarra (Public Records Office, formerly the Royal Palace),

Government of Navarre Department of Education (former Military Hospital) andthe Museum of Navarre.

Work is pending to adapt and prepare the site for site so that, in addition to therestoration of the Parma Bastion itself, a partially subterranean structure can bebuilt there to house an underground car park and sports complex within thelimits of the old plan. The undertaking will include the installation of two urbanlifts by the plazas of the museum and records office which, apart from servingthese new facilities, can be used by anyone wanting to gain access to theexpanse of the new public space.

15



Paseo de Ronda - Francia front

Recently restored, this takes in the stretch of walls and the path that goes roundthem from the Rochapea Gate to the Nuevo Gate.

The old sentry walk was opened as a public pathway in the 1960s, though notalong the stretch at the back of the Museum of Navarre, which happened morerecently, making it possible to walk its entire length.

In the face of the serious danger of ruin that was threatening the very foundationsof the wall, the town council carried out, in 1977, consolidation work of somesignificance. Its situation matches that of the now vanished medieval wall of theborough of San Cernin, which is why it might come as little surprise that remainsof the latter are contained within it.

16



Descalzos lift

Inaugurated in 2008, the “Ascensor de Descalzos” (Lift of the Barefoot) buildinglinks the old part of Pamplona next to the walls in the Paseo de Ronda (SentryWalk) with the Cuesta de Curtidores in Rochapea district, travelling a height of50m between the two.

The building houses two lifts with a capacity of between 15 and 20 people each(1500 kg max.) connecting the two levels, and also incorporates in the Paseo deRonda the foyer and disembarkation point, in a double-height space; an exhibitionarea on the second floor; and a bar-restaurant on the third. The Rochapeaentrance provides users with a large reinforced concrete shelter. Once the workhad been carried out, the affected part of the wall was rebuilt adapted to theangled trajectory of the lift, under a green bank.

17



Nuevo Gate

Restored in 2009, the origins of Nuevo (New) Gate go back to 1675, the yearin which under the Viceroy Count of Fuensalida the old gate was erected on thesame spot. This was poorly reconstructed following bombardment by royalabsolutists in 1823, having the least artistic merit of the city’s six andresembling a postern in appearance.

In 1906 the old gate was demolished to broaden the entrance to the Guipúzcoaroad; that year a steel footbridge - merely functional - was put in its place tofacilitate the movement and patrol of the guards on the front of the Rochapeawall and Gonzaga Bastion. The footbridge was in use until 1949.

In 1950 Víctor Eusa planned andbuilt the Nuevo Gate as it istoday, its architecture bearing norelation to that of the adjacentwalls.

18



Gonzaga Bastion

The building of the Citadel entailed the creation of four new Italianate bastions thatcompleted the new line of defence connecting it to the city (they were Gonzaga andTaconera, which still exist today, and San Nicolás and La Reina, which were bothdemolished between 1915 and 1920 to make way for the construction of theSegundo Ensanche – or Second Enlargement - of Pamplona). These days Gonzaga

Bastion serves as an excellent viewing point for the River Arga, northern Pamplonaand surrounding districts. Its structure, rather complex and atypical, was withoutdoubt the product of the successive reforms carried out in the 17th and 18thcenturies. It was radically modified in 1925 to give more space to the landscaped area

around the lookout and to connectLa Taconera better with the Larrainadistrict: the moat was filled in andthe walls were partially demolishedand put up again outside. The walloriginally met the old lookout at aright angle. Its recent restorationhas made it possible to return itsconstituent stretches of wall to acondition worthy of their glory days.

19



San Roque Ravelin

Also called the “Medialuna de Gonzaga”, this was built between 1675 and 1700during the reign of Charles (Carlos) II and planned as a defence outside theCitadel. Located in the gardens of La Taconera, it bears on one of its fronts thecoat of arms of the Viceroy Pignatelli, Marquis of San Vicente, appointed in 1699.In reality its name belongs to a fort built around 1730, which was rather short-lived, and the site of which would correspond today to the military swimmingpool, part of Larraina and the ring road.

Restored in 2009, it currently provides a nightly haven for the deer that come upto rest in its upper part and to keep their distance from the other animals in thesmall zoo in the La Taconera moats.

20



San Nicolás Gate

After construction of the Citadel, the new defensive line embraced four newItalianate bastions – Gonzaga, La Taconera, San Nicolás and La Reina, the lattertwo being demolished around 1920 with the extension of the Segundo Ensanche(Second Enlargement) of Pamplona. These new bastions meant opening fournew gates, too, among them San Nicolás, built in 1666. It is one of the six gatesthat led into the walled enclosure. Although it was initially put beside the churchof San Ignacio, where the Carlos III cinemas are today, the arch was demolished

in 1907 and the gate moved to the Taconera Gardens in 1929. So now thebaroque facade of the San Nicolás Gate serves as the access way to theTaconera Gardens from the area of the Bosquecillo.On the gate, at the foot ofthe shield bearing the royal arms of the House of Austria, there is a stone plaquewith the following inscription:

IN THE REIGN OF CHARLES II, AND REGENCY OF THE QUEEN HIS MO

THER, AND BEING VICEROY AND FIELDMARSHAL OF THIS KINGDOM AND OF

GVIPUZCOADON FRco TVTAVILA, DVKE OF

SAN GERMAN. IN THE YEAR 1666

21



La Taconera Bastion

This was another of the four new Italianate bastions – Gonzaga, La Taconera, SanNicolás and La Reina, the latter two being demolished around 1920 with theextension of the Segundo Ensanche (Second Enlargement) of Pamplona - thatcompleted the new defensive line created following the construction of theCitadel. Both La Taconera and La Reina embodied the same plan and structure.The process of facing the first one in stone was apparently completed in 1665. At the beginning of the 20th century the bastion lost its old cornice ofembrasures. In its place a stone parapet was built, better suited to therecreational walking use that the old sentry walk had acquired by then. Its recentrestoration has made it possible to return its constituent stretches of wall to acondition worthy of their glory days.

22



La Taconera Gate

After construction of theCitadel, the new defensiveline embraced four newItalianate bastions – Gonzaga, La Taconera, San Nicolás andLa Reina, the latter two beingdemolished around 1920 withthe extension of the SegundoEnsanche (Second Enlargement)of Pamplona.

These new bastions meant opening four new gates, too, among them LaTaconera, built in 1666. It is one of the six gates that led into the walledenclosure, and gave the city access to the Estella road via the present-daystreets Navas de Tolosa and Bosquecillo. On the gate, at the foot of the shieldbearing the royal arms of the House of Austria, there is a stone plaque with thefollowing inscription:

IN THE REIGN OF CHARLES II, AND REGENCY OF THE QUEEN HIS MO

THER, AND BEING VICEROY AND FIELDMARSHAL OF THIS KINGDOM AND OF

GVIPUZCOADON FRco TVTAVILA, DVKE OF

SAN GERMAN. THE YEAR 1666.

Taken down in 1906 to make the access to Pamplona from Estella broaderand more comfortable, it was reconstructed in 2002 next to where it had been,between Bosquecillo and the Antoniutti Park skating rink. The stone pillars ofthe bridge to the old portal still survive as part of the filler below the widebridge that connects the streets Bosquecillo and Navas de Tolosa with the topof the avenues Bayona and Pío XII. Below Antoniutti Park and its adjoiningskating rink lies a buried 17th-century lunette which used to defend the accessto the Taconera Gate.

23



24. Victoria Bastion

25. Santiago Bastion

29. Santa Ana Ravelin

30. Santa Isabel Ravelin

33. Socorro Gate



27. Real Bastion and Cavalier

32. Santa Lucía Ravelin

28. San Antón Bastion

26. Santa María Bastion

31. Santa Clara Ravelin

Citadel



Bastions of the la Victoria, of Santiago, of Santa María, Real bastion and Cavalier and San Anton bastion

The Pamplona Citadel has become the city’s primary urban reference point. Itis considered one of the finest examples of the military architecture of theSpanish Renaissance and also one of the most outstanding defensivecomplexes in Europe. The parks it embraces and the Vuelta del Castillo, thegreen belt that surrounds it, are considered the lungs of Pamplona. Its militaryand defensive purposes have given way to the different sporting, leisure andcultural pursuits enjoyed today by the people of Pamplona.

It was begun in the time of Philip II, in 1571, to plans drawn up by the militaryengineer Giacomo Palearo, el Fratín. The new Citadel was adapted to advancesin military technology and the need to defend it from cannon with a longerreach than those previously deployed, which had rendered the old castle builtby Ferdinand the Catholic obsolete. Thus Palearo, aided by the Viceroy ofNavarre, Vespasiano Gonzaga, designed a defensive complex similar to themodern Citadel of Antwerp: a regular pentagon with five bastions at its angles- San Felipe el Real, Santa María, Santiago, San Antón and La Victoria. Thelatter two were demolished in 1888 to make way for the first Ensanche(Enlargement) of the city, although some remains of San Antón Bastion can beseen in the Pamplona auditorium.

The Citadel was formally completed in 1646, the year it was visited by PhilipIV. The conclusion of works and the royal visit were commemorated by puttingthe coats of arms of both the monarch and the Count of Oropesa over themain gate that opened onto the Avenida del Ejército. A genuine city was builtinside the Citadel. On 23 July 1966 it ceased to belong to the Army. Within theenclosure there was a series of military constructions that formed a miniaturetown, with a radial network of narrow streets and alleys converging on thecentral square or parade ground. In 1969 a plan was approved to demolish thebuildings inside it that had no “architectural value”. Only the Magazine,Weapons Hall, Oven and Gunpowder Store (old provisions warehouse and

24. 25. 26. 27. 28



cellar) were left standing. The modern design proved its effectiveness, giventhat it was never taken by force. Only once did it succumb. It happened duringthe winter of 1808, when by the Treaty of Fontainebleau, French troops werestationed outside the city, the Viceroy Marquis of Vallesantoro having refusedto put them up inside the military enclosure.

On 16 February, after heavy snow, the French began to throw snowballs at theNavarrese guarding the Citadel who, in the excitement of the game, forgot theirduties and found themselves suddenly surrounded and disarmed by the foreigntroops. Shortly afterwards the War of Spanish Independence broke out.



Ravelins of Santa Ana, Santa Isabel, Santa Clara y Santa Lucía

Under the viceroyalty of the Count of Oropesa, ravelins or half moons were added,known by the names Santa Teresa, Santa Ana, Santa Isabel, Santa Clara andSanta Lucía. In the mid 18th century, these exterior citadel defences amountedto small earthen lunettes, with no stone covering and practically ruined by therain. In view of this, new counterguards with ravelins facing towards the countrywere built in the reign of Viceroy Benavides, reflecting the systems of militarydefence devised by the famous engineer Vauban.

Among them the Santa Isabel and Santa Clara ravelins stand out, both havinglengths of wall on which a shield with the Viceroy’s arms appears, along with aninscription placing the building of the ravelin – and the Viceroy in question – inthe year 1685. On these the following can be read:

IN THE REIGN OF CHARLES II OFCASTILE AND OF NAVARRE

VICEROY AND FIELD MARSHALL OFTHIS KINGDOM D. ENRIQUE

BENAVIDES I BAZAN, OF THE COUN-CIL OF STATE. IN THE YEAR 1685

29. 30. 31. 32



The Santa Teresa and Santa Lucía ravelins were partially demolished at thebeginning of the 20th century to make way for the construction of militarybarracks. The latter, Santa Lucía, was restored in 2007 as part ofconstruction work on the new bus station (see p. 122). The rest of theravelins have been undergoing restoration in recent years (2010-2011),together with their counterguards and covered way, with the help of theGovernment of Navarre.



Socorro Gate

The Socorro Gate, in reality made up of three successive gates (those of theravelin, the Santa Isabel counterguard and the Citadel wall - the main one) withtheir corresponding sleeping (fixed) and movable bridges, dates from 1720. In thatyear it was removed from its original site, hard up against the Santa María Bastion,to its current one: centred in the wall. The aim: to be able to defend it from theenemy from the flanks of the bastions that guarded it, Santa María and Santiago.Even today, if we stop on the longest of the three fixed bridges and look at thecorresponding stretch of Citadel wall, we can make out, from the difference inthe size of the ashlars, the original position of the Socorro Gate.

Today this bridge connects the Citadel with the Vuelta del Castillo (CastleSurround) by means of a “bomb-proof” vault.

In its original location stands the Chapel, where these days civil marriages areheld.

33



Main Gate of the Citadel

The main gate of the Citadel, which dates from the end of the 16th century, isthe one that opens on to the present-day Avenida del Ejército. Placed there is the1571 inscription commemorating the builder of the fortress, Viceroy VespasianoGonzaga. Although there was a drawbridge leading to it, the citadel being entirely

surrounded by moats, when the San Antón and Victoria bastions weredemolished in 1888 to make way for the first enlargement of the city, the moatwas filled in and the drawbridge, already unusable, was removed.

34



Guardhouse

While the original guardhouse occupied the two vaults situated on either side ofthe vaulted tunnel leading into the enclosure from the Avenida del Ejército, itcame to assume its present form when construction began in 1756.

Both porticoed huts, one on either side of the small plaza, are now used forwarehousing and municipal office space.

Oven

The fortification’s old bread oven serves today as an exhibition centre and foravant-garde installations. Along with the Guardhouse, Weapons Hall, Magazine

and Gunpowder Block, itwas one of the fivebuildings that wereconserved and restoredwhen the Citadel wasbequeathed by the Armyto the Municipality in1964.

35

36



Gunpowder Block

Formerly a granary, this wasremodelled and covered from 1725with bomb-proof vaults. Today itprovides the Citadel with one moreexhibition space. Along with theGuardhouse, Weapons Hall, Magazine and Oven, it was one of the five buildingsthat were conserved and restored when the Citadel was bequeathed by the Armyto the Municipality in 1964.

Magazine

Built in 1695 by the engineer HérculesTorrelli, it is the oldest building in theenclosure. Today it houses artexhibitions.Along with the Guardhouse,Weapons Hall, Oven and GunpowderBlock, it was one of the five buildings that were conserved and restored whenthe Citadel was bequeathed by the Army to the Municipality in 1964.

Weapons Hall

This was built in 1725 as part of thereforms planned by the prestigiousVerboom for the City and Walls. It hasfour storeys and served as an artillerystore. Today it hosts artistic andcultural events. Along with theGuardhouse, Magazine, Oven and Gunpowder Block, it was one of the fivebuildings that were conserved and restored when the Citadel was bequeathedby the Army to the Municipality in 1964.

37

38

39



Bus Station

Pamplona Bus Station, situated on Calle Yanguas y Miranda, occupies one of themost central areas of the city. Completed in 2007, its 40,000 square metresoffer, apart from 52 bays, car parks and a commercial centre with restaurants,a cafeteria and other additional services.

Its construction has been a brilliant exercise in integrating new facilities intorestoration of the formal structure of the monument itself. In 2005 work beganon this substructure “hidden” beside the monument in the subsoil of its vanishedglacis. The roof of the station converts into a great green sheet which, as thoughit were an exercise in origami, folds up together with the structure to reconstructthe defensive elements of the Pamplona Citadel’s Santa Lucia Ravelin – glacis,

40



covered way, counterscarp and moat – which had disappeared years before toenable the development of the city with the Primer Ensanche (First Enlargement).

A green space of more than 30,000 m² has been recovered for residents,restoring the old citadel glacis that had once been occupied by military barracks.Years later (from the beginning of 1972, when all these buildings disappeareddue to the barracks being moved out of town), it had been converted into anasphalt parking space for all kinds of vehicles and which was also used duringthe San Fermín celebrations to host fiesta stalls.

The aggressive visual and environmental impact caused by the large parkingarea has thus been replaced by a green cloak which enfolds within it the heartof Pamplona’s land communications: the Bus Station.


1. Entry Gate2. Loopholes or low embrasures3. Loopholes or high embrasures4. Caserns or bomb-proof vaults5. Stone gargoyles6. Casern windows7. Horseshoe space8. Ascent ramps9. Observation posts

10. Stone paving11. Parapet12. Embrasures13. Merlon14. Cordon15. Scarp16. Capital angle17. Flanking angle18. Flank

19. Gorge20. Counterscarp21. Countermine shaft entrance22. Covered way23. Glacis24. Stairs25. Defensive mound


Glossary / 125

Glossary

AAngle of the bastion

The angle formed by the face of thebastion and its flank.

AnimaThe bore of the barrel in artillery andfirearms.

ArsenalDepot or general storehouse for weaponsand other items of war.

AshlarLarge blocks of stone cut into regularshapes ready for building walls andmasonry arches.

Ashlar workWork done with ashlars ordered andplaced in well-pointed courses.

ArtilleryWeapon of war of the type designed tofire large projectiles over long distancesby means of an explosive charge.

BBank

Steeply sloped reinforcement for the

lower part of the walls to make it strongerand keep siege machines at a distance.Also to prevent digging or mining underthe walls.

BanquetteLong bench-shaped area of earth or roughstone, accessed by a ramp from insidethe castle and which is large enough forthe soldiers to occupy in two lines,protected from enemy fire up to shoulderheight by the wall, parapet or fortification.

BastionPentagonal fortification projecting outwardat the point where two curtain walls meet,comprising two faces that forms a salientangle, two flanks joining them to the walland an entrance gorge.

Bastion faceEach of the two walls that meet at asalient or which form the capital angle ofthe bastion.

Bastion flankSide of a military fort or the immediatearea to the side. Part of the bastionforming an angle with the curtain wall andfacing out to the front. Each of the wallsjoining the enclosure to the bastionfaces.

BatteryAll the artillery ready to fire. Artillery unit,usually commanded by a captain,



composed of a relatively small number ofarms and men.

BeltStone, brick or adobe wall surrounding afortress for its external defence. It mustbe of a height to impede easy scaling bybesiegers and robust enough to resist thedifferent attack methods of invaders. Ifthe wall closes on itself it is called anenclosure.

Bomb-proof vaultVault that has been sufficiently reinforcedto enable it to withstand the impact ofhowitzers and mortars in siege warfareand thus protect the garrison and itsmunitions.

BondingManner in which building materials(masonry, ashlars, brick or otherelements) are arranged in a stoneworkconstruction. Different types of bondsare: stretcher, header, rowlock, etc…

BoroughMediaeval fortresses built by feudalnobles to watch over the territory in theirjurisdiction where groups of merchantsand craftsmen etc., settled. The origin ofmany medieval cities.

BossPart of the ashlar that sticks out from theconstruction, with rounded or bevelledarrises.

BreechloaderFirearm that is loaded at the back (thelower part of the mechanism, not themuzzle).

CCalibre

Internal diameter or bore of a firearmbarrel.

CannonArtillery piece with a very long muzzle inrelation to its calibre, used to shoot balls,shot or a certain type of hollow projectile.

Cannon instrumentsArtillery battery accessories.

Cannon GripSemicircular indentation on the planks ofthe linstock to house the grips of thecorresponding arm.

CaponierFortification that originally consisted of astockade with loopholes and embrasuresat the same depth as the moat to defendit. In modern times the name is given to agallery or casemate placed at varioussites to flank one or more moats from thecity.

CasemateVery strong vault for one or more artillerypieces. It was situated on the flank of thebastion and protected by the orillon,which housed several artillery pieces,with the aim of preventing the assailantfrom getting across the moat.

CasernBuilding with a bomb-proof cannon vault,built within the defence (bastion, fort etc.)and which also served as a barracks andstorehouse for provisions, munitions andmaterial.

CastleWalled group of buildings enclosing aplace of arms and around which there area series of dependencies with at least


Glossary / 127

one habitable tower. A fortifiedconstruction. Additional defensiveelements are: walls, bridges, towers, andthe upper living quarters, known as thekeep. Built specifically for the defence ofstrategic areas and of people, theestablishment of noble power, watchingover the area, attacks, etc.

Castle Wall or City WallStone, brick or adobe wallencircling a fortress as an externaldefence. It had to be high enoughto deter climbing from the outsideby attackers and strong enough toresist attack. If the wall enclosesthe area completely it is called anenclosure.

CavalierHigh defensive feature within the fort tomake it easier to protect with firearms orto dominate in the case of enemyoccupation.

CercaOld Spanish word for a town wall.

ChemiseIn mediaeval fortifications, a wall lowerthan the keep which it protects. Inmodern fortifications, covering of theearth embankments with masonry walls,the final layer done with stonework.

CitadelFortified enclosed area usually in theshape of a regular polygon, intersectingthe inside of a walled settlement whichdominates it and constituting the lastplace of refuge.

CorbelMoulded architectural feature whichprotrudes on a vertical plane and isdesigned to hold something up.

CordonPerimeter torus on all the externalparameters of the fortification separatingthe banked walls of the parapets from theembrasures, preventing them from beingscaled. It normally consisted of one ofthe courses of stone near the upper partof the parameters.

CounterguardOutwork in a fort with two faces formingan angle, built in front of the bastions andravelins for their defence.

CountermineUnderground passage cut below theenemy to blow them up or to attack themas they work on their own undergroundtunnels. Countermine networks were dugaround strongholds in preparation forthese works.

CounterscarpBanked wall of the moat opposite thescarp, which is to say on the side facingthe country next to the covered way.

Covered wayWatch and access walkway whichencircles and defends the moatsurrounding the fortifications, comprisinga banquette from which soldiers could fireover, using the glacis as a parapet.

Curtain wallStretch of wall between two bastions inmodern fortifications.

DDead area

Sector of the approaches that cannot beshot at from any angle.



DrawbridgeStrong, rigid piece wood that went overthe moat. In case of enemy attack thebridge was raised using a complicatedmechanism of pulleys, chains andweights. Raising the drawbridge stoppedthe attackers from getting in and workedto protect and reinforce the gate itself.The connection between sleeper bridgesand the fort was made by a drawbridge totry to prevent the enemy getting in.

EEmbrasure

Opening specifically for shooting with non-portable arms (e.g. cannon), made in fortifications, towers and turrets,as often in the base as in their walls orroofs.

EnclosureSee Belt.

EsplanadeIncline going from the covered walkway tothe countryside. Highest part of the walls,on the edge of which the battlements arebuilt. Stone flooring or framework withstrong planks on which a battery’s guncarriages were mounted and moved.

FFacade

Principal front of a building that faces thestreet or open space.

FaceEither side of a town or castle wall. Alsoany of the six sides of a cut ashlar.

FascineTightly packed bundle of slenderbranches used by military engineersespecially for rendering and binding earthinto the embankments of thefortifications. They were also used tocrown, set alight, etc.

FenceArtificial barricade of the height andthickness needed to resist a shot or aricochet.

Fixed cannonCannon inside the fortress.

FortFortified enclosure.

Fortín (Spanish term)Small fort.

FortressLarge fortified enclosure such as a castle,citadel etc.

FrontEach of the two lengths of wall fromwhich the ends of the flanks join to closethe bastion and form its angle. Twobastions and the curtain wall that joinsthem form a bastioned front.

GGargoyle

Stone channel and outlet for water fromthe roof. Sometimes decorated withzoomorphic creatures, many of themfantastic.

GarrisonSoldiers that garrison a city or castle.

GlacisOpen area free of vegetation or obstacles


Glossary / 129

all around a modern fortress, on a slightslope to make the enemy’s approachdifficult. The area went right up to theedge of the covered way.

GorgeEntrance from the city to the bastion, ordistance between the flanking angles.Straight imaginary line for when there isno parapet joining the flanks of adefensive construction.

GraffitoPiece of historical graffiti. Hand-donewriting or drawing left on ancientmonuments, typically carved or done withgraphite.

GunpowderInflammable mixture used for incendiarydevices and fireworks.

HHalf moon

See Ravelin.

HornworkExternal fortification made of demi-bastions joined by a curtain wall. Servesthe same purpose as a tenaille but isstronger as it defends both the faces andcurtain of the flanks. Usually had a ravelinin front of its curtain wall.

HowtizerArtillery piece that fires grenades, thelength of which, relative to the diameterof the bore, is greater than a mortar andless than a cannon of the same calibre. Itis mounted on a wheeled carriage tomake it easier to move.

LLienzo (Spanish word)

Stretch of wall that goes between twoconsecutive towers or bastions.

Lined (or groove) boreIn artillery pieces and all firearms ingeneral, a barrel with helical rifling insideto increase the range.

LoopholeLong, narrow opening in a wall forshooting out of. It was usually wider onthe outside, so the hole flared out. Ageneric word that was even adopted byfusiliers in 20th-century forts.

LunetteSmall bastion, tended to be isolated.Usually protected and reinforced thedefences on the angles of the ravelinsand bastions.

MMagazine

Building for keeping gunpowder and otherexplosives.

MasonryTraditional construction system inwhich stones which have not beenspecially cut are built up using limemortar. Smaller stones are fitted intothe gaps between the larger ones.Many walls and castles were built inthis way. Larger stones were used inthe lower parts of the wall. Sometimesthe two faces are different, in whichcase the outer one is worked more. Inmodern forts it is used to build wallsfrom the entrance ravelins, counter



guards etc. - anywhere not in the directline of enemy fire.

MerlonEach of the stretches of parapet betweenembrasures. Solid part of the breastworkbetween two battlements to protect thedefending soldier on the ramparts ortower. Usually having loopholes, andsometimes with supports for the shutterson the battlements.

MineCavity made in a shaft, bottom of a bridgeetc. in which to insert gunpowder andblow it up. Box full of gunpowder orbombs buried beneath someconstructions which was set off if theenemy gained the fort.

Mine or TunnelUnderground gallery which is openedwhen forts are besieged, with a hiddenroom at the back full of explosives todestroy the city fortifications.

Mine or tunnel entranceArched doorway giving access to thecountermine.

MoatDeep excavation encircling the fort andmaking assault difficult as well ascovering the defender’s movements.

Mortar (artillery)Artillery piece for firing shells. Short withhigh calibre.

Muzzle-loaderFirearm that is loaded through its muzzle.

OObservation Post

Mound situated between embrasures sothe artillery chief could climb up andindicate exactly which way to fire thecannon.

PPalisade

See Stockade

Parade groundOpen area inside a walled enclosure usedfor the changing or formation of troops.Below the parade ground there could be alower ward that was used for the samepurpose.

ParapetShort terreplein over the main one, facingthe countryside, to defend the soldiers'chests from being hit. In modernfortifications, a short terreplein on theoutside of the covered way whichdefended the soldiers while they wereshooting.

PieceSee Cannon.

PlasterLayer of gypsum, stucco or other mixtureput over the walls of a house to give it asmooth surface.

PlatformThe top of a bastion.

PoliorceticsSet of techniques and approaches for thetaking and defending of strongholds. Theart of siege warfare.


Glossary / 131

PortcullisBarred gate made of iron to defend theentrance to a fort or other parts of thewalled enclosure. Also, steel part withgrooves in the cock of flintlock firearms;by banging into the flint it ignited theflashpan.

PortholeOpening in the parapet of wall or at theback of the battery for safe and accuratefiring of cannon.

PositionTopographical position of a fort.

PosternSecondary, small door to a fort, used fordiscreet entrances and exits to surprisethe enemy or regroup the troops in themoat.

PoundTo attack and destroy with artillery.

Pound (lb)Old measurement of weight in Castile,where the pound was divided into 16ounces. In Aragon, the Balearic Islands,Catalonia and Valencia it had 12 ounces,17 in the Basque country and 20 inGalicia and other quantities in othertowns.

Putlog holesHoles in the wall to hold horizontalscaffolding planks or floor beams.

RRavelin

Semicircular outwork with two faces at asalient angle built beyond the curtain wall,the two demi-gorges of which constitutethe counterscarp. Allows the curtain wall,

access points and flanks of a bastion to

be protected. Also called a "half moon".

RedanProtruding angle formed by a face and aflank adjacent to a bastion. A bastion has

two redans.

Ricochet fireMethod of firing cannon in which theamount of powder is reduced so there isless tension in the shot, thus making itpossible to attack soldiers in the coveredwalkway. The battery of cannon was linedup with the covered walkway and theshells fell on the line, rebounding on thefloor and the parapet. Invented by Vauban

in the last quarter of the 17th century.

RiflePortable firearm for the infantry replacingthe crossbow and the blunderbuss. Madeup of a steel or iron barrel, usually someeight to ten centimetres long, and a firing

mechanism joined together at the breech.

Rough cut stoneBlocks of stone smaller than ashlars,

regularly sized, and cut less precisely.

RowlockBrick laid on the long, narrow side with

the small or "header" side exposed.

SSalvo

A salute given by firing guns. A series ofcannon explosions but without a projectileto honour or salute someone.Simultaneous shot from several identicalpieces of artillery.



SapAdvance by the besiegers protected bytheir galleries or trenches which they havedug themselves, or under the shelter ofthe besieged fortification.

ScarpSlope that forms the wall of the mainbody of a city, from the cordon to themoat and counterscarp; or plane, alsosloping but in the other direction, thatforms the wall supporting the earth of thecovered way.

Sentry BoxSmall hollow space for the shelter anddefence of sentries, usually covered andwith loopholes. Appeared and developedwith bastioned fortification.

Sentry walkIn mediaeval fortresses, the continuouspassage around the exterior perimeter ofthe walls for the purposes of vigilanceand shooting.

ShotDirection a firearm shoots in.

Sleeper Wood or MudsillStatic part of the floor of a bridge justbefore the drawn part, the length of whichwas usually insufficient to reach the scarpof the moat to be crossed.

Slope or gradientImaginary sloping line that joined theembrasures to the glacis and other partsof the fort and showed the areas underattack from those embrasures. The samething could be done from the batteriesattacking the fort.

StockadeA row of stakes hammered into theground vertically about 5 cm from eachother, secured with horizontal strips. Theywere placed on the banquette of thecovered way, in trenches and elsewhere.

StoneworkAny construction or part of it (wall, vault,etc.) made with stone or bricks andmortar. Also called stonework if they weremade of adobe.

StrongholdWalled city or fortress.

SwabInstrument consisting of a long stick witha bristled cylinder at one end, used forcleaning the barrels of firearms.

TTambour

Small circular defence placed in front ofthe doors of a fortification.

TerrepleinA mass of earth with which the containingwall of an enclosure is filled, or which isbuilt up before and subsequently faced withmasonry.

To chemiseSee Chemise.

To entrenchTo fortify a military position with trenches.

To flankTo protect your own flanks. To threatenthe enemy’s flanks. To be positioned in acastle, bastion, hill or suchlike, facing atown, fort, etc., so as to be able to reachthem with your artillery fire crossing orpassing through them.

(To lay a) headerIn construction: with the long side of thebrick or stone laid at right angles to theface.


Glossary / 133

1. Socorro Gate2. Drawbridge3. Sleeping (fixed) bridge4. Mine chambers5. Moat6. Scarp7. Cordon8. Parapet9. Sentry box

10. Ravelin door11. Gorge12. Counterguard door

13. Access passage to sentry box14. Traverse15. Counterscarp16. Parade ground17. Countermine shaft entrance18. Covered way19. Passage between

covered way and traverse20. Roadside post21. Glacis22. Glacis entrance

to parade ground

23. Bastion face24. Angle of the bastion25. Flank26. High embrasure27. Low embrasure28. Casemate29. Access tunnel to casemate30. Rear of the bastion31. Artillery access ramp32. Curtain wall33. Parapet walkway



(To lay in a) stretcher bond In construction: with the long side of thebrick or stone going in the same directionas the length of the face.

TowerTall stronghold construction that can bepart of a wall or independent and comesin many different shapes and sizes interms of building and layout inside, butmost were square.

TrenchDefensive ditch permitting troops toshoot at the enemy while under cover aswell as advancing towards over thebattlefield to make a final assault.

TurretAny fortification tower and in particular acircular one.

UUrban expansion area

Land designated for new buildings on theoutskirts of a town. The buildings thathave been put up on this land.

VVault

Stone or brick built curved constructionused to cover a space between two wallsor a line of pillars. The different types arenamed after their shape: groin vault(semi-cylindrical, in half point sections);barrel vault (the result of crossing twocannon vaults at right angles).

WWalled

Protected or enclosed by walls.

YYard

Unit of measurement equal to aboutthree feet or 836 mm.



A walk around the Pamplona Fortifications

� Walk � Course of the vanished wall � Camino de Santiago

6

7

89

11 1012

13

14

1617

18

15

19

20

21

22

25

23

26

24

2733

29

30

31

34

32

353637

38

28

3940

1 km

2 km

3 km

4 km

5 km

0


2

1

3

4

5

1. San Bartolomé Fort [Interpretation Centre for the Walls of Pamplona]

2. Arga Lift3. Labrit Walkway4. Labrit Bastion5. Ronda del Obispo Barbazán (Magdalena Front) 6. Cathedral of Santa María la Real7. Redín Bastion8. Low Bastion of Our Lady of Guadalupe9. Los Reyes Ravelin

10. Francia or Zumalacárregui Gate11. Low Bastion of El Pilar12. El Abrevador Bastion13. Archivo General de Navarra 14. Town Hall15. Parma Bastion16. Paseo de Ronda - Francia Front17. Descalzos Lift18. Nuevo Gate19. Gonzaga Bastion20. San Roque Ravelin21. San Nicolás Gate22. La Taconera Bastion23. La Taconera Gate24. La Victoria Bastion25. Santiago Bastion26. Santa María Bastion 27. Real Bastion and Cavalier 28. San Antón Bastion29. Santa Ana Ravelin30. Santa Isabel Ravelin and Counterguard31. Santa Clara Ravelin and Counterguard32. Santa Lucía Ravelin33. Socorro Gate34. Main Gate of the Citadel35. Guardhouse36. Oven37. Gunpowder Block38. Magazine 39. Weapons Hall 40. Bus Station

0 200 m


978-84-95930-47-7

www.murallasdepamplona.es


Documents

San Bartolomé Fort. Interpretation Centre for the Pamplona Fortifications