FYP AS ONE

Student Name: James Reidy
Student ID: 12139939
Internal examiner: Dr Richard Kirwan
Project title: The work and Influences of Sebastian Vauban throughout the
seventeenth and eighteenth century.
Degree title: Bachelor of Arts in History, Politics, Sociology and Social Studies

I hereby declare that this project is entirely my own work, in my own words, and that all
sources used in researching it are fully acknowledged and all quotations properly identified. It
has not been submitted, in whole or in part, by me or another person, for the purpose of
obtaining any other grade.

Acknowledgements:
First off I would like to thank my supervisor Dr Richard Kirwan for helping me with my
thesis. Without his guidance and countless advice throughout the year I would be lost without
it.
Next I would like to thank Professor Rossitsa Gradeva from the American University in
Bulgaria for her advice and providing me the tools to start my research for the thesis.
I would like to thank the Glucksman library and staff for its facilities and providing me the
opportunity to conduct my research and work.
I would like to thank the Early Printed Books Department in Trinity College Dublin for their
cooperation and assistance in my research.
I would also like to thank my family for all their support throughout the year.
Finally, I want to thank my girlfriend Fiona for her support and for her assistance in helping
me obtain valuable sources from France and also for the translation of French documents.

Abstract:
This Thesis is about Sebastian Le Preste de Vauban, a French Military engineer and Architect
who fought with the French army, under King Louis XIV throughout the seventeenth century.
His ideas on fortification and siege warfare changed the scale for future engineers to adopt
his methods. The thesis is structured into three chapters that focus on Vauban’s innovations
and his legacy after his death in 1707. The first chapter is an overview of the Military
Revolution that occurred in the Seventeenth century and how new innovations on weaponry,
fortification and siege warfare inspired Vauban to create his own methods. The second
chapter follows onto Vauban himself and discusses in depth his ideas on siege warfare and
fortification. The introduction of the parallel trenches and using geometry for his fortification
designs were just some of Vauban’s ideas he brought to the table. The third chapter concludes
on Vauban’s legacy in the eighteenth century. This chapter looks at Vauban’s influences on
other cities such as Vienna in a series of maps and comparing them to his own work in
France. Vauban was the centre of literature historical and fictional writers who used his work
to create their own stories and analysis. The chapter concludes on French engineers Marc
Réne de Montalembert and Michel Chartier de Lotbiniere who studied Vauban’s techniques
in order to create their own work.

Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
Chapter 1: An Overview of the Military Revolution ....................................................................... 7
Chapter 2: Sebastian Vauban Contribution to the French Empire................................................. 15
Chapter 3: Sebastian Vauban Influence and Legacy in the Eighteenth Century ............................. 22
Conclusion................................................................................................................................. 31
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................. 33
Map Appendices........................................................................................................................ 39

1
INTRODUCTION:
The topic of research for the final year project is about Sebastian Vauban (1633-1707), who
was a French military engineer in the seventeenth century. Vauban is known for his
fortification and siege warfare methods which revolutionised Europe into changing their own
techniques and structures. Vauban created new defensive features to the star fortifications in
France, which helped the country in creating strong borders and withstanding attacks from
their enemies for centuries. Vauban modernised siege warfare by introducing the parallel
trenches which reduced casualties on the battlefield. Vauban’s work came at a time of change
in Europe in terms of military moderation. This was known as the Military Revolution
according to historians Michael Roberts and Geoffrey Parker. The Military Revolution
occurred as there were changes in weaponry, tactics, and soldier formation, new ways of
fortification and siege warfare and equipment. These innovations helped Vauban to
contribute his own ideas. The questions that will be discussed in the thesis will be about
Vauban’s influence on fortification, siege warfare and Vauban’s influences on other military
engineers and regions after his death. These questions will be accessed by introducing
primary and secondary source materials to see did Vauban influence others after his death.
The scholarship on the Military Revolution is debated amongst various historians.
Michael Roberts, who is an expert in Swedish history, debated the idea of King Gustavus
Adolphus and how he was linked to the beginning of the Military Revolution. Roberts’ points
out examples of adding muskets to cavalry men to increase fire power and inspired others to
follow suit.1
Roberts’ statement is backed by Paul Douglas Lockhart who explains that
Gustavus based his tactical system on prevailing western notions, but with greater success.2
Geoffrey Parker supports the Military Revolution thesis but takes a different approach
1
Michael Roberts, Profiles in Power Gustavus Adolphus, (New York, 1992), p.104.
2
Paul Douglas Lockhart, Sweden in The Seventeenth Century, (New York, 2004), p.34.

2
believing that it was the advancement of fortification that brought the revolution along.
Parker explains that wherever new fortresses were built, military leaders were compelled to
increase the size of their armies.3
Not all historians agree with the idea of the Military
Revolution which occurred in the seventeenth century, most notably Jeremy Black who
challenges it and argued that military changes occurred in the eighteenth century due to the
expansion of European armies. Christopher Duffy also criticises the notion of the Military
Revolution occurring in the seventeenth century by arguing that the developments of warfare
happened on a broader scale between the fifteenth and nineteenth century. Duffy argues that
sixteenth century Italy brought a military change in Europe in terms of fortification and how
it laid the foundation for future innovations.4
The scholarship in the thesis about Vauban continues with his approach on
fortification and siege warfare. His work can be seen by historian Geoffrey Parker and
Martha Pollak. Pollak takes a different approach from her fellow scholars by introducing
illustrations of cities and fortification styles which gives one a better understanding how
Vauban worked. The Citadel of Lille, which was Vauban’s finest work according to King
Louis XIV, is explained in great detail by Pollak. She also notes the citadel was labelled as
the queen of citadels by Vauban, which shows the importance of the fortress was in terms of
implementing future ones.5
Vauban himself wrote a book on fortification and went into great
detail on how he used mathematics in order to create the perfect structure and provided
illustrations to show his work.6
Historian Paddy Griffith has examined Vauban’s contribution
in the area of siege warfare. Griffith explained how Vauban added a “Scientific method” in
3
Geoffrey Parker, The Military Revolution, Military innovation and the rise of the West 1500-1800, (Cambridge,
1996), p.7.
4
Christopher Duffy, Siege Warfare, The Fortress in the Early Modern World 1494-1660, ( NewYork, 1979), pp
23-42.
5
Martha Pollak, Cities At War In Early Modern Europe, (New York, 2010), p.54.
6
Sebastian Vauban, A New Method of Fortification, (London, 1691), pp 2-30, (https://www.eebo.chadwyk.com),
date accessed 5/2/2016.

3
terms of geometry to trenching and how it changed siege warfare for the coming centuries.7
Jean-Denis Lepage who specialises in French fortresses praises Vauban for the work he has
done. Lepage states that Vauban owed his astonishing career to his exceptional talent.8
The scholarship moves onto the final chapter where Vauban was the talking point
amongst writers, historians, philosophers and French engineers. One example was by
Voltaire, who was a French philosopher and historian in the eighteenth century. Voltaire
spoke highly of Vauban and labelled him the “great Vauban” due to his contribution to the
French military.9
Vauban’s work was the centre of a fictional novel written by Oliver
Goldsmith who was Anglo-Irish. Goldsmith uses fictional characters to discuss the
fortification of Fort Phillip, which was constructed in a Vauban styled fortification on the
island of Minorca and was used by the British in the Seven Years War.10
A series of maps
illustrations of cities like Vienna (see illustration five in appendix) and fortresses like Josefov
(see illustration seven in appendix) are used to show similarities of work done by Vauban in
France.
In terms of research methodology, one had to look outside the boundaries of the local
library. For my primary research, I made a field visit to a Vauban styled fortification, just
north of Grenoble, France. The structure was a small fortification with a court yard and
barracks; situated on top of a hill, which once looked over the borders of Italy in the
seventeenth century. Here I toured the fort and looked at how Vauban constructed the
fortress. This was important field work as one can see and understand the detail and layout of
the fortress and how it was built. Other primary research included maps from the seventeenth
7
Paddy Griffith, The Vauban fortifications of France, (Ospreys, 2006), P10, (https://www.googlebooks.com),
8
Jean-Denis Lepage, Vauban and the French Military Under Louis XIV: An Illustrated History of Fortifications
and Strategies, (MacFarland, 2009), p.6, (https://www.googlebooks.com), date accessed 5/2/2016.
9
Voltaire, The age of Lewis XIV: a new edition revised and considerably augmented by the author. Translated
from the French of M.Voltaire, (London, 1753) P6, (https://quod.lib.umich.edu), date accessed 5/2/2016.
10
Oliver Goldsmith. “A History of England, in a series of letters from a nobleman to his son”. (London 1764), pp
208-209, (https://quod.lib.umich.edu), date accessed 5/2/2016.

4
or eighteenth century, which I obtained from the national museum of France, through their
website (https://www.galcia.bnf.fr). The map illustrations showed cities that were designed
by Vauban or cities and/or fortresses that were inspired by his designs. This was important
primary research as it gave good evidence in describing Vauban’s work in the thesis. The
illustrations also gave evidence in comparing similarities from Vauban’s work to other cities
and fortresses throughout Europe, which provides support for the argument in the third
chapter. One other area of primary research was obtaining work that was design or written by
Vauban. For this part, I went to the Department of Early Printed Books, which is located in
Trinity College Dublin. At the department, I obtained a book that was written by Vauban in
1693 but was translated into English by a writer named Abell Swall. The name of the book by
Vauban is called “New methods of fortification”, which is five mini books put together as
one. In this book, Vauban discusses the use of geometry in his work and would go into great
detail on how to create the perfect fortress. The in-depth detail was also accompanied by
illustrations at the end of each book so the reader can understand what Vauban was trying to
create. This was important for the research process as one can understand how Vauban
thought while he was constructing cities and fortresses and can apply it to the thesis.
Eighteenth Century Collections Online (https://www.quod.lib.umich.edu), was another useful
database for primary reading on Vauban. This database provides letters and books from the
eighteenth century on Vauban’s work. These sources are important as it gives the view of the
writers like Voltaire on Vauban just after his death. For secondary source reading, useful
books were sourced from the University of Limerick library. These books were useful in the
early stages of my research as it discussed the Military Revolution that occurred in
seventeenth century Europe. For secondary source reading on my second chapter, I had to
search in broader terms. I did research on the internet using search engine such as Google
scholar (https://www.scholar.google.com) and a journal database called Jstor

5
(https://www.jstor.org.). Both of these websites were useful as they have access to books that
the university library would not have. These websites contained books such as the Vauban
Fortifications on France by Paddy Griffith, French Fortifications 1715-1815: An Illustrated
History by Jean-Denis Lepage and A Scientific Way of War by Ian Hope. These books were
helpful in the second chapter as they combined with the primary sources, which gave support
for the argument on Vauban’s contribution to siege warfare and fortification.
For my thesis question, the argument will be broken and formed into three
chapters. The first chapter looks at the Military Revolution in Europe. This chapter gives an
overview and the importance of the Military Revolution and how it inspired Vauban to bring
his own innovations into it. This chapter is broken down into different segments and
discusses the origins of the Military Revolution and later the advancement of weaponry, siege
warfare, and fortification. These sections in the chapter discuss the advancement in the
respective areas and how it laid the foundation for Vauban to form his own methods. This
chapter also gives a better understanding of the Military Revolution, which also helps to
understand chapters two and three in relation to siege warfare and fortification. The use of
primary sources is limited in this chapter. In the second chapter, the attention turns to Vauban
and his innovations that helped France in the seventeenth century. The first part of the chapter
goes into detail of Vauban’s early life and how he fought in a rebellion against the crown
before switching sides. This chapter continues on to Vauban’s ideas that were introduced into
siege warfare and how his new methods like the parallel trenches were seen as a new
dimension to siege warfare. The final part of chapter two is the topic of fortification. In this
part, Vauban used his knowledge of mathematics and applied it to the star fortifications
around the French Empire in order to improve the structure of the fortresses. The third and
final chapter brings the reader to the topic of Sebastian Vauban’s influences after his death in
1707. This chapter is broken into three segments, where primary sources are used to back up

6
this argument. The first part is the topic of fortification and how cities like Vienna and
Josefov emulated Vauban’s method of fortification. Map illustration plays a big part in this
chapter as it shows similarities between the foreign and French cities that were constructed by
Vauban. The next part of the chapter looks at how people saw Vauban after he died. In this
part, letters between noble people and even spies of the enemy discuss how Vauban’s
infrastructure amazed them. The final part of the chapter discusses how military engineers
like Marc Réne de Montalembert and Michel Chartier de Lotbiniere followed Vauban’s
blueprint in formulating their own ideas. This part of chapter is important as one will see how
military engineers in the eighteenth century followed Vauban’s ideas. This chapter plays an
important role in formulating the thesis as it brings in primary sources for the argument,
which discusses Vauban’s influences on other people.

7
Chapter 1: An Overview of the Military Revolution.
The seventeenth century brought new methods in the area of warfare and military innovations
in Europe. Different methods used in war tactics included soldier formation and improved
ground tactics like the induction of the Parellel trenches. New weaponry like the attachment
of the bayonet to the rifle was introduced, which brought an end of the pike era. New
stronghold layouts were introduced across Europe like the fashionable star forts that added a
new defensive dimension to siege battles. In this chapter, an argument will be constructed on
the outline of the Military Revolution and how it is linked to Sebastian Vauban’s own ideas
on warfare and fortification. The first part of the chapter will look at Swedish influences on
the Military Revolution and how they inspire other countries to modernise their own style of
warfare. The second part will look at the evolvement of weaponry during the seventeenth
century and how it played a role in warfare. The third part for examination will be about siege
warfare and its changes which influenced Sebastian Vauban to create his own ideology of
siege warfare. The final part will be about the area of fortification and the emergence of the
star fort. Although the star fort was introduced in the sixteenth century, this chapter looks at
how it became a popular design and was used in various cities by Vauban in France.
The origins of the Military Revolution have been argued by historians through the
years. Author Benjamin Chapmen makes a statement that Sweden began their military
innovations in the mid-sixteenth century right up to the mid-seventeenth century by their king
Gustavus Adolphus. Chapmen points out that king Adolphus changed the cavalry charge and
how they would not fully attack the enemy until they were a pistol shot away.11
Chapmen
explains that the regiment was able to fire from that distance and cause disorder amongst the
11
Benjamin Chapmen, The History of Gustavus Adolphus and the Thirty Years War up to the King’s Death,
(London, 1856), p.96.

8
enemy ranks.12
English historian Michael Roberts also argued that early military changes
began in Sweden, which became a resilient empire under King Adolphus and would prove its
power on the battlefield. Roberts explains that Sweden had a strict code of conduct for
discipline and tactical decisions which played its part over victories in Germany.13
Under his
reign, Sweden obtained vast lands from the faltering Holy Roman Empire. Their military
power was down to sheer motivation and continuous practice that turned them into a well-
trained force. Geoffrey Parker points out that the Swedish army trained regularly in order to
improve their military power. Parker states they became strong in the art of artillery as they
practiced reloading their guns and also the addition of copious amounts of field artillery
helped them to win battles.14
Sweden out did its main rivals, for example, the Dutch empire
only had a handful of guns in 1597, whereas the Swedish deployed an estimated 80 cannon
units in its German campaign of 1630. One new aspect, which was observed by Scottish
Colonel Robert Monro was how the Swedish muskets fired. Monro states that the first rank
would march ten paces before firing.15
This brought an advantage as it unravelled the enemy
troops as the Swedish army kept on marching and forcing the enemy to pull back from their
position.
The improved Swedish military system was in full swing at the battle of Breitenfeld in
1631. The Swedish army had their men well disciplined, with 10,000 horse, 21,400 infantry
and 27 field guns in formation; their German allies faltered but the Swedish reserve army
took their place and routed the imperial army in two hours of fighting.16
This prime example
indicates there were rash changes in warfare by the Swedish army as they fought in a fitting
formation as they were not unfazed when their German counterparts departed the battlefield
12
Ibid
13
Michael, Roberts, Profiles in Power Gustavus Adolphus, (New York, 1992), p.104.
14
Geoffrey Parker, The Military Revolution 1500-1800, (Cambridge University Press, 1988), p.23.
15
Ibid.
16
Ibid.

9
as they were replaced by the reserve unit. The field guns provided adequate support as shells
rained down on the enemy. The cavalry unit was defended by the infantry from enemy
attacks. The cavalry would then advance with their swords out to attack the enemy. This
differed from most of Europe as various horsemen would carry guns and would have a long
drawn out battle. Sweden’s war exploits made the headlines throughout Europe on how the
Swedish Empire could develop so quickly and take on the longstanding Holy Roman Empire.
Even the great Napoleon’s thunderbolt method of shattering enemies in a quick battle could
not achieve what the Swedish did in Breitenfeld.17
The changes by Adolphus also suggest he
laid the foundation for other military experts to contribute to the Military Revolution.
The evolvement of the Swedish Empire was only the beginning of the Military
Revolution; the innovation of new weaponry was the talking point throughout the seventeenth
century. One evolvement was the cavalry and infantry men were equipped with firearms.
This was also the introduction of the bayonet, which is a sword been attached at the end of a
musket. The bayonet changed infantry warfare as it replaced the pike men unit.18
The bayonet
was seen as a vastly superior tactic than the pike as it was attached to the musket so when a
soldier was out of ammunition or did not have time to reload the bayonet provided a
substitute weapon in which the soldier can use to attack any oncoming enemy. The bayonet
also defended the cavalry unit from enemy soldiers. The bayonet laid the foundation that
inspired Vauban to create the socket bayonet. Vauban created the socket bayonet precisely to
increase French firepower by rearming pike men with firearms.19
This statement suggests that
the creation of the bayonet inspired Vauban to enhance it into a more functional weapon.
17
Russell F. Weigley, The Age of Battlefields, (Indiana University Press, 1991), p.23.
18
Jeremy Black, European Warfare: 1660-1815, (London, 1994), p.39.
19
John Lynn, Giant of the Grand Siècle: The French Army, 1610-1715, (Cambridge, 2006), p.465,
(https://www.googlebooks.com), date accessed 21/1/2016.

10
The development of the grenadier unit occurred in the mid
seventeenth century. Although the grenadier had been founded during the Ming dynasty in
China, the military revolution brought out the best of it. The grenadier battalion provided
cover by firing shells filled with gunpowder at the enemy while the cavalry charges to
attack.20
Other bomb units like the mortars and bomb vessels played their part. Jeremy Black
points out the bomb vessels weren’t always effective on the battlefield. Black states they
could provide indirect fire but most of the time it was direct, rockets were also used but were
inaccurate and usually hit no target.21
This was down to the lack of knowledge on how to
properly use the rocket or how it was made. Cannons also developed into a more ferocious
weapon to kill. Other empires like the English and French followed the Swedish example by
using 1.5 or 3 pounder cannons and using them as guns.22
This offered good support for the
battalions around them as cannon fire offers more damage and firing range. Twelve pounder
cannons were away from the fighting but were situated to cover weak areas on the
battlefield.23
The battlefields decreased in size, so any shift in position can be sometimes
difficult to pull off. Was this an advantage to anyone? Not really because it caused more
horrific scenes of war as loss of limbs became more common with the advancement of
artillery. However, it did speed up the battle phase as soldiers took turns firing their guns at
each other. These numerous innovations brought a new dimension to warfare that existed
before the seventeenth century. The introduction of the bayonet gave the musketeers an
alternative option in terms of attack, the improvement of artillery guns provided better cover
and also were used in siege warfare. These innovations were the stepping stone of the rise of
the gun powder age.
20
John Childs, Warfare In The Seventeenth Century, (Caswell, London 2001), p.156.
21
Jeremy Black, European Warfare: 1660-1815, (UCL Press London, 2001), p.28.
22
John Childs, Warfare in The Seventeenth Century, (Caswell, London 2001), pp 158-159.
23
Ibid.

11
One universal change that occurred was siege warfare. Sieging was a big aspect of
conquering territory as if one conquers a fort or a city, they would seize the land and what it
holds. Siege warfare became the main principle of the military revolution according to
Parrott.24
Both the attacker and defence would devise plans and drawings, which includes
siege equipment like the catapult or ballistic, size of encampment and weak spots on castle
walls. The next advancement of siege warfare came about by Vauban and his Dutch
counterpart Meeno Van Cooehorn. Their new way of thinking brought about a new age of
sieging that would be used in various sieges in Spain, Netherlands and in the siege of Vienna
in 1683, where the Habsburg Empire prevented the vastly superior Ottoman Empire from
expanding their empire into Western Europe. One new aspect of sieging was the increase of
manpower on the field. Although foot soldiers already played a big part in sieging, increasing
the numbers brought about other advantages. One advantage was that supplies got to the
battlefield quicker. This gave the attackers an advantage as they did not slow down their
assault as supplies were constantly arriving. Other areas of advantage was the additional
troops made good wastage of enemy camps and also supplied as a backup unit to fight off
any repel attacks.25
Mercenaries became a common theme throughout the seventeenth
century. The use of mercenaries otherwise known as sell swords became more wide spread,
the reason for this is because they were inexpensive to use. The disadvantage of mercenaries
was discipline to orders. David Parrot argues how Mercenary generals opposed any war
strategy given by the siege commanders that would require resolute military qualities.26
Siege
warfare would also affect the outcome of the war. The Dutch wars and the Spanish war of
succession were just two examples where siege warfare played an important role. In 1673, the
Siege of Maastricht began the Dutch Wars which became the second conflict that erupted
24
David Parrot, The Business of War Military Enterprise and Military Revolution in Early Modern Europe, (New
York, 2012), pp 148-150.
25
Ibid.
26
Ibid.

12
between the Dutch and the French in the 17th
century. This war was important as it showed
the French engineer Vauban at his very best. He introduced the Parallel trenches, which made
it problematic for the defenders on the walls to attack the oncoming enemies. The parallels
trenches also provided a pathway towards the castle walls (this theme is discussed more in
depth in chapter two). These new methods would lead to the capture of Maastricht but the
city would return to the Dutch after the treaty of Nijmengen in 1678.
A new outline of fortresses came about due to outbreaks of wars and the new
standard of sieging. They were reshaped and walled up to prevent been captured. Architects
were tasked to fortify sites or existing cities throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries.27
There were problems as the investors or city councils in different Kingdoms
wanted to have a sense of style in the cities. The architects were assigned to construct a
fortress but also to be able to add an elegance style of beauty. This caused problems as the
military architects could not get the balance right as if they build up the style of a town, they
would lose out on the defence and it was the same the other way around. Martha Pollak states
that the city of Palmanova stands out as the perfect town with military and beauty aspects that
mixed well together.28
One new area of reformation of fortification was the famous
hexagonal blueprint or star forts. These blueprints was advised by Vauban and helped create
these forts all around France. The hexagonal patterns helped the cities defend against sieges.
The defending troops would have an advantage as the shape of the wall gave them an above
ground advantage as they have more angles to fire at the enemy. The star fort walls were also
hard to attack as the angles made it more difficult to assault with siege weapons. The
hexagonal layout was popular throughout Europe and was used in cities of Milan, Turin and
Vienna. It was not only Vauban that helped created new fortification methods; Von
Coehorns’s eight bastioned fortresses were designed to create a solid fortification. This
27
Martha Pollak, Cities at War in Early Modern Europe, (New York, 2010), p.86.
28
Ibid.

13
abstract layout had no entryway or internal streets and the compulsive repetition of forms
intended to replicate defences in depth (bastion, ravelin, covered street).29
This provided
more of a defensive fort that would make it highly impregnatable. The buildings were at a
higher elevation so that oncoming attacks can be seen from a distance. Forts were situated
around the city borders to prevent damage to the city. With Vauban and Von Coehorns
designs, cities were more difficult to capture as a whole as the walls would divide the cities
into sections as it would slow the enemy’s assault and capture of the city. This was a clever
ploy as the new wall layout had an advantage over its medieval predecessors. Medieval
fortresses had round or square walls which made it easy to invade in comparison to the star
forts. Destroying medieval walls was seen as an easier task according to J.E Kaufmann. He
points out one method was digging a shallow ditch near the walls as its foundations would
then crumble.30
This would be impractical for the star forts as it would be difficult to create a
ditch around edges as you are more vulnerable of been hit by bowmen.
To conclude, this chapter examined the origins of the Military Revolution. New or
advanced weaponry were introduced, siege warfare became an important aspect and a new
era of fortification also became vital for this century. The first sign of the revolution came
from Sweden as they changed their approach on warfare by introducing a more artillery
approach and by the mid seventeenth century they went from a small domain to a powerful
empire. The bayonet and grenadier introductions brought a new element to the battlefield.
The changes of siege warfare were invaluable as the increase of manpower and siege
equipment brought stability and increase speed of sieging a city was important as there were
less causalities. The innovation of the parallel trenches helped to protect the troops from been
attacked and also assisted in moving them forward, towards the castle walls. Fortifications
changes included hexagonal walls, which provided better angles to defend the city and also
29
Ibid, p.80
30
J.E, Kaufmann, The Medieval Fortress, (Boston, 2004), p.60.

14
made it more difficult for the enemy to reach the walls. Forts built on or near the castle walls
provided another line of defence. Overall this chapter breaks down the changes throughout
the seventeenth century and help lay the stage for Vauban and his contributions for France
and indeed Europe.

15
Chapter 2: Sebastian Vauban’s contribution to the French
Empire.
“The art of fortifying does not consist in rules and systems, but only in common sense and
experience”.31
These are the words of Sebastian Vauban, one of France’s greatest military
engineers. Vauban’s contributions did not just change how France operated as a country but
how warfare evolved in Europe throughout the seventeenth century. Vauban was not just
gifted in architecture but also in the art of siege warfare as he participated in an estimated
fifty sieges in his lifetime. In this chapter, the discussion will be about Sebastian Vauban and
his contribution to the French military. The first section will discuss the early life of Vauban
and how his talent for warfare was seen. The section will follow Vauban’s rise in King Louis
XIV army and how Louis-Nicolas de Clerville (the King’s engineer) helped evolve Vauban’s
skills. The next section will examine Vauban’s impact on siege warfare and how he used
geometry to win battles and capture fortresses like Maastricht and Lille. Vauban’s creation of
parallel trenches contributed in the advancement of siege warfare. The final section will
examine Vauban’s work on fortifications. In this part, one will see how Vauban shaped the
way that fortresses were built and became difficult to capture.
Sebastien Le Prestre de Vauban was born on 1 May 1633 in a small village, southeast
of Avalon. Vauban was born into a poor background and got his name from a domain of
Vauban, a region in the area.32
At a young age, Vauban was enrolled into Semur-en-Auxois,
where he learned mathematics and also to read and write. Vauban excelled in mathematics
and would use this skill in later life during various siege operations. Vauban discusses in
great length in his book “A new method of fortification” how important mathematical
31
Marija Obradovic, Slobodan Misic, Are Vauban’s Geometrical Principles Applied in the Petrovaardin Fortress,
(Turin, 2014), p.1.
32
Jean-Denis Lepage, Vauban and the French Military Under Louis XIV, (MacFarland, 2009), p.7
(https://www.googlebooks.com) date accessed 06/11/2015.

16
techniques such as parallels and angles were used in order to build a perfect trench.33
Although Vauban would become a loyal servant to the King, in his early days he was
something of a rebel. In 1651, aged of only 17, Vauban joined the prince of Conde’s
regiment, in the rebellious Frondeur. Historian Jean-Denis Lepage states that Vauban joining
the rebels was more of an accident than a conviction.34
Lepage meant that Vauban did not
join by choice but that he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. However joining the
rebels did give Vauban his first insight in siege warfare. He participated in the siege of Saint
Mene-Hould and also helped with the defences in the town of Clermont. Vauban would later
be promoted to cavalry master and would oversee other siege operations. This was a
formative experience for Vauban as he obtained the knowledge of siege warfare and also
achieved a high rank in the rebel army at a young age.
In 1652, the rebel army was defeated and Vauban was taken captive and was
presented before the King. Lepage states that Vauban only went with his captives after he
negotiated his surrender while on horseback.35
This caught the attention of Mazarin who was
cardinal and guardian of King Louis XIV. Mazarin was impressed how a young rebel like
Vauban was able to negotiate his surrender even though he was out numbered when he was
captured. Mazarin gave Vauban a position in the King’s army, where he began a good
relationship with King Louis XIV. Vauban’s early actions had an important impact on his
future. By joining the rebels, Vauban learned fortification and siege warfare techniques and
had the opportunity to put them into practice. Even the manner of his capture was impressive
as he would not give in until his demands were met. This was vital for the French army as
Vauban had self-confidence and would not break under pressure. When Vauban joined the
33
Sebastian, Vauban, A New Method of Fortification, (London, 1691), pp 2-6,(https://www.eebo.chadwyk.com),
34
Jean-Denis ,Lepage, Vauban and the French Military Under Louis XIV, (MacFarland, 2009), p.8
35
Ibid.

17
King’s army, he was placed under the guidance of Louis-Nicolas de Clerville, who was
General Commissioner of fortifications in France and was involved in fortifying the cathedral
in Marseille.36
(See Illustration one in appendix). Vauban was put under his supervision
where he obtained valuable experience in siege warfare. Vauban would assist Clerville in
various sieges such as Saint Mene-Hould and Stenay. Here Vauban obtained useful
experience and by 1655 was appointed the Kings ordinary engineers.37
The evidence
suggests that Vauban’s experience obtained from Clerville and from the rebels also helped
him become the great engineer as history knows him today.
Vauban played a vital role in revolutionising siege warfare. Vauban’s ideas and
methods brought faster and safer sieges. Vauban participated in the Franco-Dutch war which
occurred in 1672-1678. At this stage, Vauban had a wealth of experience from his time with
Clerville and from the rebel forces in his early years. From these experiences, Vauban was
able to create his own siege tactics in order to get results. Vauban’s famous manoeuvre was
the Parallels trenches innovation. Those trenches were a system of parallels on a broad
front.38
Vauban would first review the fortifications defences in order to discover a weak
point and start digging the trenches. Historian Paddy Griffith discusses how important
Vauban’s tactics changed a siege attack. Griffith stated that before Vauban’s era soldiers
were vulnerable to attacks as the as the layout of the trenches left an opening.39
Griffith then
discusses how Vauban used “scientific methods” in the trenches in order to provide better
cover for his men.40
This scientific method relates to Vauban’s parallel trenches. With the
extra cover provided, Vauban’s men advanced towards the castle walls with only minimal
casualties. Vauban employed the parallel trench system at the siege of Maastricht in 1673,
36
See appendix.
37
Jean-Denis, Lepage, (Macfarland, 2009), p.9.
38
Paddy Griffith, The Vauban fortifications of France, (Ospreys, 2006), p.10, (https://www.googlebooks.com),
39
Ibid.
40
Ibid.

18
which was Vauban’s first siege in sole command.41
(See illustration two in appendix).
Vauban used mathematics to help him in his siege. In the illustration, one can see the trench
layout south of the city and how it slowly approached the city just using the parallel
formation. Vauban used geometry on the battlefield in order to prepare his siege equipment in
the safest way possible. Vauban would also use mathematics in order to build earth walls.
Vauban used his engineers to dig earth walls at a specific angle and height in order to provide
comfortable cover fire from the enemy. Ian Clarence Hope states that Vauban would teach
his engineers mathematics so that they could measure the battlefield and create the trenches
and earth walls.42
Even Vauban himself would draw out illustration of shapes and angles in
order to perfect his attack and also taking into account, the safety of his men.43
The earth
walls would be built inwards and outwards. The earth walls build inwards prevented enemy
raids while walls build outwards protected the siege equipment and the temporary
encampments that were in place. When Vauban’s men reached the castle walls, they would
set up breaching batteries. The batteries would attack the wall, causing that section to
crumble and open up the city for an attack.44
The evidence suggests that Vauban earth walls
and parallel technique was instrumental in siege warfare. While the earth walls provided
cover, the parallel trenches made it trouble-free to advance forward.
Vauban was seen as a very successful architect while also being a brilliant engineer.
Although Vauban’s skills in siege warfare over shadowed his fortress building, he was still
regarded as an important figure in building some of the finest fortresses in France. Vauban
would usually design his fortresses in a star shape. The star shape walls made an attack on
41
See appendix.
42
Ian C Hope, A Scientific way of War, (Nebraska Press, 2015), p. 30 (https://www.googlebooks.com) date
accessed 11/11/2015.
43
date accessed 11/11/2015. P48.
44
Paddy Griffith, The Vauban fortifications of France, (Ospreys, 2006), p.12 (https://www.googlebooks.com),

19
any fortress difficult to breach as the oncoming enemy was more vulnerable to be hit by a
bowman. Star forts were originally design by Italian engineers in the sixteenth century in
order to stop the French invasion into Italy. One aspect of the star forts was the “dead zones”.
Dead zones were diamond pointed turrets that gave oncoming enemy no cover and were
vulnerable from attacks. Vauban improved the architecture by creating his own ideas.
Vauban again would use mathematics to measure the angles of the walls in order to provide
the best defence. Historian Martha Pollak points out that mathematics played an important
part in Vauban’s work. Pollak states that Vauban used advanced military geometry in order to
provide free standing fortresses around the borders of France.45
By following this method,
Vauban would work out if there were any weak points in the walls surrounding the fortress.
One example of Vauban’s mathematical work on fortification was the use of geometry for the
bastion system. Bastions are angle structures, facing outwards from the city walls, which give
the soldiers on the wall a better overview on the battlefield. Vauban used geometry in order
to get the correct angles for the Bastions so that they provided a better defence for the city.46
This was an important aspect from Vauban as it showed he went into great detail when
designing fortresses.
Vauban designed his fortress or cities in several different ways. One fortification he
did work on was the palace and citadel on the Belle Isle.47
(See illustration four in appendix).
Here Vauban had a wall built around the citadel. This gave the fortress city another line of
defence. If the walls were breached at Belle Isle, the oncoming enemy would have to go
through another layer of wall in order to take the fortress at a whole. This was important as it
delays the invaders attempted occupation of the city and would also diminish their supplies.
The Belle Isle citadel has three lines of defences with dead zones and trenches, which made it
45
Martha Pollak, Cities at War in Early Modern Europe, (Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp 50-55.
46
47
See appendix.

20
difficult to attack. Vauban also discussed different defensive methods that could be beneficial
for fortification. In one particular area, Vauban discusses in his book the differences between
a wet moat and a dry moat. Vauban gives his own insight on both techniques in order to point
out the advantages and disadvantages. In his own words, Vauban points out that having a
shallow moat was futile as the enemy can cross the moat, which renders it defective.48
Vauban also explained that moats filled with water without a running stream can lead to
illness. Vauban stated, “if the water that fills the moat be not a running stream, it begets an
unwholesome air which causes distempers in soldiers”.49
This statement gives a good insight
on how detailed Vauban can be when it came to creating the perfect fortress.
Vauban’s best fortification work was the pentagonal fortress of Lille.50
(See
Illustration three, six or eleven in appendix). Lille was an important fortress for the kingdom
after it was taken from Belgium in 1667 and had to be redesigned in order to stay under
French control. Martha Pollak argues that Lille acquired fundamental importance for the
defence of the northern border of France and was heavily fortified.51
Vauban’s old teacher
Clerville was given the task first to reinforce the city but failed to please the King. When
given the chance, Vauban designed the fortress in such a way, that it can only be attack from
the city itself. This was important for the French borders as foreign invaders must enter
through the city in order to attack the fortress. Pollak states this was an experiment as the
fortress was on a slope and one could see the city from below.52
This was clever from Vauban
as the soldiers in the fortress could shoot down at the invaders if they had successfully taken
the city. The Lille project took three years to finish. At the time of its completion, Lille was
48
49
Ibid.
50
See appendix.
51
Martha Pollak, Cities at War in Early Modern Europe, (New York, 2010), pp 50-55
52
Ibid.

21
regarded as the most beautiful fortress in Europe.53
The fortress in Lille and the citadel in
Belle Isle showed how Vauban brought his own style to fortress building. With his
experience of siege warfare, Vauban was able to build fortresses that would be able to resist
attacks.
To conclude the discussion of Vauban’s work on Siege warfare and fortification, one
can see how he played a big role in evolving both areas throughout the seventeenth century.
Vauban played a key role in the Frondeur and participated in their siege operations which
proved successful. Vauban then joined the king’s army after he negotiated his own surrender.
Vauban then studied under Clerville which helped him improve his abilities. From Clerville
Vauban learned how to lead a siege war and also learned the art of fortification. Vauban was
promoted to King’s engineer and created his own style of siege attacks. The introduction of
Parallel trenches and the use of mathematics on the battlefield indicate how Vauban saw
warfare and was able to take advantage by using simple geometry measures. His contribution
brought a new era to siege warfare. Vauban’s achievement in fortification was recognised in
France and throughout Europe. His dynamic style of having the fortress on a slope in the city
of Lille brought better defence and attack at the same time. Overall Vauban’s work had a
strong influence in the French army and his contribution to warfare can be seen throughout
Europe.
53
Ibid

22
Chapter 3: Sebastian Vauban’s legacy and influences in the
eighteenth century.
Sebastian Le Prestre de Vauban’s legacy brought about new innovations in siege warfare and
fortification. His ideas were implemented throughout Europe during and after his death in
1707. Admiration for the great engineer was shown and future buildings like the Saigon
citadel in Vietnam was labelled as a Vauban styled fortification. In this chapter, an argument
will be formed on Vauban’s influences throughout the field of siege warfare and fortification.
The first part of the chapter will examine a series of fortification map layouts of cities from
Austria, Czech Republic and Romania in order to link them to the work of Vauban. These
cities should share similarities to Vauban’s work in the area of wall formation and design,
bastion and citadels. The second part of the argument will look at how Vauban was viewed in
contemporary literature. This will be an important synopsis as one can see how other
contemporary historians and writers viewed Vauban’s contribution to the military revolution.
The final part of the chapter will explore the topic of military engineers such as Michel
Chartier de Lotbiniere and Marc Réne de Montalembert who were inspired by Vauban’s
work. In this part, one will see how engineers looked at Vauban’s previous work to construct
their own fortresses and bring their own ideas into it.
Vauban’s contribution to fortress building was recognised around Europe. His
methods were used by other architects as they either constructed new fortresses or upgraded
existing ones incorporating Vauban’s ideas. Jean Denis Le Page explains that Vauban’s
bastion system layout (which was discussed in the previous chapter) led to similar fortresses
to be built outside of France. Le Page states the bastioned system was widely exported to

23
fortify trading posts, forts, cities and trading ports in the colonies in America.54
This suggests
other engineers and city councils wanted to apply this system as it was seen to be successful
in France. One example of the impact of Vauban’s work is the city of Vienna, which was
upgraded in the 1760s in order to strengthen its defences. It had similar aspects to the
fortresses Vauban had built in France, which prevented the French empire from losing its
territory in the wars against the Dutch and the Spanish. Although Vauban never visited
Vienna or had any links to the design of these fortifications, his idea of how a fortress should
be built was copied numerous times as it was seen as the best model of the eighteenth
century. One similar trait that Vienna’s design had to Vauban’s work was the structure of the
walls. Joseph Daniel Von Huber’s bird’s eye view of the map shows the layout of Vienna in
1769.55
(See illustration five in appendix). Here one can see the wall layout is similar to the
design of the city of Lille in which Vauban constructed in the late seventeenth century.56
(See
illustration six in appendix). The walls are formed in a hexagonal structure which makes it
difficult for oncoming siege equipment to penetrate or even advance near it. The similarity
between the wall structures from both cities suggests that Vauban’s method was influenced
by the architects from Vienna.
The influence of Vauban’s fortress ideas can also be seen in the Josefov fortress,
which was located in the Czech Republic.57
(See illustration seven in appendix). The Josefov
Fortress was designed by French general Duhamel de Querlonde and was erected between the
years 1780-1787 under the supervision of Josef II, the emperor of the Austrian Empire. The
fortress was located in eastern Bohemia, on the river Elba which divided the fortress in two.
54
Jean-Denis, Lepage, Vauban and the French Military Under Louis XIV, (MacFarland, 2009), p.285,
55
See appendix.
56
See appendix.
57
See appendix.

24
The Josefov fortress shares similar traits that of the Belle Isle in France.58
(See illustration
four in appendix). The fortress of Belle Isle was of similar size and was also split in two by a
river going through it. The layout of Josefov is similar to Belle Isle in terms of its wall and
bastion structure. For instance, if one looks at the left of Belle Isle, one can see the bastions
behind the walls, giving it an extra defensive approach. At Josefov, the bastions are located
all around the southern structure of the fortress. The architects in designing of Josefov
introduced the bastions similar to the fortresses of Belle Isle and Lille as it provided a
different defence dimension.
One other example of a fortress build by Vauban’s methods was the Alba Carolina,
which is located in Romania.59
(See illustration eight in appendix). The construction of Alba
Carolina started in 1715 (eight years after Vauban’s death) by an engineer named J.C Weiss.
Here one can see some resemblance from Vauban’s work as seven bastions (arrow shaped)
are located around the citadel walls. This layout shares similarities to the Huningue fortress.
The Huningue fortress was fortified by Vauban in the years 1679-1681 and is located in
north-east France, on the river Rhine.60
(See illustration nine in appendix). One obvious
connection between both fortresses is the similarities of the bastions and also the length of the
curtain wall in between them. These wall structures provided equal distances between the
bastions. This is important as the fortresses in both illustrations would not have a weak side.
The shape of Alba Carolina is very similar to the Huningue which gives the suggestion that
the Alba Carolina was inspired by Vauban. One other detail to point out from the illustrations
is that there is a gap between the outer walls and inner walls. Illustration three, four and five
in appendix shows more detail of the gap between the walls as it provided the cities in
question more protection as the bastions are located in between them. The similarities from
58
See appendix.
59
See appendix.
60
See appendix.

25
the layouts of Vienna, Josefov and Alba Carolina suggest that Vauban had a strong influence
on cities and fortresses long after his death.
In terms of contemporary literature, Vauban’s work as a builder and a siege engineer
has been a topic of discussion. In the eighteenth century, Vauban was referenced in
manuscripts, letters, journals and books by writers, fictional and historians who saw him as
an important figure of the previous century. One indication of the importance of Vauban’s
work was a letter written by Elizabeth Lady Cravan, who was known for travel exhibitions
around Europe. In one of her series of letters, Lady Cravan discusses a port on the
Mediterranean coast and how the implementation of Vauban’s plan would have put the port
in a much stronger position. Lady Cravan writes “If Vauban’s plan had been followed for this
port; it would have been one of the finest in the Mediterranean. As it is at present, none but
vessels of the lightest burthen can enter”.61
Lady Cravan’s argument is that if the architect
implemented Vauban’s idea, it would have produced a stronger base. Lady Cravan also
pointed out that if the port had Vauban’s layout it would had a strong trading name as it
would have brought bigger boats to the port. Lady Cravan was not the only person to take
into account the importance of Vauban in fortress building. French philosopher and historian
Francois-Marie Arouet, or commonly known as Voltaire, discusses Vauban and how his
methods were the foundation for future engineers. Voltaire in his own words stated “Vauban
constructed fortifications according to his own method, which is now become a rule of our
good engineers”.62
This indicates that Vauban was respected by his peers and also future
engineers. Voltaire further goes on to praise the structure of Vauban’s work and how Vauban
innovations made them less exposed to artillery attacks. In his own words, Voltaire stated
61
Elizabeth Lady Cravan.(1785), “A Journey through Crimea to Constantinople”, letter to his serene Highness
the Margrave of Brandebourg, Anspach and Bareith. Eighteenth century collections,
(https://quod.lib.umich.edu), date accessed 19/1/2016.
62
Voltaire, The age of Lewis XIV: a new edition revised and considerably augmented by the author. Translated
from the French of M.Voltaire, (London, 1753), p.122, (https://quod.lib.umich.edu), date accessed 2/2/2016.

26
“high and menacing fortifications were only too much the more exposed to the destruction of
artillery; and the more he (Vauban) made them level, the less liable they were to be destroyed
or taken”.63
This suggests that Voltaire was impressed with Vauban’s contribution to
fortification and also to the history of France. Vauban’s work was also at the centre of
attention in Britain by a military educationalist Lewis Lochee. Although born in Brussels,
Lochee moved to Britain and opened up a military school to teach young men the art of
warfare. Lochee also wrote a book on fortification and talks highly of Vauban’s work.
Lochee stated that Vauban made important discoveries in fortifying and that it lessened the
stress of his predecessors.64
Lewis statement suggests that Vauban new methods of
fortification created a simpler and stronger fortress styles.
Vauban was also mentioned by fictional writers, who would use Vauban’s work to
create their own stories. Fiction and historical writer Oliver Goldsmith referenced Vauban’s
work in his book, A History of England: in a series of letters between an unnamed noble man
and his son. Both characters discussed St Philips castle (A fort that was based on the island of
Minorca), which had fallen under French control in the Seven Years’ War. Although the
nobleman and his son are fictional characters in Goldsmiths’ work, the story itself is based on
real evidence that occurred. In his letters, the nobleman explained to his son the importance
of the stronghold and how it was built under the influence of Vauban styled fortification. In
one of his letters, the nobleman states “This fortress had been reckoned, next to Gibraltar, the
strongest in Europe, the works having been planned by the celebrated Vauban”.65
The
nobleman’s statement explained that the fort was under British control but was built under
Vauban’s influence. This gives the sense that Vauban was respected by rival empires for his
63
Ibid.
64
Lewis Lochee, Elements of fortification. By Lewis Lochee, Master of the Military Academy at Little Chelsea,
(London, 1780), p. xvii, (https://quod.lib.umich.edu), date accessed 2/2/2016.
65
Oliver Goldsmith. A History of England, in a series of letters from a nobleman to his son, (London 1764),P209,

27
methods of fortification. Goldsmith also points out the strength of St Philips castle was seen
as impregnable that the French army went to extreme measures to capture it. The nobleman
states that “in order to make themselves the masters of the important fortress, the French had
landed with twenty thousand men, which was seen as a continental assault”.66
The
nobleman’s statement indicates that the French knew how Vauban’s fortresses were built and
by overwhelming the British, the French commanders would seize the castle without starting
a siege war. This gives a strong indication that Vauban’s methods were respected outside of
France.
One other fictional writer, Daniel Defoe also used Vauban’s work in one his books.
Defoe wrote a book of a fictional Ottoman spy, who was stationed in late seventeenth Paris,
France. In one account of a series of letters, the spy discusses a port that was built by Vauban.
The spy goes into detail the size of the port, how the port created its own pool for the ships
and also holding three hundred long sail ships. The Ottoman spy goes on to discuss the laying
of the gates, which were six and fifty foot wide and how the workers at the port were not
convinced that the gates would work. In his letters the spy stated “being a work of that
prodigious expense, and requiring so much skill of the engineer, that some workmen of very
good experience declared to the King, it was impossible that Monsieur Vauban, whose
undertaking the whole was, could ever bring it to perfection”.67
The spy goes on to say that
the King laughed at them before they successfully fitted the gate, in which the spy was
amazed with the result. The writings from Defoe and Goldsmith suggest that Vauban was
highly rated for his work as it was the centre of attention from both abstracts. Overall the
perspectives of lady Cravan, Voltaire, Lewis Lochee, Fictional writers Oliver Goldsmith of
66
Ibid
67
Daniel, Defoe, A continuation of letters written by a Turkish spy in Paris, (London, 1718), p.224,

28
Fort Philip and Daniel Defoe’s Ottoman spy were equally impressed by Vauban’s legacy of
fortification and praised the work he had done.
Vauban’s legacy as a military engineer had inspired future engineers in the French army.
Future engineers had the opportunity to learn from Vauban’s work by studying his memoirs
and map layouts for a siege or building a fortress. One military engineer that was inspired by
Vauban was Marc Réne de Montalembert who was born in the year 1714. Montalembert was
fond of fortification and was attracted to the Traité de L’attaque, which was written by
Vauban. Although he respected Vauban’s ideas, Montalembert made changes to Vauban’s
fortification methods as he sought to improve the current structures. He removed the bastion
system and replaced it with an artillery tower.68
Montalembert disliked the bastion system
and saw the artillery tower as more effective. In an inscription, Montalembert explained that
the tower was larger than the bastion and could contain more men and cannons.69
Montalembert also expanded the line of defence with the inclusion of detached forts.70
In the
illustration shown in the book by Lepage, one can see that Montalembert (bottom illustration)
moved the defence line forward in order to protect the fortress from heavy fire by the
oncoming Siegers. Montalembert detach forts would stretch across the perimeter in order to
use its full effect. Montalembert’s ideas would not be used until the nineteenth century as the
French military disregarded his work in respect for Vauban. By developing these new
innovations, the evidence suggests that Montalembert was inspired by Vauban’s methods.
Although he changed some techniques in order to evolve the style of fortification, Vauban’s
practices gave Montalembert the opportunity to create his own style.
68
Jean-Denis Lepage, Artillery tower by Montalembert, (1776). French Fortifications, 1715-1815: An Illustrated
History, (MacFarland, 2009), p.63, (https://www.googlebooks.com) date accessed 20/1/2016.
69
Ibid.
70
Jean-Denis Lepage, Montalembert introduction of detached forts, (1776). French Fortifications, 1715-1815:
An Illustrated History, (MacFarland, 2009), p.72, (https://www.googlebooks.com) date accessed 20/1/2016.

29
One other engineer that stood out in the eighteenth century was Michel Chartier de
Lotbiniere. Born in Quebec City in 1723, Lotbiniere participated in the Seven Years War in
North America. He constructed fortresses for the French colony and also participated in siege
operations. One link that shows that Lotbiniere followed Vauban’s fortification methods was
the construction of Fort Carlion, between the years 1755-1758. The fort was based on
Vauban’s layout as it contains similar traits to fortresses in France.71
(See illustration seven in
appendix). Fort Carlion resembles citadels that were constructed in France during the time of
Vauban. These citadels provided an extra line of defence and were usually located on the
outskirts of the city in order to prevent damage. The fort in the map was separated from the
town and also provided defence for it. A prime example to strengthen the case was the citadel
of Lille, which was also located outside of the city.72
(See illustration eight in appendix). The
fort also had bastions around the perimeters and had a place of arms in the centre of the fort.
The fort was surrounded by a dry moat, which Vauban mentioned in his book on fortification
was his favourite style of moat as it prevented diseases. These little details used by Lotbiniere
give one the indication that he followed in the footsteps of Vauban when it came to
constructing forts.
To conclude our argument, one can see that Vauban’s legacy had lived on in various
different ways. In the first part, the evidence suggests that the cities and fortresses of Vienna,
Josefov and Alba Carliona followed the patterns of French cities, which were designed and
constructed by Vauban. Although there is no indication that the engineers used Vauban’s
direct work, the cities in question shared similarities to some cities in France. The next part,
one can see Vauban’s ideas were discussed amongst people from different backgrounds in the
eighteenth century. One can also see that the people in question praised Vauban’s work and
went on in detail about how formidable his fortresses were. Vauban’s legacy in warfare
71
See appendix.
72
See appendix.

30
inspired French engineers such as Lotbiniere and Montalembert to carry on his legacy.
Lotbiniere used Vauban’s ideas on fortification in America while Montalembert developed
Vauban’s techniques in order to evolve the fortification style.

31
Conclusion:
To conclude the argument from the overall thesis, the evidence suggests that Sebastian
Vauban played a pivotal role in changing siege warfare and fortification methods in the
seventeenth century and also having an influence in the eighteenth century after his death.
Although chapter one did not reflect on Vauban’s work as such, one understands the Military
Revolution that occurred in the seventeenth century and how it inspired Vauban to create his
own ideas. The topics that were discussed were the introduction of the bayonet been attached
to a rifle, which gave Vauban the idea to create the socket bayonet. The chapter moved onto
the advancement of siege warfare which includes the expansion of man power, better and
stronger siege equipment and smaller battlefields. The chapter’s final focus was on the
increase of the numbers of star forts around Europe which gave Vauban his fame for creating
stronger fortification around France. In chapter two the focus was on Vauban and his ideas
that changed siege warfare and fortification. The chapter began with Vauban’s early life and
how his talent for siege warfare was seen at an early stage and how he was elected to the
King’s engineers. Vauban later in his career applied geometry on the battlefield to create the
best offensive strategies and the speeding up the siege process. The introduction of the
parallel trenches brought a change to siege attacks as it prevented heavy casualties on many
battlefields and also made it easier to manoeuvre around the battlefield and reach city walls.
The siege of Maastricht was one example of the use of parallel trenches. Vauban also applied
his mathematic skills into fortress building. He used geometry in order to create citadels,
moats, bastions and other defensive mechanisms. These innovations led to the building of
strong fortresses like the Belle Isle and the citadel in Lille. The final chapter looked at how
Vauban methods influenced other people and cities around the world. Cities such as Vienna
and Josefov adopted Vauban’s technique and although it does not confirm that Vauban
influenced those structures, map illustrations of the cities suggests they were due to

32
similarities between them and Vauban’s work. Letters from royalty such as Lady Cravan,
memoirs from philosophers like Voltaire and even fictional work from Oliver Goldsmith and
Daniel Defoe from the eighteenth century also gave a strong indication that Vauban inspired
them and was praised for his techniques around Europe. The memoirs discussed how Vauban
was praised by the enemy for his work on St Phillips Castle and how 20,000 French soldiers
were needed to take the castle as it had strong defences. The final part of chapter three
finished on two French engineers who used Vauban’s methods to create their own fortresses.
Michel Chartier de Lotbiniere used Vauban’s work to create fortresses in the French territory
in North America while Marc Réne de Montalembert used Vauban’s methods as a stepping
stone to formulate his own fortress structures in the eighteenth century.
Overall from the argument, one can agree on that Sebastian Vauban was a
distinguished and well regarded military engineer and architect. His fabrication on siege
warfare and fortification brought a modern way of thinking in terms of creating strong
fortresses that were functional until the nineteenth century. Vauban’s introduction of parallel
trenches was a huge advancement on trench warfare that his innovation was used in the First
World War. Vauban’s work was discussed amongst great Philosophers like Voltaire and was
at the centre of fictional novels, which showed he was highly respected. Most importantly
Vauban laid the foundation for others to create their own piece of history.

33
Map appendices:
Illustration 1: Louis-Nicolas De Clerville, Overview of the Citadel in Marseille (1610-1677),
(https://www.galcia.bnf.fr), date accessed 14/11/2015.
Illustration 2: Anonymous, Overview of the siege of Maastricht (1673), (https://www.galcia.bnf.fr),

34
Illustration 3: T. Daniel, Overview of Lille after its occupation by France (1667),
Illustration 4: Sebastian Vauban, Belle Isle Citadel, 1683, (https://www.gallicia.bnf.fr) date accessed
18/1/2016.

35
Illustration 5: Joseph Daniel, Von Huber, Map of Vienna (Aerial view), 1769.
(https://www.wien.gv.at), date accessed 18/01/2016.
Illustration 6: T. Chaperon, The Town and Fortress of Lille, (https://www.gettyimages.com), date

36
 Illustration 7: Jean-Denis, Lepage, Fortress Josefov (Bohemia), 1787. From, Vauban and the
French Military Under Louis XIV: An Illustrated History of Fortifications and Strategies,
(MacFarland,2009) P285, https://www.googlebooks.com), date accessed 18/01/2016.
Illustration 8: Anonymous, Bird view of the Alba Carolina, (1715-1738),
(https://www.edu.kindergraff.ro) date accessed 21/1/2016.

37
Illustration 9: Sebastian Vauban, Bird view of Huningue Fortress on the River Rhine, (1696),
(https://gallica.bnf.fr), date accessed 21/1/2016.
Illustration 10: Thomas Jeffery, Detail source map of Fort Carlion, (1758),
(https://weaponsandwarfare.flies.wordpress.com), date accessed 20/1/2016

38
Illustration 11: Anonymous, Overview of the city of Lille and citadel, (1743), (https://www.fortified-
places.com), date accessed 20/1/2016.

39
Bibliography:
Primary:
 Cravan, Elizabeth, A Journey through Crimea to Constantinople, letter to his serene
Highness the Margrave of Brandebourg, Anspach and Bareith.(Eighteenth century
collections, 1785), (https://quod.lib.umich.edu), date accessed 19/01/2016.
 Defoe, Daniel, A Contribution of Letters Written by a Turkish Spy in Paris, (London,
1718), (https://quod.lib.umich.edu), date accessed 19/01/2016.
 Goldsmith, Oliver, A History of England, in a Series of Letters from a Nobleman to
his Son, (London, 1764), (https://quod.lib.umich.edu), date accessed 19/01/2016.
 Lochee, Lewis, Elements of fortification. By Lewis Lochee, Master of the Military
Academy at Little Chelsea, (London, 1780), (https://quod.lib.umich.edu), date
accessed 2/2/2016.
 Vauban, Sebastian, A New Method of Fortification, (London 1691)
(https://www.eebo.chadwyck.com), date accessed 06/11/2015.
 Voltaire, The age of Lewis XIV: a new edition revised and considerably augmented by
the author. Translated from the French of M.Voltaire, (London, 1753) P122,
Secondary:
 Black, Jeremey, European Warfare: 1660-1815, (London, 1991).
 Black, Jeremey, The Origins of War in Early Modern Europe, (Edinburgh, 1987).
 Chapmen, Benjamin, The History of Gustavus Adolphus and the Thirty Years Was up
to the Kings Death, (London, 1856).
 Childs, John, Warfare in the Seventeenth Century, (London, 2001).

40
 Duffy, Christopher, “The Fortress in the Early Modern World 1494-1660”, Siege
Warfare, (New York, 1979).
 Griffith, Paddy, The Vauban Fortifications of France, (Ospreys 2006),
 Hope, Ian, A Scientific Way of War, (Nebraska 2015),
 Kaufmann, J.E and H.W. The Medieval Fortress, (Boston, 2004).
 Lepage, Jean-Denis, French Fortifications 1715-1815: An Illustrated History,
(MacFarland, 2009), (https://www.googlebooks.com), date accessed 20/01.2016.
 Lepage, Jean-Denis, Vauban and the French Military under Louis XIV: An Illustrated
History of Fortifications and Strategies, (MacFarland, 2009),
 Lockhart, Paul Douglas, Sweden in the Seventeenth Century, (New York, 2004).
 Lynn, John, Giant of the Grand Siècle: The French Army 1610-1715, (Cambridge,
2006).
 Misic, Slobodan, Obradovic, Marija, Are Vauban’s geometrical principles applied in
the Petrovaardin Fortress, (Turin 2014).
 Parker, Geoffrey, “Military innovation and the rise of the west 1500-1800”, The
Military Revolution, (Cambridge, 1988).
 Parrot, David, “Military Enterprise and Military Revolution in Early Modern Europe”
in The Business of War, (New York, 2012).
 Pollak, Martha, Cities at War in Early Modern Europe, (New York, 2010).
 Roberts, Michael, Profiles in Power, Gustavus Adolphus, (New York, 1992).
 Weigley, Russell, The Age of Battlefields, (Indiana, 1994).

41
Map Illustrations:
 Anonymous, Bird view of the Alba Carolina, (1715-1738),
(https://www.edu.kindergraff.ro), date accessed 21/1/2016.
 Anonymous, Overview of the siege of Maastricht (1673), (https://www.galcia.bnf.fr),
 Anonymous, Overview of the city of Lille and citadel, (1743), (https://www.fortified-
places.com), date accessed 20/1/2016.
 De Clerville, Louis-Nicolas, Overview of the Citadel in Marseille (1610-1677),
 Jeffery, Thomas, Detail source map of Fort Carlion, (1758),
(https://weaponsandwarfare.flies.wordpress.com), date accessed 20/1/2016.
 Lepage, Jean-Denis, Fortress Josefov (Bohemia), (1787) From, “Vauban and the
French Military Under Louis XIV: An Illustrated History of Fortifications and
Strategies”, (MacFarland, 2009), p.285, (https://www.googlebooks.com), date
 Vauban, Sebastian, Belle Isle Citadel, (1683), (https://www.gallicia.bnf.fr), date
accessed 18/1/2016.
 Vauban, Sebastian, Bird view of Huningue Fortress on the River Rhine, (1696),
(https://gallica.bnf.fr), date accessed 21/1/2016.
 Von Huber, Joseph Daniel, Map of Vienna (Aerial view), (1769),
(https://www.wien.gv.at), date accessed 18/01/2016.
 T. Chaperon, The Town and Fortress of Lille, (https://www.gallica.bnf.fr), date

42
 T. Daniel, Overview of Lille after its occupation by France (1667),
Archives:
 Early Printed Books Department, Trinity College, Dublin.
 Early Printed Books Online, (https://www.eebo.chadwyk.com).
 Eighteenth Century Collections Online. (https://quod.lib.umich.edu).
Word Count: 10,182

FYP AS ONE

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to FYP AS ONE

Similar to FYP AS ONE (20)

FYP AS ONE