Download - Facultatea de Științe Socio-Umane - Universitatea ...

Characteristic Features of the Defensive System of Caraşova-Grad Fortress
In the opposite part of the fortress, but not just at the end of the enclosure, was
built a second tower, probably rectangular (Pl. 11.1-3, Pl. 14.3-4). One of its sides
consists of the enclosure wall, similar to the first tower. At the entrance of the tower a
trap was observed (Pl. 6.3), consisting of an opening in the lower part of the enclosure
wall, through which the enemies could fall in the abyss.
On the south-western side of this first phase of the fortress, there was a small
passage way, between the enclosure wall and a part of an inner wall (Pl. 7.1-2). This
passage suddenly became narrow, and one could get to the back side of the first
tower.
Another defense structure consisted of a semicircular hole at the base of the
northern side of the enclosure wall (Pl. 7.3). Behind this hole, towards west, were
found stone sling balls (Pl. 8.1). As an auxiliary precaution to block the penetration of
the enemies at the base of the enclosure wall, on this side, the wall was superposed to
a rock, deliberately left there (Pl. 10.3).
As for the second phase, we can only speak about the blocking of a passage way
with an enclosure wall (kept on 4.78 meters high and 2.80 m wide), built towards
south-west (Pl. 8.2-3, Pl. 9.1-2), between an edge of the ancient fortress and the
abyss. The construction of this part of the enclosure solved the problem of any
attempt of attacking the fortress from south-west, south and east. This was probably
an intermediate phase.
The last building phase covers all the ancient fortification, and, at the same time,
an extension. One could assume a number of reasons for such a massive intervention:
a violent destruction, an earthquake, or just a need for extension and modernization.
Regardless the exact cause, the re-building was ample, involving all the levels,
horizontal and vertical as well. The precise moment of this intervention cannot be
supposed, relying either on archaeological finds, or on written sources. We could take
into account three moments: the first half of the 15 th century (Filipo Scolari), during
the Teutonic presence in Banat or, the last, during Iancu of Hunedoara's reign (1441-
1456). Anyone of these three moments is plausible, because important activities of
restoring the fortifications affected by the Ottoman attacks took place in the region.
The coins discovered in Caraşova fortress, though few, cover Sigismund of
Luxemburg's reign (1387-1437). Two other arguments can be added. The first
argument is that, in 1520, the fortress was in advanced degradation, and a number of
expensive repairs had to be done. The second argument is the assumption that, at the
end of the 15 th century and the beginning of the 16 th century, such a fortress was
already obsolete, and it was maintained mostly as a point or supervision.
The first element is the demolition of the older enclosure wall on its northern side
and towards the first defense ditch. The enclosure wall was dismantled until the level
they stepped on inside the fortress. The new enclosure wall was built along the whole
former enclosure, in front and closed to it, on the northern side (Pl. 10.1-2). The
outside parament towards the defense ditch was dismantled, and a new enclosure was
built, at a lower distance.
163