Media News Publishing

3 подписчика

Novogrudsky Castle, probably more than any other, attracts lovers of the history and heritage of Belarus and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania

Novogrudsky Castle, probably more than any other, attracts lovers of the history and heritage of Belarus and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Indeed, the colorful ruins that have survived to our time, cause the desire to imagine what the monument looked like.
Moreover, the monument affects both scientists and artists (including masters of 3D art). As a result, we currently have a number of reconstructions of the castle. At the same time, they repeat a lot in one and create a certain canonical image of a fortress. The latter has a number of solid deficiencies, which I would like to draw attention to in this article. I will try to do it shortly and as accurately as my knowledge will allow. More reliable answers, I hope, can be obtained as a result of further study of the monument.
The creator of the modern image of the castle is the famous Mikhail Tkachev, who conducted archaeological research on the territory of the monument. Based on the scientific work of Tkachev, artist Evgeny Kulik prepared the first drawing-reconstruction of the castle, from which, in fact, all other reconstructions carry out their genealogy (in general, it is possible that the artist also had an influence on the formation of the image of the castle): similar and based on the proposed option Tkachev.

But the historian, seeking to create an image of a magnificent fortress, made a number of hypotheses, which, in my opinion, are not confirmed when verifying the material accumulated before this one. One of the most important is the existence of the so-called seventh, or City Tower and best Spanish castles.
At one time, Polish archaeologists uncovered a wall that ran from the Kolodiezhnaya Tower towards the Small Castle: As the researcher wrote, he discovered this tower in 1970 as a result of archaeological excavations, but could not investigate it because of the dense building in this place. Moreover, Tkachev admitted that there were gates in the tower, and in front of the castle, in this way a kind of pre-zamka was formed.
The discrepancy in this hypothesis is as follows. The width of the passage in the so-called Mala Brahma (at the top of this predzamchya) is only about 1.5–2 m. Small gates before restoration: With such dimensions, the cart is barely squeezed through! Therefore, this passage could not be the main gate of the castle. And there was no gate at the bottom, and most likely, there was no seventh tower, or a pre-zamka. And everything looked, as it seems to me, as follows. The passage in the Little Brahma had an auxiliary character (additional gate). Through it, for example, could go down for water if necessary. That is, for the extraction of water later, on this side, the Kolodijnaya tower was installed. And from the tower in the side of the Small Castle a wall was erected to defend the moat between the two castles. Additional defense of both locks in the form of a shaft was also on the north side. Here is a plan to navigate: In this case, the question arises, where were the main gates of the castle? At the reconstruction of Staschenyuk, the option of driving is proposed just in the defensive wall in the area of the present passage, through which tourists usually get to the castle Detinets. However, as a rule, the gate was made in the towers, or at least should be flanked. This thing is quite typical (castells-campers like Lida and Crew are a completely different case, they are not worth remembering). And at Staschenyuk, we see a weak gate in the most unsafe, which means a suitable place for an attack. Therefore, this option, in my opinion, must be discarded.
Most likely, the main gate was located in Shchitovka, which has been preserved to our time. And it is precisely the presence of the passage that explains the big breach in the tower (however, this is a long-known idea, the authorship of which I do not want to appropriate in any way):

Картина дня