grupa: 40 E

echipa: Socol Bianca

Ciobotarasu Stefan
Nadeem Yamin
Severin Fortress
- case study no. 3-

1. General Data
1.1 The name of the ansamble:
 Severin Fortress
1.2 Location and Google Maps extras:
 Severin Fortress is located in Drobeta Turnu Severin, Mehedinti county (Carol I
Boulevard, in General Dragalina Park), and it is found in the National Archeology
Repertory by the code 109782.07.01. The ansamble is composed of the Dungeon Ruin,
the Chapel Ruin, and the enclosure walls.

1.3 The builders, and the year

Project realized by the town hall and funded by the European Union through the Regional
Operational Program 2007-2013, finshed in 2009
1.4 Category of intervention in which it is registered
c. Fragmentary ruin

2. Historical Data
It is not known exactly the year when the Severin Fortress was borned. Some historical theory
highlights that in 1233 the citizens raised the tower of a new fortress that was supposed to be called
Severinpolis, named after the emperor Septimus Sever. The Hungarian King Andrei II strengthened the
protection of the fortress and handed it over to the Ioanite Knights back in in 1247. There was a Gothic
church in the fortress that was built from materials taken from the Roman fort Drobeta. Although it was
strategically elevated by the Danube, the one that succed to conquer it could have a lot of benefits. To
avoid that, at the end of the 13th century, King Stefan of Hungary waged five wars with the Bulgarians to
defend the military stronghold of Severin.

1|P a g e
 After its tumultuous past, the Fortress of Severin will be owned by Mircea
cel Batran, the "Ban of Severin". This happens in 1406. The walls of the fortress
were witnesses of the treaty of anti-Ottoman alliance signed by Mircea cel
Batran and the Hungarian king Sigismund of Luxembourg.
After the fall of Constantinople in 1453, the attacks of the Danubian
oppressions ceased, Bania moving to Strehaia, later to Craiova, and the
population of Severin migrating to Cerneti, a village 6 km ahead, which will also
be the capital of Mehedinti district. Sp, back in 1524 the fortress reaches in the
hands of Soliman the Magnificent. This lead to its destruction, to make a new
military stronghold in the south of the Danube. From the old fortress, only one
tower left, called the Tower of Sever. Its reconstruction lasted almost 300
years.
In 1936, prof. Dr. Al. Baracila executed excavations, and managed to
reconstruct the plan of the fortress and found out rich archaeological materiala
(stones, iron, copper, and even a cannon) So, taking into consderation the professor work, the plan of
the fortress was made of:
 a plan of rectangular shape
 two walls built of river stones
 three towers and a deep defence pit.

3. General description of the ansamble

Severin Fortress was one of the most important fortifications for that specific area. For more than 3
centuries it functioned like a gate that linked the Eastern and Western Europe. The ruins that are today
present on the site, remained from a single construction. There were two enclosures, an exterior and an
interior one; surrounded by a pit. After the digging, some towers were found. They are placed in the
interior of the fortress, like that:
 two of them are on the south side
 the other two are found on the interior side of the defensive wall
Around the north-east side there is a wall, which reaches up to three floors, it is 55 m long, 9 m long
and 6 m wide. In the S-E corner, people thought that there was a hidden tunnel that leads to the
Danube. In 1868 two diggings were done, but unfortunately, two people lost their lives because of the

2|P a g e
lack of the security measures. Nowadays, the ruins of the church are kept. There were also found some
workshops for material confectioning (a bread oven). Also, in that place, there were found the footprints
of a settlement that burned. This fortress is one of the most important military stronghold, taking into
consideration the defensive system of the Romanian Country. It benefits from a special attention against
the Ottoman aggressions.

There are three stages in which it seems most likely that the citadel has been built to the form that
the present ruins let it meet.

 The first stage

In the first stage it was rise the interior precint. It was represented by a dreptunghiular plan with the
long sides oriented towards N-S. The north wall had a 22m height. In the middle of the walls (E-V) there
was two rectangular towers. The second tower represented the prince access in the fortress. Cezar
Bolliac mentioned the existence of arched entrances in the SE tower, which pointed towards the
Danube. In this case, he considered that the gate could have been the main entrance, or maybe about
the gate was added after the rising of the walls (down to the river). Also, in the interior, it was the
church, built from stone and bricks. Taking into account the architecture of the church, the fortress
would have been erected by the rulers of the Romanian Country, at the end of the XII century and the
beginning of the XIV century. At this moment, a problem is outlined, namely the possibility of the
existence of a previous fortification. The third apse of the basilica is thought to be destroyed since it
couldn't be discovered under the ruins of the mentioned church.

3|P a g e
4|P a g e
  The second stage
The second phase comprises the outer enclosure, which is approximately 6-7 m away from the inner
precint, doubled on the W, N and E, to the S sides. The curtain of W and N have the shape of a wall that
supports the slope, while at the E wall is kept at appreciable heights, reaching even 8 m. The wall is
oblique to the outside, measuring in the lower part about 4 m, made of carved stone. In the middle of
the east and NE side there is a semicircular tower which seems to have been used as an artillery
platform. Also to this period belong the simodifications brought to the church to adapt it to the Catholic
cult (a vault wrench and a sparrowhawk were discovered).

 The third stage

The third phase consists in the lifting of an enclosure to the south, because it is difficult to find
another use for the parallel walls that are found there. The two outer walls are placed in the extension
of the second precint, and the other two are built in the continuity of the inner sides of the towers.

4. Previous problems of the intervention

 The existence of a previous fortification due to the church. A researcher identifies Roman
elements reused in the medieval construction, but in the absence of stratigraphic evidence isn’t
showing the year when the church was built. It s possible to exist from the period of the
Hungarian banishment of Severin or to a fortress raised by the Ioanite knights between 1247
and 1254 (the date of the second diploma).

5|P a g e
  The excavations were extended due to soil condition. To establish the exact chronology of the
constructions here, we are struck by the character of the information resulting from the
archaeological research, which did not cover the whole complex. Why? Because of the
disturbances of the soil suffered.
 The opinions of the researchers differ in terms of the number of phases of assignment and
periodization. These opinions limit us to follow one string of the story.
 Lack of attention. Back in 1868, two workers died while digging due to the lack of the security
measures that weren’t taken into consideration.

5. Interventions Description

The City Hall of Drobeta Turnu Severin managed to rehabilitate the Fortress of Severin between 2009-
2015, through a project funded by the European Union. Shortly after the beginning of the rehabilitation
and modernization of the fortress, 159 coins from the 16th century were discovered.
Archeological complexes have been detected. The digging is done to discover all the elements that have
been preserved from the medieval structure. In the case of the fortress, the project wants to highlight
the ruins ant to make their arrangements worthwhile.
From the old fortress was kept the tower named by the locals The Severus Tower, and the ruins that
formed the fortress.

6. Evaluation in raport with the principle intervention

In raport with the principles of restoration, the Fortress of Severin respect the Charter of Venice.
The most important rule that is found in the 9 article of the Charter of Venice, which says that: „The
process of restoration is a highly specialized operation. Its aim is to preserve and reveal the aesthetic
and historic value of the monument and is based on respect for original material and authentic
documents. It must stop at the point where conjecture begins, and in this case moreover any extra work
which is indispensable must be distinct from the architectural composition and must bear a
contemporary stamp. The restoration in any case must be preceded and followed by an archaeological
and historical study of the monument.”. The same rule applied in this medieval ansamble.

7. Conclusion
Although various problems were encountered following the restoration of the medieval fortress of
Severin, the final work was a success for the whole community, managing to bring to the surface a part

6|P a g e
of a long-lost history of the city. This fortress is the city core, being used by the inhabitants both for its
historical qualities and for the formation of medieval events that tend to bring to life the atmosphere of
the past centuries. The restoration work proved to be a real success, respecting the Charter of Venice. In
my opinion, this restoration work is balanced, which is why I do not consider that other changes are
necessarily.

7|P a g e
Bibliography
https://zigzagprinromania.com/blog/cetatea-severinului/
https://blog.letsdoitromania.ro/danube/legendele-dunarii-istoria-cetatii-medievale-a-severinului/
https://relevee.uauim.ro/m89/
https://www.icomos.org/charters/venice_e.pdf
https://ro.scribd.com/doc/252714810/monografia-municipiului-Dr-Tr-Severin-docx

8|P a g e