PRINCESS BASTION REPORT:
A SURVEY OF THE AREA FROM THE RIGHT REENTRANT 
ANGLE OF THE PRINCESS BASTION TO THE RIGHT REENTRANT 
ANGLE OF THE BROUILLAN BASTION, AND THE RELATION OF THIS 
AREA TO CAP NOIR

BY

MARGARET FORTIER

February, 1966

(Supervision: W. Stevenson, J. Hanna)

(Fortress of Louisbourg Report H B 3)

Presently, only some illustrations are included here.
For all of them, please consult the original report in the archives of the Fortress of Louisbourg

Return/retour - Table of Contents/
Table des Matières

SECTION II

CHAPTER 1

Right Flank

The right flank - the most regular section of the unconventional Princess Bastion - presents the least confusing picture throughout the Work's history. Its form, generally speaking, followed along the same lines as the flanks of a regular bastion, and, once built, it seems to have undergone little revision. These facts make it relatively easy to determine what actually stood in this section of the Bastion. However, for the years before 1749, the accuracy of any statement is seriously mitigated by the fact that dimensions, scarce for all parts of the Bastion, are almost totally lacking for the right flank. From 1749 on, there are some measurements available. These are best considered as they appeared, since, except for the length, they are most likely not the original dimensions of the flank.

By 1732 work on the landward fortifications had been carried out up to the construction of the curtain between the Queen's and Princess Bastions. Nothing was said of the flank until the fall of 1733. At that time, Verrier and Ganet declared that it was imperative that the right flank and face of the Princess Bastion and the Princess-Queen's Curtain be raised to a certain unspecified height before the end of the year. It was feared that the marshy land on which these three walls stood would be the cause of their crumbling if they were left unfinished. Obviously, therefore, the flank's foundations must have been laid, and building begun, before October, 1733. [5] Confirming this, a plan drawn in 1733 shows the partially completed flank raised to a height of 7 pieds,9 pauces. [6] (Figure 3)

Though insufficient funds and the onset of poor weather prevented the completion of the flank in 1734, the level of the cordon was reached and the rampart begun. [7 ]The next year saw the whole Bastion raised to the height of the parapet and the work on the ramparts continued. [8] (Plate 1; Figures 4 and 7)

By the end of 1735 one of the few things yet undone at the Princess Bastion was the placing of the embrasures, in masonry, in the right flank. The hope was expressed that this could be accomplished during 1736; [9] however, lack of funds and poor weather were again responsible for the postponement of a project. [10] It was not until 1737 that work was began on the flank's six embrasures. [11] There is no actual record of their completion, but it is probable that it was accomplished that same year. Verrier spoke of putting cannon on the "new flank" of the Princess Bastion in the fall of 1737. There is a possibility that he was referring to the retired battery (sometimes called the retired flank), but, if not, the only alternative is the right flank since the one on the left was not completed until 1739. [12] There is no plan showing the completed embrasures prior to 1739.13 (Figure 12)

An important detail not discussed in any of the early documents appears on several of the plans; [14] that is, that the parapet of the flank was not as wide as that of the right face. The lack of dimensions makes it impossible to determine the precise difference, and the changes made during the English occupation and during Franquet's tenure make impossible the use of later plans and accounts. (Figures 12, 20-no.1, 17-no. 2)

In 1744 a platform was built on the right flank. The exact nature of the new platform is not known. A provisional toisé listed the length of the timbers taken together as 60 [pieds] and their width as 9 [pieds] 10 [pouces]. The platform itself was 14 pieds long, with an average width of 12 pieds. [15]

There is no record of emergency alterations having been made at the flank by the French during the first siege, and the years of the English occupation seem to have witnessed few major changes or repairs. A plan outlining the changes the English would like to have made contains nothing new for the right flank. [16] (Figure 16) There is, however, one reference to the broadening and raising  of the rampart "adjoining the
[Princess-Queen's] Curtain" . The reference is found in a discussion of the right face, and it is not clear whether or not the above statement actually did relate to the flank. [17] In any case there was no further mention of any such work having been carried out at the right flank of the Bastion.

On their return, the French set about outlining the repairs needed for strengthening the fortifications. The estimates drawn up at this time provide some sorely needed dimensions for parts of the Princess Bastion, including the right flank.

It appears that they intended to use a technique similar to the one employed in construction of the Crenelated Wall, and proposed by Verrier for his projected eperon. The walls of the right face and flank, the loophole wall, and the retired battery were to be covered with pine frames imbedded into the facing. These frames - formed by spacing boards at intervals of 4 pieds vertically and horizontally - would receive a revetment of pine planking. Iron clamps were to hold the frames flush against the walls in order to receive the planking. [18] For this operation, the right flank required:

Pine woodwork - 30 pieces 20 pieds long
        Length (total)           600 - 0
        Width                            7 - 8            233-4-0
For the parapet which includes the embrasures and merlons
        Length (total)            648 - 0            252-0-0
        Width                             7 - 8
Pine planking - 2 pouces thick
        Length                         20 - 0 - 0
        Height                           3 - 2 - 0
For the parapet
       Length                           20 - 0 - 0 [19]
       Width                               2 - 4 - 0
Masonry
       Length                            20 - 0 - 0
       Height                              3 - 2 - 0         33-2-0
       Thickness                         0 - 3 - 0
For the parapet which includes embrasures and merlons
        Length                           20 - 0 - 0
       Height (average)             0 - 5 - 0         19-2-8
       Thickness                        1 - 1 - 0 [20]

Sixty iron clamps, weighing 1200 livres, and 10 toises of sod were also needed to complete the work. [21]

It is probable that the length of 20 toises given for the planking and the masonry was close to the actual length of the flank since both materials were intended to cover the total length of the wall. The height of 3 toises 2 pieds might also be taken as fairly accurate. [22] This last figure, however, represented the height below the parapet and not the wall's total height. The full height of the wall cannot be gleaned from these figures since only an average height was given for the wall above the escarp.

In a Memoire written in 1751 Franquet stated that the parapet of the flank was 2 pieds 1 pouce higher than that of the face. The wall did not remain on the same level, but continued to mount some 13 pouces before reaching the right reentrant angle. At this angle, therefore, the right flank's parapet was 3 pieds 2 pouces higher than that of the face. [23]

Franquet also noted that the width of the flank was only 7 pieds 2 pouces at its summit and was not able to resist cannon fire. [24] This defect he intended to rectify by increasing the width to 18 pieds while replacing the six embrasures already there with five newly formed openings. The old embrasures were said to be reveted with sod and masonry. [25] The rampart of the flank was covered with a wooden platform extending the length of the flank 2 pieds 4 pouces below the parapet. The platform was for the training of cannoniers and held several cannon and a mortar. [26]

Besides widening the parapet and piercing the flank with five embrasures, Franquet planned to enlarge the rampart and repair the exterior revetment. For these projects he needed:

296 cubic toises of earth at 9" ......................................  2664: 0: 0:
69 cubic toises of masonry at_125" .............................  7375: 0: 0:
80 square toises of sod at 5"  ........................................   400: 0: 0:
95 pine wood beams at 3" .............................................   285: 0: 0:
92 square toises of planks 2 pouces
                 thick at 12" 16^s ............................................  1177: 12: 0:
1215^L weight of iron at 9^s ...........................................     545:17: 0:
                                                                                       _____________
                                                                                        12447: 9: 0:  [27]

Several plans from 1751, 1755 and 1756 show the flank with five embrasures. However, these all represent works  proposed by Franquet or ordered by the King, not works completed. [28] The English account of the state of the fortifications in 1758 noted that there were six embrasures in the flank, [29] and a list of artillery surrendered by the French at the capitulation stated that there were six cannon found at the right flank. [30] Also, those plans from 1756 through 1759 which seem to reflect the existing state of things show the flank pierced by six embrasures. [31] It would appear, therefore, that the proposed change from 6 to 5 embrasures was never made.

In 1758 the French declared that the right flank was in good condition. [32] However, Bastide stated that: "The Mortar is dropt out of the whole the Stone loose and ready to fall. The Merlons are partly tumbled down and the rest ready to fall. The inner-wall is equally bad. The parapet of this flank must likewise to made good before it can be fir'd from." [33]

This account, if accurate, would seem to indicate that the repairs listed by the French in 1749 and 1751 were never carried out.

Two years later, while demolishing the fortifications, the English recorded the length of the flank as 12$ feet, a figure very close to the one given in the toisé of 1749; that is, 120 pieds or 127 feet 10 1/2 inches. The English also found when digging their demolition mines that the earth around the flank was mossy and filled with stones. [34]

Return/retour - Table of Contents/
Table des Matières