hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in descending order. Sort in ascending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
France (France) 190 0 Browse Search
Europe 110 0 Browse Search
Histoire De Napoleon 94 0 Browse Search
Napoleon (Ohio, United States) 82 0 Browse Search
Memoires Napoleon 82 2 Browse Search
England (United Kingdom) 78 0 Browse Search
Austria (Austria) 60 0 Browse Search
Canada (Canada) 60 0 Browse Search
Memoires De Napoleon 60 0 Browse Search
Russia (Russia) 54 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of H. Wager Halleck , A. M. , Lieut. of Engineers, U. S. Army ., Elements of Military Art and Science; or, Course of Instruction in Strategy, Fortification, Tactis of Battles &c., Embracing the Duties of Staff, Infantry, Cavalry, Artillery and Engineers. Adapted to the Use of Volunteers and Militia.. Search the whole document.

Found 175 total hits in 75 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
Lyons (France) (search for this): chapter 14
hat is now known. It, however, requires great modifications to suit it to different localities. For a horizontal site, it is probably the most perfect system ever devised. It is based on the system of Vauban as improved by Cormontaigne, and contains several of the modifications suggested by modern engineers. It is applied in a modified form to the new fortifications of Paris. Baron Rohault de Fleury has introduced many modifications of the ordinary French system in his new defences of Lyons. We have seen no written account of these works, but from a hasty examination in 1844, they struck us as being too complicated and expensive. The new fortifications of Western Germany are modifications of Rempler's system, as improved by De la Chiche and Montalembert. It is said that General Aster, the directing engineer, has also introduced some of the leading principles of Chasseloup and Carnot. The English engineers have satisfied themselves with following in the track of their co
Breme (Bremen, Germany) (search for this): chapter 14
try. Their works, however, throw up in much haste, were in many respects defective, although well adapted to the exigencies of the time. Freytag, their principal engineer, wrote in 1630. Some of his improvements were introduced into France by Pagan. He was preceded by Marolois, (a cotemporary of Pagan,) who published in 1613. In Germany, Rimpler, a Saxon, wrote on fortification in 1671. He was a man of great experience, having served at the sieges of Candia, Phillipsburg, Bonn, Riga, Bremen, Dansburg, Bommeln, &c. He fell at the siege of Vienna in 1683. His writings are said to contain the groundwork of Montalembert's system. In Italy, after the time of Tartaglia, Marchi, Campi, &c., we find no great improvement in this art. Several Italians, however, distinguished themselves as engineers under the Spaniards. The fortifications of Badajos are a good example of the state of the art in Italy and Spain at that epoch. The citadel of Antwerp, built by two Italian engineers, Pa
Vienna (Virginia, United States) (search for this): chapter 14
died in 1589. His writings are valuable as showing the state of the art at that time, and the changes which he himself introduced. He was an engineer of much practical knowledge and experience, having assisted at the sieges of Malta, Golletta, Vienna, Jula, Nicosia, Famagusta, &c. The first French engineer who wrote on fortification was Errard de Bar-le-Duc, who published near the close of the sixteenth century. As an engineer, he was rivalled by Chatillon, a man of distinguished merit. n,) who published in 1613. In Germany, Rimpler, a Saxon, wrote on fortification in 1671. He was a man of great experience, having served at the sieges of Candia, Phillipsburg, Bonn, Riga, Bremen, Dansburg, Bommeln, &c. He fell at the siege of Vienna in 1683. His writings are said to contain the groundwork of Montalembert's system. In Italy, after the time of Tartaglia, Marchi, Campi, &c., we find no great improvement in this art. Several Italians, however, distinguished themselves as eng
Holland (Netherlands) (search for this): chapter 14
held a corresponding position under the Dutch republic. Coehorn's ideas upon fortification are conceived with an especial view to the marshy soil of his own country, and, although well suited to the object in view, are consequently of less general application than those of his more distinguished cotemporary and rival. The best specimens of his mode of construction that exist at the present day, are the fortresses of Manheim, Bergen-op-Zoom, Nimiguen, and Breda. Coehorn was followed in Holland by Landsberg, an able and practical engineer, who to much reading added extensive experience, having himself served at sixteen sieges. His system was in many respects peculiar, both in trace and relief; it dispensed with the glacis, and all revertments of masonry. His plans could be applied only to marshy soils. The first edition of his work was published in 1685. But the career of Vauban forms the most marked and prominent era in the history of fortification; it constitutes the conne
Riga (Russia) (search for this): chapter 14
he country. Their works, however, throw up in much haste, were in many respects defective, although well adapted to the exigencies of the time. Freytag, their principal engineer, wrote in 1630. Some of his improvements were introduced into France by Pagan. He was preceded by Marolois, (a cotemporary of Pagan,) who published in 1613. In Germany, Rimpler, a Saxon, wrote on fortification in 1671. He was a man of great experience, having served at the sieges of Candia, Phillipsburg, Bonn, Riga, Bremen, Dansburg, Bommeln, &c. He fell at the siege of Vienna in 1683. His writings are said to contain the groundwork of Montalembert's system. In Italy, after the time of Tartaglia, Marchi, Campi, &c., we find no great improvement in this art. Several Italians, however, distinguished themselves as engineers under the Spaniards. The fortifications of Badajos are a good example of the state of the art in Italy and Spain at that epoch. The citadel of Antwerp, built by two Italian engine
Italy (Italy) (search for this): chapter 14
His work on fortification exhibits much originality and genius, but it is doubtful whether it has very much contributed to the improvement of this art. His ideas have been very severely, and rather unfairly criticized by the English, and particularly by Sir Howard Douglas. Chasseloup de Laubat early distinguished himself as an engineer of much capacity and talent. He followed Napoleon in nearly all his campaigns, and conducted many of his sieges. He remodelled the fortifications of Northern Italy and of the Lower Rhine. He published in 1811. The improvements which he introduced are numerous and valuable, and he probably contributed more to advance his art, and to restore the equilibrium between attack and defence, than any other engineer since Cormontaigne. After the fall of Napoleon and the partition of his empire, the allies mutilated or destroyed the construction of Chasseloup, so that, it is believed, no perfect specimen of his system remains. The cotemporaries of Chass
Landsberg am Lech (Bavaria, Germany) (search for this): chapter 14
esponding position under the Dutch republic. Coehorn's ideas upon fortification are conceived with an especial view to the marshy soil of his own country, and, although well suited to the object in view, are consequently of less general application than those of his more distinguished cotemporary and rival. The best specimens of his mode of construction that exist at the present day, are the fortresses of Manheim, Bergen-op-Zoom, Nimiguen, and Breda. Coehorn was followed in Holland by Landsberg, an able and practical engineer, who to much reading added extensive experience, having himself served at sixteen sieges. His system was in many respects peculiar, both in trace and relief; it dispensed with the glacis, and all revertments of masonry. His plans could be applied only to marshy soils. The first edition of his work was published in 1685. But the career of Vauban forms the most marked and prominent era in the history of fortification; it constitutes the connecting link b
Strasbourg (France) (search for this): chapter 14
ined from the fact that he fought one hundred. and forty battles, conducted fifty-eight sieges, and built or repaired three hundred fortifications. His memoirs, found among his manuscript papers, on various military and political subjects, are numerous, and highly praised even at the present day. But his beautiful and numerous constructions, both of a civil and military character, are real monuments to his genius. The best illustrations of his principles of fortification occur at Lille, Strasbourg, Landau, Givet, and Neuf-Brisack. His writings on mines, and the attack and defence of places, are, by the profession, regarded as classic. His improvements in the existing method of attack gave great superiority to the arms of his countrymen, and even enabled him to besiege and capture his rival Coehorn, in his own works. He died in 1707, and was soon succeeded by Cormontaigne. The latter did not attempt the introduction of any new system, but limited himself to improving and perfec
Napoleon (Ohio, United States) (search for this): chapter 14
early distinguished himself as an engineer of much capacity and talent. He followed Napoleon in nearly all his campaigns, and conducted many of his sieges. He remodelled the fortifications of Northern Italy and of the Lower Rhine. He published in 1811. The improvements which he introduced are numerous and valuable, and he probably contributed more to advance his art, and to restore the equilibrium between attack and defence, than any other engineer since Cormontaigne. After the fall of Napoleon and the partition of his empire, the allies mutilated or destroyed the construction of Chasseloup, so that, it is believed, no perfect specimen of his system remains. The cotemporaries of Chasseloup were mostly engaged In active field service and sieges, and few had either leisure or opportunity to devote themselves to improvements in permanent fortification. Choumara published in 1827. His system contains much originality, and his writings give proof of talent and genius. He has ve
Metz (France) (search for this): chapter 14
t of fortification, besides being elegantly written, contain the most valuable information of any works we have. His most admired constructions are to be found at Metz, Thionville, and Bitche. The beautiful crown works of Billecroix, at Metz, are perfect models of their kind. Cormontaigne died in 1750. Cotemporary with him wMetz, are perfect models of their kind. Cormontaigne died in 1750. Cotemporary with him were Sturin and Glasser. The former deviated but slightly from the systems of his predecessors, but the latter invented several ingenious improvements which gave him great reputation. Next follows Rosard, a Bavarian engineer; and Frederick Augustus, king of Poland, who devoted himself particularly to this art. The former casemaent and genius. He has very evidently more originality than judgment, and it is hardly probable that his system will ever be generally adopted in practice. The Metz system, as arranged by Noizet, as a theoretical study, is undoubtedly the very best that is now known. It, however, requires great modifications to suit it to dif
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...