Computer reconstruction of the appearance of the Albazinsky fortress during the first siege

Natsvin Aleksei Viktorovich Assistant Professor; Department of General Mathematics and Computer Science; Amur State University 21 Ignatievskoe Shosse str., Blagoveshchensk, Amur Region, 675028, Russia natsvin1998@yandex.ru Other publications by this author     Eremin Il'ya Evgen'evich Doctor of Technical Science Professor, Department of Information and Management Systems, Amur State University 675028, Russia, Amurskaya oblast', g. Blagoveshchensk, ul. Ignat'evskoe Shosse, 21 ilya.eremin.70@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Lokhov Aleksei Yur'evich PhD in History Associate Professor; Department of Tactics; Far Eastern Higher Combined Arms Command School named after Marshal of the Soviet Union K.K. Rokossovsky 158 Lenin St., Blagoveshchensk, Amur Region, 675021, Russia kluger999@inbox.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction

The village of Albazino in the Skovorodinsky district of the Amur region in the past played an important role in the development of the Far East. Initially, the town of Yaksa of the Daurian prince Albaza stood in its place, which was captured and destroyed by the detachment of Yerofey Khabarov in 1651. 14 years later, in the autumn of 1665, a fugitive detachment led by Nikifor Chernigov occupied the territory and rebuilt a small wooden prison. In turn, in the early 1680s, relations between Russia and the Qing Empire worsened, as a result of which, during 1681-1684, the fortifications of the Albaza prison were significantly expanded in accordance with the new requirements for its defense capability. At the same time, in 1682, the Albaza prison became the center of the Albaza voivodeship, and in 1684, voivode Alexei Tolbuzin arrived at the fortress, who also painted it. The large wooden prison existed until the summer of 1685 and was then destroyed during the siege by the Qing army. The main reason for the rapid fall of the fortress was its inability to withstand Chinese artillery, which was corrected during the construction of a new wooden-earth fortress in the fall of the same year. The Albaza prison was again besieged in the summer of 1686, but was never captured. The long siege of the fortress ended with the signing of the Treaty of Nerchinsk in September 1689, as a result of which Russia lost not only the fortress, but also the occupied Amur region, while the lost territories were returned only in 1858 after the signing of the Treaty of Aigun ^[1].

It should be noted that the use of computer technology in the reconstruction of architectural complexes is not new. With the help of new tools created by the microcomputer revolution of the late 1980s, the first computer reconstructions were carried out in the USA, Japan, Germany and other European countries in the 1990s ^[2]. In turn, in Russia, computer technologies were first used in the reconstruction of architectural complexes in 2000 ^[3].

It is worth noting that in Russian practice there is a wide range of computer reconstructions of wooden structures. For example, in 2011, work was presented on creating a virtual model of the Zashiversky Church, and in 2014, the Zarubin Estate and the Shenmudian Temple using BIM technology ^[4]. In turn, in 2022, the result of recreating the appearance of a 14th-century Novgorod estate was presented ^[5]. At the same time, the issues of recreating complex wooden architectural complexes, such as prisons, have also been raised by researchers, for example, in 2008, a publication on the reconstruction of the Tambov Fortress was presented ^[6], in 2013. Ilim prison ^[7], and 2019 Sayansky prison ^[8]. If we summarize such work, we can identify the following typical steps: collecting information about the object of interest; analyzing the accumulated data and drawing up drawings; modeling and visualizing the finished reconstruction. In turn, graphic editors, computer-aided design systems, and general-purpose three-dimensional editors are most often used among the software.

Currently, there are many options for reconstructing the appearance of the Albaza prison. Thus, graphic sketches of the fortress were created by Artemyev A.R. and Kochedamov V.I., as well as plans created by Trukhin V.I. and Bagrin E.A. ^[9]. In addition, according to Kochedamov's sketches, two models were created, located in the Amur Regional Museum of Local Lore and the Albaza Museum of Local Lore (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Reconstruction of the Albazinsky prison: a) a 1989 model located in the Amur Regional Museum of Local Lore by Artamonov Yu.A.; b) a graphic sketch developed by Artemyev A.R. in 1999; c) a plan developed by Trukhin V.I. in 2018; d) a sketch created by Bagrin E.A. in 2019.

It is worth noting that in all the variety of studies conducted, computer technologies were practically not used, which could significantly improve the final result. Thus, the purpose of this study was the most complete and well-founded computer reconstruction of the Albaza prison in 1685, for the implementation of which the following methodology was proposed.

First, it is necessary to collect all available archaeological data to synthesize a topoplane that allows you to accurately link individual parts of the fortress. This step of the algorithm involves the use of a raster graphics editor with layer support, which was chosen by the freely distributed GIMP software.

Secondly, it is necessary to reproduce known objects in a simplified three-dimensional form according to available text sources and place them most efficiently on top of the topographic plan. This stage involves uploading a topographic plan in the form of a flat object into a three-dimensional modeling software and building individual structures from simple geometric objects. The Blender general-purpose 3D editor was used to perform all manipulations in three-dimensional space.

Thirdly, using information from graphical sources, reproduce a simplified representation of the structures of the internal filling of the fortress, similar to the previous step.

Fourth, to detail the verified three-dimensional models made in the previous step. It is worth noting that at this stage it is advisable to simulate each building in a separate project in order to save hardware resources.

Fifth, to fragment the obtained models into blocks for their subsequent reproduction by means of three-dimensional printing. This step involves breaking down the models of the previous step into separate fragments and adapting them for printing, for which the previously mentioned Blender is excellent.

Synthesis of the general topographic plan

The history of the research of the Albazinsky prison begins with its visit by the Governor-General of Eastern Siberia, N.N. Muravyov, during the first Amur rafting in 1854. Then, a year later, the famous botanist Maak R.K. visited the territory of the fortress, who drew up an approximate diagram of the territory of the fortress and the Chinese camp located on the other side of the Amur River (Fig. 2, a). It is worth noting that according to the plan, at the time of its compilation, the western rampart of the fortress had not yet been washed away by the Amur, which cannot be said about the topographic survey of 1899, in which the rampart was already missing (Fig. 2, b).

Fig. 2. Maps of the territory of the Albaza prison: a) map of Maak in 1855 ^[10]; b) map of the Albaza village in 1899 ^[1].

A further survey of the settlement in 1949 was conducted by Novikov-Daursky G.S., who collected several finds on its territory. However, full-fledged archaeological research was started only in the 70s by a detachment of the North Asian integrated expedition of the Institute of History, Philology and Philosophy of the Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences. The fortress studies conducted in 1974-1976 and 1979-1980 were led by Sukhov V.V. and Glinsky S.G. Among the entire array of expedition results, the general topographic plan of the settlement and the excavation plan R-6, containing fragments of the base of the round bell tower and walls, are of the greatest interest for the reconstruction (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. Results of the Sukhoi expedition ^[11]: a) topographic plan of the settlement; b) excavation site R-6.

The Amur Archaeological team of the Institute of History, Archeology and Ethnography of the Peoples of the Far East of the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, under the leadership of A.R. Artemyev, continued the study of the Albazinsky prison in the period from 1988 to 2002, with interruptions in 1985 and 1998. During the field work, the northern part of the fortress was explored, and the northeast corner tower (excavation A) and other structures were discovered. The authors have drawn up a topographic plan, which also includes the excavations of the previous expedition (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4. Results of Artemyev's expedition ^[12]: a) topographic plan of the settlement; b) excavation A.

The most up-to-date results were presented by the Albaza Archaeological expedition, created by the Petropavlovsk Foundation with the support of the Central Research Center of the Amur Region, in 2011-2022. Of the many finds of the expedition that were directly related to the period of existence of the Albaza prison under consideration, the most interesting is the foundation of the church found in excavation I (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5. Results of Cherkasov's expedition ^[13]: a) topographic plan of the settlement; b) excavation I.

It is worth noting that this topographic plan is the most accurate of the presented ones, as it was compiled by professional surveyors using the most modern geodetic equipment. Thus, further work on the reconstruction consisted in combining all the previously considered topographic plans in a raster graphic editor and transferring the necessary excavations to the Cherkasov plan and, as a result, obtaining an accurate geographical reference of all the structures found. It is quite obvious that this process was hampered by the inaccuracy of the old maps due to their manual compilation. However, in the course of the work, the authors obtained some average version, shown in Figure 6.

Fig. 6. The result of combining topographic plans.

Thus, the obtained topographic plan makes it possible to uniquely identify the position of the three structures. However, at the same time, two of the three excavations have fragments of the rear, which gives some idea of the direction of the walls and the possibility of identifying the position of other buildings of the perimeter of the prison mentioned in the painting of 1684.

Reconstruction of the main perimeter facilities

The authors used materials from the end of the 17th century, from the collections of the Russian National Library, the St. Petersburg branch of the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences, as well as the RGADA, as text sources. The main and most informative textual sources were the paintings of the Chernigov prison in 1674^[14] and the Albaza prison in 1684 (Fig. 7).

7. The original painting of the Albaza prison in 1684 ^[15].

Thanks to textual sources, it was possible to reproduce the appearance of 70% of the structures of the fortress fence, including the walls, in turn, for the remaining 30% it was necessary to study architectural analogues and norms of wooden architecture of the time period under consideration ^[16-17].

First of all, the authors attempted to resolve the conflict between the construction of the fortress wall, namely, on the models, as well as on Artemyev's sketches, the walls represented a rear with shelves, at the same time, in Kochedamov's illustrations, all the fortress walls except for the sections connecting the Chernigov prison with a large wooden prison were covered. If we take into account the following fragment of the painting from 1674: "The Sovereign Albazinsky prison with Nagorodnaya is covered with a board ...", then it can be revealed that the version of the wall proposed by Artemyev contradicts, which makes Kochedamov's version more correct. The very structure of the wall is presented in detail in the painting of 1684, namely, loopholes were made under and above the shelves, in addition, a fence set back from the rear took place under the shelves, the space between which was covered with earth. As a result of the resolution of this issue, it was decided to direct further efforts to the most detailed described structures of the fortress.

The first objects whose appearance was reconstructed were the corner towers of the Chernigov prison. According to the painting, the towers had the same linear dimensions and configuration. Firstly, the ground floor was a closed room for prisoners (amanats) and had a single entrance. Secondly, the second floor was equipped with loopholes and had entrances from the walls, which were climbed from covered stairs attached to the tower. Thirdly, the dimensions of the Chernigov prison given in the painting made it possible to reproduce the walls, but due to the lack of information about the passage tower, the contour of the fortress temporarily remained unclosed.

The northeastern corner tower served as a further recreated structure. The first floor of the tower was blind with the only entrance through a trapdoor in the floor of the second floor. The second floor had exits to the walls and was equipped with loopholes, while an internal staircase provided access to the third floor. The third floor, also equipped with loopholes, began with a wedge and ended with a four-pitched roof covered with double timbers. The entrance to the second floor of the tower was also carried out from an attached covered staircase, the remains of which were found in the excavation. Both the southeastern and southwestern towers had a general configuration and dimensions similar to the northeastern tower. However, the painting does not indicate the presence of a middle floor that allows access to the walls, therefore, the second floor began with a hole, and access to it was carried out by an internal staircase.

In turn, to complete the eastern facade of the fortress, it was necessary to reconstruct the eastern passage tower. Based on information from the painting of 1684, the tower had three floors, while the third floor included a collapse equipped with deck windows for firing two cannons and a four-pitched roof. The roof ended with an observation deck, above which towered a two-headed eagle studded with white iron. The first floor with a double outer wall had a through passage with internal and external gates, while most likely the passage was separated by internal walls from the stairs. This decision to locate the stairs is justified by the absence of any mention of them in the painting, as well as the need to make it difficult for a potential enemy to access the second floor of the tower itself. The second floor of the tower, in turn, does not have any description of its structure. It was decided to eliminate this drawback by borrowing architectural solutions from similar architectural objects of the period under review, including the travel towers of the Yakut and Ilim prisons (Fig. 8).

8. Architectural analogues of the passage towers ^[17]: a) Yakut prison; b) Ilimsky prison.

An analysis of their devices showed that the second floor was often equipped with chapel balconies, which had both a defensive function and a cult function. It is worth noting that similar decisions were made to use when recreating the passage (Spasskaya) tower of the Chernigov prison, however, due to its obviously smaller size, it was decided to place the stairs to the second floor similarly to the corner towers, i.e. outside.

The last detailed structure directly related to the fortress fence was the southern bell tower. According to the painting of 1684, the tower had an octagonal log base with double walls, while the outer walls ended in a collapse, in turn, the collapse itself, like the bell tower, continuing the inner walls were paved. On the collapse around the tower, a corridor covered with double-timbers was equipped with a "railing built into the jamb." The log house of the bell tower reaches the collapse, on which the playground is equipped. On the site there are sixteen pillars and a "railing mounted in a jamb", and on those pillars there is a cobblestone collapse on which a tent (an eight-pitched roof) ending with a poppy and a cross has already been installed. The tower had four floors. In turn, the information on the excavation of the P-6 indicates the exact position of the tower, but due to the fact that it captures only part of its base, it does not allow to determine its linear dimensions. It was decided to compensate for this shortcoming by using the Chinese cartographic drawing of the siege of Albaza prison, presented in the Chinese atlas "Aihun, Luosha, Taiwan, Nei Menggu tu", stored in the Library of Congress of the USA (Fig. 9).

Fig. 9. Fragment of the drawing "Luosha" containing the Albaza prison ^[1].

According to the drawing, the tower, as well as the church, are depicted similar in size, therefore, it can be assumed that the size of their bases is similar. It is also worth noting that this drawing has a rather important detail connecting the tower and the church, namely the air passage.

The reconstruction of the church turned out to be the most time-consuming task ^[18], since only the data from excavation I were thoroughly known, namely the shape and dimensions of the base, the lateral limits and the altar. First of all, the authors analyzed in more detail the appearance of the church, represented in the drawing "Luosha". Thus, it was revealed the presence of a refectory, as wide as the base of the church, flanked by two log cabins with entrances from the front of the building. In addition, the image shows a rather high porch, which may indicate the presence of a lining under the refectory. Since this was the end of the information from archival sources, it was decided to take the missing data from historical analogues and supplement the solution with traditional proportions typical of Russian wooden architecture (Fig. 10, a). In the process of searching for analogues, a photograph of the Church of the Savior on the Kokshenge River was found, the appearance of which was quite close to the reconstructed church of the Albazinsky prison (Fig. 10, b).

Fig. 10. Auxiliary materials: a) reconstruction of the Zashiversky church of the Ilimsky ostrog ^[19]; b) photo of the 19th century of the Savior Church (Vologda province) ^[20].

The last object related to the fortress fence of the Albaza prison was the voivodeship yard. At the same time, in the painting of 1684, only his position is indicated that "... And from the corner towers along the Amur River up the prison wall is forty-four fathoms ... Yes, in the same prison wall at the corner of the imperial courtyard for the arrival of the voivodes and commanding people. And from the Amur River from the tsar's courtyard, the prison wall to the corner tower is forty fathoms...". It is also worth noting that there is no specific representation of this object among the existing solutions. However, due to the objective function of this structure, namely the housing of the voivode's servants and the temporary accommodation of the voivode himself, it was decided to take as a basis the option created by N.P. Kradin, but simplify its design, bringing it closer to a typical two-story tower.

All of the above surveys were designed as simplified three-dimensional models and placed on top of a synthetic topographic plan, while it turned out that the archaeological and chronicle data matched almost perfectly (Fig. 11).

Fig. 11. The plan of the Albazinsky prison in 1684

As you know, the purpose of such architectural complexes was not only in military functions, but also implied the conduct of administrative and economic activities, so it was decided to direct further efforts to the previously unrepresented interior of the fortress.

Reconstruction of internal filling facilities

An analysis of all possible unsubscriptions and letters revealed the fact of the presence of a state barn and granary in the small Chernigov prison, as well as a command hut, shopping malls and barns. It is quite obvious that this list of structures was not enough for the full-fledged operation of the fortress. In the generalized view of the prisons, there were buildings such as the voivodeship manor with the necessary outbuildings – a barn, a cookhouse and a soap house, a moving hut with subordinate facilities such as guard huts, stables and armories. In addition, a courtyard with shops and barns was set up for trading activities, as well as a customs yard for collecting yasak collected from the local population.

The introduction of this information into the reconstruction process allowed us to take a different look at the chaotic representation of buildings inside the fortress in the drawing "Luosha". Thus, it was possible to conditionally identify four main areas of the fortress, namely the complexes of the voivodeship courtyard, the command hut, the shopping malls and the customs yard. The complex of the voivodeship courtyard in the northwestern part of the fortress included a voivodeship manor, a barn, a cookhouse and a soap house. The complex of the command hut in the northeastern part of the fortress included a moving hut itself, an armory, a stable, a powder magazine, surrounded by a fence with a canopy for various household equipment. Nearby, there was also one of the huts, which served as a guard guarding the eastern passage tower. The shopping complex in the southwestern part of the fortress included nine shops and two barns. There was also a second guard hut to guard the southern entrance to the fortress. It is worth noting that the shops were located in such a way that the formed street was oriented parallel to the entrance to the church. In the remaining southeastern corner of the fortress there were yasachny barns and a customs hut, as well as a well found during excavations. It is worth noting that the appearance of all these structures, due to the lack of any description, was reproduced using numerous analogues of the time period under consideration. Thus, a detailed plan of the fortress was drawn up, including not only the defensive structures of the fortress, but also the internal buildings (Fig. 12), in turn, the three-dimensional implementation of this plan is shown in Figure 13.

Fig. 12. Objects of internal filling.

Fig. 13. Simplified model of the Albaza prison in 1684 (view from the west).

The further implementation of the virtual reconstruction of the Albaza prison was aimed at implementing a highly detailed virtual model and a physical representation in the form of a layout.

Simplified model detailing and three-dimensional printing

The final stage of the reconstruction was no less laborious, as 22 buildings and about four hundred meters of walls had to be recreated in detail. This stage was carried out by analogy with real construction, while standard building materials such as boards, beams and logs were interpreted as rectangular parallelepipeds and cylinders. In turn, when modeling, there was a unification of individual parts to reduce labor costs, so only three types of logs, two types of timber and two types of boards were used in modeling. In addition, modifications related to the technical limitations of three-dimensional printing and the selected scale (1:72) were applied to the model, namely, small details such as, for example, teeth, it was decided to eliminate. In turn, each object had to be divided into printed modules and equipped with assembly devices such as grooves, hooks and protrusions. The final three-dimensional model is shown in Figure 14.

Fig. 14. Detailed model of the Albaza prison in 1684 (view from the west).

Later, thanks to the joint work of staff and students of the Faculty of Design and Technology and the Faculty of International Relations, a corresponding exhibition was created at the Scientific Museum of Amur State University (Fig. 15). The handwritten map "Amur River from the tract" by Semyon Remezov of the XVIII century and panoramic photographs of the fortress territory served as the initial materials for the design ^[21].

Fig. 15. The exposition in the lobby of the 7th building of the University (view from the east).

It is worth noting that a significant advantage of this exhibition is its accessibility not only for employees and students of Amur State University, but also for the urban population, as the model stands in the lobby of the building.

Conclusion

The idea of creating a modern model of the Albaza prison in 1685 by means of its 3D printing arose back in September 2018, however, at that time the project could not be completed due to the lack of a complete understanding of the fortress structure. Thus, a trivial applied task has grown to a full-fledged scientific and practical study that took about three years. At the same time, the research of the Albazinsky prison did not stop there, the authors also reproduced the immediate course of the siege of 1685, the composition of the siege army of Qing China, reconstructed the artillery armament of both sides of the conflict, and attempted to find the location of the Albazinsky Spassky Monastery ^[22]. It is also worth noting that the solutions of this project are planned to be used in the future to reproduce the appearance of the Nerchinsk prison ^[23].