Świecie nad Wisłą – Teutonic Castle

History

   The origins of Świecie date back to the early Middle Ages, when a Slavic stronghold was believed to have existed on its territory. At the end of the first quarter of the 13th century, it was relocated to a more defensible location by the Pomeranian Prince Świętopełk, after he lost his seat in Sartowice to the Teutonic Knights. In 1245, Świecie was unsuccessfully besieged by Teutonic Knights, after whose departure the prince was to further strengthen the fortifications. In 1309, the “Swecza castrum” was captured by the Teutonic Knights, along with the entire Eastern Pomerania. The betrayal of one of the bribed defenders, who severed the bowstrings and destroyed other military equipment, is said to have contributed to the surrender. The stronghold could have been damaged during the two-month siege, or even completely burned down after the capture, but it was probably rebuilt by the Teutonic Knights after a few years and then adapted as the seat of the commandery (the first commander of Świecie, a certain Dietrich von Lichtenhain, was recorded in 1320).
   The brick castle was built on a new place in the years 1335-1350, although finishing and construction works in the outer bailey continued for several more years. According to some records, the founder was supposedly the commander Günther von Hohenstein, who was in office in the years 1344-1349, who “castrum Swetze construxiit”, but the work probably began under the Grand Master Dietrich von Altenburg. After completion, the castle in Świecie was considered a key stronghold in the defense system of the Teutonic Knights in Gdańsk Pomerania, and the secular commandry became one of the most influential in the entire Teutonic state. The strategic importance of the castle can be proved by the fact that in 1377 it was equipped with firearms. At that time, it was only the second Teutonic castle (the first one was the castle in Lipienek), which had such progressive weaponry.
   In 1410, during the Great War between Poland and Lithuania against the Teutonic Order, the castle in Świecie was besieged, but it was one of the few that was not captured after the victory of the allied armies at Grunwald. This enabled the commander of Świecie, Heinrich von Plauen (der Ältere) to organize the defense of Malbork and at the same time protect the Order from total defeat. Only the nearby town was occupied, and Dobiesław Puchała received its administration from the king. At the turn of September and October, fighting related to the Teutonic retaking of Świecie was said to have caused damages to the castle, because the House Commander asked Plauen der Ältere to send four carpenters and six bricklayers to repair holes in the castle wall. Together with Heinrich Reuss von Plauen, he also advised the demolition of the outer bailey wall in order to provide a better position for attacking the town.
   During the Thirteen Years’ War, the castle was temporarily in the hands of anti-Teutonic forces, after the Pomeranian knights and reinforcements from the town of Chełmno, commanded by Otto Machwica, approached Świecie in 1455. The following year, the Teutonic crew from Gniew tried to retake Świecie, but the raid ended only with the capture and plundering of the town. The Teutonic mercenaries managed to retake the castle only in 1460, when they sailed by boat and got inside through the dansker tower, in conspiracy with one of the servants. The Polish garrison was to withdraw to the outer bailey and burn the bridge on the moat, which made impossible to capture the entire castle complex. The main part of the castle was recaptured in 1461, after an eleven-month siege by mercenaries paid by the Toruń city council. Long fighting, including a four-month defense of bergfried tower itself, led to extensive damages to the castle.
   Between 1461 and 1502, Świecie Castle was owned by the Toruń city council, which ordered repairs and reconstruction, including the upper part of the northwestern tower. In 1469 renovation and construction work was carried out on the bridge, in 1471 the roofs were repaired, and in 1472 the bridge and other damages to the castle bailey were repaired again. In 1478, a carpenter was supposed to carry out work on the gate and the dansker, while in 1482 and 1483, workers from Toruń drove piles for the bridge and carried out other repairs. A year later, a new well was built in the main courtyard, and work on the roofs resumed. In 1502, the Toruń city council relinquished its share in favor of Łukasz Mełdzyński, the starost of Rogóźno. Five years later, the king purchased half of Świecie from him and the other half from the starost of Świecie, Mikołaj Kościelecki, and then, at the request of the Prussian states, transferred it to the new starost, Jerzy Konopacki. The last claims of the Toruń city council to Świecie were satisfied in 1520.
   In the third quarter of the 16th century, the castle was rebuilt in the Renaissance style by Jerzy Konopacki, the castellan of Chełmno, son of the starost of the same name. After 1579, it was administered by starosts from other families, while the castle premises served as starost offices. In 1655, Świecie was captured by the Swedes, which contributed to enormous destructions. The burnt building began to gradually deteriorate, until after 1772 the Prussian authorities began the demolition of the southern and eastern wings of the upper ward. Fortunately, slightening was interrupted in 1843 as a result of the decision of Frederick William IV, and in 1859 repair works began. Partial reconstruction of the castle took place after World War II.

Architecture

   The castle was situated in the forks of the Vistula and Wda rivers, as a two-part complex, consisting of the commandry’s house (upper ward) and the outer ward. From the west access to it was defended by the fortified town, transferred from its original location on the slope after 1338. Initially, the Vistula was flowing almost under the walls of the castle, and the bank of the Wda, unlike the current state, was about 30 meters away. On the eastern side of the castle, at the mouth of Wda, there was a natural triangular spur. From the west, an outer bailey was preceded by a wide moat, nearly 40 meters wide, connecting the Wda and Wisła. Another moat protected the upper ward on three sides, however, it was not connected with the Vistula along its entire width, because it was closed by a dam from the east. Probably the banks of the moats on the north and east sides were covered with wood or surrounded with a palisade. Perhaps they were not always filled with water, it  was flooded as needed through the culverts.
   The walled outer bailey measured approximately 95 x 90 meters. In the middle of the section of the western wall there was a four-sided tower, flanking the entrance gate located on its southern side. The buildings in the courtyard of the outer bailey included the commander’s house, standing on the Vistula side, at the southern curtain. It must have been a large house, because it had a basement, on the ground floor it housed the quarters of secular serving knights (dieners), and on the first floor there was the commander’s apartment. In the vicinity, i.e. also from the south, there was a stable, while the coach house recorded in documents, if it was a separate building from the mentioned stable, must have been located near the northern curtain. In addition to the above buildings, there was a barn, probably built on the western side, and there must have been other economic buildings in the outer bailey (e.g. a forge). Most likely, together with the infirmary, they were located at the northern section of the defensive wall.
   In the eastern part of the outer bailey, there was a gate leading to a wooden bridge, which rested on either masonry piers or timber posts. Beyond this bridge stood another gate, positioned along the line of the zwinger of the upper ward. It may have been housed within a small gatehouse or topped by a superstructure built onto the zwinger wall, as it was reportedly equipped with a drawbridge, raised by chains connected to an operating mechanism. It is possible that the entrance was divided into a larger main gateway for riders and wagons, and a smaller wicket gate for pedestrians, which had its own separate drawbridge. Past this gate, a paved passageway cut through the zwinger, with side walls contained small doorways that led into the remaining part of the zwinger (the space between the inner and outer walls) surrounding the entire upper ward.

   The upper ward had a regular square plan with a side of approximately 51 meters, with a gate on the western side. The complex was probably initially planned as a four-wing structure, but eventually received two large, perpendicular wings, the most important of which, occupying the entire width of the side, was the northern wing, while the eastern one had a length shortened by the width of the first one. The buildings on the southern and western sides were much more modest and probably did not exceed the curtains of the defensive wall to which they were added. The courtyard, measuring approximately 26 x 26 meters, was surrounded by cloisters, but located only at the northern and eastern wings. The cloisters had brick pillars, which are not known to have been completed. They were not topped with vaults, but only with a wooden walkway at the first floor level.
   At the corners of the upper ward stood four cylindrical towers, integrated into the defensive walls and projecting three-quarters of their circumference in front of the wall face. The main tower, located in the northwest corner, with a diameter of 10.2 meters, wall thickness of 3.5 meters, and a height of approximately 36 meters, served as a bergfried. The other three towers were significantly lower, roughly matching the height of the perimeter wall, with diameters ranging from 9.3 meters (northeast) to 10.2 meters (both southern towers). They were closely integrated with the castle structures and the defensive walls, could be accessed from the buildings, and their interiors were connected to the wall-walks. They functioned as flanking towers, providing mutual coverage and protection for the zwinger. This was an unconventional feature in 14th-century Teutonic Knights architecture, likely adopted from Western European building traditions, possibly from the Rhineland (e.g., Zülpich Castle), where it had, in turn, been influenced by French models (e.g.,  Coucy Castle).
   The core of the upper ward was surrounded on all four sides by a lower outer wall, 1.8–1.9 meters thick, which created the aforementioned zwinger, measuring 9.5–10.5 meters in width. Its corners were reinforced with projecting sections, though extended only about 30–50 cm in front of the face of the wall, a distance less than the thickness of the wall itself. On the southern side of the castle stood a dansker – latrine tower, positioned outside the main defensive perimeter. A passage led to it, extending from the eastern cloister and continuing across a gallery supported by an arch over the space between the inner and outer walls. The dansker tower rose along the bank of the Vistula River, attached to the outer face of the defensive wall, a configuration typical of Prussian castles (Grudziądz, Malbork). The zwinger itself, serving a defensive purpose, was initially undeveloped; however, by the 15th century, it housed a tailor’s dwelling, likely constructed of timber. Furthermore, this area between the walls may have served as a burial ground for the knight brothers (presumably on the northern side, beneath the windows of the castle church), and it may also have contained drainage channels for waste from the castle’s service quarters.
   The main tower was erected upon a high plinth built of carefully hewn granite blocks. Up to a height of 12 meters, the brickwork featured facades decorated with rhomboidal patterns made of zendrówka (vitrified, dark-fired bricks). Throughout its entire height, the tower was also marked by putlog holes, recesses left by the scaffolding used during construction. For three-quarters of its circumference, the tower rested on its own independent foundation, while the remaining section was supported by a robust squinch (arch-corbel) located in the northwestern corner of the north wing, which transferred the weight of the tower’s upper part onto the castle’s perimeter walls. The upper section of the tower was crowned with crenellations and machicolations, supported by sixteen stepped stone corbels and brick wall piers. Access to the main tower was provided from the northern wing via a drawbridge located on the southwestern side, positioned at a height of 14–15 meters. The drawbridge section connected at a right angle to what was likely a fixed wall-walk belonging to the northern wing. It could be raised from inside the tower, measured approximately 2.4 meters in length and 1.3 meters in width, and, when lifted, completely sealed the entrance, preventing access to the tower. Furthermore, the semicircular-arched entrance must have been fitted with a sturdy door.
   The interior of the main tower was divided into eight levels, each containing circular chambers. The three lowest levels, situated below the entrance, were covered by domed vaults and connected via openings in these vaults, through which ladders or ropes could be lowered. The first two chambers were ventilated by ducts built into the thickness of the walls: one running diagonally from the second to the third level, and another, vertical, circular shaft with a diameter of 0.6 meters, extending from the very bottom to the highest floor of the tower. In addition to providing ventilation, this shaft could have served as a hoist for transporting goods, such as water drawn from a well at the very base, or as a speaking tube. The second level measured 5.2 meters in height and 2.8 meters in diameter. The third level was the tallest, reaching approximately 10 meters. The fourth level, with a diameter of 3.5 meters and a height of 4 meters, contained the tower’s entrance, which featured a vestibule set within the thickness of the wall. A second vestibule, which could be bolted from the inside, provided access to a staircase 1.6 to 2 meters wide. The passage from the first vestibule into the main chamber could also be bolted, though from the outside, likely because the chamber contained a prison cell, or perhaps to prevent anyone from inadvertently entering a space that featured a central opening in the floor.
   From the fourth level upward, all the tower’s chambers were connected by a spiral staircase built into the thickness of the wall. Traditionally, it was designed to turn to the right, making it difficult for those entering to use weapons. All the upper chambers were covered by domes featuring massive cross-ribs, and each was illuminated by a single narrow slit opening. On the seventh level, there was also a latrine for the guards. The space on the eighth level had a slightly larger diameter than the rooms below, 4.2 meters instead of 3.5 meters, due to a reduction in the thickness of the walls. It also featured a larger window overlooking the Vistula River, as well as a hearth with a segmental vaulted hood and a chimney built into the thickness of the wall. This fireplace would have served the guards on cold days and was also essential during sieges for heating pitch or oil.

   The main northern wing was positioned parallel to the Wda River. It measured 12.8 meters in width and 51 meters in length, with wall thicknesses ranging from 2.6 meters (the outer walls) to 1.9 meters (on the courtyard side). It was constructed of bricks using a Flemish bond, set upon a high foundation of quarried granite. The interior comprised three primary levels. As was typical in other Teutonic castles, the cellar and ground floor served utilitarian purposes, while the upper floor functioned as the principal level for ceremonial and religious use. At the very top of the wing was a low storage and defensive section, likely consisting of two levels above the lower refectory and one level above the higher chapel. Within the thickness of the walls at the attic level, there was also a defensive gallery that encircled the entire wing, connecting to the galleries of the adjacent structures and the main tower.
   The cellar of the northern wing consisted of an eight-bay chamber measuring 44.9 by 8.2 meters, with a height of 3.2 meters. It featured a cross-rib vault with broad ribs and transverse arch bands, partitioned by two narrow barrel-vaulted sections. Access was provided via a passage from the courtyard, which formed a landing in front of the portal. This landing was covered by a cross-rib vault reinforced with a transverse arch on the side facing the stairs. Recesses, fitted with wooden shelving, were set into the eastern and southern walls. Beyond the doors lay further niches with segmental arches, likely used for storing keys and portable light sources. In the third bay from the west, a hypocaustum furnace was situated in the cellar. It consisted of two chambers: a lower one serving as a firebox, and an upper one at ground-floor level, which accumulated heated air via stones arranged on a brick grate. A chimney, extending from the rear of the furnace, served to vent the smoke.
   The ground floor of the north wing consisted of an open space without permanent masonry partitions, though a temporary partition made of non-durable materials may have originally existed. It is probable that the ground floor was divided into two rooms, both covered by semi-cylindrical barrel vaults featuring lunettes for window and portal openings. Each room had its own entrance from the courtyard level; the western room, in fact, was accessed via two separate portals. The western room was illuminated by three narrow, slit-like windows on the north side and one on the west, all featuring high sills. The eastern room was lit and ventilated by three similar slit-like openings on the north side and one on the east. The entire ground floor was characterized by a modest architectural form, consistent with its functional, utilitarian purpose.
   On the upper floor, in the eastern section of the north wing, there was a five-bay chapel measuring 23.2 × 8.4 meters, covered by a rib stellar vault. The ribs descended onto shafts, which in turn rested on limestone corbels decorated with tracery motifs. The chapel was illuminated by three tall, splayed windows on both the north and south sides (arranged asymmetrically) and a single window on the east side. These windows were pointed, glazed, and likely featured tracery, though their moulding was relatively simple. Access was provided from the cloister through a pointed, moulded portal aligned with the central window. The door located there could be bolted from the inside. A passage was cut into the north wall, leading to a staircase that descended to the basement of the north-east tower. Opposite this was an entrance to a spiral staircase, set within the thickness of the wall, that led to the attic. In the north-east corner, there was a passage to a chamber within the tower, which may have served as a sacristy, while the west wall contained a passage leading to the refectory. Additionally, the chapel featured two wall niches: one semicircular and one with a segmental arch, as well as a pointed-arched recess for sedilia, framed by a rectangular niche decorated with frescoes. The western bay of the chapel was slightly narrower than the others, suggesting it may have housed a gallery supported by stone corbels attached to the walls. The chapel walls were originally adorned with paintings, likely depicting figural scenes, complemented by an ornamental frieze running beneath the vault corbels. Furthermore, the interior of the chapel may have been decorated with banners, and according to the records, with crossbows hung on the walls, in a rather unusual fashion.
   The western part of the north wing was occupied by a four-bay refectory measuring 21.5 × 8.5 meters. It featured a vaulted ceiling, constructed in a manner similar to that of the chapel, with ribs descending onto shafts and corbels. The ends of the wall arches were decorated with polychrome in black, green and red. The ribs and the vault were also adorned with painted decoration. The walls featured secular-themed murals, as well as a frieze running beneath the windows, consisting of a two-colored ribbon surrounded by pink and green leaves. Above this ribbon was a heraldic frieze, and in some sections, a frieze incorporating animal and plant motifs. The refectory was heated by a hypocaustum furnace located in the cellar, from which warm air rose through openings in the floor. Despite its smaller dimensions, the refectory was illuminated by the same number of pointed-arched windows as the chapel. Because the refectory had a lower ceiling, its windows were positioned at a lower level and were not as tall as those in the adjacent room. On the interior side, the windows featured very steeply sloped sills, while on the exterior they were splayed (the northern windows were splayed on both the interior and exterior sides). Access to the refectory was provided from the cloister through a moulded, pointed portal, which niche was covered on the inside by a segmental barrel vault. The door within the portal could be closed with a bar.
   The eastern wing featured a similar functional layout: cellars and a ground floor dedicated to storage and utility purposes, an upper floor serving as a residential and formal area, and an attic used for storage and defense. Access to the cellar was provided via a stair passage that turned at a right angle. The landing in front of the portal was covered by a segmental barrel vault. Just beyond this, within the thickness of the wall was a passageway leading to a staircase that ascended to the ground floor. The cellar was divided into two chambers. The larger, southern one was covered by a barrel vault, though it also bore traces of an intended, but never completed groin vault. In the northern part of the cellar lay a smaller room featuring a central pillar that supported two arches. These arches divided the space into two smaller areas: a western section with a barrel vault aligned with the axis of the wing, and an eastern section covered by a monastery vault. Both spaces connected to the main southern cellar chamber through pointed-arched openings. It is possible that a brewing furnace was originally located within this area. The ground floor was divided into two rooms, with the northern one containing a furnace and a chimney. In the Middle Ages, this space may have housed a bakery and a malthouse. On the upper floor, the eastern wing likely contained a cross-vaulted dormitory, as well as perhaps another refectory (or another representative hall).
   The smaller buildings on the western and southern sides of the courtyard likely lacked cellars, with the exception of a small basement beneath the central section of the western wing. On its ground floor, in addition to the gate passage, there may have been a guardroom and storage areas, possibly including an armory. The gate passage itself could be secured with gate and a portcullis. The western wing also featured an upper floor, perhaps intended for the commander or the brethren. It certainly contained a dedicated space above the gate, which may have housed the mechanism for operating the portcullis, along with an opening facing the passage through the zwinger. The ground floor of the southern wing may have contained a kitchen and a pantry. Above this, the southern wing also had an upper floor, accessible via stairs built into the thickness of the wall, which may have served as a storage area. In its eastern section, there must have been a passageway leading to the latrine tower. The western and southern wings were most likely covered by a mono-pitch roofs, which rested against the perimeter wall of the upper ward.
   Inside the north-eastern tower, the two lowest levels spanned the height of three stories of the eastern wing. At the basement level, there was a chamber with a diameter of 3 meters, hypothetically used as a dungeon or prison. It stood approximately 6 meters high, with a barrel vault positioned at the same level as the ground floor of the adjacent wing. Ventilation and light were provided by a single narrow slit, which featured a steeply rising, stepped sill. Access to the chamber was gained from the chapel located on the upper floor of the northern wing, via a long staircase built into the thickness of the wall, 2.2 meters high, with a width that tapered toward the bottom. Above this was a room that functioned as a sacristy. It was circular in plan, with a diameter of 4 meters, and was covered by a domed vault at a height of just over 7 meters. Its only source of light was a small, pointed window with splayed reveals on both sides. Higher up, there was likely another circular room, accessible from the defensive gallery of the northern wing. According to the records, this space may have served as a prison for Teutonic Knights.
   The south-eastern tower contained at ground level a circular chamber 3 meters in diameter and slightly over 6 meters in height, enclosed by walls 3.5 to 3.7 meters thick. Two opposing channels ran through this space. While they descended vertically within the thickness of the wall, they angled outward beyond the masonry near the floor level. In the floor of the room, there was a small opening leading into a cellar chamber, 1.8 meters in diameter, into which both channels emptied. The chamber was covered by a brick barrel vault and was completely dark. There was no entrance to it, as the aforementioned opening in the vault was too small for a person to pass through. It must have functioned as a well, from which water was drawn into the upper rooms via the channels. On the upper floor, the room in the southeastern tower may have been functionally linked to the dormitory, while the room on the top floor could have served as a guard post.
   The castle in Świecie was the only one of the Teutonic commandry buildings built until the mid-14th century that was characterized by the use of the technique of flanking the foreground and a gate with a high, cylindrical tower equipped with prominent machicolations. This was due to the fact that until the 13th century, conquering Teutonic castles was beyond the technical capabilities of potential opponents: the Prussians and Lithuanians. With the change of the political situation and a new opponent – Poland, the need to develop fortifications began to be noticed. As a result, after the construction of a new-shaped castle in Świecie, strongholds were built in Brodnica, Bytów and Barciany with more progressive defense capabilities. The castle in Świecie was probably built with the participation of an architect of Rhine origin, who took over solutions already used in Prussia (commandry castle) and enriched them with elements found outside the Teutonic Knights’ borders (circular flanking tower, machicolations).
 
Current state


   The partially rebuilt northern wing of the upper ward has survived to this day, along with the main tower topped with machicolations and the partially reconstructed north-eastern tower, currently approximately 11 meters high. Only the vaulted basement rooms have survived from the eastern wing. The lower parts of the two remaining corner towers and short fragments of the curtains connecting them and the outer wall of the zwinger also are visible. In the area of the former bailey, only faint remains of the defensive wall in the north-east corner are visible. After renovation and construction works carried out in recent months, the castle has been reopened to visitors (among others the elevations have been renewed, the vaults have been reconstructed, and a roof is planned over the northern wing). The monument is open from Tuesday to Sunday, from 10:00 to 17:00.

show this monument on map

return to alphabetical index

bibliography:
Leksykon zamków w Polsce, red. L.Kajzer, Warszawa 2003.
Spławska-Korczak M., Zamek krzyżacki w Świeciu. Próba rekonstrukcji zamku wysokiego w średniowieczu, Toruń 2014.
Steinbrecht C., Die Ordensburgen der Hochmeisterzeit in Preussen, Berlin 1920.
Torbus T., Zamki konwentualne państwa krzyżackiego w Prusach, Gdańsk 2014.
Torbus T., Zamki konwentualne państwa krzyżackiego w Prusach, część II, katalog, Gdańsk 2023.
Wasik B., Zamek w Świeciu. Topografia i technika budowy zamku krzyżackiego, “Komunikaty mazursko-warmińskie”, nr 2/2018.