For over 300 years, Aħrax Tower has been standing guard over Tat-Torri Bay and the South Comino Channel. The Knights of St John consolidated their presence and control over the island through the construction of such towers.

Aħrax Tower, together with Torre Rossa and Torre Selmun, would have offered some sense of security to those inhabitants wishing to reside and till the fields in the deserted Aħrax peninsula.

Graphic reconstruction of Aħrax Tower and its 1715 battery based on the remains of the northern enclosing wall and the 1906 British survey sheet. Photo Courtesy of Dr Stephen C. Spiteri

Nowadays, the situation is completely different. The dynamism of the area and the presence of various ‘boat houses’ hugging Tat-Torri Bay offers a sharp contrast to the barren garigue landscape that Aħrax Tower would have safeguarded in the late 17th century.

Aħrax Tower formed part of a chain of defensive towers erected between 1658 and 1659 at the expense of Grand Master Martin De Redin. It was the sixth tower to be built in the series of 13 De Redin towers. It was completed by the end of November 1658 at a cost of 590 scudi. Aħrax Tower shares most of the characteristics of the other De Redin towers.

Until 1715, Aħrax Tower lay alone guarding the Fliegu coastline. In the early years of the 18th century, the Order embarked on a highly ambitious programme to defend each and every vulnerable bay or inlet with batteries, redoubts and entrenchments.

The Aħrax coastline facing Comino was fitted with three batteries and four redoubts. Batteria della Harach (Aħrax Battery) was constructed next to the De Redin Tower in order to repel any enemy ships approaching that particular area.

Aħrax Battery was constructed next to De Redin Tower to repel enemy ships approaching that area

Coastal batteries were meant to open fire on enemy ships to try and stop them from disembarking their troops ashore. They mainly consisted of three essential elements – a gun platform, one or two blockhouses and an enclosing free-standing loopholed V-shaped wall known as a redan.

Aħrax Battery consists of a semi-circular gun platform facing Ir-Ramla tat-Torri l-Abjad and a blockhouse abutting the western wall of the tower. The semi-circular gun platform is surrounded by a shallow ditch and a glacis made up of rubble stones dug up from the ditch.

Unlike other batteries, Batteria della Harach’s semi-circular gun platform was ringed with a low parapet, without any embrasures, i.e., its guns were meant to fire en barbette. This implied that these guns were meant to fire over a parapet as opposed to through an embrasure. In fact, the Order’s records of expenses entitled Misura e Conto Sommario dell’ Opere di Fortificationi fatte nel lido delle marine dell’ isole di Malta, Chemunna e Gozzo nell’ anni 1715 e 1716, fail to mention any troniere, cannoniere or merlon (words that refer to embrasures) when it comes to Batteria della Harach, further stressing the en barbette gun arrangement.

In the latter-mentioned Order’s records of expenses in the Batteria della Harach, 20 scudi were spent on feritori (musketry loopholes). Since the blockhouse lacks any visible evidence of musketry loopholes, this might imply that some sort of enclosing walls were built, which in turn were pierced with such loopholes. A report on the condition of coastal fortifications elegantly handwritten by Col. George Whitmore in 1829 attests to the presence of a loopholed wall that closed off Aħrax Battery’s gorge.

A careful study of the structures on this site back in 2012 revealed the presence of a thick wall built from masonry which is quite similar to that of the blockhouse. This is placed diagonally, adjacent to the northern wall of the tower. This wall does not reach the edge of the semi-circular gun platform as it appears to have been dismantled about two-thirds of its length from the tower.

Interestingly, at the edge of the semi-circular gun platform, one can appreciate two types of masonry, i.e., neatly cut masonry blocks resting alongside the plastered pietra a secco revetment of the scarp wall. The presence of these neatly cut masonry blocks may indicate that these served as some sort of foundation for the enclosing wall. This would imply that originally the enclosing wall linked up to the edge of the gun platform. Could it be that the mentioned thick wall formed part of the enclosing wall that the battery was given in 1715?

The rock-hewn ditch around the gun platform. Note the two types of masonry used where the gun platform ends, i.e.: neatly cut masonry blocks resting alongside the plastered pietra a secco revetment of the scarp wall. Photo: Author’s collection

A 1906 British survey sheet seems to support the latter theory as it shows what can be interpreted as the remains of two diagonally-placed walls on both the northern and southern sides of the tower. This might imply that until 1906, there was some sort of standing structure on the southern side of the tower as well, similar to that which survives on the northern end. Could these represent the two enclosing walls that were part of the original 1715 battery landward enclosure?

Unfortunately, no trace whatsoever of the southern enclosing wall remains to be seen above ground nowadays. This may mean that this wall might have already been in ruins at the time (1906) and was probably cleared away at some later stage as it had become a source of inconvenience to the occupants of the tower.

The area around the tower is nowadays covered by a layer of concrete, making it very difficult to trace the foundations of such a wall. The presence of this presumed southern enclosing wall and its approximate date of construction can only be ascertained by an archaeological investigation of the site.

However, the arrangement of the tower, the blockhouse, the semi-circular gun platform, and the proposed configuration of the enclosing walls do not quite correspond to a 1761 Hospitaller plan entitled Pianta Ideale del Golfo della Melleha e delli Freghi con li Trincieramenti da Farsi.

According to this 1761 plan, Aħrax Tower had two enclosing walls erected at two of its corners in such a way so as to secure the landward approach to the gun platform while, at the same time, using two of the tower’s outer walls to serve as a redan. In addition, this plan fails to show the blockhouse, while the gun platform is depicted in the shape of a major arc rather than that of the existing semi-circle, thus extending its cover to Daħlet ix-Xmajjar inlet as well.

Detail from 1906 survey sheet showing the Aħrax Tower and Battery (yellow box). The white box shows a zoomed-in image with the walls on the tower's northern and southern sides indicated by red arrows. Photo courtesy of The National Archives of Malta

Detail from the 1761 plan revealing a different configuration of the Aħrax Tower and Battery compared to that of the 1906 survey sheet. The two walls emerge from two corners of the diagonally placed tower. Photo courtesy of The National Library of Malta

Hence, the layout of Aħrax Battery is very intriguing as the Order’s 1761 plan and the surviving remains of this tower-battery complex do not match. This raises various questions, as in most instances, these 1761 plans almost invariably provided correct details about the various coastal batteries and redoubts. It seems, however, that Batteria della Harach may be an exception. The surviving evidence is open to interpretation. One possibility may be that the battery built in 1715 had to undergo some alterations in order to provide additional defence to the other adjacent inlet, i.e. Daħlet ix-Xmajjar.

Unfortunately, the answers to the former questions are not as simple as one may think. The fact that the tower underwent various significant alterations during the British era and later in the 20th century, makes this issue a complex one.

Military engineers experimented with the configuration of blockhouses and redans when designing coastal batteries, creating a wide variety of designs. However, the Batteria della Harach bears a unique configuration. Its layout meant that the eastern wall of the tower was completely exposed to the enemy. This arrangement is very peculiar, as it makes this strategic tower-battery complex at Aħrax a very poorly designed fortified enclosure. It is defective in its most basic principles of defence, given that the area at the foot of the eastern wall of the tower could not be enfiladed in any way, thus creating a dangerous stretch of dead ground.

Remains of the proposed northern enclosing wall of the Batteria della Harach. Photo: Author’s collection

Batteria della Harach’s blockhouse. Photo: Author’s collection

A close inspection of Aħrax Tower’s eastern wall reveals corbel supports for a box machicoulis. The machicoulis (Maltese: gallerija tal-misħun) was a medieval form of defence in which stones, boiling oil or hot water could be dropped onto the attackers at the base of the tower. However, in this case, the machicoulis did not serve a defensive role but constituted a retardataire feature (i.e., a feature that harps to bygone times) with its main function being that of a water spout to drain rainwater from the tower’s roof.

Hence, the tower’s eastern wall was very vulnerable to a landward attack. This is why most batteries employed a V-shaped redan trace in order to eliminate such a threat. It would seem then, that the enclosing walls of the Batteria della Harach were mainly added simply to enclose the gorge and protect the gun crew from incoming shots, designed to work more in the form of flanking traverses rather than defensible perimeter walls.

The recently restored Aħrax tower and battery. Photo: Author’s collection

In conclusion, given the above findings, the 1761 Hospitaller plan might reveal the military engineers’ proposal to improve the design of this strategic outpost by completely changing its configuration. If the 1761 plan had been implemented, Aħrax Battery would have acquired greater offensive qualities through a larger gun platform, as well as better defensive qualities with the elimination of the defective 1715 landward enclosure and the addition of a redan trace entrenchment surrounding the whole battery. These reflect the importance of this northernmost strategic outpost. Yet, the 1903 British survey sheet and the surviving remains at Aħrax reveal that the 1761 plan never materialised.

Passers-by will not ponder on the tower’s incongruous plans as they are too focused on admiring the views that the area provides. The cream-coloured facade of Aħrax Tower brought about by its recent restoration contrasts nicely with the blue water and the golden sand dunes juxtaposed with green vegetation. This is a graceful scene only ruined by the ill-fitting ‘boathouses’.

Acknowledgments

The author thanks Stephen C. Spiteri, Jeffrey Sammut, Stanley Farrugia Randon and the staff at the National Library and National Archives of Malta for their assistance in the compilation of this article. In his research, the author also referred to Fortifications of the Knights Hospitallers in Mellieħa by Jonathan Muscat and the late Jimmy Muscat.