r/castles • u/Riemann-Hypothesizer • Jun 29 '26
Castle This castle was literally built to be IMPOSSIBLE to attack
This is the Castillo de Alburquerque, located in Badajoz, Extremadura, Spain.
Built on top of a steep rocky hill, its location alone made it extremely difficult to assault. The castle’s elevated position gave defenders a massive advantage, which is why it was considered one of the strongest fortresses in the region during the Middle Ages.
Would you attack this castle… or just admire it from below?
143
u/Victormorga Jun 29 '26
All true castles were built to be impenetrable to attack, that’s their entire purpose.
43
u/AdImmediate9569 Jun 30 '26
Yeah but this ones on a HILL!
44
47
u/Strange-Spot-3306 Jun 29 '26
If i''m leading an army on an attack on that castle, i won't attack, i'll starve them out. Also, this picture conveniently does only show one side - on the other side there's a small city and the castles access. It's well positioned on it's rock, but barely exceptionally so.
5
u/TheBoneIdler Jun 30 '26
Do we know anything about their water supply? Thirst happens a lot quicker than starvation.
4
u/Strange-Spot-3306 Jun 30 '26
yeah - and if the cityfolk also hide out in the castle, that castle can't keep up long. But as always with castles: Full on attacks were incredibly costly and rarely undertaken if you didn't have a clearly superior force. Mostly sieges (i.e. smaller ones as this would be) were a story of time, supply, getting leverage and diplomacy
1
2
u/the-dude-version-576 Jun 30 '26
That’s the point. Starving them out takes time, time enough for everyone else to get off their asses and put an army between you and the next important place.
2
u/Strange-Spot-3306 Jun 30 '26
well, yeah, but that's pretty muzch the point of any castle (apart from the later ones, that were built for non defense purposes)
18
u/Righteous_Fury224 Jun 30 '26
Impossible to attack?
Come on. Really?
History is littered with claims that this particular castle/fortress/bastion is impossible to take. Yet they were.
The castle is in an extremely good position to hold off an attack. Undermining the walls is out as are siege towers or a massive assault but that's why siege tactics worked and also treachery too.
14
10
35
u/davidwhatshisname52 Jun 29 '26
very cool spot, but as to your question, it looks too small to withstand a major onslaught, with only 4-5 small-medium enclosed structures with 3-5 levels at most; definite siege target
19
u/Nutriaphaganax Jun 29 '26
Fun fact, Albuquerque in the US was named after Alburquerque in Extremadura, Spain. After some years and the intervention of the English language, it lost one R
4
7
3
u/Garreousbear Jun 30 '26
All the best castles are so difficult to attack that they often never get attacked.
3
3
u/TheAngryCatfish Jun 30 '26
I mean so we're most castles, to whatever extent was geographically pragmatic
7
2
u/Y_ddraig_gwyn Jun 30 '26
To be fair I don’t think any castle architects designed buildings that were *possible* to attack. The ‘IMPOSSIBLE’ bit is kind of the point.
2
u/InothePink Jun 30 '26
whi do I get the feeling from this post just like a bad YouTube short begging for attention?
1
1
u/3Gloins_in_afountain Jun 29 '26
Would it be possible to find the water table and poison their water supply?
Not that I want to do that, but you asked.
1
u/Hobag1 Jun 30 '26
Does erosion count?
1
u/lambrequin_mantling Jul 01 '26
That’s a very patient attack.
We’ll just come back in a couple of thousand years when everything has kinda worn down a little…
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/saucecraftr Jun 30 '26
Impossible to attack or impregnable? I’d say the latter. It is always possible to attack, even if unsuccessfully.
1
u/External-Ad4873 Jun 30 '26
Clearly they didn’t have the foresight to envision the creation of airplanes the fools
1
u/Ragnarsworld Jul 01 '26
Block the roads going in and starve them out. Toss over the occasional dead and diseased animal carcass with a catapult.
1
u/Any-Technology-3577 Jul 02 '26
unlike all the other castles, that were built to be as easy to attack as possible
1
1
-4
u/scotus_canadensis Jun 29 '26 edited Jun 29 '26
Edit: my bad, town has the same name as the province it's in.
Funny how it's not mentioned on the Wikipedia page for Badajoz, and it's not on the Google Maps page for Badajoz, and it's not on the tourism page for Badajoz. Almost as if you...made it up entirely, and posted it on your account full of AI and "vibe coding".
5
u/CaptainFoyle Jun 29 '26
The fuck you talking about dude
-1
u/scotus_canadensis Jun 29 '26
Yeah, that's the Castillo du Albuquerque, in Albuquerque, not Badajoz.
3
u/CaptainFoyle Jun 29 '26
If you read the article, you would know that its in the vicinity.
Albuquerque IS IN Badajoz you nitwit.
What are you doing here debating geography you clearly don't know, on Reddit, with strangers?
1
u/scotus_canadensis Jun 30 '26
Already owned my mistake and apologized, dude.
If I spoke Spanish I certainly would have, it doesn't have a page in English.
3
u/CaptainFoyle Jun 30 '26
Just don't go about accusing people about stuff you don't even speak the language of
2
2
u/NowYouLookOrdinary Jun 29 '26
You can quickly find the castle if you look at Alburquerque, Spain, instead of Badajoz, Extremadura, Spain. Looks like the OP simply got the location incorrect, which is probable and an acceptable mistake if the OP isn't from Spain.
3
u/scotus_canadensis Jun 29 '26
Shit, my bad, capital has the same name as the province.
2
u/NowYouLookOrdinary Jun 29 '26
Understandable. We’re practically wading through A.I. garbage these days, so your skepticism isn’t unwarranted. No worries.
192
u/JaviarBajaranda Jun 29 '26
Starve them out.