Ottoman–Hungarian

Wars
1366-1566

From Wikipedia 2011

A Knight of the Ungarian Black Army 1463-1494
Actions of the Black Army after the death of King Matthias
 Ottoman–Hungarian Wars 1366-1526
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Battle of Nándorfehérvár (now Belgrade, Serbia), Anachronistic Hungarian painting from the 19th century. In the
middle Giovanni da Capistrano with the cross in his hand.

Date 1366 to 1526+[1]

Location Balkans and Kingdom of Hungary
Result partway Ottoman victory, Hungarian Kingdom partitioned

Belligerents

Hungary † Hungarian allies: Kingdom of

Croatia Wallachia Moldavia Serbian Ottoman Empire
Despotate

Commanders and leaders

King of Hungary Ottoman Sultan
Strength
[2] [3]
~20,000 - 60,000 Capable of raising 100,000 men

Ottoman–Hungarian Wars
Campaign of Louis I (1) – Treviso – Campaign of Louis I (2) – Nicopolis – Doboj – Radkersburg – Golubac – Lower Danube War
– Smederevo – Szeben – Iron Gate – Niš – Zlatitsa - Várna – Kosovo – Nándorfehérvár (1456) – Jajce – Vaslui – Breadfield –
Krbava field – Otranto – Mohács (1526) – Campaign of 1527–28 – Little War (1530-52) – Kőszeg – Buda(1541) – Campaign of
1543 – Eger (1552) – Szigetvár – Eger (1596) – Keresztes – Saint Gotthard – Vienna (1683) – Buda (1686) – Mohács (1687) –
Slankamen – Zenta – Petrovaradin
see also:
Ottoman–Habsburg wars
The Ottoman-Hungarian War refers to a series of battles between the Ottoman Empire and the medieval Kingdom of Hungary.
Following the Byzantine civil war, the Ottoman capture of Gallipoli and the decisive Battle of Kosovo, the Ottoman Empire
seemed poised to conquer the whole of the Balkans. However, the Ottoman invasion of Serbia drove Hungary to war against the
Ottomans, with the former having interests in the Balkans and competing for the vassalship of the Balkan states of Serbia,
Bulgaria, Wallachia, and Moldavia. Initial Hungarian success culminated in the Crusade of Varna, though without significant
outside support the Hungarians were defeated. Nonetheless the Ottomans suffered more defeats at Belgrade, even after the
conquest of Constantinople. In particular was the infamous Vlad the Impaler who with limited Hungarian help resisted Ottoman
rule until the Ottomans were able to place his brother, a man less feared and less hated by the populace on the throne of Wallachia.
Ottoman success was once again halted at Moldavia due to Hungarian intervention but the Turks emerged triumphant at last when
Moldavia and then Belgrade fell to Bayezid II and Suleiman the Magnificent respectively. In 1526 the Ottomans crushed the
Hungarian army at Mohács with King Louis II of Hungary perishing along with 14,000 of his foot soldiers. Following this defeat,
the eastern region of the Kingdom of Hungary (mainly Transylvania) ceased as an independent power and served as an Ottoman
tributary state, constantly engaged in civil war with Royal Hungary. The war continued with the Habsburgs now asserting primacy
in the conflict with the Suleiman and his successors. The northern and western parts of Hungary managed to remain free from
Ottoman rule, but the Kingdom of Hungary, the most powerful state east of Vienna under Matthias I, was now divided and at
constant war with the Turks.
Background In the century after the death of Osman I, Ottoman rule began to extend over the Eastern Mediterranean and the
Balkans. The important city of Thessaloniki was captured from the Venetians in 1387, and the Turkish victory at the Battle of
Kosovo in 1389 effectively marked the end of Serbian power in the region, paving the way for Ottoman expansion into the rest of
Europe. The Battle of Nicopolis is thought to be the first significant encounter between Hungary and the Ottoman Empire, where a
broad alliance of Christian monarchs and the Knights Hospitaller were defeated by a numerically superior Turkish army (the
Ottomans had also enlisted the support of their new vassal, the Serbian Despotate).
Balkan and Turkish wars of Louis the Great Louis I of Hungary (King: 1342-1382) In 1344 Wallachia and Moldavia became
Louis's vassal.[4] Louis with his ernomous 80.000 strong army repelled the Serbian Dušan's armies in vojvodine of Mačva and
principality of Travunia in 1349. when Czar Dusan broke into Bosnian territory he was defeated by Bosnian Stjepan II with the
assistance of King Louis' troops, and when Dušan made a second attempt he was decisively beaten by his luckier rival, King Louis
the Great himself, in 1354.[5] The two monarchs signed the peace agreement in 1355. His latter campaigns in the Balkans were
aimed not so much at conquest and subjugation as at drawing the Serbs, Bosnians, Wallachians and Bulgarians into the fold of the
Roman Catholic faith and at forming a united front against the looming Turkish menace. In 1366 John V Byzantine Emperor
visited Hungary to beg for help against Turks. It was relatively easy to subdue Balkanian Orthodox countries by arms, but to
convert them was a different matter. Despite Lajos' efforts, the peoples of the Balkans remained faithful to the Eastern Orthodox
Church and their attitude toward Hungary remained ambiguous. Louis annexed Moldavia in 1352 and established a vassal
principality there, before conquering Vidin in 1365. The rulers of Serbia, Walachia, Moldavia, and Bulgaria became his vassals.
They regarded powerful Hungary as a potential menace to their national identity. For this reason, Hungary could never regard the
Serbs and Wallachians as reliable allies in her subsequent wars against the Turks. The Ottoman Turks confronted the Balkan
vassal states ever more often. Louis defeated the Turks when Hungarian and Turkish troops clashed for the first time in history at
Nicapoli in 1366. The Hungarian Chapel in the Cathedral at Aachen was built to commemorate this victory. He defeated the
Turkish army in Wallachia in 1374. In the spring of 1365, Louis I headed a campaign against the Bulgarian Tsardom of Vidin and
its ruler Ivan Sratsimir. He seized the city of Vidin on 2 May 1365; the region was under Hungarian rule until 1369.[6]
Timur and the Ottoman Interregnum Despite these successes the Ottomans would have to start all over from near-scratch when
in 1402 Timur of the Chagatai Khanate captured the Ottoman Sultan Bayezid the Thunderbolt at Ankara, so named for the speed
of his crushing victories against his Christian opponents, most notably at Nicopolis.
Campaigns of Murad II, 1421 - 1451
The Ottoman Empire seemed to have collapsed after 1402 but Murad II, the successor to Mehmed I proved to be a man of far
greater ghazi skills then his peaceful predecessor whose appreciation of Byzantine assistance even made him go so far as to accept
the Byzantine Emperor as his suzerain. Such an arrangement was out of all proportion to the powers of the two Empires, and in
1422 Murad II demonstrated how much of a "suzerain" the Emperor was to the Sultan when Constantinople narrowly escaped an
Ottoman conquest With Byzantium neutralized and terrified in servitude as a vassal, Murad II began his holy war against his
Christian opponents, attacking Macedonia and capturing Thessalonika from the Venetians in 1430. Between 1435 and 1436 the
Ottomans made a show of strength in Albania but the country survived total knock out when the Kingdom of Hungary, whose
borders now neared those of the Ottoman realm intervened.
Campaigns of John Hunyadi
He received tempting offers from Pope Eugene IV, represented by the Legate Julian Cesarini, from Đurađ Branković, despot of
Serbia, and George Kastrioti, prince of Albania, to resume the war and realize his ideal of driving the Ottomans from Europe. All
the preparations had been made when Murad's envoys arrived in the royal camp at Szeged and offered a ten years' truce on
advantageous terms. Branković bribed Hunyadi -he gave him his vast estates in Hungary- to support the acceptance of the peace.
Cardinal Julian Cesarini found a traitorous solution. The king swore that he would never give up the crusade, so all future peace
and oath was automatically invalid. After this Hungary accepted the Sultan's offer and Hunyadi in Władysław's name swore on the
Gospels to observe them.
Battle of Varna Murad II was unable to stop Hunyadi from calling in reinforcements from Western Europe. Few knights came,
but those that did assisted in capturing Nis on November 3 1443, defeating another Turkish army as they crossed the Balkan
Mountains and then taking another victory on Christmas Day. Christmas or not, supplies for the Crusader army were low and
Hunyadi concluded a 10-year peace treaty with Murad II, presumably on his terms for it was triumphant Hungarian that entered
Buda in February of 1444. 10 years was the maximum time permitted by Islamic law for a treaty with an "infidel". Unfortunately
for the Hungarians, no such time limit existed in the minds of the Papal legate, for if it did it would have been a very small one -
Cardinal Cesarini incited the Hungarians to break the treaty and attack the Turks once more. It was a foolish move, for much of
the Crusader armies' strength had been reduced due to the loss (by defection) of Serbia, Albania and the Byzantine Empire.
Fanciful ideas had been discussed of Greeks making diversionary attacks in the Peloponnese. Even the recapture of Jerusalem was
entertained.
The Crusader army attacked across the Danube. Sultan Murad II, upon hearing of the Christian breach of the treaty is said to have
mounted the broken treaty on his standard and said the words, "Christ, if you are God as your followers claim, punish them for
their perfidy". Accounts vary as to how many troops were present but the Crusaders may have been 30,000 whilst the Ottomans
between two to three times larger. Nonetheless Hunyadi's successful defense wagons held the line until King Ladislas led a foolish
glory-motivated charge to his death against the Turkish lines. His head was mounted on a spear and all the defeated Christians
could see it, most likely before their death, for very few survived the battle. It was somewhat consoling for to the Hungarians that
John Hunyadi lived to fight and win another day.
After Varna The Hungarians recovered their strength after Varna and John Hunyadi was able lead another expedition down the
Danube. Turkish counter-attacks saw this "crusade" driven back. After Murad dealt with the Greeks at the Peloponesse and other
traitors who fought him at Varna, he turned his attention to Albania, whose leader was once one of many Ottoman hostages was
now a popular resistance leader. Hunyadi could not refuse an offer to fight the Turks and in 1448 an army of some 24,000
Hungarians marched south into Serbia. At the Second Battle of Kosovo Murad scored another victory against the Hungarians.
This time, Hunyadi had had enough and was unable to campaign against the Ottoman Sultan. Murad II passed on his powers to his
successor, Mehmed II. Thanks to such victories, the Ottoman forces were able to capture Constantinople in 1453 with only the
Italians able to offer minimal yet much-needed support.Battle of Belgrade (1456) Meanwhile, the Ottoman issue had again
become acute, and, after the fall of Constantinople in 1453, it seemed natural that Sultan Mehmed II was rallying his resources in
order to subjugate Hungary. His immediate objective was Nándorfehérvár (today Belgrade). Nándorfehérvár was a major castle-
fortress, and a gate keeper of south Hungary. The fall of this stronghold would have opened a clear way to the heart of Central-
Europe. Hunyadi arrived at the siege of Belgrade at the end of 1455, after settling differences with his domestic enemies. At his
own expense, he restocked the supplies and arms of the fortress, leaving in it a strong garrison under the command of his brother-
in-law Mihály Szilágyi and his own eldest son László Hunyadi. He proceeded to form a relief army, and assembled a fleet of two
hundred ships. His main ally was the Franciscan friar, Giovanni da Capistrano, whose fiery oratory drew a large crusade made up
mostly of peasants. Although relatively ill-armed (most were armed with farm equipment, such as scythes and pitchforks) they
flocked to Hunyadi and his small corps of seasoned mercenaries and cavalry. On July 14, 1456 the flotilla assembled by Hunyadi
destroyed the Ottoman fleet. On July 21, Szilágyi's forces in the fortress repulsed a fierce assault by the Rumelian army, and
Hunyadi pursued the retreating forces into their camp, taking advantage of the Turkish army's confused flight from the city. After
fierce but brief fighting, the camp was captured, and Mehmet raised the siege and returned to Constantinople. With his flight
began a 70 year period of relative peace on Hungary's southeastern border. However, plague broke out in Hunyadi's camp three
weeks after the lifting of the siege, and he died August 11. He was buried inside the (Roman Catholic) Cathedral of Alba Iulia
(Gyulafehérvár), next to his younger brother John. Sultan Mehmet II paid him tribute:"Although he was my enemy I feel grief
over his death, because the world has never seen such a man."
The Noon Bell Pope Callixtus III ordered the bells of every European church to be rung every day at noon, as a call for believers
to pray for the defenders of Belgrade. However, in many countries (like England and Spanish kingdoms), news of the victory
arrived before the order, and the ringing of the church bells at noon thus transformed into a commemoration of the victory. The
Popes didn't withdraw the order, and Catholic (and the older Protestant) churches still ring the noon bell in the Christian world to
this day.
Mehmed II (1451 - 1481) and fall of Constantinople Mehmed conquered Constantinople in 1453. (Main article: Fall of
Constantinople April 2, 1453 – May 29, 1453 ) With Constantinople under his belt and a great euphoria from the conquest,
Mehmet II began making preparations for his next campaign against Belgrade. The city was a triple-walled fortress but was poorly
manned. Nonetheless when Mehmed II tried to take the city, not only was he repulsed but a furious and suicidal counter-attack
launched by the inexperienced and fanatical civilians drove the Turks from the field. Even so the Ottomans were able to campaign
with greater success elsewhere. The Duchy of Athens, Trebizond and Albania was brought beneath the Sultan's boot in 1456,
1461 and 1468. Of equally great importance was the death of John Hunyadi to the Plague, depriving the Hungarians one of their
most heroic generals.
Turkish wars of Matthias Corvinus (1458-1490) Military actions of Matthias Corvinus and the Black Army[7] [8]
Matthias Corvinus was John Hunyadi's son. The 15 years old boy was crowned in Buda in 1458. In 1471 Matthias renewed the
Serbian Despotate in south Hungary under Vuk Grgurević for the protection of the borders against the Ottomans. In 1479 a huge
Ottoman army, on its return home from ravaging Transylvania, was annihilated at Szászváros (modern Orăştie, 13 October 1479)
in the so-called Battle of Breadfield. The following year Matthias recaptured Jajce, drove the Ottomans from northern Serbia and
instituted two new military banats, Jajce and Srebernik, out from reconquered Bosnian territory. In 1480, when a Ottoman fleet
seized Otranto in the Kingdom of Naples, at the earnest solicitation of the pope he sent the Hungarian general, Balázs Magyar, to
recover the fortress, which surrendered to him on 10 May 1481. Again in 1488, Matthias took Ancona under his protection for a
while, occupying it with a Hungarian garrison.
Wallachian and Moldavian wars Vlad the Impaler & war with Wallachia, 1456 - 1475 Mehmed II's post-Constantinople
troubles escalated further when the Balkan principality of Wallachia under Count Vlad Dracul rebelled against the Ottoman
Empire and declared the King of Hungary as his suzerain. The main drive for these actions was Vlad's return to his homeland after
being in exile, as a hostage of the Ottoman sultan. Five years after his return from exile, Vlad initiated war with the Turks when in
1461 he impaled the Turkish ambassadors demanding tribute from him and took the fortress of Giurgiu. Vlad then began leading a
bloody assault across the Danube to the Black sea, destroying as much of the ports as he could lay his hands on to prevent
Ottoman naval attacks. Ottoman attempts to subdue Vlad militarily proved a failure but his cruelty, which had given him the edge
of striking terror into the hearts of his enemies proved to be his undoing. When Mehmed offered the populace the choice of Radu,
Vlad's brother or the Impaler himself, the populace knew who to choose and soon Vlad was once again an exile on the run. An
attempt to return a few years afterwards ended in his death in battle.
Stephen the Great & war against Moldavia, 1475 - 1476 Mehmed's army seems to have spent itself in Wallachia for the
campaign against the Moldavians was shorter and yielded poorer results still. In 1475 Mehmed ordered an invasion of Moldavia.
Again, the Ottomans often took possession of the field but Moldavian hit & run tactics proved effective against the Turks. Poor
roads slowed the Ottomans further still until Stephen was able to concentrate his forces at Vaslui. An Ottoman offensive was held
in check and then finally driven from the field on 10 January 1475.
The Ottomans returned in 1476, this time assisted by their allies from Crimea, the Tartars and their newly-conquered Vassal of
Wallachia. Stephen knew that he did not have the resources to defend his people and evacuated them to the mountains. After a
failed attack on the Ottoman vanguard Stephen seemed on the brink of defeat when King Matthias Corvinus of Hungary offered
assistance against the Sultan. The Ottomans withdrew when the Hungarians began moving in and fighting did not resume until
1484.
Bayezid II, 1481 - 1512
Bayezid's early reign was cursed with a small civil war against his brother Jem, who escaped to the west. There European leaders
entertained ideas of installing a pro-Western Sultan whilst Crusading their way to the Balkans. Consequently Bayezid II did not
incite any serious wars with his Christian opponents until his brother's death in 1495. In the meantime Bayezid signed a ten-year
peace with Hungary in 1484 although this did not prevent a defeat of an Ottoman army at Villach in 1493. Between 1484 and
1486 Bayezid campaigned annually against Moldavia in an attempt to subdue it and link up with Crimea, his Muslim vassal and
ally. Despite two defeats in 1485 and 1486 Moldavia was subjugated. As Bayezid's reign drew to a close he was entangled in a
civil war between his sons Ahmed and Selim. Eventually Selim took the throne in 1512 and for the next 8 years continued minor
conquests in the west - although his main achievement was the conquest of the Mamluke Sultanate. It would be Selim's successor,
Suleiman who would continue the war against Hungary.
Suleiman the Magnificent, 1520 - 1566
Suleiman resumed the war against Hungary by attacking the city of Belgrade, the same settlement that had defied Mehmed II over
half a century ago. Despite reminiscent heroic resistance, the city fell to Suleiman. In 1522 Suleiman took his army to a
strategically successful siege of Rhodes, allowing the Knights Hospital to evacuate for the fort.
Mohács: the Fall of the Kingdom Main article: Battle of Mohács When Suleiman launched an invasion in 1526 the Grand vizier
was able to construct a great bridge ahead of the Sultan allowing his army to march into Hungary. Despite 80 days of marching
and taking 5 days to cross the Danube River the Ottomans met no resistance against the Hungarians. The original plan set out by
King Louis II was to send a vanguard to hold the Danube where the Ottomans were expected to cross, yet the nobles of the
Kingdom refused to follow the King's deputy in battle, claiming that they did so out of zealous allegiance to the King (and would
therefore only follow him). Consequently when King Louis II took the field his army of 26,000 men seemed to be doomed to fail
against the Ottomans' 100,000[9]. At Mohacs the plains of Hungary allowed the Heavier Christian Knights to launch an effective
charge. As the Hungarian knights brushed aside first the Akinjis and then the Sipahis, the Ottoman cavalry regrouped and flanked
the knights. However, the Sultan placed his Janissaries and cannon chained up as an effective last line of defense. The Hungarian
cavalry took serious casualties from the skilfully handled Turkish artillery. With the Cavalry annihilated, the Infantry suffered
immense casualties as the weight of numbers of the Ottomans and their skill in battle took their toll. When Suleiman the
Magnificent found the body of the dead Louis II he is said to have been disappointed at cutting down the youth, who had no heirs.
Aftermath of Mohács John Zápolya, who had been instructed by Louis II to raid the enemy's supply lines arrived at the battle too
late and fled the scene. Suleiman however was not ready to annex the Kingdom completely into the Ottoman realm and so John
Zapolyai was installed as the vassal King of Hungary. Meanwhile at the diet of Bratislava Archduke Ferdinand of Austria was
declared King of Hungary. The surviving nobles of Hungary now had to choose between a native vassal of Suleiman and a
Christian "foreigner" to pledge allegiance to. Suleiman's victory at Mohacs is considered a great and decisive battle for the
Ottomans. However, even though the Kingdom of Hungary was knocked out of the war Austria now took on the Ottoman enemy.
This is not to say that Austria alone could bear the full might of the Ottoman Empire, nor was Ottoman rule in most of Hungary
seriously contested beyond the city of Buda.
After John Szapolya's death (1540) Hungary was split into three parts. The north-west (present-day Slovakia, western
Transdanubia and Burgenland, western Croatia and parts of north-eastern present-day Hungary) remained under Habsburg rule;
although initially independent, later it became a part of the Habsburg Monarchy under the informal name Royal Hungary. The
Habsburg Emperors would from then on be also crowned as Kings of Hungary. The eastern part of the kingdom (Partium and
Transylvania) became at first an independent principality, but gradually was brought under Turkish rule as a vassal state of the
Ottoman Empire. The remaining central area (most of present-day Hungary), including the capital of Buda, became a province of
the Ottoman Empire. Nonetheless Mohacs simply enlarged the borders of the Ottoman realm thereby increasing exposure to
attack, bringing the empire into later conflict with Poland, Russia, the Cossacks and the Habsburgs.
Footnotes
1. ^ The Kingdom ceased to exist as a de facto sovereign country after Mohacs but the Habsburg rulers remained
the legitimate sovereign Kings of Hungary after the Diet of Bratislava
2. ^ Grant, R.G. (2005). Battle a Visual Journey Through 5000 Years of Combat. London: Dorling Kindersley. pp.
122.The Hungarians, with Vlad the Impaler had some 30,000 men whilst at Mohacs there was roughly 20,000 men
3. ^ The Royal army for Mohacs had an initial strength of 60,000 before disease and desertion decimated it
4. ^ http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/HUNGARY.htm#LajosIdied1382B
5. ^ http://www.archive.org/stream/austriahungarywa00ludwrich/austriahungarywa00ludwrich_djvu.txt
6. ^ Божилов, Иван (1994). "Иван Срацимир, цар във Видин (1352–1353 — 1396)" (in Bulgarian).
Фамилията на Асеневци (1186–1460). Генеалогия и просопография. София: Българска академия на науките. pp.
202–203. ISBN 9544302646. OCLC 38087158.
7. ^ Kartográfiai Vállalat (1991). "[Historical Worldmaps]". Történelmi világatlasz (Map). 1 : 10.000.000, . p.
112, section V. ISBN 963-351-696-X-CM.
8. ^ Fenyvesi, László (1990) (in Hungarian). Mátyás Király fekete serege [The Black Army of King Matthias].
Hadtörténelem fiataknak. Budapest, Hungary: Zrínyi Katonai Kiadó. ISBN 9633260170.
9. ^ Sources such as this Stephen, Turnbull (2003). The Ottoman Empire 1326 - 1699. New York: Osprey. pp.
46.support this number, other suggest a smaller number of 60,000
Hungary around 1550.
 Louis I of Hungary 1342-1382
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reign 21 July 1342 – 10 September 1382 (40 years, 51 days)
Predecessor Charles I SuccessorMary

King of Poland
Reign 17 November 1370 – 10 September 1382(11 years, 297 days)
Predecessor Casimir III SuccessorJadwiga

Spouse Margaret of Luxembourg Elizabeth of Bosnia

IssueCatherine of Hungary Mary of Hungary Hedwig of Poland

House Angevin (Anjou-Hungary)

Father Charles I of Hungary
Mother Elizabeth of Poland
Born 5 March 1326Visegrád, Kingdom of Hungary
Died 10 September 1382 (aged 56) Nagyszombat, Kingdom of Hungary (present-day Trnava, Slovakia)
Louis the Great (Hungarian: I. (Nagy) Lajos, Croatian: Ludovik I, Polish: Ludwik Węgierski, Ukrainian: Людвік I Великий,
Slovak: Ľudovít Veľký, Italian: Luigi I d'Ungheria, German: Ludwig der Große, Bulgarian: Лудвиг I, Serbian: Лајош I Анжујски,
Czech: Ludvík I. Veliký, Lithuanian: Liudvikas I Vengras (5 March 1326, Visegrád – 10 September 1382, Nagyszombat/Trnava)
was King of Hungary and Croatia from 1342 and King of Poland from 1370 until his death.[1][2] (See Titles section) Louis was the
head of the senior branch of the Angevin dynasty. He was one of the most active and accomplished monarchs of the Late Middle
Ages, extending territorial control to the Adriatic and securing Dalmatia, with part of Bosnia and Bulgaria, within the Holy Crown
of Hungary. During his reign Hungary reached the peak of its political influence.[3] He spent much of his reign in wars with the
Republic of Venice. He was in competition for the throne of Naples, with huge military success and the latter with little lasting
political results. Louis is the first European monarch who came into collision with the Ottoman Turks. He founded the University
of Pécs in 1367, the letter patent issued by pope Urban V [4]
Family Louis was the third son of Charles I of Hungary and Elisabeth of Poland, the daughter of Ladislaus the Short and sister to
Casimir III of Poland.
He had four brothers and two sisters:
• Charles (1321 died after a month),
• Ladislaus (Belgrade, 1 November 1324 – 24 February 1329)
• Andrew, Duke of Calabria (Visegrád 1327–1345 Naples),
• Stephen, Duke of Slavonia (1332–1354).
• Katherine of Hungary (d. 1355)
• Elisabeth of Hungary (d.1367)
In 1342, Louis married his first wife, Margaret (1335 – 1349), underaged daughter of Charles IV, Holy Roman Emperor, who died
while still a minor. He then married his second wife, Elisabeth, daughter of Stephen II of Bosnia, who became Louis's vassal, and
Elisabeth of Kuyavia, in 1353 . Her maternal grandfather was Polish Casimir II of Kuyavia, son of Ziemomysł of Kuyavia and
Salome of Eastern Pomerania. Louis had three known daughters, all born of his second wife:
• Catherine (1370 – 1378)
• Mary, his successor in Hungary, who married Sigismund, at that time Margrave of Brandenburg (1371 – 1395), who
became King of Hungary (1387–1437) and Holy Roman Emperor (1433–1437).
• Hedwige his successor in Poland, who married Jogaila, then Grand Duke of Lithuania
Biography
Louis, named for his great uncle, Saint Louis of Toulouse. Louis acquired the seven liberal arts (grammar, rhetoric, logic,
geometry, arithmetic, music, astronomy). When he was sixteen, Louis understood Latin, German and Italian as well as his mother
tongue. He owed his excellent education to the care of his mother, a woman of profound political sagacity, who was his chief
counsellor in diplomatic affairs during the greater part of his long reign. In 1342, at the age of sixteen, he succeeded his father as
king of Hungary and was crowned at Székesfehérvár on the 21st of July with great enthusiasm. Louis led his armies many times in
person. Besides his best known campaigns, he fought in Bulgaria, Bosnia, Wallachia Serbia, Lithuania and against the Golden
Horde. The first Ottoman Hungarian clash occurred during his reign. He led assaults personally and climbed city walls together
with his soldiers. He shared the privations and hardships of camp life with his soldiers. Although a few legends were woven
around his name, one incident casts light on his courage. When one of his soldiers who had been ordered to explore a ford was
carried away by the current, the King plunged into the torrent without hesitation and saved the man from drowning. Louis liked
warfare - he came close to losing his life in several battles -, tournaments and hunts. Similarly to his mother he was deeply
religious. As an excellent commander and a gallant fighter, Louis resembled his exemplar, King Saint Ladislaus. Under his reign
lived the most famous epic hero of Hungarian literature and warfare, the king's Champion: Nicolas Toldi. John de Cardailhac,
patriarch of Alexandria and envoy of the Vatican,(who visited the utmost European countries and monarchs) wrote: "I call God as
my witness that I have never seen a monarch more majestic and more powerful... or one who desires peace and calm as much as
he."
Economic and legislative activity
Culture of the royal court
Under the reign of his father (Charles I of Hungary), the Renaissance arrived in Hungary. The Renaissance style came directly
from Italy during the Quattrocento to Hungary foremost in the Central European region. The development of the early Hungarian-
Italian relationships was a reason of this infiltration, which weren't manifested only in dynastic connections, but in cultural,
humanistic and commercial relations. This effect was getting stronger from the 14th century. In the first half of the 14th century,
the statues of ladies, knights, court musicians, servants and guardsmen mark not only the turn of the 14th and 15th centuries, but
also the beginning of a new age. Dressed in full-length gowns, richly gathered cloaks, pointed shoes and daring hats, they are an
unexpected reminder of a flourishing, almost decadent Hungarian Trecento, whose mere existence was no more than a conjecture
before the miraculous appearance of the archaeological foundings at Buda Castle. At the height of the feudal anarchy, the barons,
whose power was far greater than that of the king, fought battles and made alliances. However, by gradually overcoming the
power of the barons, breaking the resistance of the renegade towns and putting an end to chaos, Charles I of Hungary, who grew
up among the modern financial and trading life of Naples and Milan, brought prosperity to feudal Hungary. Knights, soldiers,
businessmen and artists from Naples and other Italian towns brought a new vitality.[5]
Monetary and economic background
Kingdom of Hungary under the Angevins For the new economic taxation and customs system of his father see the Economic
policy of Charles I article. One of the primary sources of power of his father was the wealth derived from the gold mines of east
and northern Hungary. Eventually itself the gold production of mines reached the remarkable figure of 3,000 pounds (1,400 kg) of
gold annually - one third of the total production of the world as then known, and five times as much as that of any other European
state.[6][7] The gold coin of Hungary (the Forint), of the same weight and purity of its namesake of Florence, was clear proof of the
country's prosperity. The Hungarian and Florencian coins were the most valuable coins of the age. The gold flowed in an
undiminished stream into Louis' coffers, enabling him to keep a court even more splendid than his father's. The power of the
former Árpád Dynasty was still based on vast royal estates. Under the Angevins, the royal family was restored as the greatest
land-owning family of the realm (they had one third of all lands), but the Angevin power was rather based on the possession of
castles. And the whole country, spared for two generations from serious invasion or civil war, blossomed with a material
prosperity which it had never before known. By the end of Louis' reign, the total population of Hungary proper had risen to some
three million (4 million in complete Hungary, with Croatia, Slavonia and Dalmatia), and it contained 49 royal boroughs, over 500
market towns and more than 26,000 villages. International commerce, favoured by the continued stability and high repute of the
currency, began to make headway.
Determinant laws
Hungary Constitutionally, Louis maintained much of the structure of his father's regime, but introduced several cultural reforms.
In 1351 Louis also confirmed the constitution (Golden Bull of 1222), adding an explicit declaration that all nobles enjoyed 'one
and the same liberty', a provision which, it appears, besides reaffirming the rights of the noble class as a whole, including the
familiares, also enlarged its ranks by bringing full noble privileges to a further class of border-line cases. His other laws
introduced the entail system regulating the inheritance of the land-owning class. In 1351, Louis codified the military obligations of
the nobility in the so-called Law of Entail (ősiség). In the past the nobility mustered soldiers according to the size of their
holdings. With the passage of time, however, many of these estates had been sold or split up, causing diminishing returns and a
reduction of military obligations. This was harmful to the country's military strength. Other provisions of the law stabilised land
tenure by universalising the system of aviticitas under which all land was entailed in the male line of the owner's family,
collaterals succeeding in default of direct heirs; if the line died out completely, the estate reverted to the Crown. The daughters of
a deceased noble were entitled to a quarter of the assessed value of his property, but this had to be paid them in cash. [8] This (Law
of Entail) is a highly important law, which ensured the integrity of ancestral property, remained in force until 1848 and was to a
great extent instrumental in keeping Hungary in Hungarian hands. At the same time, Louis standardised the obligations of the
peasant to his lord at one-ninth of his produce, neither more nor less. As he also had to pay the tithe to the church and the porta to
the state, the peasant's obligations were thus not inconsiderable, but do not appear to have been crushing in this age of prosperity;
his right of free migration was specifically re-affirmed.[8]
Poland He decreed that the Polish nobility would no longer be required to pay 'extraordinary' taxes, or pay with their own funds
for military expeditions outside Poland. He also promised that during travels of the royal court, the king and the court would pay
for all expenses, instead of using facilities of local nobility. In 1374 King Louis of Hungary approved the Privilege of Koszyce
(Polish: "przywilej koszycki" or "ugoda koszycka") in Košice in order to guarantee the Polish throne for Maria and her affianced
husband, Count Sigismund of Brandenburg, by locking the gates of the city and allowing none to leave it till they had consented to
his wishes. For the female succession of Polish throne, he gave new special rights for Polish nobility. He broadened the definition
of who was a member of the nobility and exempted the entire class from all but one tax (łanowy, which was limited to 2 grosze
from łan (an old measure of land size)). In addition, the King's right to raise taxes was abolished; no new taxes could be raised
without the agreement of the nobility. Henceforth, also, district offices (Polish: "urzędy ziemskie") were reserved exclusively for
local nobility, as the Privilege of Koszyce forbade the king to grant official posts and major Polish castles to foreign knights.
Finally, this privilege obliged the King to pay indemnities to nobles injured or taken captive during a war outside Polish borders.[9]
Domestic, military and religious policy
Style of government Despite the Hungarian tradition of the strong parliaments, Louis the Great did not want to share his power
with the diet permanently. He convoked the Diet in 1351 and once again in 1352, but never after. The influence of the noblemen
extended only to their county. Counties did not have either a permanent armed force nor other authority than the sedria (Latin:
county). We cannot even talk about local governments in the counties anymore. To judge local criminals and administration of
justice in case of noblemen who could not visit the royal High Court of Justice was the duty of other office bearers - according to
the order of the palatine and the king -, who held general meetings for several counties from time to time. In the 1370s there were
several changes in the government, aiming at an even more powerful centralisation of power. The chancellery was divided into
two parts, the secret chancellery was established with the lead of the secret chancellor. The head of the former chancellery got the
title "supreme chancellor". The third department of the High Court of Justice was set up, too: besides the law court of the palatine
and the court of royal presence headed by the supreme judge, the court of special royal presence was formed, headed by the
supreme chancellor. The royal treasurer was not a financial office bearer any more, he became the judge of appeal cases of royal
towns. His financial duties were taken over by the independent treasure keeper from that time on.[10]
Military structure During the four decades of his reign, the economic policy and power he inherited from his father was more
than enough to carry on his military campaigns. He turned that accumulated economic capital to the uses of power.[11] The
Angevins introduced the so-called honor (=office; in old Hungarian becsü) system. Instead of further large donations
(fiefdom/feudum) the faithful magnates (the Baron class and above) of the king were given an office. Powerful officials of the
kingdom, like the count palatine, were appointed count (lat. comes, hung. ispán) to several counties. They became the keepers of
royal property (including castles) in their counties and the representatives of the king. The barons administered these possessions
by their own men (familires, roughly: vassals). Honor ensured real power. While most of the aristocrats had only 2 or 3 castles
(even the exceptionally powerful Lackfi family had only 7 castles), the possessions of a greater honor ensured power over 10 or
20 castles. These offices were not given for eternity. The king could deprive the baron of his honor any time. The most powerful
honors (residents and governors of his countries) often rotated among the members of magnates. The lesser nobles the "gentry
class" invariably got traditional donations: inheritable lands (fiefdom). The Hungarian military organization was based on the
honor system. Every baron, the holders of the great honors, led a banderium (Eng. banner). The banderium was composed of the
baronical retinue, the armed noblemen of the baron’s counties, and some peasants from the royal estates who served as light
infantry. The banderia ensured a numerous, but mostly inexperienced army. Noblemen were obligated to serve 3 months in
defense of the country and 40 days for foreign campaign. On the other hand, the king was powerful enough to neglect this rule if
he wished. Besides the banderia, the king could directly raise an army by paying dispositio (salary) to every noblemen who joined
him. The king also hired mercenaries for his campaigns. The privileged group of Cumans and Székelys also served the king. Louis
set up his artillery in the beginning of his reign, however he used cannons only for city/castle sieges. Louis often waged wars in
two or three frontlines/countries at the same time, and used large foreign mercenary armies in far countries.
Role as champion of the church Their following campaigns "in every directions" (for example, against the Greek Catholic Serbs,
the heretic Bosnians and pagan Lithuanians and Tartars) are in close connection with the political and converting ambitions of the
Holy See. Louis the Great often provided military help in the inner fight of Ecclesiastic State of the Popes. Hungarian troops
protected the Pope on his return from Avignon to Rome. In 1356 a letter from the Pope called him "Christ's shield, the Lord's
athlete". In the meantime Louis the Great continued his father's policy in banning the collection of papal tithe and asserting royal
interest in filling church positions. In 1370, Louis financed the wars of the pope (Urban V) against the Florentines.[12] During the
fight for the throne of Naples there was an intensive exchange of ministers between the Papal and the Hungarian court. After this
period Papal legates visited Hungary only on very important occasions. Their duties included converting in the East, settling the
Balkan situation, mediating in peace treaties. Bishop Guido's legation in 1349 was a very important one. The Popes recognised the
Turkish danger early and in this matter Pope Urban V sent his minister to Buda. In 1371 a papal legate came to Hungary to settle
the dispute between King Louis and Emperor Charles IV. At the same time Hungarian legates spent months in Avignon, where -
besides settling public matters - they forwarded the requests of their relatives or familiares to the Pope in the form of so-called
papal requests (supplicatio).[13]
Wars and campaigns During his 40 years-long reign, there were only three years of peace (1342, 1375, 1376).
Italian wars Wars with Venice and Naples Main articles: Neapolitan campaigns of Louis the Great, Treaty of Zadar, and Peace
of Turin In 1345, Louis decided to capture the city of Zadar, on the Dalmatian coast. His soldiers however refused to take the
field, since some Hungarian leaders had been corrupted by Venice before the battle. In the spring of 1346 the Hungarian King
arrived with his vast Royal Army of 100,000 men, of whom more than 30,000 were horsemen and men-at-arms and 10,000 were
soldiers under Stephen II. The Venetians had attempted to bribe several Hungarian generals, including the Bosnian Ban, who gave
away the positions of Hungarian troops. On 1 July 1346 a fierce clash followed, which the Hungarian side eventually won only
due to its numerical superiority, leaving some 7,000 casualies on the field.[14] Zadar remained in Venetian hands. Louis embarked
on an expedition against Naples in revenge of the murder of his younger brother Andrew, Duke of Calabria, husband of Joan I of
Naples. The circumstances of his death – in a palace conspiracy – suggested the involvement of the Napolitan queen. The news of
Prince Andrew's murder created great consternation throughout Europe and especially in Hungary. Since the Pope had failed to
bring the guilty to justice, King Louis declared war on Naples and personally led his troops into Italy. Louis entered Italy on 3
November 1347 and, after obtaining the support of many local princes, he entered Benevento early in 1348, much to the applause
of the Neapolitan baronage. Louis defeated his enemies in Battle of Capua. Many of the conspirators escaped, but king Louis
would capture Charles of Durazzo and ordered his execution. However, he was proved to be innocent, and Louis subsequently lost
much of his popularity in Italy. He also did not trust the locals who originally supported Andrew’s cause, and they became hostile
to him. On 15 January, Queen Joan fled Naples by ship to Provence, soon to be followed by her second husband, Louis of
Taranto. Having established himself in Naples with little difficulty, Louis was nevertheless forced to withdraw quickly by the
arrival of the Black Death. In his rush to leave ravaged Italy, he appointed two Hungarian officials to hold the regency. They soon
lost the support of the local barons and opened the way for the return of Joan and her husband. Two years later, early in 1350,
King Louis landed at Manfredonia. After serials of successful battles city and castle sieges, he was again able to control the
Kingdom of Naples and its capital city. On this Napolitan journey, Louis the Great carried gold coins equal to Hungary's six, and
Europe's two years, of total gold production, with countless silver pieces piled atop them.[11] However, the Kingdom of Naples
was namely a vassal state of the Papacy, and the Hungarian-Neapolitan union would have harmed papal interest. Louis could not
become the legal king of Naples without the assent of Pope Clement VI; therefore he soon called off the campaign at the
insistence of his exhausted troops and renounced all claims on the Neapolitan crown. Before leaving Italy, he had the papal curia
of Avignon begin an inquest into the murder of Andrew, but the papal court found Joan innocent, largely for political reasons, as
Joan agreed to ceded her temporal rights over the city of Avignon to the papacy. The conflict with Naples was finally settled in
1381, one year before Louis’ death. Pope Urban VI stripped the royal title from Joan and authorized king Louis to execute his
decision. He was too ill to go personally, but his nephew, Charles of Durazzo, with the help of Hungarian gold and troops, seized
the throne and killed Joan, who was smothered with pillows, in revenge for the method of Andrew's assassination.[15]) From 1357
to 1358, Louis waged a new war against Venice for the rule of Dalmatia. After successfully organising an anti-Venetian league,
Louis put the cities of Dalmatia to fire and the sword, expelling all the Venetians. By the Treaty of Zara (1358), all of Louis's
demands over the Adriatic region were recognized. He immediately built up an Adriatic fleet. After the third Venetian war (1372–
1381) Venice had to pay annual tribute to Louis (Peace of Turin, 1381). The Venetians also had to raise the Angevin flag on St.
Mark's Square on holy days. In 1381 Louis obtained from the Republic of Venice the relics of St. Paul the Hermit, which were
taken with great ecclesiastical pomp to the Pauline monastery near Buda.[16] Louis' Italian army contained German mercenary
heavy infantry and English longbowmen, Hungarian heavy knights and light cavalry from Hungary, Louis party Italians and
Italian nobles.
Northern wars In the North, Louis's diplomacy, moreover, was materially assisted by his lifelong alliance with his uncle, King
Casimir III of Poland, who had appointed him his successor. Louis waged successful wars against the pagan Lithuanians,
Mongols, and against Bohemians. The young Louis had become very popular in Poland due to these campaigns. In Poland, Louis
defeated Lithuanians (1350–1352) and the Mongols(Golden Horde), and conquered Galicia (Central-Eastern Europe). After the
serials of victories over the Tatars, the Hungarian sphere of influence stretched eastward as far as the Dniester.[17] In 1345
Bohemians besieged Kraków, the Polish capital. Louis arrived in time and dispelled the Bohemian army. In the wars between
1345–47, Louis defeated the Golden Horde. After uncle Casimir's death in 1370, Louis organised a very lavish Angevin-style
funeral for uncle Casimir to demonstrate his power and wealth in Poland. The Poles elected Louis King of Poland in compliance
with the agreement made in Visegrád during his father's reign. In accordance with the 1355 dynastic agreement, he was crowned
King of Poland at Kraków 17 November 1370 by Iaroslav Archbishop of Gniezno, primate of Poland.[18] Being the ruler of
Poland, however, was not an unqualified pleasure. After he became king of Poland Louis ruled the country through regents. Louis
had commissioned (his mother) Elizabeth of Poland as Regent of Poland (1370–1375) to conveniently eliminate her from his
Court. Still, Queen Elizabeth had some justification for taking part in the affairs and quarrels of Poland, being a Polish princess.
The Poles hated to pay taxes and loved to quarrel among themselves and with the Court, especially with the domineering dowager
Elizabeth. Elizabeth's regency turned out to be a failure, her background notwithstanding. In 1375, the Poles killed 160 of her
Hungarian bodyguards and the mother Queen escaped to Hungary. Louis reconed with the rebels, and strengthened his power
again, at his mother's expense. In 1378, Louis appointed his loyal vassal and friend: prince Władysław of Opole as his regent in
Poland.
Balkan and Turkish wars In 1344 Wallachia and Moldova became Louis's vassal.[19] Louis with his ernomous 80,000 strong
army repelled the Serbian Dušan's armies in vojvodine of Mačva and principality of Travunia in 1349. when Czar Dusan broke
into Bosnian territory he was defeated by Bosnian Stjepan II with the assistance of King Louis' troops, and when Dušan made a
second attempt he was decisively beaten by his luckier rival, King Louis the Great himself, in 1354.[20] The two monarchs signed
the peace agreement in 1355. His latter campaigns in the Balkans were aimed not so much at conquest and subjugation as at
drawing the Serbs, Bosnians, Wallachians and Bulgarians into the fold of the Roman Catholic faith and at forming a united front
against the looming Turkish menace. In 1366 the Kingdom of Bosnia recognised the Hungarian authority, but Louis had himself
crowned as King of the Serbians and Bosnians. After facing the Hungarian King Louis I in several locations, the last military
campaign of the Hungarian monarch was decisive and in 1367 Lazar of Serbia recognised his authority over the Serbians. Louis
annexed Moldavia in 1352 and established a vassal principality there, before conquering Vidin in 1365. The spread of Hungarian
influence in the future Moldavia also contributed to an increasing Romanian presence in the territory, because the Romanian
elements that would organize Moldavia, migrated there from the Kingdom of Hungary, from the region of Maramureş.[21] In the
spring of 1365, Louis I headed a campaign against the Bulgarian Tsardom of Vidin and its ruler Ivan Sratsimir. He seized the city
of Vidin on 2 May 1365; the region was under direct Hungarian rule until 1369.[22] Louis took Ivan Sratsimir and his family into
captivity. Later, in 1369, Louis reinstalled Ivan and the country got vassal status. In 1366 Byzantine Emperor John V visited
Hungary to beg for help against Turks. John V came to the Hungarian capital of Buda, where according to one account he acted
arrogantly while he was asking for military help. Other accounts dispute this but the rulers parted on bad terms, John V had to
leave one of his sons as hostage.[23] It was relatively easy to subdue Balkanian Orthodox countries by arms, but to convert them
was a different matter. Despite Louis' efforts, the peoples of the Balkans remained faithful to the Eastern Orthodox Church and
their attitude toward Hungary remained ambiguous. The rulers of Serbia, Bosnia, Walachia, Moldavia, and Bulgaria became his
vassals. They regarded powerful Hungary as a potential menace to their national identity. For this reason, Hungary could never
regard the Serbs and Wallachians as reliable allies in her subsequent wars against the Turks. The Ottoman Turks confronted the
southern vassal states in the Balkan region ever more often. However Louis defeated the Turks when Hungarian and Turkish
troops clashed for the first time in history at Nicapoli in 1366. The Hungarian Chapel in the Cathedral at Aachen was built to
commemorate this victory. He defeated the Turkish army in Wallachia in 1374. But it is easily arguable that his Balkan enterprises
brought Hungary, on balance, more of a loss than benefit.
Inheritance of Poland and death In 1370, the Piasts of Poland died out. The last dynast, Casimir the Great, left only female issue
and a grandson. Since arrangements had been made for Louis's succession as early as 1355, he became King of Poland upon his
uncle's death in right of his mother, who held much of the practical power until her death in 1380 . When Louis died in 1382, the
Hungarian throne was inherited by his daughter Mary. In Poland, however, the lords of Lesser Poland did not want to continue the
personal union with Hungary, nor to accept Mary's fiancé Sigismund as a regent. They therefore chose Mary's younger sister,
Hedwig as their new monarch. After two years of negotiations with Louis widow, Elizabeth of Bosnia, who was regent of
Hungary, and a civil war in Greater Poland (1383), Hedwig finally came to Kraków and was crowned "King" (not Queen) of
Poland on 16 November 1384. The masculine gender in her title was intended to underline the fact that she was a monarch in her
own right and not a queen consort.
Peace in Hungary in a turbulent Europe
Although he waged a host of campaigns outside Hungary, Louis did keep peace within Hungary itself. In an era when Spain was
harassed by the Arabs, France targeted by the English, Germany tormented by the rivalries of its princes, Italy the scene of bloody
conflicts among its city-states, Poland and Russia the objects of Lithuanian and Tartar attacks, and Byzantium and the Balkan
states subject to Turkish raids and expansion, Hungary flourished as an island of peace. In death as in life, Louis expressed his
wish to lie eternally by his idol's side. Accordingly, he was laid to rest in Nagyvárad beside the tomb of King Saint Ladislaus ry,
Louis did keep peace within Hungary itself. In an era when Spain was harassed by the Arabs, France targeted by the English,
Germany tormented by the rivalries of its princes, Italy the scene of bloody conflicts among its city-states, Poland and Russia the
objects of Lithuanian and Tartar attacks, and Byzantium and the Balkan states subject to Turkish raids and expansion, Hungary
flourished as an island of peace. In death as in life, Louis expressed his wish to lie eternally by his idol's side. Accordingly, he was
laid to rest in Nagyvárad beside the tomb of King Saint Ladislaus.
Ancestors
Ancestors of Louis I of Hungary

16. Charles I of Naples

8. Charles II of Naples
17. Beatrice of Provence
4. Charles Martel of Anjou
18. Stephen V of Hungary
9. Maria of Hungary
19. Elizabeth the Cuman
2. Charles I of Hungary
20. Albert IV, Count of Habsburg
10. Rudolph I of Germany
21. Heilwig of Kiburg
5. Klementia of Habsburg
22. Burckhard V of Hohenburg
11. Gertrude of Hohenburg
23. Mechtild of Tübingen
1. Louis I of Hungary
24. Konrad I of Masovia
12. Casimir I of Kuyavia
25. Agafia of Rus
6. Władysław I the Elbow-high
26. Casimir I of Opole
13. Euphrosyne of Opole
27. Viola
3. Elisabeth of Poland
28. Władysław Odonic
14. Boleslaw the Pious
29. Hedwig
7. Hedwig of Kalisz
30. Béla IV of Hungary
15. Jolenta of Poland
31. Maria Laskarina
Titles
King of Hungary, Dalmatia, Croatia, Rama, Serbia, Galicia, Lodomeria, Jerusalem and Sicily from 1342, King of Poland from
1370
References
1. ^ Louis I. (2009). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 24 April 2009, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online:
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/348730/Louis-I
2. ^ [1][dead link]. Archived 2009-11-01.
3. ^ http://encyclopedia.farlex.com/Louis+the+Great
4. ^ Homepage of the University of Pécs
5. ^ "History of Hungary". Impulzus.sch.bme.hu. http://impulzus.sch.bme.hu/info/hunhist.html. Retrieved 2009-
11-16.
6. ^ "Hungary - History". Nationsencyclopedia.com. http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Europe/Hungary-
HISTORY.html. Retrieved 2008-11-21.
 7. ^ "C. A. Macartney: Hungary - A Short History". Mek.oszk.hu. http://mek.oszk.hu/02000/02086/02086.htm.
Retrieved 2008-11-21.
8. ^ a b "Macartney". Hungarian-history.hu. http://www.hungarian-history.hu/lib/macartney/macartney05.htm.
Retrieved 2009-11-16.
9. ^ http://www.almanachdegotha.org/id197.html
10. ^ "Knight Kings". Mek.niif.hu. http://mek.niif.hu/01900/01949/html/index1.html. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
11. ^ a b http://www.hungarian-history.hu/lib/lazar/zar07.htm
12. ^ "Full text of "Studies in church history"". Archive.org.
http://www.archive.org/stream/studiesinchurchh02pars/studiesinchurchh02pars_djvu.txt. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
13. ^ KNIGHT KINGS, Church History: Connection with the Holy See (György Rácz)
14. ^ "Stephen II of Bosnia". New World Encyclopedia.
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Stephen_II_of_Bosnia. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
15. ^ http://chestofbooks.com/reference/American-Cyclopaedia-6/Joanna.html
16. ^ "Printer Friendly - Catholic Online". Catholic.org.
http://www.catholic.org/printer_friendly.php?id=5973&section=Encyclopedia. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
17. ^ Vásáry 2005, p. 156.
18. ^ "POLAND". Fmg.ac. http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/POLAND.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-16.
19. ^ "Hungary Kings". Fmg.ac. http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/HUNGARY.htm#LajosIdied1382B. Retrieved
2009-11-16.
20. ^ "Full text of "Austria-Hungary and the war"". Archive.org.
http://www.archive.org/stream/austriahungarywa00ludwrich/austriahungarywa00ludwrich_djvu.txt. Retrieved 2009-11-
16.
21. ^ Vásáry 2005, p. 157.
22. ^ Божилов, Иван (1994). "Иван Срацимир, цар във Видин (1352–1353 — 1396)" (in Bulgarian).
Фамилията на Асеневци (1186–1460). Генеалогия и просопография. София: Българска академия на науките. pp.
202–203. ISBN 9544302646. OCLC 38087158.
23. ^ Keneth Setton, The papacy and the Levant (1984) page 300.URL
Louis I of Hungary
Capetian House of Anjou
Cadet branch of the Capetian dynasty
Born: 5 March 1326 Died: 10 September 1382
Regnal titles
Preceded by King of Hungary Succeeded by
Charles I 1342 - 1382 Mary I
Preceded by King of Poland Succeeded by
Casimir III 1370 - 1382 Hedwig I
— TITULAR —
Preceded by Succeeded by
King of Galicia and Lodomeria
Władysław II Opolczyk Mary I
1370 — 1382
Titles in pretence
— TITULAR —
Preceded by Succeeded by
King of Croatia
Charles I Mary I
1342–1382
The Golden Cloak clasp, Hungarian Chapel in the Cathedral of AachenCastle of Diósgyőr in Hungary, which was one of his
favourite rural hunting castles Louis on Heroes Square, Budapest

Hungarian coat of arms with Angevin helmet and Polish Coat of Arms (1340s)

The first big seal of Louis The second big seal of Louis Hungarian-Polish big seal (1370-1382) Privilege of Kassa

Hungarian clothes between 1370-1410 period Golden Forint, which depict King Saint Ladislaus, who was Louis' idol.

Fonthill vase is the earliest Chinese porcelain object to have reached Europe. It was a Chinese gift for Louis the great. Louis in
Zadar. Contemporary embossment. The family coat-of-arms. The golden horseshoe in the beak of the ostrich means the "talisman
of good luck"
Lands ruled by Louis in 1370s

The middle-aged King Coat of arms (clockwise from upper left): paternal (Hungary – the Arpad stripes – and Anjou-Sicily),
Poland, Dalmatia, and Hungary (the double cross).
 Battle of Nicopolis (1396)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Battle of Nicopolis
(Note the counterfactual depiction of siege weapons)

Date September 25, 1396

Nicopolis, Bulgaria
Location
43°42′21″N 24°53′45″E43.70583°N 24.89583°E
Result Decisive Ottoman victo y
Belligerents

Ottoman Empire Kingdom of France[1] Kingdom of Hungary[1] Wallachia[2]

Knights Hospitaller[1] Republic of Venice[1] Republic of Genoa
Moravian Serbia
Second Bulgarian Empire; contingents from German princes of the Holy
Roman Empire;[1] units from Poland, Bohemia, Navarre and Spain.[1]
Commanders and leaders
Sigismund Stibor of Stiboricz Philip, Count of Eu (POW) Jean Le Maingre (POW)
Bayezid I
John the Fearless (POW) Enguerrand VII (POW) Jean de Vienne †
Stefan Lazarević
Jean de Carrouges † Mircea the Elder Stephen II Lacković
Strength
 Heavily disputed but credibly estimated at perhaps Heavily disputed but credibly estimated at perhaps
12,000-15,000.[3] See the Strength of forces section. 7,500-16,000.[3][4] See the Strength of forces section.
Casualties and losses
Heavy casualties, especially during the initial phase of
Most of the Crusader army was destroyed or captured; a
the battle; Ottoman casualties include the massacre of
small portion, including Sigismund, escaped.[5]
~1000 civilian hostages by the Crusaders the night
300-3,000 prisoners were executed.[6][7]
before the battle.
The Battle of Nicopolis[8] took place on 25 September 1396 and resulted in the rout of an allied army of Hungarian, French,
Burgundian, German and assorted troops (assisted by the Venetian navy) at the hands of an Ottoman force, raising of the siege of
the Danubian fortress of Nicopolis and leading to the end of the Second Bulgarian Empire. It is often referred to as the Crusade of
Nicopolis and was the last large-scale crusade of the Middle Ages.
Background There were many minor crusades in the 14th century, undertaken by individual kings or knights. Most recently there
had been a failed crusade against Tunisia in 1390, and there was ongoing warfare in northern Europe along the Baltic coast. After
their victory at the Battle of Kosovo in 1389, the Ottomans had conquered most of the Balkans, and had reduced the Byzantine
Empire to the area immediately surrounding Constantinople, which they later proceeded to besiege (in 1390, 1395, 1397, 1400,
1422 and finally conquering the Byzantine capital in 1453). In 1393 the Bulgarian tsar Ivan Shishman had lost Nicopolis — his
temporary capital — to the Ottomans, while his brother, Ivan Stratsimir, still held Vidin but had been reduced to an Ottoman
vassal. In the eyes of the Bulgarian boyars, despots and other independent Balkan rulers, this was a great chance to reverse the
course of the Ottoman conquest and free the Balkans from Islamic rule. In addition, the frontline between Islam and Christianity
had been moving slowly towards the Kingdom of Hungary. The Kingdom of Hungary was now the frontier between the two
religions in Eastern Europe, and the Hungarians were in danger of being attacked themselves. The Republic of Venice feared that
an Ottoman control of the Balkan peninsula, which included Venetian territories like parts of Morea and Dalmatia, would reduce
their influence over the Adriatic Sea, Ionian Sea and Aegean Sea. The Republic of Genoa, on the other hand, feared that if the
Ottomans would gain control over River Danube and the Turkish Straits, they would eventually obtain a monopoly over the trade
routes between Europe and the Black Sea, where the Genoese had many important colonies like Caffa, Sinop and Amasra. The
Genoese also owned the citadel of Galata, located at the north of the Golden Horn in Constantinople, to which Bayezid had laid
siege in 1395. In 1394, Pope Boniface IX proclaimed a new crusade against the Turks, although the Western Schism had split the
papacy in two, with rival popes at Avignon and Rome, and the days when a pope had the authority to call a crusade were long
past. The two decisive factors in the formation of the last crusade were the ongoing Hundred Years' War between Richard II's
England and Charles VI's France and the support of Philip II, Duke of Burgundy.[9] In 1389, the war had ground to one of its
periodic truces. Further, in March 1395, Richard II proposed a marriage between himself and Charles VI's daughter Isabella in the
interests of peace and the two kings met in October 1396 on the borders of Calais to agree to the union and agree to lengthen the
Truce of Leulinghem.[10] The support of Burgundy, among the most powerful of the French nobles was also vital. In 1391,
Burgundy, trying to decide between sending a crusade to either Prussia or Hungary, sent his envoy Guy de La Trémoille to Venice
and Hungary to evaluate the situation. Burgundy originally envisioned a crusade led by himself and the Dukes of Orléans and
Lancaster, though none would join the eventual crusade. It was very unlikely that defense against the Turks was considered a
particularly important goal of the crusade. Burgundy's interest in sponsoring the crusade was in increasing his and his house's
prestige and power and, historian Barbara Tuchman notes, "since he was the prince of self-magnification, the result was that
opulent display became the dominant theme; plans, logistics, intelligence about the enemy came second, if at all."[11] In 1394,
Burgundy extracted 120,000 livres from Flanders, sufficient to begin preparations for a crusade, and in January 1395 sent word to
Sigismund, the King of Hungary that an official request to the King of France would be accepted.[11] (Sigismund became Holy
Roman Emperor in 1433). In August, Sigismund's delegation of four knights and a bishop arrived in the court of Paris to paint a
description of how "40,000" Turks were despoiling and imperiling Christian lands and beg, on Sigismund of Hungary's behalf, for
help. Charles VI, having secured a peace with England through the marriage of his daughter, was able to reply that "as chief of the
Christian kings" it was his responsibility to protect Christianity and punish Sultan Bayezid. French nobility responded
enthusiastically to the declaration; Philip of Artois, Count of Eu, the Constable of France, and Jean Le Maingre, the Marshal of
France, declared participation in the crusade the duty of every "man of valor".[12]
Strength of forces The number of combatants is heavily contested in historical accounts. Historian Tuchman notes, "Chroniclers
habitually matched numbers to the awesomeness of the event," and the Battle of Nicopolis was considered so significant that the
number of combatants given by medieval chroniclers ranges as high as 400,000, with each side insisting that the enemy
outnumbered them two-to-one, which for the crusaders offered some solace for their defeat and for the Turks increased the glory
of their victory. The oft-given figure of 100,000 crusaders is dismissed by Tuchman, who notes that 100,000 men would have
taken a month to cross the Danube at Iron Gate, while the crusaders took eight days.[3] The closest record to a first-person account
was made by Johann Schiltberger, a German follower of a Bavarian noble, who witnessed the battle at the age of 16 and was
captured and enslaved for 30 years by the Turks before returning home, at which time he wrote a narrative of the battle estimating
the crusader strength at the final battle at 16,000,[3] though he also estimated Turkish forces as a wildly inflated 200,000.[13]
German historians of the 19th century attempting to estimate the combatants on each side came to the figures of about 7,500-9000
Christians and about 12,000-20,000 Turks, while noting that, from the point of logistics, it would have been impossible for the
countryside around Nicopolis to have supplied food and fodder for scores of thousands of men and horses.[3] (Medieval armies
acquired supplies by taking them from the surrounding area as they marched, as opposed to using the supply lines of modern
armies.)
Source Year Affiliation # of crusaders # of Turks Total # Cite
[13]
Johann Schiltberger 1427 European 16,000 200,000 216,000
German historians of the 19th c 19th century European 7,500-9,000 12,000-20,000 19,500-29,000 [3]
 [14]
Şükrullah in his Behçetu't-Tevârih 15th century Ottoman 130,000 60,000 190,000
[4]
David Nicholle 1999 European 16,000 15,000 31,000
Composition of crusader forces From France, it was said about 2,000 knights and squires joined, and were accompanied by
6,000 archers and foot soldiers drawn from the best volunteer and mercenary companies. Next in importance were the Knights
Hospitaller of Rhodes, who were the standard bearers of Christianity in the Levant since the decline of Constantinople and
Cyprus. Venice supplied a naval fleet for supporting action, while Hungarian envoys encouraged German princes of the
Rhineland, Bavaria, Saxony and other parts of the empire to join. French heralds had proclaimed the crusade in Poland, Bohemia,
Navarre and Spain, from which individuals came to join.[1] The Italian city-states were too much engaged in their customary
violent rivalries to participate, and the widely reported and acclaimed English participation never actually occurred. The report of
1000 English knights comes from contemporary Antonio Fiorentino, and was taken as fact by historian Aziz S. Atiya and others
following him. A thousand knights would have actually amounted to "four to six thousand men and at least twice as many horses",
counting foot-soldiers and other retainers. However, there are no records of financial arrangements being made in England to send
a force abroad, nor of any royal preparation needed to organize and dispatch such a force. Reports of Henry of Bolingbroke or
other "son of the Duke of Lancaster" leading an English contingent must be false since the presence of Henry and every other such
son, as well as almost every other significant noble in the land, is recorded at the king's wedding five months after the crusade's
departure. Atiya also thought that the invocation of St. George as a war cry at Nicopolis signified the presence of English soldiers,
for whom George was a patron saint; but Froissart, who mentions this, claims that the cry was made by the French knight Philippe
d'Eu. Furthermore, there was no collection of ransom money in England to pay for captives, as there was in every other country
that had sent men to the battle. Sporadic mention in contemporary accounts of the presence of "English" may be attributed to
Knights Hospitaller of the English tongue subgrouping, who joined their comrades for the crusade after leaving Rhodes (where the
Hospitallers were based at the time) and sailing up the Danube.[15] Possible reasons for the English absence include the increasing
tension between the king and the Duke of Gloucester, which may have convinced the two that they had best keep their supporters
close, and the antipathy caused by the long war between the English and French, resulting in the English refusing to consider
putting themselves under a French-led crusade, regardless of the recently concluded peace.[1] Nevertheless, obviously inflated
figures continue to be repeated. These include 6-8,000 Hungarians,[16][17] ~ 10,000 French, English and Burgundian[17] troops, ~
10,000 Wallachians,[18] ~ 6,000 Germans[18] and nearly 15,000[18] Dutch, Bohemian, Spanish, Italian, Polish, Bulgarian, Scottish
and Swiss troops on the land, with the naval support of Venice, Genoa and the Knights of St. John. These result in a figure of
about 47,000 - 49,000 in total; possibly up to 120,000 or 130,000 according to numerous sources, including the 15th century
Ottoman historian Şükrullah who gives the figure of the Crusader army as 130,000 in his Behçetu't-Tevârih.[14][19]
Composition of Islamic forces Also estimated at about 20-25,000;[16] but inflated figures continue to be repeated of up to 60,000
according to numerous sources including the 15th century Ottoman historian Şükrullah, who gives the figure of the Ottoman army
as 60,000 in his Behçetu't-Tevârih;[14] alternately described as roughly half of the Crusader army.[19] The Ottoman force also
included 1,500 Serbian heavy cavalry knights[20] under the command of Prince Stefan Lazarević, who was Sultan Bayezid's vassal
since the Battle of Kosovo in 1389, as well as his brother-in-law after the Sultan married Stefan's sister, Princess Olivera Despina,
the daughter of Prince Lazar of Serbia (Stefan's father) who had perished at Kosovo.
Journey While Philip, Duke of Burgundy, had originally planned to lead the crusade along with John of Gaunt and Louis of
Orleans, all three withdrew, claiming that the peace negotiations with England required their presence, though perhaps also
because none dared leave the vicinity of the throne if their chief rivals stayed. However, Burgundy retained control of the
enterprise he was funding by naming 24-year-old John de Nevers, the Duke's eldest son, for nominal command. Burgundy,
perhaps recognizing that his son, as well as Constable d'Eu and Marshal Boucicaut, who were both under 35, lacked the necessary
experience, summoned Enguerrand VII, Lord of Coucy, the most experienced warrior and statesman of the realm, and prevailed
on him to be "chief counselor" to Nevers during the crusade. The ambiguity of the crusaders' command structure would prove to
be crucial in the final outcome. While Nevers was given a long list of "counselors", as well as another list of prominent French
lords on the crusade with whom Nevers could consult "when it seemed good to him", the concept of unity of command was not
yet understood by medieval warriors.[21] Rules of discipline for the crusade were decreed at a War Council on March 28, 1396,
which included the final provision, "Item, that [in battle] the Count and his company claim the avante garde," revealing that the
chivalric code continued to require knights to prove their valor by leading the charge.[22]
To Buda The crusade set forth from Dijon on April 30, 1396, heading across Bavaria by way of Strasbourg to the upper Danube,
from where they used river transport to join with Sigismund in Buda. From there the crusader goals, though lacking details of
planning, were to expel the Turks from the Balkans and then go to the aid of Constantinople, cross the Hellespont, and march
through Turkey and Syria to liberate Palestine and the Holy Sepulchre, before returning in triumph to Europe by sea.
Arrangements were made for a fleet of Venetian vessels to blockade the Turks in the Sea of Marmara and for the Venetians to sail
up the Danube to meet the crusaders in Wallachia in July.[22] Coucy was not with the crusader body as it traveled, having been
detached on a diplomatic mission to Gian Galeazzo Visconti, the Duke of Milan. Furious at French political maneuvering that had
removed Genoa from his influence, Gian Galeazzo had been attempting to stop the transfer of Genovese sovereignty to France and
Coucy was dispatched to warn him that France would consider further interference a hostile act. The quarrel was more than
political. Valentina Visconti, the wife of the Duke of Orleans and Gian Galeazzo's beloved daughter, had been exiled from Paris
due the machinations of Queen Isabeau the same month as the departure of the crusade. The Duke of Milan threatened to send
knights to defend his daughter's honor but, in the wake of the disaster at Nicopolis, it was widely believed that he had relayed
intelligence to Bayezid I of crusader troop movements. There is no firm evidence of this and it is likely that Gian Galeazzo
became a scapegoat after the fact due the existing animosity with France, though there remains the possibility that the Duke of
Milan, who had murdered his own uncle to ensure his own power, did in fact betray the crusaders. Coucy, his diplomatic mission
complete and accompanied by Henry of Bar and their followers, left Milan for Venice, from where he requisitioned a ship on May
17 to take him across the Adriatic Sea, landing in the Croatian port of Senj on May 30 before making his way overland to the
rendezvous in Buda.[23] Coucy arrived well before Nevers, who had stopped in the upper Danube for receptions and festivities
thrown by German princes. Nevers did not arrive in Vienna until June 24, a full month behind the crusader vanguard led by d'Eu
and Boucicaut. A fleet of 70 Venetian vessels loaded with provisions was sent down the Danube, while Nevers enjoyed yet more
parties thrown by his brother in law Leopold IV, Duke of Austria. Nevers then asked his brother in law for a staggering loan of
100,000 ducats, which took time to arrange, and eventually arrived in Buda in July.[24]
Buda to Nicopolis Once the leaders had arrived, strategy had to be coordinated with Philibert de Naillac, Master of the Knights
Hospitaller, and representatives of the Venetian fleet. Forty-four Venetian ships had carried the Hospitallers from Rhodes through
the Aegean into the Sea of Mamara, and some continued into the Black Sea and up the Danube without engaging in battle. The
fact that the Turks, who had an inferior naval presence, did not challenge the Venetians for control of the sea is seen as evidence
that Bayezid and the majority of his forces were already on the European side.[24] The War Council in Buda was immediately the
forum of a fierce dispute. The previous year, Bayezid had declared that he would attack Hungary by May, yet he had not appeared
by end of July. Hungarian scouts sent out as far as the Hellespont could find no sign of him, causing the French to proclaim that
he was a coward. Sigismund of Hungary assured the crusaders that Bayezid would come, and advised that it would be wiser to let
the Turks make the long march to them, rather than make the same long march to find them. This strategy was rejected by the
French and their allies. Coucy, acting as spokesman, stated, "Though the Sultan's boasts be lies, that should not keep us from
doing deeds of arms and pursuing our enemies, for that is the purpose for which we came." Sigismund had little choice but to
acquiesce, though chroniclers also write that Coucy's speech excited jealousy in D'Eu, who felt that he should have had the honor
of spokesman due to his position as Constable of France.[25] The crusaders began to march down the left bank of the Danube,
though part of the Hungarian army veered north to gather the forces of Transylvania and the Mircea the Elder-led forces of
Wallachia. The remainder of the Hungarians brought up the rear of the crusader column. As the crusaders moved into Muslim-
held territory, pillaging and mistreatment of the population reportedly grew. While crusaders had been reported to engage in
periodic pillage and rapine while passing through Germany, the indiscipline of the French reportedly reached new heights when
they entered "schismatic" lands. Chroniclers also waxed eloquent on the immorality and blasphemy of the crusaders, writing
detailed accounts of drunkard knights lying with prostitutes for days, despite writing from at best second-hand accounts. Tuchman
cautions that such chroniclers were part of a contemporary tendency to blame the defeat of the crusade on the immorality of the
crusaders, and that it is impossible to verify such claims.[26] At Orşova, where the Danube narrows at the Iron Gates gorge, the
column crossed to the right bank using pontoons and boats over eight days. Their first target was Vidin, previously an important
town of western Bulgaria and then under Turkish control. The prince of Vidin, having no desire to fight for his Turkish
conquerors against an overwhelming force of crusaders, promptly surrendered. The only bloodshed was the execution of Turkish
officers in the defending garrison, though the incident served to further convince the French that Turks were incapable of
challenging the crusaders in the field.[3] The next target was Oryahovo (Rachowa), a strong fortress located 75 miles from Vidin.
Frustrated by the lack of opportunity to show their bravery in deeds of arms, the French carried out a forced march at night to
reach the castle before their allies, arriving in the morning just as the Turkish forces had come out to destroy the bridge across the
moat. In fierce combat the French secured the bridge but were unable to push forward until Sigismund arrived. The forces
combined and managed to reach the walls before night forced the combatants to retire. The next morning the inhabitants of
Oryahovo agreed to surrender to Sigismund on the assurance that their lives and property would be spared. The French promptly
broke Sigismund's agreement, pillaging and massacring the town after the gates were open, and later claiming that they had taken
the town by conquest because their men-at-arms had topped the walls the night before. A thousand residents, both Turkish and
Bulgarian, were taken hostage and the town set ablaze. The Hungarians took the French action as a grave insult to their king,
while the French accused the Hungarians of trying to rob them of the glory of victory through combat.[27][28] Leaving a garrison to
hold Oryahovo, the crusaders continued towards Nicopolis, assaulting one or two forts or settlements along the way, but
bypassing one citadel from which messengers escaped to inform Bayezid of the Christian army.[28] On September 12, the
crusaders came within view of the fortress of Nicopolis on its limestone cliff.[29]
Siege of Nicopolis Nicopolis, located in a natural defensive position, was a key stronghold controlling the lower Danube and lines
of communication to the interior. A small road ran between the cliff and river, while the fortress was actually two walled towns,
the larger one on the heights on the cliff and the smaller below. Further inland from the fortified walls, the cliff sloped steeply
down to the plain.[29] Well-defended and well-supplied,[7] the Turkish governor of Nicopolis, Doğan Bey, was certain that Bayezid
would have to come to the aid of the town and was prepared to endure a long siege.[30] The crusaders had brought no siege
machines with them, but Boucicaut optimistically stated that ladders were easily made and worth more than catapults when used
by courageous men. However, the lack of siege weapons, the steep slope up to the walls and the formidable fortifications made
taking the castle by force impossible. The crusaders set up positions around the town to block the exits, and with the naval
blockade of the river, settled in for a siege to starve out the defenders.[30] Nevertheless they were convinced that the siege of the
fortress would be a mere prelude to a major thrust into relieving Constantinople and did not believe that Bayezid I would arrive so
speedily to give them a real battle.[31] Two weeks passed as the bored crusaders entertained themselves with feasts, games and
insulting the martial prowess of their enemy. Whether through drunkenness or carelessness, the crusaders posted no sentries,
though foragers venturing away from the camps brought word of the Turks' approach. Bayezid was at this time already through
Adrianople and on a forced march through the Shipka Pass to Tirnovo.[32] His ally Stefan Lazarević of Serbia joined him on the
way.[citation needed] Sigismund had sent 500 horsemen to carry out reconnaissance in force around Tirnovo, 70 miles to the north, and
they brought word back that the Turks were indeed coming. Word also reached the besieged inhabitants of Nicopolis, who blew
horns and cheered. Boucicaut claimed the noise of their celebration was a ruse as he believed that the Sultan would never attack;
he further threatened to cut off the ears of anyone who discussed rumors of the Turks' approach as being damaging to the morale
of the crusaders.[32] One of the few to concern himself with scouting the situation was Coucy, who took a group of 500 knights and
500 mounted archers south. Learning of a large group of Turks approaching through a nearby pass, he separated 200 horsemen to
carry out a feint retreat, drawing the pursuing Turks into an ambush where the rest of his men, waiting concealed, attacked their
rear. Giving no quarter, Coucy's men killed as many as they could and returned to the camp where his action shook the camp from
its lethargy and drew the admiration of the other crusaders. Tuchman argues that it also increased the overconfidence of the
French and again drew the jealousy of D'Eu, who accused Coucy of risking the army out of recklessness and attempting to steal
glory and authority from Nevers.[33] Sigismund called a war council on the 24th, in which he suggested a battle plan in which the
Wallachian foot soldiers would be sent forward to meet the Turk vanguard, which was usually a poorly armed militia normally
used for pillage but was used in battles to tire opponents before they met better quality Turkish forces. Sigismund claimed that this
vanguard was not worthy of the attention of knights. Once the shock of first clash had past, Sigismund proposed that the French
form the front line to rush in, while the Hungarians and the other allies followed to support the attack and keep the sipahis
(Turkish cavalry) from sweeping around the crusaders' flanks. D'Eu denounced the proposal as a demeaning to the knights, who
would be forced to follow peasant footmen into battle. He reportedly stated, "To take up the rear is to dishonor us, and expose us
to the contempt of all" and declared that he would claim front place as Constable and anyone in front of him would do him mortal
insult. In this he was supported by Boucicaut; Nevers, reassured by the confidence of the younger French lords, was easily
convinced.[33] With the French set on a charge, Sigismund left to make a battle plan for his own forces. Apparently within hours,
he sent word to the camp that Bayezid was only six hours away. The crusaders, said to be drunk over dinner, reacted in confusion
- some refusing to believe the report, some rising in panic, and some hastily preparing for battle. At this point, supposedly because
of a lack of spare guards, the prisoners taken at Rachowa were massacred. Even European chroniclers would later dub this an act
of "barbarism".[34]
The battle At daybreak on September 25, the combatants began to organize themselves under the banners of their leaders. At this
point, Sigismund sent his Grand Marshal to Nevers to report that his scouts had sighted the Turkish vanguard and asked for the
offensive to be postponed for two hours, when his scouts would have returned with intelligence as to the numbers and disposition
of the enemy. Nevers summoned a hasty council of advisors, in which Coucy and Jean de Vienne, admiral of France and the
eldest French knight on the crusade, advised obeying the wishes of the Hungarian king, which seemed wise to them. At this, D'Eu
declared that Sigismund simply wished to hoard the battle honors for himself and declared his willingness to lead the charge.
Coucy, who declared D'Eu's words to be a "presumption," asked for the council of Vienne, who noted, "When truth and reason
cannot be heard, then must rule presumption."[35] Vienne commented that if D'Eu wished to advance, the army must follow, but
that it would be wiser to advance in concert with the Hungarians and other allies. D'Eu rejected any wait and the council fell into a
fierce dispute, with the younger hawks charging that the elder knights were not prudent, but fearful. The argument seems to have
been settled when D'Eu decided to advance.[35] D'Eu took control of the vanguard of the French knights, while Nevers and Coucy
commanded the main body. The French knights, accompanied by their mounted archers, rode out with their backs to Nicopolis to
meet the Turks, who were descending the hills to the south. The Knights Hospitaler, Germans and other allies stayed with the
Hungarian forces under Sigismund. The subsequent events are obscured by conflicting accounts. Tuchman notes, "Out of the
welter of different versions, a coherent account of the movements and fortunes of the battlefield is not to be had; there is only a
tossing kaleidoscope."[36] The French charge crushed the untrained conscripts in the Turkish front line and advanced into the lines
of trained infantry, though the knights came under heavy fire from archers and were hampered by rows of sharpened stakes
designed to skewer the stomachs of their horses. Chroniclers write of horses impaled on stakes, riders dismounting, stakes being
pulled up to allow horses through, and the eventual rout of the Turkish infantry, who fled behind the relative safety of the sipahis.
Coucy and Vienne recommended that the French pause to reform their ranks, give themselves some rest and allow the Hungarians
time to advance to a position where they could support the French. They were overruled by the younger knights who, having no
idea of the size of the Turkish force, believed that they had just defeated Bayezid's entire army and insisted on pursuit.[20] The
French knights thus continued up the hill, though accounts state that more than half were on foot by this point, either because they
had been unhorsed by the lines of sharpened stakes or had dismounted to pull up stakes. Struggling in their heavy armor, they
reached the plateau on the top of the slope, where they had expected to find fleeing Turkish forces, but instead found themselves
facing a fresh corps of sipahis, whom Bayezid had kept in reserve. As the sipahis surged forward in the counterattack sounding
trumpets, banging kettle drums and yelling "God is great!", the desperation of their situation was readily apparent to the French
and some knights broke and fled back down the slope. The rest fought on "no frothing boar nor enraged wolf more fiercely," in the
words of one contemporary chronicler. Admiral de Vienne, to whom was granted the honor as the eldest knight of carrying the
French standard into battle, was wounded many times as he attempted to rally the morale of his countrymen, before being struck
down dead. Other notable knights who were slain include Jean de Carrouges, Philippe de Bar and Odard de Chasseron. The Turks
threatened to overwhelm Nevers and his bodyguard threw themselves to the ground in silent submission to plead for the life of
their liege lord. Notwithstanding the declaration of jihad, the Turks were as interested in the riches that could be gained by
ransoming noble captives as anyone else, and took Nevers prisoner. Seeing Nevers taken, the rest of the French yielded.[37] The
timeline of events is hazy, but it appears that as the French were advancing up the slope, sipahis were sweeping down along the
flanks in an envelopment. Accounts tell of the Hungarians and other nationalities in confused combat on the plain and of a
stampede of riderless horses, which Tuchman speculates pulled free from their tethers, at the sight of which the Transylvanians
and the Wallachians concluded that the day was lost and abandoned the field. Sigismund, the Master of Rhodes, and the Germans
fought to prevent the envelopment with "unspeakable massacre" on both sides.[20] At this point, a reinforcement of 1,500[20]
Serbian knights under the command of Stefan Lazarević proved critical.[16] Sigismund's force was overwhelmed. Convinced to
flee, Sigismund and the Master managed to escape by fisherman's boat to the Venetian ships in the Danube.[20] Hermann, a soldier
in Sigismund's army led the force that allowed the escape and was later rewarded by being named a count.[citation needed] Bayezid and
his ally Stefan Lazarevic recognized the Nikola II Gorjanski, Lazarevic's brother-in-law, fighting on Sigismund's side. A deal was
made, and Sigismund's army surrendered, completing their defeat in detail.[citation needed]
Aftermath Sigismund would later state to the Hospitaller Master, "We lost the day by the pride and vanity of these French. If they
believed my advice, we had enough men to fight our enemies." Chronicler Jean Froissart would declare. "Since the Battle of
Roncesvalles when [all] twelve peers of France were slain, Christendom received not so great a damage."[38]
Captives and ransom Bayezid toured the battlefield later that day, hoping to find the corpse of the King of Hungary, and "torn by
grief" at his losses, which outnumbered that of the Crusaders. His rage was only heightened by the discovery of the massacred
prisoners from Rahovo. He ordered all of the prisoners assembled before him the following morning (September 26). The Turks
recognized Jacques de Helly, a French knight who had served under Murad I, and had him identify the chief nobles for ransom.
Coucy, Bar, D'Eu, Gui de La Tremoïlle and several others were grouped with Nevers to be spared. Those judged to be under age
20 were also spared and put into forced servitude.[39] The rest, thought to number several thousand, were bound together in groups
of three or four and had their hands tied to be marched naked before the Sultan. Ordered to proceed, a group of executioners
proceeded to kill each group in turn, either by decapitation or by severing their limbs from the body. Nevers and the rest of the
noble captives were forced to stand beside Bayezid and watch the executions. Jean Le Maingre, called "Boucicaut", was
recognized in the line, and Nevers fell to his knees before the Sultan and indicated with intertwined fingers that they were like
brothers. Thus convinced that Boucicaut was worth a noble ransom, he was spared and grouped with the other high nobles. The
killing continued from early morning until late afternoon, at which point Bayezid, either himself sickened by the bloodshed or
convinced by his ministers that he was unnecessarily enraging Christendom against him, called off the executioners. Leaving
aside the more hyperbolic account, the number of dead is said to have ranged from 300 to 3000, though the number of dead on the
battlefield was much more.[6][18] Of those who fled the battlefield, few survived. So many attempted to swim to the boats in the
Danube that several sank from the load; afterward, those on the boats pushed away those trying to board. Many who attempted to
swim all the way across the river drowned. Sigismund, fearful of Wallachian treachery, sailed to the Black Sea and Constantinople
before making his way home by sea. Those Crusaders who made it across the Danube and tried to return home by land found that
the land they were traveling over had already been stripped of forage by the retreating force of Wallachians. Reduced to
wandering through the woods in rags and robbed of whatever possessions they had, many of the starved survivors died along the
way. Perhaps the most famous of the few who reached home after this journey was Count Rupert of Bavaria, who arrived at his
doorstep in beggar's rags and died several days later from his trials.[6] The captives were forced to march the 350-mile length to
Gallipoli, stripped of clothing down to the their shirts and most without shoes, with hands tied and beaten by their captors. At
Gallipoli, the noble captives were kept in the upper rooms of a tower while the 300 prisoners that were the Sultan's share of the
common captives were kept below. The ship carrying Sigismund passed within half a mile of the tower as it went through the
Hellespont, for which the Turks lined the captives along the shore and mockingly called out for Sigismund to come and rescue his
comrades. Sigismund, while in Constantinople, had made overtures to ransom the captives, but Bayezid was aware that Hungary's
wealth had been depleted in the crusade and that richer ransoms could be had from France. After two months in Gallipoli, the
prisoners were transferred to Brusa, the joint Ottoman capital located in Asia, where they awaited word of their ransom.[40] In the
first week of December, rumors of unimaginable defeat arrived in Paris. As no certain news was to be had, rumor-mongers were
imprisoned in the Grand Châtelet and, if convicted of lying, sentenced to death by drowning. The King, Burgundy, Orleans and
Duc de Bar all sped envoys to Venice and Hungary to bring word back. On December 16, merchant ships brought word to Venice
of defeat at Nicopolis and the escape of Sigismund.[41] Jacques de Helly, the knight who had identified the nobles after the battle,
had been charged by Bayezid, under his vow to return, to inform the King of France and Duke of Burgundy of his victory and
demands for ransom. On Christmas, de Helly rode into Paris and, kneeling before the king, recounted the expedition, the battle,
defeat and Bayezid's massacre of the prisoners. He also carried letters from Nevers and the other noble captives. Those for whom
he did not carry letters were assumed to be dead, and weeping members of the court gathered around de Helly to seek more
information about loved ones. According to the Monk of St. Denis, "affliction reigned in all hearts" and Deschamps wrote of
"funerals from morning to eve." January 9 was declared a day of mourning throughout France and that day "it was piteous to hear
the bells toiling in all the churches in Paris."[42] A delegation with rich gifts for Bayezid left Paris on 20 January 1397 to negotiate
the ransoms. De Helly, bound by his oath to return, had already departed with letters for the captives. Gian Galeazzo's help
became vital, as he had extensive contacts in the Ottoman court. Envoys were sent informing him of belated approval by the King
allowing the fleur-de-lis to be added to the Visconti escutcheon, Galeazzo's first wife having been from the French royal house,
and to make every effort to gain his assistance. Meanwhile, those envoys sent in early December had reached Venice and, having
learned of the fate of the captives, were attempting to make their way to Brusa. Venice, which was the French conduit to the
Muslim east due to her trade network, became the center for exchange of news, cash and ransomed captives.[43] On 13 February
1397, de Coucy, ill and perhaps suffering from battle wounds, died. Boucicaut and Guy de Tremoille released on their own accord
to seek funds in the Levant reached Rhodes where de Tremoille fell ill and died around Easter. French negotiators in the Sultan's
court finally reached agreement on a ransom of 200,000 gold florins in June. Comte d'Eu died on 15 June. With a down payment
of 75,000, the prisoners were released on 24 June on their promise to stay in Venice until the rest of the ransom was paid.
However, the nobles found it unthinkable to travel in less than their accustomed splendor and borrowed nearly as much as the
ransom amount in re-provisioning themselves. Arriving in Venice in October after stopping in various islands to recover and
borrow money, the financial transactions required to both provide the ransom and pay for the travel arrangements and living
expenses of the nobles were tremendously complicated. A three-sided transaction between Burgundy, Sigismund and Venice took
27 years to settle. A plague outbreak in Venice required the nobles to move temporarily to Treviso, but still claimed Henri de
Bar.[44] The last of the Crusader leaders - Nevers, Boucicaut, Guillaume de Tremoille and Jacques de la Marche -, along with
seven or eight other knights, re-entered France in February 1398. They were greeted by minstrels, parties and parades as they
journeyed across the kingdom, though Tuchman notes, "the receptions probably represented not so much popular enthusiasm as
organized joy, in which the 14th century excelled."[45]
Broader ramifications With a historian's hindsight Johan Huizinga remarked upon "the lamentable consquences of statecraft
recklessly embarking on an enterprise of vital import in the spirit of a chivalrous adventure",[46] though participants and
contemporary chroniclers did not analyse the catastrophe in these terms. No new expedition was launched from Western Europe
to stop the Turkish advance in the Balkans after this defeat, until the 1440s. England and France soon renewed their war.
Wallachia continued its stance against the Ottomans, having stopped another expedition in the next year, 1397, and in 1400 yet
another expedition of the Ottomans. The defeat of Sultan Beyazid I by Timur (Tamerlane) at Ankara in the summer of 1402
opened a period of anarchy in the Ottoman Empire and Mircea took advantage of it to organize together with the Kingdom of
Hungary a campaign against the Turks. The Hungarians and Poles were defeated at the Battle of Varna in 1444, and
Constantinople finally fell in 1453 to the Turks, followed by the Despotate of Morea in 1460 and the Empire of Trebizond in
1461, which brought an end to the last vestiges of the Byzantine Empire as well as the final remaining pockets of Greek resistance
against the Ottoman Turks in both the Balkans and Anatolia. The Battle of Nicopolis is also widely regarded as the end of the
Second Bulgarian Empire, since hopes for its salvation had come to an end with the defeat of the Crusaders. By their victory at
Nicopolis, the Turks discouraged the formation of future European coalitions against them. They maintained their pressure on
Constantinople, tightened their control over the Balkans, and became a greater threat to central Europe.[5]
Notes
1. ^ a b c d e f g h Tuchman, 548
2. ^ The Crusades and the military orders: expanding the frontiers of latin christianity; Zsolt Hunyadi page 226
3. ^ a b c d e f g Tuchman, 554
4. ^ a b Nicolle, p. 37. "In fact the Crusaders probably numbered some 16,000 men. Traditional Turkish sources
give the number of Ottoman troops as 10,000 but when their Balkans vassals were included they may have numbered
around 15,000."
a b
5. ^ "Battle of Nicopolis". Encyclopædia Britannica. 2009.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/414447/Battle-of-Nicopolis. Retrieved 2009-02-18.
6. ^ a b c Tuchman 562
7. ^ a b Grant, p 122
8. ^ (Bulgarian: Битка при Никопол, Bitka pri Nikopol; Turkish: Niğbolu Savaşı, Hungarian: nikápolyi csata,
Romanian: Bătălia de la Nicopole)
9. ^ Tuchman, 544-545
10. ^ Tuchman, 533-537
11. ^ a b Tuchman, 545
12. ^ Tuchman, 545-546
13. ^ a b Schiltberger, Johann (ca 1427). "The Battle of Nicopolis (1396)". from The Bondage and Travels of Johann
Schiltberger, trans. J. Buchan Telfer (London: Hakluyt Society, series 1, no.58; 1879. The Society for Medieval Military
History. http://www.deremilitari.org/resources/sources/nicopolis.htm. Retrieved 2009-02-18.
14. ^ a b c "Askerı Yapi Ve Savaşlar: Savaşlar (2/11)" (in Turkish). www.theottomans.org.
http://www.theottomans.org/turkce/osmanli_ordu/savaslar2.asp. Retrieved 2009-02-18.
15. ^ Tipton, Charles L. (1962). "The English at Nicopolis". Speculum (37): 533–40.
16. ^ a b c Grant
17. ^ a b Madden
18. ^ a b c d See, for example, an estimate of 10,000 executed in "I Turchi E L'Europa: Dalla battaglia di Manzikert
alla caduta di Costantinopoli: Bayazed I (1389-1402)" (in Italian). www.maat.it. http://www.maat.it/livello2/turchia-
europa.htm#bayazedI. Retrieved 2009-02-18.
19. ^ a b Türk Tarihi: Battle of Nicopolis (Turkish)[dead link]
20. ^ a b c d e Tuchman 560
21. ^ Tuchman, 549
22. ^ a b Tuchman, 550
23. ^ Tuchman, 550-551
24. ^ a b Tuchman, 552
25. ^ Tuchman, 553
26. ^ Tuchman, 553-554
27. ^ Tuchman, 554-555
28. ^ a b Madden, p 184
29. ^ a b Tuchman, 555
30. ^ a b Tuchman, 556
31. ^ Madden, 185
32. ^ a b Tuchman, 556-557
33. ^ a b Tuchman, 558
34. ^ Tuchman, 558-559
35. ^ a b Tuchman 559
36. ^ Tuchman 559-560
37. ^ Tuchman 560-561
38. ^ Tuchman 561
39. ^ Tuchman 561-2
40. ^ Tuchman 564-6
41. ^ Tuchman 566
42. ^ Tuchman 566-7
43. ^ Tuchman 568
44. ^ Tuchman 571-5
45. ^ Tuchman 575
46. ^ Huizinga, The Waning of the Middle Ages (1919) 1924:69.
References Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Battle of Nicopolis
• Atiya, Aziz S. (1965). The Crusades in the Later Middle Ages. New York.
• Atiya, Aziz S. (1978). The Crusade of Nicopolis. New York.
• Földi, Pál (2000) (in Hungarian). Nagy hadvezérek: Hunyadi János (Great Warlords: János Hunyadi). Budapest: Anno
Publisher. ISBN 963 9066 66 4.
• Froissart, Jean (1400). Froissart's Chronicles. IV. ISBN 0140442006.
• Grant, R.G. (2005). Battle: A Visual Journey Through 5,000 Years of Combat. London: Dorling Kindersley.
• Housley, Norman, ed (1996). Documents on the Later Crusades, 1274–1580. New York.
• Madden, Thomas F. (2005). Crusades: the Illustrated History (1 ed.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
• Mango, Cyril (2002). The Oxford History of Byzantium (1 ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Nicolle, David (1999). Nicopolis 1396: The Last Crusade. Campaign Series. London: Osprey Publishing.
• Parker, Geoffrey (2005). Compact History of the World (4 ed.). London: Times Books.
• Riley-Smith, Jonathan (1995). The Oxford History of the Crusades. Oxford.
• Sherrard, Philip (1966). Great Ages of Man: Byzantium: A History of the World's Cultures. Time-Life Books. ISBN 978-
0662833406.
• Tuchman, Barbara W. (1978). A Distant Mirror: the Calamitous 14th Century. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. ISBN 0-
345-28394-5.
• Zsolt, Hunyadi (1999). The Crusades and the military orders: expanding the frontiers of Latin Christianity. CEU
Medievalia. London: Budapest Dep. of Medieval Studies, Central European Univ. 2001. p. 226. ISBN 9639241423
9789639241428. http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/260026764.
External links
Military history of the Ottoman Empire portal
• History of War: Battle of Nicopolis, 25 September 1396

Depiction of the French charge. Note the nearly innumerable combatants. Titus Fay saves King Sigismund of Hungary in the

Battle of Nicopolis. Painting in the Castle of Vaja, creation of Ferenc Lohr, 1896.

Map of Europe with the Danube marked 1540 depiction of the battle

The crusaders took eight days to cross the Danube at the Iron Gate
 Battle Map

The execution of the prisoners in retaliation for the Rahovo massacre of Ottoman prisoners-
 John Hunyadi (1444-1456)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Regent-Governor of the Kingdom of Hungary

Voivode of Transylvania

Brno, 1488. Statue of Hunyadi, Heroes' Square, Budapest,

Regent-Governor of the Kingdom of Hungary, Voivode of Transylvania
Spouse Erzsébet Szilágyi
Issue Ladislaus Hunyadi Matthias Corvinus

House House of Hunyadi

Father Voyk[1] (Vajk)[2] Hunyadi
Mother Elizabeth Morzsinay
Born c. 1407
Died 1456 Nándorfehérvár, Kingdom of Hungary (now Belgrade, Serbia)
Burial Roman Catholic Cathedral of Alba Iulia (then Gyulafehérvár)

Signature

John Hunyadi (Hungarian: Hunyadi János [ˈhuɲɒdi ˈjaːnoʃ], Medieval Latin: Ioannes Corvinus or Ioannes de Hunyad,
Romanian: Iancu (Ioan) de Hunedoara, Croatian: Janko Hunjadi, Serbian: Сибињанин Јанко / Sibinjanin Janko, Slovak: Ján
Huňady) (c. 1407[3] – 11 August 1456), nicknamed The White Knight[4] was a general (1444–1446) and Regent-Governor (1446–
1453) of the Kingdom of Hungary.[5][6] Hunyadi is widely celebrated as a successful and powerful generalissimo. He promoted a
revision of dated military doctrine and was an outstanding and iconic military opponent of the Ottoman Empire. Hunyadi was, in a
sweeping scope of European military history, the pre-eminent strategist and tactician of the 15th century in Christendom.[5] He
was also a Voivode of Transylvania (1440–1456),[7] and father of the Hungarian king, Matthias Corvinus. Hunyadi's military
genius, prowess and wherewithal to prosecute preventive and aggressive crusading warfare policies welded together many
Christian nationalities against the onslaught of the vastly numerically superior Ottoman Muslim forces. Hunyadi's leadership
achieved a state of integrity, stalemate and détente for the Hungarian Kingdom and the many European states that lay to its
periphery. Hunyadi's aim to re-organize the military forces of Hungary from strictly a feudal-based aristocratic levy into an
efficient and professional standing army would bring reform to European military components in a 'post-Roman' European war-
making society. These reforms were further developed by his successor and son King Matthias Corvinus who took them to their
ultimate culmination with the Black Army of Hungary. Hunyadi is often considered the bellwether of the European "post-Roman"
professional "Standing Army". He is renowned as one of the greatest Medieval field commanders of all time: His victory over
Mehmed II at the Siege of Nándorfehérvár (now Belgrade) in 1456 against overpowering odds is regarded as a seminal piece of
European military history. He was awarded the title Athleta Christi (Champion of Christ) by Pope Pius II.[8]
Family Main article: Hunyadi family The Hunyadi family were Hungarian noble family in the medieval Kingdom of Hungary, of
Wallachian[9] (Romanian)[10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] origin according to the majority of sources. Hunyadi was named Valachus or
Balachus ("the Wallachian") in some contemporary texts.[19] There are also authors suggesting a possible Slavic origin,[20][21] with
other sources suggesting a possible Tatar-Cuman[22][23][24][25][26] descendance. However, according to Hugh Seton-Watson, "both
Hunyadi and his son considered themselves Hungarians".[27] According to other options, John Hunyadi came from a modest
Romanian noble family from Hațeg.[28] Others simply refer to the obscurity surrounding the year of birth and parentage.[29][30] The
Hunyadis were first recorded in a royal charter of 1409 in which Sigismund of Luxembourg, then King of Hungary, granted Vojk
the Hunyad Castle (in contemporary Hungarian: Hunyadvár, later Vajdahunyad, in present-day Romanian: Hunedoara) and its
estates for his distinction in the wars against the Ottomans.
Genealogy Vojk (or Vajk/Vayk) -Hunyadi's father- was described as being Vlach (an exonym and sometime endonym for
Romanian) descent by medieval chroniclers[31] and modern historians.[12][32][33][34][35] He was a nobile Knyaz[36] from
Wallachia[36][37][38] and was the son of "Şerb" (also spelled Serban, Sorb, Serbe or Sorbe), or a Vlach Knyaz from the Banate of
Szörény (Severin), Kingdom of Hungary. There are varying opinions as to Şerb's ancestry. From one point of view he had
supposedly Tatar-Cuman origin, because the second part of his name is derived from a Cuman dignity name ('Bâg'- prince) and
'Sor' means 'Calamity' in Tatar-Turkic.[24] Additionally, 'Sor' was an Altaic people in that period as well.[24] "Şerb" became
Catholic and Hungarian in culture.[39] According to medieval sources, Şerb had three sons: Hunyadi's father Vojk (a Hungarian
pagan name[citation needed], or a properly Vlach name, or even a Turkic or Slavic one), Magos (Mogoş, also Mogos, meaning "tall" in
Hungarian), and Radu(l) or Radol[citation needed] (a Romanian name).[40][41][not in citation given] According to some linguists, his son's name
(Vayk) was likely originated from the Turkic 'Bayk, Bayq',[23][24] what was used till the 18th century by Tatars.[24] A theory
developed at the end of the 19th century that Şerb was originally from Serbia.[42] Vojk took the family name of Hunyadi in 1409
when he received the estate around the Hunyad Castle from Sigismund and was ennobled as count of Hunyad. There are theories
about his great-grandfather, researchers suggest that he was probably called Costea[28] While the family's name and ascent to
comital rank of Count of Hunyad were established only by Sigismund granting the title; the lack of evidence for royal descent
gave rise to various legends and scholarly constructions about the origins of the Hunyadis. This is especially true of Hunyadi's son
Matthias Corvinus and his origin has also been disputed in modern times.[43] Matthias Corvinus' court historian Antonio Bonfini
flattered his king by tracing the family's ancestry to the Roman gens Corvina, or Valeriana, while adding: "for this man was
indeed born of a Romanian father and a Hungarian mother"[44] A contemporary Hungarian historian Johannes de Thurocz,
similarly flattering his king, wrote in the Chronicle of the Hungarians (Chronica Hungarorum) that the Hunyadi family was of
Hunnic origin, even calling Matthias Corvinus the "Second Attila".[45] The 16th century Saxon historian Gáspár Heltai made
Hunyadi the illegitimate son of king Sigismund and the young noble Erzsébet Morzsinay.[46][47]
Corvinus legend The epithet Corvinus (referring to the raven) was first used by Antonio Bonfini the biographer of his son
Matthias Corvinus, but is also applied to Hunyadi. It is linked to the legend documented by Gáspár Heltai. The legend said that
Hunyadi was the illegitimate son of Hungarian King Sigismund of Luxembourg,[48] and that Vojk was a faithful soldier of his
father for two decades. After the death of his wife, King Sigismund met Elizabeth Morzsinai, a virgin noblewoman, and fell in
love. In the morning, the king gave a royal ring to the lady, promising her that he would take care of the son. After the boy was
born, the family set off to Buda to the palace of Sigismund. During the trip, they took a rest, and baby Hunyadi started crying.
Elizabeth gave him the ring to make him quiet, whereupon a rook stole the ring. Elizabeth's brother took his bow and arrow and
shot the rook, whereupon, as if by a miracle, the rook did not die, and the ring was recovered. Arriving at the royal court in Buda,
Sigismund filled the baby's cradle with precious stones. Other versions of the legend state that it was the child Hunyadi himself,
about 6 years old, who shot the arrow. The legend may have some basis in fact, as his presumed father, Vojk, had never before
had a coat of arms depicting a raven, and suddenly he changed it for some reason. Moreover Wallachian coat of arms (which
changed its appearance through the Early Modern Age) depicts a raven-like bird (actually a black aquila chrysaëtos[49]) holding a
cross in its beak.[50] The family of Vojk received the estates of Hunyad, and Hunyadi's education was funded by the king. The part
of the legend that is most questioned is not the raven and the events surrounding Hunyadi, but the parentage by Sigismund. The
main counterargument is that Hunyadi was not able to become king of Hungary because he was not considered of royal blood. It
is argued that Hunyadi, his wife Elizabeth, and their son Matthias invented and/or promoted the legend in order to allow
Hunyadi's son to become king.
Mother Hunyadi's mother was Elizabeth Morzsinay (Hungarian: Erzsébet Morzsinay, Romanian: Elisabeta Morşina or Elisabeta
Mărgineanu[51]), a lady of the lesser nobility from Káránsebes (today:Caransebeş),[52] Krassó-Szörény county,[dubious – discuss]
Kingdom of Hungary. According to primary sources she was the daughter of a Romanian[53] lesser noble from Hunyad
(Hunedoara), Transylvania, Kingdom of Hungary. Some modern writers suggest she was ethnic Hungarian[47][54][55] while others
note that her family (also known as the Demsusi Muzsina family) was a family of Romanians ennobled in the second half of the
15th century[56] Since she was a noble her religion was Roman Catholicism. Ortodox people were not allowed to be noble in the
Kingdom of Hungary at least not after the arrival of Anjou kings.[57]
Wife In 1432, Hunyadi married Erzsébet Szilágyi (c. 1410-1483), a Hungarian noblewoman, also of high rank (Szilágy being the
name of a county overlapping with present-day Sălaj County).
Children John Hunyadi had two children, Ladislaus and Matthias Corvinus. Ladislaus felt victim to the struggle between
Hungary's various barons and its Habsburg king, Ladislaus the Posthumous (also king of Bohemia), in the years after the death of
Hunyadi. After the assassination of Ulrich II of Celje, the king felt threatened by Ladislaus. The king planned to eliminate him by
inviting him to Buda. Suspecting no evil, Ladislaus accompanied the King to Buda, but on arriving there was arrested on a charge
of plotting against the King, condemned to death without the observance of any legal formalities, and beheaded on 16 March
1457. His brother, Matthias, was also inveigled to Buda by the enemies of his house, and, on the pretext of being concerned in a
purely imaginary conspiracy against the King, was condemned to decapitation, but was spared on account of his youth. In
November 1457, the King died. Matthias was taken hostage by George of Poděbrady, governor of Bohemia, a friend of the
Hunyadis who aimed to raise a national king to the Magyar throne. Poděbrady treated Matthias hospitably and affianced him with
his daughter Catherine, but still detained him, for safety's sake, in Prague, even after a Magyar deputation had hastened thither to
offer the youth the crown. Matthias took advantage of the memory left by his father's deed, and by the general population's dislike
of foreign candidates; most the barons, furthermore, considered that the young scholar would be a weak monarch in their hands.
An influential section of the magnates, headed by the Palatine Ladislaus Garai and by Nicholas of Ilok, voivode of Transylvania,
who had been concerned in the judicial murder of Matthias's brother Ladislaus, and hated the Hunyadis as semi-foreign upstarts,
were fiercely opposed to Matthias's election; however, they were not strong enough to resist against Matthias's uncle Mihály
Szilágyi and his 15,000 veterans. On 20 January 1458, Matthias was elected king by the Diet. It was the first time in the medieval
Hungarian kingdom that a member of the nobility, without dynastic ancestry and relationship, mounted the royal throne.
Rise of a general While still a young enterprising man, Hunyadi entered the retinue of Sigismund, who appreciated his qualities
but was also the King's creditor on several occasions. A document describing a loan agreement of 1.200 gold florins, dated from
1434 refers to him "János the Wallachian"[58](John the Wallachian). He accompanied the monarch to Frankfurt in Sigismund's
quest for the Imperial crown in 1410, took an active part in the Hussite Wars in 1420, and in 1437 was sent south to successfully
raise the Turkish siege of Semendria. The young knight served many powerful magnates and strategists of Sigismund, including
Stefan Lazarević and Philippo Scolari. In Milan he made the acquaintance of the condottiere (mercenary captain) Francesco
Sforza and studied the new military art of Italy.[59] Later he received numerous landed estates and a privileged position in the royal
council of Hungary. His star was soon in the ascendant and in 1438 King Albert found Hunyadi promoted to Ban of Severin[48]
that lay south of the defensible southern frontiers of Hungary; the Carpathians and the Drava/Sava/Danube complex, a province
subject to constant Ottoman harassment. On the untimely death of Albert in 1439, Hunyadi was of the volition that Hungary was
best served by a warrior king and lent his support to the candidature of young King of Poland Władysław III of Varna in 1440,
and thus came into collision with the powerful magnate Ulrich II of Celje, the chief proponent of Albert's widow Elisabeth of
Bohemia (1409–1442) and her infant son, Ladislaus Posthumus of Bohemia and Hungary. Featuring prominently in the brief
ensuing civil war, Władysław III's side was thus reinforced by Hunyadi's noticeable military abilities, and was rewarded by
Władysław with the captaincy of the fortress of Belgrade, a latter dignity that he shared with Mihály Újlaki. He became the king's
trusted adviser and most highly-regarded soldier, and was put in charge of military operations against the Ottomans. The king
recognized Hunyadi's merits by granting him estates in Eastern Hungary. Hunyadi became the greatest landowner in Hungarian
history. At the peak of his career he could call himself master of 2.3 million hectares of land, 28 castles, 57 towns and about 1,000
villages.[11] Unlike most of his contemporaries, Hunyadi did not use his great revenues or the military and political weight of his
thousands of retainers simply for his personal aggrandizement; for many years, he bore a large share of the cost of fighting the
Ottomans.[60]
First battles with the Ottomans The main frame of the conflict with the Turks now resided in his jurisdiction and Hunyadi soon
showed and displayed extraordinary capacity in marshalling its defenses with the limited resources at his disposal. In 1441 he
scored a pitched battle victory at Semendria over Ishak Bey. The following year, not far from Nagyszeben in Transylvania he
annihilated an invasion force of Ottomans that offered stern battle with an immense host, and recovered for Hungary the
suzerainty of Wallachia. In February 1450, he signed an alliance treaty with Bogdan II of Moldavia. In July 1442, an undaunted
and intrepid Hunyadi proceeded march against the enemy with 15,000 Hungarian and Szekler irregulars against a massed
formation of a third Turkish invasion force reinforced by the choicest of Ottoman military numbering 80,000 in Wallachia sent in
retaliation for subsequent defeats. Hunyadi's engagement at the Iron Gates is one of Hungary's more celebrated victories,
Hunyadi's maneuvers of infantry, cavalry and war wagons performed superbly to the astonishment of the Turkish commander
Sehabbedin, who was astounded by the smallness of the Magyar army. These victories made Hunyadi a prominent enemy of the
Ottomans and renowned throughout Christendom, and was a prime motivator to undertake in 1443, along with King Władysław,
the famous expedition known as the long campaign. Hunyadi, at the head of the vanguard, crossed the Balkans through the Gate
of Trajan, captured Niš, defeated three Turkish pashas, and, after taking Sofia, united with the royal army and defeated Sultan
Murad II at Snaim (Kustinitza). The impatience of the king and the severity of the winter then compelled him (February 1444) to
return home, but not before he had utterly broken the Sultan's power in Bosnia, Herzegovina, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Albania. No
sooner had he regained Hungary than he received tempting offers from Pope Eugene IV, represented by the Legate Julian
Cesarini, from Đurađ Branković, despot of Serbia, and George Kastrioti Skanderbeg, prince of Albania, to resume the war and
realize his ideal of driving the Ottomans from Europe. All the preparations had been made when Murad's envoys arrived in the
royal camp at Szeged and offered a ten years' truce on advantageous terms. Branković bribed Hunyadi – he gave him his vast
estates in Hungary – to support the acceptance of the peace. Cardinal Julian Cesarini found a traitorous solution. The king swore
that he would never give up the crusade, so all future peace and oath was automatically invalid. After this Hungary accepted the
Sultan's offer and Hunyadi in Władysław's name swore on the Gospels to observe them.
Battle of Varna Two days later Cesarini received tidings that a fleet of Venetian galleys had set off for the Bosporus to prevent
Murad (who, crushed by his recent disasters, had retired to Anatolia) from recrossing into Europe, and the cardinal reminded the
King that he had sworn to cooperate by land if the western powers attacked the Ottomans by sea. In July the Hungarian army
recrossed the frontier and advanced towards the Black Sea coast in order to march to Constantinople escorted by the galleys.
Đurađ Branković, however, fearful of the sultan's vengeance in case of disaster, privately informed Murad of the advance of the
Christian host, and prevented Kastrioti from joining it. On reaching Varna, the Hungarians found that the Venetian galleys had
failed to prevent the transit of the Sultan - indeed, the Genoese transported the Sultan's army (and received, according to legend,
one gold piece for each soldier shipped over). Hunyadi, on 10 November 1444, confronted the Ottomans with less than half the
Hungarian forces. Nevertheless, victory was still possible in the Battle of Varna as Hunyadi with his superb military skills
managed to rout both flanks of the Sultan's army. At this point, however, king Władysław, who up to that point had remained in
the background and relinquished full leadership to Hunyadi, assumed command and with his bodyguards carried out an all-out
attack on the elite troops of the Sultan, the Janissaries. The Janissaries readily massacred the king's men, also killing the king,
exhibiting his head on a pole. The king's death caused disarray in the Hungarian army, which was subsequently routed by the
Ottomans; Hunyadi himself narrowly escaped. On his way home, Vlad II Dracul of Wallachia imprisoned Hunyadi; only the
threats of the palatine of Hungary brought the voivode, theoretically an ally of Hunyadi against the Ottomans, to release him.[61]
Regent of the Kingdom of Hungary
Brief personal rule At the diet which met in February 1445 a provisional government consisting of five Captain Generals was
formed, with Hunyadi receiving Transylvania and four counties bordering on the Tisza, called the Partium or Körösvidék, to rule.
As the anarchy resulting from the division became unmanageable, Hunyadi was elected regent of Hungary (Regni Gubernator) on
5 June 1446 in the name of Ladislaus V and given the powers of a regent. His first act as regent was to proceed against the
German king Frederick III, who refused to release Ladislaus V. After ravaging Styria, Carinthia, and Carniola and threatening
Vienna, Hunyadi's difficulties elsewhere compelled him to make a truce with Frederick for two years. In 1448 he received a
golden chain and the title of Prince from Pope Nicholas V, and immediately afterwards resumed the war with the Ottomans. He
lost the two-day Second Battle of Kosovo (7–10 October 1448, owing to the treachery of Dan II of Wallachia, then pretender to
the throne, and of his old rival Branković, who intercepted Hunyadi's planned Albanian reinforcements led by George Kastrioti,
preventing them from ever reaching the battle. Branković also imprisoned Hunyadi for a time in the dungeons of the fortress of
Smederevo, but he was ransomed by his countrymen and, after resolving his differences with his powerful and numerous political
enemies in Hungary, led a punitive expedition against the Serbian prince, who was forced to accept harsh terms of peace. In 1450
Hunyadi went to Pozsony to negotiate with Holy Roman Emperor Frederick III the terms of the surrender of Ladislaus V, but no
agreement could be reached. Several of John Hunyadi's enemies, including Ulrich II of Celje, accused him of conspiracy to
overthrow the King. In order to defuse the increasingly volatile domestic situation, he relinquished his regency and the title of
regent. On his return to Hungary at the beginning of 1453, Ladislaus named him count of Beszterce and Captain General of the
kingdom. The king also expanded his coat-of-arms with the so-called Beszterce Lions.
Belgrade victory and death Meanwhile, the Ottoman issue had again become acute, and, after the fall of Constantinople in 1453,
it seemed natural that Sultan Mehmed II was rallying his resources in order to subjugate Hungary. His immediate objective was
Nándorfehérvár (today Belgrade). Nándorfehérvár was a major castle-fortress, and a gate keeper of south Hungary. The fall of this
stronghold would have opened a clear way to the heart of Central Europe. Hunyadi arrived at the siege of Nándorfehérvár at the
end of 1455, after settling differences with his domestic enemies. At his own expense, he restocked the supplies and arms of the
fortress, leaving in it a strong garrison under the command of his brother-in-law Mihály Szilágyi and his own eldest son László
Hunyadi. He proceeded to form a relief army, and assembled a fleet of two hundred ships. His main ally was the Franciscan friar,
Giovanni da Capistrano (known today as St. John of Capistrano), whose fiery oratory drew a large crusade made up mostly of
peasants. Although relatively ill-armed (most were armed with farm equipment, such as scythes and pitchforks) they flocked to
Hunyadi and his small corps of seasoned mercenaries and cavalry. On 14 July 1456 the flotilla assembled by Hunyadi destroyed
the Ottoman fleet. On 21 July, Szilágyi's forces in the fortress repulsed a fierce assault by the Rumelian army, and Hunyadi
pursued the retreating Ottoman forces into their camp, taking advantage of the Turkish army's confused flight from the city. After
fierce but brief fighting, the camp was captured, and Mehmet lifted the siege and returned to Istanbul. A 70 year period of relative
peace on Hungary's southeastern border began with his flight. However, plague broke out in Hunyadi's camp three weeks after the
lifting of the siege, and he died August 11. On his deathbed Hunyadi said Defend, my friends, Christendom and Hungary from all
enemies... Do not quarrel among yourselves. If you should waste your energies in altercations, you will seal your own fate as well
as dig the grave of our country..[62] He is buried in the Roman Catholic Cathedral of Gyulafehérvár (now: Alba Iulia) next to his
younger brother, John. Sultan Mehmet II paid him tribute:"Although he was my enemy I feel grief over his death, because the
world has never seen such a man."
The Noon Bell Pope Callixtus III ordered the bells of every European church to be rung every day at noon, as a call for believers
to pray for the defenders of the city.[63][64] The practice of Noon bell is traditionally attributed to the international conmemoration
of the Belgrade victory and to the order of Pope Callixtus III.[65][66][67]
Legacy The rise of nationalism has led to hero images of John Hunyadi in the discourse of several local nationalities – each in its
own way has claimed him as their own[dubious – discuss]. Along with his son Matthias Corvinus, Hunyadi is considered a Hungarian
national hero and praised as its defender against the Ottoman threat.[68][69][70][71] He was born in and had a career in the Kingdom of
Hungary, Hunyadi was a member of the Hungarian aristocracy and a subject of the Hungarian crown. His whole life was
dedicated to the Hungarian and Christian cause; he married a Hungarian noblewoman, Erzsébet Szilágyi; and he reared his
children as Magyars[original research?].[72] He no doubt was born in the Catholic faith, which his father probably had already professed.
He has not only become member of the Hungarian nobility but has also risen according to their deserts to the highest positions in
the land.[73] John Hunyadi is mentioned in Szózat, a poem which is considered a "second anthem" of Hungary. Romanian
historiography gives Hunyadi a place of importance in the history of Romania too. He is remembered in Romania as a national
hero mostly due to his Romaniannote 1 origin and his role as Voivode of Transylvania (a region at the time part of the Kingdom of
Hungary now part of Romania). Hunyadi was also responsible for establishing the careers of both Stephen III of Moldavia and the
controversial Vlad III of Wallachia. Pope Pius II writes that Hunyadi did not increase so much the glory of the Hungarians, but
especially the glory of the Romanians among whom he was born.[74][75][76][77] The French writer and diplomat Philippe de
Commines described Hunyadi as a very valiant gentleman, called the White Knight of Wallachia, a person of great honour and
prudence, who for a long time had governed the kingdom of Hungary, and had gained several battles over the Turks[78] Hunyadi
was "recognised as being Hungarian..." and "frequently called Ugrin Janko, 'Janko the Hungarian'" in the Serbian and Croatian
societies of the 15th century,[79][80] while another bugarštica makes him of Serbian origin[80] He is also portrayed as an ardent
supporter of the Catholicization of Orthdox peoples[81] In Bulgarian folklore, the memory of Hunyadi was preserved in the epic
song hero character of Yankul(a) Voivoda, along with Sekula Detentse, a fictitious hero perhaps inspired by Hunyadi's nephew,
János Székely.[82] Nicolaus Olahus was the nephew of John Hunyadi[83] Among Hunyadi's noted qualities, is his regional primacy
in recognizing the insufficiency and unreliability of the feudal levies, instead regularly employing large professional armies. His
notable contribution to the development of the science of European warfare included the emphasis on tactics and strategy in place
of over-reliance on frontal assaults and mêlées. His diplomatic, strategic, and tactical skills allowed him to serve his country well.
After his death, Pope Callixtus III stated that "the light of the world has passed away", considering his defense of Christendom
against the Ottoman threat. The same pope ordered the noon bell to be rung for the memory of Hunyadi's victory in siege of
Belgrade, and to mark the resistance to Islamic progression inside Europe.
Notes
^ According to the majority of references, modern historians and mainstream sources. There are also alternative researches
suggesting other origin as it is already explained in the article.
1. ^ Engel, Pál; Andrew Ayton, Tamás Pálosfalvi (2005). Andrew Ayton. ed. The realm of St. Stephen: a history of
medieval Hungary, 895-1526. I.B.Tauris. p. 283.
2. ^ Gwatkin, Henry Melvill; John Bagnell Bury, James Pounder Whitney, Zachary Nugent Brooke. The
Cambridge medieval history, Volume 8. Macmillan. pp. 608.
3. ^ János Hunyadi. (2010). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved August 10, 2010, from Encyclopædia
Britannica Online: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/277182/Janos-Hunyadi
4. ^ White Knight (Clear waters rising: a mountain walk across Europe by Nicholas Crane, Viking, 1996, p. 320),
White Knight of Wallachia [1][2] or White Knight of Hungary (Encyclopedia of the undead, p. 67, Career Press, 2006,
Jihad in the West: Muslim conquests from the 7th to the 21st centuries By Paul Fregosi, p. 244., Prometheus Books,
1998) depending on sources
5. ^ a b "János Hunyadi". Encyclopædia Britannica. 2010.
6. ^ Stanley Sandler, Ground warfare: an international encyclopedia, Volume 1, ABC-CLIO, 2002, p. 391
+general+Ground
warfare&hl=en&ei=YDTNTOedNYzLswaXz8inAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCQQ6AEw
AA#v=onepage&q=Hungarian%20general&f=false
7. ^ Nicholson, Helen J. (2004). The Crusades. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press. p. 115. ISBN 0-313-32685-1.
8. ^ Suttner, Ernst Christoph (2007). Staaten und Kirchen in der Völkerwelt des östlichen Europa : Entwicklungen
der Neuzeit. p. 201.
9. ^ Encyclopædia Britannica "Janos Hunyadi"
10. ^
http://books.google.com/books?id=Zgg6eqKKkbcC&pg=PA306&dq=iancu+de+hunedoara&hl=en&ei=yWd7TZWXLc6
u8QPFo8C6Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CEYQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=iancu%20de%20
hunedoara&f=false
11. ^ a b Lendvai, Paul (2003). The Hungarians: a thousand years of victory in defeat. C. Hurst & Co. Publishers.
pp. 62. ISBN 9781850656821. "Matyas Hunyadi [...] was of Romanian origin on his father's side"
12. ^ a b Babinger, Franz. Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time. Princeton University Press. p. 20.
13. ^ [3] Ronald D. Bachman, ed. Romania: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1989
14. ^ Stoianovich, Traian (2000). The Balkans Since 1453. C Hurst & Co Publishers Ltd. p. 53. ISBN 1-85065-551-
0.
http://books.google.ro/books?id=xcp7OXQE0FMC&pg=PA53&lpg=PA53&dq=%22white+knight+of+wallachia%22#v
=snippet&q=%22john%20hunyadi%20was%20a%20rumanian%22&f=false. "John Hunyadi was a Rumanian who had
entered the service of Hungary and fought with such success against the Turks that he became a Hungarian national hero"
15. ^ Catholic Encyclopedia[4] "it may be taken as proved that the family of Hunyadi was of Rumanian origin"
16. ^ http://www.mongabay.com/reference/country_studies/romania/all.html
17. ^
http://books.google.com/books?ei=5UWCTcTHH4uLswbz_L20Aw&ct=result&id=QuBnAAAAMAAJ&dq=hunyadi+v
oyk&q=Hungarian+historians+have+sometimes+attempted+to+deny#search_anchor
18. ^ Elteto, Louis J.; Cadzow, John F.; Ludanyi, Andrew (1983). Transylvania: the roots of ethnic conflict. [Kent,
Ohio]: Kent State University Press. p. 45. ISBN 0-87338-283-8. "Although some Hungarian historians have tried to
disprove that the Hunyadi family was of Vlach (Wallachian) origin, the overwhelming evidence supports the view that
they indeed were not Magyars, but rose in the service of the Hungarian king"
19. ^ Hebron, Malcolm (1997). The Medieval Siege, Theme and Image in Middle English Romance. Oxford
University Press. p. 86. ISBN 9780198186205.
20. ^ Molnar, Miklos: A Concise History of Hungary. P. 61
21. ^ Frucht, Richard C. (2005). Eastern Europe: an introduction to the people, lands, and culture. ABC-CLIO. pp.
339. ISBN 9781576078006.
22. ^ Katolikus Lexikon: Hunyadi János, A M. Nemz. Tört. IV. Bp., 1896. - Elekes 1952. - Teke 1980. - Puskely
1994:279.(Hungarian)
23. ^ a b Acta orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, Volume 36, Magyar Tudományos Akadémia, 1982 p.
425-427, Cited:'Recalling what has been said above concerning the Turkic name Bayq, we may rightly come to the
conclusion that the name of Janos Hunyadi's father, Vayk was of Tatar-Cuman origin.', 'Vayk's family, which was of
Tatar-Cuman origin', 'The Damga (Turkic/Raven) must have been the mark of Vayk's clan'
24. ^ a b c d e Magyar Nyelvtudományi Társaság (SOCIETY OF HUNGARIAN LINGUISTICS), Magyar nyelv,
Volume 79, Akadémiai Kiadó, 1983, p.113
25. ^ László Rásonyi, Yusuf Gedikli, Doğu Avrupada Türklük, Selenge, 2006, p. 112
26. ^ Yılmaz Öztuna, Devletler ve hânedanlar, Volume 2, Kültür Bakanlığı, 2005, p. 116
27. ^ Seton-Watson, Hugh. Eastern Europe between the wars, 1918-1941. Cambridge University Press. pp. 25.
ISBN 9781001284781.
28. ^ a b Ioan Aurel Pop, Thomas Nägler, Mihai Bărbulescu, The History of Transylvania: Until 1541, Romanian
Cultural Institute, 2005 p. 294
29. ^ Nicholson, Helen J. (2004). The Crusades. Greenwood Publishing Group. pp. 115. ISBN 9780313326851.
30. ^ "János Hunyadi:Defender of Christendom - Hunyadi's Origin Contested". Corvinus Library.
http://www.hungarian-history.hu/lib/hunspir/hsp16.htm. "Historians are still in the dark about the year and place of his
birth, and even his parentage seems shrouded in mystery."
31. ^ Fejer, Georgius (1844). "E scriptorum ac literarum solennium testimoniis deducta." (in Latin). III. Genus et
incunabula Joannis, regni Hungariae Gubernatoris. Magyar Orszagos Leveltar, Buda. p. m.
http://www.arcanum.hu/mol/lpext.dll/fejer/33f4/3598/35fb?fn=document-frame.htm&f=templates&2.0. Retrieved 9
February 2011. "Herois nostratis pater fuit Voik, Valachus,"
32. ^ [5] A History of Hungary Peter F. Sugar, Péter Hanák, Tibor Frank - History - 1994
33. ^ Engel, Pal. Realm of St. Stephen : A History of Medieval Hungary, 895-1526. London,, GBR: I. B. Tauris &
Company, Limited, 2001. p xii.
34. ^ Encyclopædia Britannica |"Janos Hunyadi"
35. ^ Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages, Vol 1, De André Vauchez,Richard Barrie Dobson,Michael Lapidge p. 705
|http://books.google.com/books?id=qtgotOF0MKQC&pg=PR11&dq=Encyclopedia+of+the+Middle+Ages,+Volumul+1
++De+Andr%C3%A9+Vauchez,Richard+Barrie+Dobson,Michael+Lapidge&lr=&hl=ro&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false
36. ^ a b Domokos G. Kosáry, Steven Béla Várdy, History of the Hungarian nation, Danubian Press, 1969, p. 45
37. ^ Ioan Aurel Pop, Thomas Nägler, Mihai Bărbulescu, The History of Transylvania: Until 1541, Romanian
Cultural Institute, 2005, p. 294
38. ^ Enea Silvius Piccolomini, (Pope Pius II), In Europa - Historia Austrialis, BAV, URB, LAT. 405, ff.245, IIII
kal. Aprilis MCCCCLVIII, Ex Urbe Roma
39. ^ David Nicolle, Angus McBride, Hungary and the fall of Eastern Europe 1000-1568, Osprey Publishing, 1988
40. ^ [6]
41. ^ Petre P. Panaitescu "Istoria Românilor", 7th edition, Editura didactică şi pedagigică, Bucureşti, 1990, p. 109
42. ^ Dr. Borovszky Samu, Magyarország vármegyéi és városai, Kiadta az országos monográfiai társaság,
Budapest
43. ^ Cf. Dr. Borovszky Samu, Magyarország vármegyéi és városai (Hungary's counties and cities), published by:
Országos Monográfiai Társaság (the Society for Hungarian Monographies), Budapest.)
44. ^ Decad. III, lib. 4, ed. cit., p. 448, in Armbruster, Adolf. The Romanity of the Romanians. Ch 3. Sec 2. p70
45. ^ TEKE ZSUZSA: HUNYADI JÁNOS • 1407 k.–1456, 10. évfolyam (1999) 9-10. szám (93-94.) (Rubicon
History Magazine, Hungarian)
46. ^ http://www.hik.hu/tankonyvtar/site/books/b152/ch12s01s01.html Heltai Gáspár: Krónika az magyaroknak
dolgairól (Hungarian)
47. ^ a b Anthony Endrey, Hungarian History: From 1301 to 1686, Hungarian Institute, 1980 Citation from the book:
"a Hungarian noblewoman, Elizabeth Morzsinai" [7]
48. ^ a b "János Hunyady". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. 1913.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07564b.htm.
49. ^ Dan Cernovodeanu. La Science et L'Art Heraldiques en Roumanie. Editura Stiinţifică şi Enciclopedică.
http://books.google.com/books?id=tWAoPAAACAAJ&dq=Dan+Cernovodeanu.
50. ^ Thomas Thornton. The Present State of Turkey. University of California.
http://books.google.com/books?id=9UpCAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA358&dq=wallachia+raven.
51. ^ Ion I. Nistor, Istoria românilor, Volume 1, Biblioteca Bucureștilor, 2002, p. 250
52. ^ László Kővári, Erdély nevezetesebb családai (more famous families of Transylvania), Barráné és Stein
Bizománya, 1854, p. 122
53. ^ "Opulenti Boyeronis (i. e. a Vlach nobleman) filiam – ex genere Morsinai – Transalpinus quidam Boyero,
nomine Woyk, qui ob simultates valachicas huc (in Transilvaniam) se patriis, ex oris receperat, venustate Morsinaianae
captus, duxit. – Elisabetham, vocatam ferunt;" available from:
http://www.arcanum.hu/mol/lpext.dll/fejer/33f4/3598/35fb?fn=document-frame.htm&f=templates&2.0
54. ^ Zoltán Bodolai, Hungarica: a chronicle of events and personalities from the Hungarian past, Hungaria, 1983
55. ^ Hóman Bálint- Szekfű Gyula: Magyar történet II., KMENy, Bp., 1936, 432.
56. ^ Makkai, László; Mócsy, András; Szász, Zoltán; Béla Köpeczi (2001). "III. TRANSYLVANIA IN THE
MEDIEVAL HUNGARIAN KINGDOM (896–1526), FROM THE MONGOL INVASION TO THE BATTLE OF
MOHÁCS". Romanian Voivodes and Cnezes, Nobles and Villeins. HISTORY OF TRANSYLVANIA. 1. Boulder,
Colorado: Social Science Monographs, Distributed by Columbia University Press, New York. ISBN 0-88033-479-7.
http://mek.niif.hu/03400/03407/html/57.html. "When he [János Hunyadi] served as Transylvania's voivode and Székely
count (the first time that the two offices were held by one man), Hunyadi drew into his retinue not only Hungarian and
Székely retainers but also several Romanian cnezes...several distinguished Transylvanian families trace their ancestry to
cnezes ennobled by Hunyadi: the Nádasdi Ungor, Malomvizi Kenderesi, Kendeffi...and Demsusi Muzsina
families...János Hunyadi's mother came from the Demsusi Muzsina family"LCCN 2001-131858
57. ^ Centraleuropas historia (The History of Central Europe) Kristian Gerner, Natur & Kultur , Stockholm 1997,
page 370
58. ^ Molnar, Miklos : A Concise History of Hungary. p. 61
59. ^ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/277182/Janos-Hunyadi
60. ^ http://mek.niif.hu/03400/03407/html/84.html
61. ^ "National Geographic Magyarország: A várnai csata" (in Hungarian).
http://www.geographic.hu/index.php?act=napi&rov=5&id=742. Retrieved 2008-06-02.
62. ^ Sisa, Stephen (1990). The spirit of Hungary: a panorama of Hungarian history and culture (2 ed.). Vista
Books (original from University of Michigan). pp. 56.
 63. ^ Thomas Henry Dyer (1861). The history of modern Europe: From the fall of Constantinople. J. Murray. p. 85.
http://books.google.com/books?id=jBAMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA85&dq=Noon+bell+belgrade&cd=5#v=onepage&q=Noo
n%20bell%20belgrade&f=false.
64. ^ István Lázár: Hungary: A Brief History (see in Chapter 6)
65. ^ Kerny, Terézia (2008). "The Renaissance - Four Times Over. Exhibitions Commemorating Matthias’s
Accession to the Throne". The Hungarian Quarterly. Budapest, Hungary: Society of the Hungarian Quarterly. pp. 79–90.
http://www.ceeol.com/aspx/issuedetails.aspx?issueid=36917033-77c7-4622-8f76-dae90f531363&articleId=ca7d4a8b-
cee0-4d8b-beab-fb1536ba3597. "On July 22, 1456, John Hunyadi won a decisive victory at Belgrade over the armies of
Sultan Mehmed II. Hunyadi’s feat—carried out with a small standing army combined with peasants rallied to fight the
infidel by the Franciscan friar St John of Capistrano— had the effect of putting an end to Ottoman attempts on Hungary
and Western Europe for the next seventy years, and is considered to have been one of the most momentous victories in
Hungarian military history. The bells ringing at noon throughout Christendom are, to this day, a daily commemoration of
John Hunyadi’s victory."
66. ^ http://www.hungarianhistory.com/lib/hunyadi/hu01.htm
67. ^ http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/CLXVII/sep08/171-d
68. ^ Volume 7 of World and Its Peoples: Europe. Marshall Cavendish. 2009. pp. 891. ISBN 9780761478836. "In
the war, Janos Hunyadi (1387-1456), subsequently a Hungarian national hero, emerged to lead Hungary's political life."
69. ^ Shaw, Stanford Jay (1976). History of the Ottoman Empire and modern Turkey, Volume 1. Cambridge
University Press. pp. 51. ISBN 9780521291637. "Hunyadi had suddenly risen as the great Hungarian national hero as a
result of his victories over the Turks in 1442."
70. ^ Dupuy, Richard Ernest (1986). The encyclopedia of military history from 3500 B.C. to the present. Harper &
Row, original from University of Michigan. pp. 435. ISBN 9780061812354. "John Hunyadi, the national hero of
Hungary, and his son Mathias Corvinus, who reigned as King of Hungary"
71. ^ Matthews, John P. C. (2007). Explosion: the Hungarian Revolution of 1956. Hippocrene Books. pp. 73–74.
ISBN 9780781811743. "One of the most powerful personalities in Hungarian history, Hunyadi established a national
unity and order which transcended privileges and special interests and succeeded in raising Hungary to the status of a
great power."
72. ^ "János Hunyadi:Defender of Christendom - Hunyadi's Origin Contested". Corvinus Library.
http://www.hungarian-history.hu/lib/hunspir/hsp16.htm.
73. ^ Lukinich, Imre. A History of Hungary in Biographical Sketches. Ayer Publishing.
74. ^ C. Giurescu, Dinu; C. Giurescu, Constantin (1980). The making of the Romanian national unitary state.
Meridiane Pub. House. p. 60.
http://books.google.com/books?cd=1&id=edFBAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22In+his+Historia+de+Europa%2C+Pope+Pius+II+
states+%22&q=%22In+his+Historia+de+Europa%2C+Pope+Pius+II+states+%22#search_anchor.
75. ^ C. Giurescu, Constantin (1969). Transylvania in the history of Romania: an historical outline. Garnstone Pub.
House. p. 82.
http://books.google.com/books?id=FLpnAAAAMAAJ&q=%22+Iancu+of+Hunedoara%29+whose+name+overshadows
+all+others,+has+enhanced+the+glory+not+so+much+of+the+Hungarians,+but+of+the+Romanians,+out+of+whom+he
+came+%22&dq=%22+Iancu+of+Hunedoara%29+whose+name+overshadows+all+others,+has+enhanced+the+glory+n
ot+so+much+of+the+Hungarians,+but+of+the+Romanians,+out+of+whom+he+came+%22&cd=1.
76. ^ Aurel Pop, loan (1997) (in Romanian). Istoria Transilvaniei medievale: de la etnogeneza românilor până la
Minai Viteazul. Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană. p. 82. ISBN 973-9261-24-8.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/12693963/ioan-aurel-pop-istoria-transilvaniei-medievale.
77. ^ Burkhard Gotthelf Struve (1717). Rerum Germanicarum Scriptores aliquot insignes. 2. p. 89.
http://books.google.ro/books?id=W1M_AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA89&lpg=PA89&dq=%22non+tam+Hungaris+quam+Valac
his+ex+quibus+natus+erat+gloriam+auxit%22&#v=onepage&q=%22non%20tam%20Hungaris%20quam%20Valachis%
20ex%20quibus%20natus%20erat%20gloriam%20auxit%22&f=false.
78. ^ Scoble, Andrew Richard. The Memoirs of Philippe De Commynes, Lord of Argenton (Volume 2); Containing
the Histories of Louis Xi and Charles Viii, Kings of France. p. 87. ISBN 9781150902581.
79. ^ Domokos Varga, Hungary in greatness and decline: the 14th and 15th centuries, Hungarian Cultural
Foundation, 1982, p. 66
80. ^ a b Chadwick, H. Munro; Nora Kershaw Chadwick (1986). The Growth of Literature, Volume 2. Cambridge
University Press. pp. 316–317. ISBN 9780521310185.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Ds2oBKF_FrUC&pg=PA317&dq=Ugrin+Janko#v=onepage&q=recognised%20as
%20being&f=false.
81. ^
http://books.google.com/books?id=8LkrAQAAIAAJ&q=iancu+de&dq=iancu+de&hl=en&ei=uWl7TZy8O8ur8QPCv8S
kCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBTgU
82. ^ Балкански, Тодор (1996). Трансилванските (седмиградските) българи. Етнос. Език. Етнонимия.
Ономастика. Просопографии (1 ed.). ИК Знак 94. pp. 102–103.
83. ^
http://books.google.com/books?id=Y4EsAQAAIAAJ&q=iancu+de&dq=iancu+de&hl=en&ei=CWt7TYS2M8ey8QO4xf
C6Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBDgy
References
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to: John Hunyadi

• This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed (1911). Encyclopædia
Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
• Sources cited by the Encyclopædia Britannica:
o R.N. Bain, "The Siege of Belgrade, 1456", in Eng. Hist. Rev., 1892.
o Antonio Bonfini, Rerum ungaricarum libri xlv, editio septima (in Latin; ~contemporary source). Hungarian
edition Balassi Kiado 2001
o J. de Chassin, Jean de Hunyad, (in French), Paris, 1859.
o György Fejér, Genus, incunabula et virtus Joannis Corvini de Hunyad (in Latin), Buda, 1844.
o Vilmos Fraknói, Cardinal Carjaval and his Missions to Hungary, (in Hungarian), Budapest, 1889.
o P. Frankl, Der Friede von Szegedin und die Geschichte seines Bruches (in German), Leipzig, 1904.
o A. Pcr, Life of Hunyadi (in Hungarian), Budapest, 1873.
o József Teleki, The Age of the Hunyadis in Hungary (in Hungarian), Pest, 1852–1857; (supplementary volumes
by D. Csinki 1895).
• Enea Silvius Piccolomini (Pope Pius II) In Europa - Historia Austrialis, BAV, URB, LAT. 405, ff.245, IIII kal. Aprilis
MCCCCLVIII, Ex Urbe Roma Bilanguical (German-Latin) edition: [8]
• Camil Mureşanu, John Hunyadi. Defender of Christendom, Iaşi-Oxford-Portland 2001
Crusades portal
Further reading
In English:
• Held, Joseph (1985). Hunyadi: Legend and Reality. Columbia University Press. ISBN 0880330701.
• Muresanu, Camil (Trans. by Laura Treptow) (2000). John Hunyadi: Defender of Christendom. Center for Romanian
Studies. ISBN 9739432182.
Additional Books that Mention John Hunyadi:
• Florescu, Radu and Raymond T. McNally (1990). Dracula, Prince of Many Faces: His Life and His Times. Back Bay
Books. ISBN 0316286567.
• Lord Kinross, Patrick Balfour (1979). The Ottoman Centuries: The Rise and Fall of the Turkish Empire. Harper
Perennial. ISBN 0688080936.
In Hungarian:
• Benedek, Elek. Nagy Magyarok Élete: Hunyadi János - Hunyadi Mátyás. Pannon-Literatúra Kft.. ISBN 9639355941.
• Czuczor, Gergely. Hunyadi János és három más történet. Unikornis Kiadó. ISBN 9634274625.
• Darvas, József (2004). A törökverő. Korona Kiadó Kft.. ISBN 9639376930.
• Földi, Pál (2004). Hunyadi János, a hadvezér. Anno Kiadó. ISBN 9633753465.
• Szentmihályi Szabó, Péter (2007). Kapisztrán és Hunyadi. Szépirodalmi Könyvkiadó. ISBN 9789638618450.

The Battle of Varna, as depicted in the 1564 edition of Martin Bielski's Polish Chronicle. Sigismund of Luxembourg's royal
charter (1409)
 Hunyadi's tomb in Gyulafehérvár / Alba Iulia Catholic Cathedral. Personal Coat of arms – note the raven depicted on the
escutcheon, the origin of the name Corvinus. John Hunyadi - hand-colored woodcut in Johannes de Thurocz's Chronicle Chronica
Hungarorum,

Gothic fresco of the Siege of Belgrade in the Church of Immaculate Conception of Virgin Mary in Olomouc (1468) John
Hunyadi's seal Ioanis de Huniad, Gubernatoris

Regni Hungarie John Hunyadi, contemporary engraving John Hunyadi in a Johannes de Thurocz Chronicle woodcut
HungaryHunyad Castle, main entrance
 Battle of Sibiu (1442)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Date March 18-March 25, 1442
Location Sântimbru and Sibiu, Transylvania (now Romania)
Result Hungarian victory
Belligerents

Kingdom of Hungary Ottoman Empire

Commanders and leaders

John Hunyadi György Lépes † Simon Kamonyai † Mesid bey † Shehabbedin Beylerbey of Rumelia
Strength
10,000 men (Hungarians, Transylvanian Saxons,
ar. 35,000 above all irregulars, and some regulars
Vlach volunteers and Polish cavalry)
Casualties and losses
3-4,000 killed 15-20,000 killed
The Battle of Sibiu or Battle of Szeben (Hungarian: Szebeni csata) was a battle between Hungarians under John Hunyadi and the
Ottoman Turks on March 18 and March 25, 1442, near Sântimbru (Marosszentimre) and Sibiu. It was Hunyadi's third victory over
the Ottomans after the relief of Smederevo in 1437 and the defeat of Ishak Beg midway between Semendria and Belgrade in 1441.
The Hungarian Kingdom in the 14th century was in conflict with the Ottoman Empire. Louis I of Hungary in Bulgaria was a
match for the Turks, but the Wallachian voivods would not support the Hungarians. In the Battle of Nicopolis the Ottoman army
crushed the Hungarian-European crusaders and their Wallachian allies. In 1438 Ottoman marauders attacked Transylvania, where
in 1437 the Ottomans had been beaten by an uprising under Antal Nagy de Buda. For up to 45 days the Ottomans without let or
hindrance attacked the Transylvanian Saxon lands and Hungarian villages and market towns.In 1441 John Hunyadi came to
power. Hunyadi attacked the Ottomans in Serbia and at the Battle of Smederevo get the best of Ishak bey. Murad II wanted
revenge, and gave the task to Mesid Bey in Transylvania. The army of Mesid Bey numbered 17,000 men. He was joined by
Shehabbedin Beylerbey of Rumelia. His forces allegedly quadrupled Mesid's army, but may actually have just been equal to
Mesid's forces. Many were presumably not regular forces, but some were janissary and spakh. Hunyadi's forces consisted of
Hungarian, Transylvanian and Saxon forces, with some Polish and Romanian soldiers. The commander of the vanguard
detachment was bishop György Lépes. Lépes was responsible for the outbreak of the Transylvanian peasant-revolt in 1437.
Hunyadi's forces numbered about 10,000 men. On March 18 Lépes' forces (2,000 men) clashed with Mesid near Sântimbru. The
Ottomans won by forces of numbers and Hunyadi was forced to retreat, but Mesid did not pursue Hunyadi. Lépes was taken
prisoner and Mesid beheaded the bishop. Hunyadi's army regrouped near Sibiu. Simon Kamonyai swapped his armour for
Hunyadi's armour so that the Turks would believe he was Hunyadi. Kamonyai was to execute a head-on attack, while Hunyadi
went around Mesid's army. Kamonyai was killed in action, however Hunyadi with the Hungarian heavy cavalry charged Mesid,
and crushed the Turks. Mesid was killed, while Shehabbedin escaped with the remaining Ottomans. Hunyadi was able to ransom
Lépes's head with Mesid's head. In the two battles, 3-4,000 Hungarian and 15-20,000 Ottoman soldiers were killed. Out of
revenge Shehabbedin again entered Transylvania. In the Battle of the Iron Gate, near the Danube, he was defeated.
Sources Pál Földi. Nagy hadvezérek ("Great Warlords"), Anno Publisher, ISBN 963-9066-66-4
 Crusade of Varna (1443-1444)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Crusade of Varna was a string of events in 1443–44 between the Kingdom of Hungary, the Serbian Despotate, the
Principality of Wallachia and the Ottoman Empire. It culminated in a devastating Hungarian loss at the Battle of Varna on
November 10, 1444.
Background In 1428, while the Ottoman Empire was fighting a war with the Republic of Venice, the Ottomans and the Kingdom
of Hungary achieved a temporary peace by establishing the Serbian Despotate as a buffer state. After the war ended in 1430,[1][2]
the Ottomans returned to their earlier policy of controlling all lands south of the Danube-Sava River line. In 1432, Sultan Murad II
began raiding into Transylvania. After King Sigismund died in 1437, the attacks intensified, with the Ottomans occupying Borač
in 1438 and Zvornik and Srebrenica in 1439. At the end of 1439, Smederevo capitulated and Murad succeeded in making Serbia
an Ottoman province. Đurađ Branković, Despot of Serbia, fled to his estates in Hungary. In 1440, Murad besieged Hungary's
main border fortress, Belgrade. After failing to take the fortress, he was forced to return to Anatolia to stop attacks by the
Karamanids.[3][4] Meanwhile, Sigismund's successor Albert had died in October 1439, shortly after signing a law to "restore the
ancient laws and customs of the realm". The law restricted the royal authority by requiring the participation of landed nobility in
political decisions. Four months after Albert's death, his only son, Ladislaus, was born while Hungary was in the midst of a civil
war over the next monarch. On July 17, 1440, Vladislaus, king of Poland, was crowned despite continuing disputes.[5] John
Hunyadi aided Vladislaus's cause by pacifying the eastern counties, gaining him the position of Voivode of Transylvania and the
corresponding responsibility of protecting Hungary's southern border. By the end of 1442, Vladislaus had secured his status in
Hungary, and denied an Ottoman proposal of peace in exchange for Belgrade.[4] The Roman Catholic Church, meanwhile, had
long been advocating for a crusade against the Ottomans, and with the end of both the Hungarian civil war and a nearly
simultaneous one in Byzantium, they were able to realistically begin negotiations and planning. The impetus required to turn the
plans into action was provided by Hunyadi between 1441–42. In 1441, he defeated a raid led by Ishak Pasha of Smederevo.[3] He
nearly annihilated Mezid Bey's army in Transylvania on March 22, 1442, and in September he defeated the revenge attack of
Şihabeddin Pasha, governor-general of Rumelia.[4] Branković, hoping to liberate Serbia, also lent his support after Novo Brdo, the
last major Serbian city, fell to the Ottomans in 1441.
The Crusade
Early fighting On January 1, 1443, Pope Eugene IV published a crusading bull. In early May, it was reported "that the Turks
were in a bad state and that it would be easy to expel them from Europe", though the success of the crusade still required the
simultaneous attacks of both the Hungarian and Karamanid armies. However, in the spring of 1443, before the Hungarians were
ready, the Karamanids attacked the Ottoman Empire and were devastated by Murad's full army.[4] The Hungarian army, led by
Vladislaus, Hunyadi, and Branković, attacked in mid-October. They correctly expected that Murad would not be able to quickly
mobilize his army, which consisted mainly of fief-holding cavalrymen who needed to collect the harvest to pay taxes. Hunyadi's
experience of winter campaigns from 1441–42 added to the Hungarian's advantage. They also had better armor, often rendering
the Ottoman weapons useless. Murad could not rely on the loyalty of his troops from Rumelia, and had difficulties countering
Hungarian tactics.[4] As the Hungarians advanced, they forced Kasim Pasha of Rumelia and his co-commander Turahan Bey to
abandon camp and flee to Sofia, Bulgaria to warn Murad of the invasion. However, the two burned all the villages in their path in
an attempt to wear down the Hungarians with a scorched earth tactic. When they arrived in Sofia, they advised the Sultan to burn
the city and retreat to the mountain passes beyond, where the Ottoman's smaller army would not be such a disadvantage. Shortly
after, bitter cold set in, and the next encounter, fought at Zlatitsa Pass just before Christmas 1443, was fought in the snow. The
Hungarians were defeated. As they marched home, however, they ambushed and defeated a pursuing force in Dragoman Pass,
where Mahmud Bey, son-in-law of the Sultan and brother of the Grand Vizier Çandarlı Halil Pasha, was taken prisoner.[4] While
the battle at Zlatitsa Pass had been a disaster, the ambush returned to the Hungarians the illusion of an overall Christian victory,
and they returned triumphant. The King and Church were both anxious to maintain the illusion and gave instructions to spread
word of the victories, but contradict anyone who mentioned the loss.[4] Murad, meanwhile, returned angry and dejected by the
unreliability of his forces, and imprisoned Turahan after blaming him for the army's setbacks and Mahmud Bey's capture.[4]
Peace proposals Murad is believed to have had the greatest wish for peace. Among other things, his sister begged him to obtain
her husband Mahmud's release, and his wife Mara, daughter of Đurađ Branković, added additional pressure. On March 6, 1444,
Mara sent an envoy to Branković; their discussion started the peace negotiations with the Ottoman Empire.[4] On April 24, 1444,
Vladislaus sent a letter to Murad, stating that his ambassador, Stojka Gisdanić, was travelling to Edirne with full powers to
negotiate on his behalf. He asked that, once an agreement was reached, Murad send his own ambassadors with the treaty and his
sworn oath to Hungary, at which point Vladislaus could also swear.[4] That same day, Vladislaus held a Diet at Buda, where he
swore before Cardinal Julian Cesarini to lead a new expedition against the Ottomans in the summer. The strongest remaining
supporter of Ladislaus' claim for the throne also agreed to a truce, thus removing the danger of another civil war.[4] Between June
and August, 1444, negotiations for a treaty were carried out, first in Edirne, and then in Szeged. The Hungarians were not entirely
interested in peace, however, especially with Cesarini pushing for the crusade's continuation. The Cardinal eventually found a
solution that would allow for both the continuation of fighting, and the ratification of the treaty, and on August 15, 1444, the
Peace of Szeged was sworn into effect.[4]
Final stage Shortly after all the short-term requirements of the treaty were fulfilled, the Hungarians and their allies resumed the
crusade. Murad, who had retired shortly after the treaty was completed, was called back to lead the Ottoman army. On November
10, 1444, the two armies clashed at the Battle of Varna (near the Black Sea fortress of Varna, Bulgaria). The Ottomans won a
decisive victory despite heavy losses, while the Hungarians lost their King and over 10,000 men.[4]
Aftermath Many were crippled by frostbite, many more died in smaller follow-up battles, and most European prisoners were
killed or sold into slavery. Hungary fell back into civil war until Hunyadi was elected Regent for the infant Ladislaus in June
 1446. Branković retained control over Serbia. The Ottoman Empire was free, for several decades, from any further serious
attempts to push it out of Europe.[4]
References
1. ^ Ganse, Alexander (June 6, 2005). "History of Warfare". World History at KLMA.
http://www.zum.de/whkmla/military/italy/milxvenice.html. Retrieved 2007-05-19.
2. ^ Stearns, Peter N., et al, ed (June 2002). "5. Venice". The Encyclopedia of World History: Ancient, Medieval,
and Modern (6th ed ed.). New York: Bartleby.com. ISBN 0-39565-237-5. http://www.bartleby.com/67/538.html. Retrieved 2007-
05-19.
3. ^ a b Sugar, Peter. "Chapter 1: The Early History and the Establishment of the Ottomans in Europe" (Reprint).
Southeastern Europe Under Ottoman Rule, 1354–1804. University of Washington Press.
http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~fisher/hst373/readings/sugar.html. Retrieved 2007-05-19.
4. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Imber, Colin (July 2006). "Introduction" (PDF). The Crusade of Varna, 1443-45. Ashgate
Publishing. pp. 9–31. ISBN 0-7546-0144-7.
http://books.google.com/books?id=xeuaoghuq3cC&pg=PA17&dq=battle+of+Zlatitsa&hl=en&ei=i8XsTdOcAs7usgbUstTnCg&s
a=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=battle%20of%20Zlatitsa&f=false. Retrieved
2007-04-19.
5. ^ "Wladislaus III". Classic Encyclopedia (Reprint of Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition ed.).
LoveToKnow 1911. 2006. http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Wladislaus_III. Retrieved 2007-05-19.
 Battle of Niš (1443)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Date early November 1443
Location Niš, Ottoman Empire
Result Victory for the Christian contingent[1]
Belligerents

Kingdom of Hungary Kingdom of Poland

Ottoman Empire
Serbian Despotate
Commanders and leaders

Władysław III of Poland John Hunyadi Kasim Pasha[2] Turakhan Beg[3] Isak-Beg[4]
Skanderbeg
Đurađ Branković
Strength
20,000 Hungarian soldiers and mercenaries
Unknown
5,000 Polish soldiers[5] 8,000 Serbs[6]
Casualties and losses
Unknown 300 Albanian cavalrymen deserted along with Skanderbeg
At the Battle of Niš (Battle of Nissa) (early November, 1443), crusaders[7] led by John Hunyadi,[8] captured Ottoman stronghold
Niš and defeated three armies of the Ottoman Empire. The Battle of Niš was part of Hunyadi's expedition known as the long
campaign. Hunyadi, at the head of the vanguard, crossed the Balkans through the Gate of Trajan, captured Niš, defeated three
Turkish pashas, and, after taking Sofia, united with the royal army and defeated Sultan Murad II at Snaim (Kustinitza). The
impatience of the king and the severity of the winter then compelled him (February 1444) to return home, but not before he had
utterly broken the Sultan's power in Bosnia, Herzegovina, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Albania.
Background In 1440 John Hunyadi became the trusted adviser and most highly-regarded soldier of the king Władysław III of
Poland. Hunyadi was rewarded with the captaincy of the fortress of Belgrade and was put in charge of military operations against
the Ottomans. The king Władysław recognized Hunyadi's merits by granting him estates in Eastern Hungary. Hunyadi soon
showed and displayed extraordinary capacity in marshalling its defenses with the limited resources at his disposal. He was
victorious in Semendria over Isak-Beg in 1441, not far from Nagyszeben in Transylvania he annihilated an Ottoman force and
recovered for Hungary the suzerainty of Wallachia. In July 1442 at the Iron Gates he defeated a massed Ottoman formation of
80.000 led by Sehabbedin. These victories made Hunyadi a prominent enemy of the Ottomans and renowned throughout
Christendom, and was a prime motivator to undertake in 1443, along with King Władysław, the famous expedition known as the
long campaign with Battle of Niš as one of the battles of this campaign. Hunyadi was accompanied by Giuliano Cesarini during
this campaign.[9]
Battle There was no one major battle for Niš but five different battles. The first was a battle against small garrison in Niš and
capture of the town, three different battles against three different Ottoman armies advancing to the Niš and last, fought against the
remnants of all three of them. The battle took place in the plain between Bolvani and Niš on November 3, 1443.[10] Ottoman forces
were led by Kasim Pasha, the beglerbeg of Rumelia, Turakhan Beg and Isak-Beg.[11] After Ottoman defeat retreating forces of
Kasim Pasha and Turakhan Beg burned all villages between Niš and Sofia.[12] The Ottoman sources justify an Ottoman defeat by
lack of cooperation between the Ottoman armies led by different commanders.[13]
Aftermath George Kastrioti Skanderbeg deserted the Ottoman army along with 300 other Albanians and started a twenty-five
year long Albanian rebellion against the Ottoman Empire.[14] Murad II signed a treaty for ten years, and abdicated in favor of his
son Mehmed II. When the peace was broken the next year, Murad returned to the Balkans and won the Battle of Varna in
November 1444.[15]
References
1. ^ Riley-Smith, Jonathan, The Crusades: A History, (Continuum International Publishing Group, 1987), 275.
2. ^ Skënderbeu: Jeta dhe vepra by Kristo Frashëri, p. 130.
3. ^ Houtsma, Martijn Theodoor (1993) First encyclopaedia of Islam: 1913-1936 VIII Netherlands: E.J. Brill and
Luzac and Co. p. 466 http://books.google.com/books?id=ro--
tXw_hxMC&pg=PA876&lpg=PA876&dq=Pasha+Yigit+Beg&source=bl&ots=VsIOV9u8BG&sig=aMPS1pECgYmbxx
riLBF3ZoMP42k&hl=en&ei=EHYUTej7M4ea8QP_w_CEBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CB
YQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Pasha%20Yigit%20Beg&f=false ""In the beginning of November 1443, Turakhan Beg
commanded one of the Ottoman corps in the battle against John Hunyadi."
4. ^ Babinger, Franz (1992), Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time, Princeton University Press, p. 25, ISBN
9780691010786,
 http://books.google.com/books?id=PPxC6rO7vvsC&pg=PA25&dq=battle+of+Zlatitsa&hl=en&ei=i8XsTdOcAs7usgbUs
tTnCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CE4Q6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=battle%20of%20Zlatitsa&f
=false, "The combined host met Ottoman forces first on November 3, 1443, between the castle of Bolvan (near
Aleksinac) and the city of Niš. Here Kasim Bey, then governor of Rumelia, Ishak Bey and other standard bearers were
defeated."
5. ^ Setton, Kenneth Harry W. Hazard, Norman P. Zacour (1989) A history of the crusades : Volume VI: The
impact of the crusades on Europe Madison, Wis. : The University of Wisconsin Press p. 270 ISBN 9780299107406
OCLC 475548809
http://books.google.com/books?id=TKaPrQPFIAMC&pg=PA270&lpg=PA270&dq=turakhan+beglerbeg+rumelia&sourc
e=bl&ots=4FY7tr9Kq4&sig=-dah7t3UKE8h7RnVI9apgkQbDxM&hl=en&ei=epTsTby7M4_t-
gbakLTpDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBUQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=turakhan%20begler
beg%20rumelia&f=false "The whole army estimated to consist of 25,000 men, included an important mercenary force
hired with funds given by Serbian despot, and in addition, a contigent of 8,000 Serbs and 5,000 Polish soldiers"
6. ^ Babinger, Frank and Ralph Manheim, William C. Hickman, Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time, (Princeton
University Press, 1978), 25.
7. ^ Riley-Smith, 275.
8. ^ Hupchick, Dennis P., The Balkans: From Constantinople to Communism, (Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), 117.
9. ^ Babinger, Franz (1992), Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time, Princeton University Press, p. 25, ISBN
9780691010786,
http://books.google.com/books?id=PPxC6rO7vvsC&pg=PA25&dq=battle+of+Zlatitsa&hl=en&ei=i8XsTdOcAs7usgbUs
tTnCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CE4Q6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=battle%20of%20Zlatitsa&f
=false, "John Hunyadi accompanied by the cardinal-legate Giuliano Cesarini."
10. ^ Setton, Kenneth Harry W. Hazard, Norman P. Zacour (1989) A history of the crusades : Volume VI: The
impact of the crusades on Europe Madison, Wis. : The University of Wisconsin Press p. 270 ISBN 9780299107406
OCLC 475548809
http://books.google.com/books?id=TKaPrQPFIAMC&pg=PA270&lpg=PA270&dq=turakhan+beglerbeg+rumelia&sourc
e=bl&ots=4FY7tr9Kq4&sig=-dah7t3UKE8h7RnVI9apgkQbDxM&hl=en&ei=epTsTby7M4_t-
gbakLTpDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBUQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=turakhan%20begler
beg%20rumelia&f=false "the most important battle of the whole campaign took place at Bolvani, in the plain of Nish on
November 3, 1443"
11. ^ Babinger, Franz (1992), Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time, Princeton University Press, p. 25, ISBN
9780691010786,
http://books.google.com/books?id=PPxC6rO7vvsC&pg=PA25&dq=battle+of+Zlatitsa&hl=en&ei=i8XsTdOcAs7usgbUs
tTnCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CE4Q6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=battle%20of%20Zlatitsa&f
=false, "The combined host met Ottoman forces first on November 3, 1443, between the castle of Bolvan (near
Aleksinac) and the city of Niš. Here Kasim Bey, then governor of Rumelia, Ishak Bey and other standard bearers were
defeated."
12. ^ Imber, Colin (2006) The Crusade of Varna, 1443-45 Aldershot ; Burlington (Vt.) : Ashgate, cop. p. 16 ISBN
9780754601449 OCLC 470458159
http://books.google.com/books?id=xeuaoghuq3cC&pg=PA49&dq=kasim+pasha+nish&hl=en&ei=3UHnTZza "In the
course of their flight Kasim and Turahan burned all villages between Niš and Sofia."
13. ^ Imber, Colin (2006) The Crusade of Varna, 1443-45 Aldershot ; Burlington (Vt.) : Ashgate, cop. p. 270 ISBN
9780754601449 OCLC 470458159 "The Ottoman sources in general emphasize the disagreement and lack of
cooperation between frontier Ottoman forces under Turakhan and sipahi army under Kasim"
14. ^ Encyclopaedia of the Muslim World, Ed. Taru Bahl, M.H. Syed, (Anmol Publications, 2003), 45.
15. ^ The Historians' History of the World By Henry Smith Williams - Page 439
Further reading
• Imber, Colin (2006) The Crusade of Varna, 1443-45 Aldershot ; Burlington (Vt.) : Ashgate, cop. ISBN 9780754601449
OCLC 470458159
http://books.google.com/books?id=xeuaoghuq3cC&pg=PA49&dq=kasim+pasha+nish&hl=en&ei=3UHnTZzaHtSs8QPU7Nz
8Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=snippet&q=kasim&f=false
 Battle of Varna (1444)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

by Jan Matejko

Date November 10, 1444

Location Near Varna, present-day Bulgaria
Result Decisive Ottoman victory
Belligerents

Kingdom of Poland Kingdom of Hungary Wallachia Moldavia Grand Ottoman

Duchy of Lithuania Bulgaria Papal States Kingdom of Croatia Teutonic Empire
Knights
Commanders and leaders

Murad II
/
Władysław
John Hunyadi
III of Poland
†
Strength
~ 20,000[1][2]
~ 60,000[3][4]
(15,000 Polish, Hungarian, Bohemian soldier, 4,000 Wallachian, 1,000
(15,000 regular Janissary, Sipahi,
other Soldier from Lithuania, Papal States, Holy Roman Empire,
Mercenary of the Sultan)
Croatia, Bulgaria)
Casualties and losses
~ 10,000[5][6] ~ 20,000[7][8][9]
The Battle of Varna took place on November 10, 1444 near Varna in eastern Bulgaria. In this battle the Ottoman Empire under
Sultan Murad II defeated the Polish and Hungarian armies under Władysław III of Poland and János Hunyadi. It was the final
battle of the Crusade of Varna.[10][11]
Background After failed expeditions in 1440–2 against Belgrade and Transylvania, and the defeats of the "long campaign" of
Janos Hunyadi in 1442–3, the Ottoman sultan Murad II signed a ten-year truce with Hungary. After he had made peace with the
Karaman Emirate in Anatolia in August 1444, he resigned the throne to his twelve year-old son Mehmed II. Reneging on the
peace treaty, Hungary co-operated with Venice and the pope, Eugene IV, to organize a new crusader army. On this news Murad
was recalled to the throne by his son. Although Murad initially refused this summoning persistently on the grounds that he was not
the sultan anymore, he was outwitted by his son who on the news of his refusal wrote to him: "If you are the sultan, lead your
armies; but if I am the sultan, I hereby order you to come and lead my armies."[cite this quote] Murad then had no choice but to reclaim
the throne.
Preparations A mixed Papal army consisting mainly of Hungarian, Polish (whose combined armies numbered 15,000) and
Wallchian (4,000) forces, with smaller detachments of Czechs, Papal knights, Teutonic Knights, Bosnians, Croatians, Bulgarians,
Lithuanians, Serbs and Ruthenians (Ukrainians)[12] Papal, Venetian and Genoese ships had blockaded the Dardanelles as the
Hungarian army was to advance on Varna, where it would meet the Papal fleet and sail down the coast to Constantinople, pushing
the Ottomans out of Europe. The Hungarian advance was rapid, Ottoman fortresses were bypassed, while local Bulgarians from
Vidin, Oryahovo, and Nicopolis joined the army (Fruzhin, son of Ivan Shishman, also participated in the campaign with his own
guard). On October 10 near Nicopolis, some 4,000 Wallachian cavalrymen under Mircea II, one of Vlad Dracul's sons, also
joined. Refugee Armenians in Hungary also took part in the wars of their new country against the Ottomans as early as the battle
of Varna in 1444, when some Armenians were seen amongst the Christian forces.[13]
Deployment Late on November 9, a large Ottoman army of around 50,000 men approached Varna from the west. At a supreme
military council called by Hunyadi during the night, the Papal legate, cardinal Julian Cesarini, insisted on a quick withdrawal.
However, the Christians were caught between the Black Sea, Lake Varna, the steep wooded slopes of the Franga plateau (356 m
high), and the enemy. Cesarini then proposed a defense using the Wagenburg of the Hussites until the arrival of the Christian fleet.
The Hungarian magnates and the Croatian and Czech commanders backed him, but the young (20-year-old) Władysław and
Hunyadi rejected the defensive tactics. Hunyadi declared: "To escape is impossible, to surrender is unthinkable. Let us fight with
bravery and honor our arms." Władysław accepted this position and gave him the command. Andreas del Palatio states that
Hunyadi commanded the "Wallachian army" indicating a large Romanian component in Hunyadi's personal army.[14] In the
morning of November 10, Hunyadi deployed the army of some 20,000 crusaders as an arc between Lake Varna and the Franga
plateau; the line was about 3.5 km long. Two banners with a total of 3,500 men from the king's Polish and Hungarian bodyguards,
Hungarian royal mercenaries, and banners of Hungarian nobles held the center. The Wallachian cavalry was left in reserve behind
the center. The right flank that lined up the hill towards the village of Kamenar numbered 6,500 men in 5 banners. Bishop Jan
Dominek of Varadin with his personal banner led the force; Cesarini commanded a banner of German mercenaries and a Bosnian
one. The Bishop of Eger led his own banner, and the military governor of Slavonia, ban Franco Talotsi, commanded one Croatian
banner. The left flank, a total of 5,000 men in 5 banners, was led by Michael Szilágyi, Hunyadi's brother in law, and was made up
of Hunyadi's Transylvanians, Bulgarians, German mercenaries and banners of Hungarian magnates. Behind the Hungarians,
closer to the Black Sea and the lake, was the Wagenburg, defended by 300 or 600 Czech and Ruthenian mercenaries under hetman
Ceyka, along with Poles, Lithuanians and Wallachians. Every wagon was manned by 7 to 10 soldiers and the Wagenburg was
equipped with bombards. The Ottoman center included the Janissaries and levies from Rumelia deployed around two Thracian
burial mounds. Murad observed and directed the battle from one of them. The Janissaries dug in behind ditches and two palisades.
The right wing consisted of Kapikulus and Sipahis from Rumelia, and the left wing was made up by Akıncıs, Sipahis from
Anatolia, and other forces. Janissary archers and Akıncı light cavalry were deployed on the Franga plateau.
The battle The light Ottoman cavalry assaulted the Croats of ban Talotsi. Christians from the left riposted with bombards and
firearms and stopped the attack. Christian soldiers chased the Ottomans in a disorderly pursuit. The Anatolian cavalry ambushed
them from the flank. The Christian right wing attempted to flee to the small fortress of Galata on the other side of Varna Bay, but
most of them were slain in the marshland around Varna Lake and the river Devnya, where Cesarini also met his end. Only ban
Talotsi's troops managed to withdraw behind the Wagenburg. The other Ottoman flank assaulted the Hungarians and Bulgarians
of Michael Szilagyi. Their push was stopped and turned back; then Sipahis attacked again. Hunyadi decided to help and advised
Władysław to wait until he returned; then advanced with two cavalry companies. The young king, ignoring Hunyadi's advice,
rushed 500 of his Polish knights against the Ottoman center. They attempted to overrun the Janissary infantry and take Murad
prisoner, and almost succeeded. But Władysław had fallen in a pitfall in front of Murad's tent and slain by the Janissary
bodyguards, his head was cut off and later taken to the Ottoman court.[15] The remaining Polish cavalry was smashed by the
Ottomans. On his return, Hunyadi tried frantically to salvage the king's body but all he could accomplish was to organize the
retreat of the remains of his army. It suffered thousands of casualties, and was virtually annihilated. Many European prisoners
were slaughtered or sold as slaves; the minnesinger Michael Beheim wrote a song based on the story of one Hans Mergest who
spent 16 years in Ottoman captivity after the battle.
Aftermath The death of Władysław left Hungary in the hands of the four-year-old Ladislaus Posthumous of Bohemia and
Hungary. The defeat also set the stage for the fall of Constantinople in 1453. See also: Second Battle of Kosovo
Legacy In the aftermath the Ottomans had removed a significant opposition to their expansion into central and eastern Europe,
subsequent battles allowed a huge number of European people to become Ottoman subjects.
References
1. ^ Ervin Lipta: Magyarország hadtörténete ISBN 963-32-6337-9
2. ^ Csaba Csorba-János Estók-Konrád Salamon: Magyarország képes története, ISBN 963-548-961-7
3. ^ Ervin Lipta: Magyarország hadtörténete ISBN 963-32-6337-9
4. ^ Csaba Csorba-János Estók-Konrád Salamon: Magyarország képes története, ISBN 963-548-961-7
5. ^ Ervin Lipta: Magyarország hadtörténete ISBN 963-32-6337-9
6. ^ Csaba Csorba-János Estók-Konrád Salamon: Magyarország képes története, ISBN 963-548-961-7
7. ^ Ervin Lipta: Magyarország hadtörténete ISBN 963-32-6337-9
8. ^ Csaba Csorba-János Estók-Konrád Salamon: Magyarország képes története, ISBN 963-548-961-7
9. ^ László Markó: A Magyar Állam Főméltóságai, ISBN 963-547-085-1
10. ^ Bodnar, Edward W. Ciriaco d'Ancona e la crociata di Varna, nuove prospettive. Il Veltro 27, nos. 1–2 (1983):
235–51
11. ^ Halecki, Oscar, The Crusade of Varna. New York, 1943
12. ^ Magyarország hadtörténete (1984), 102.-103. pg.
 13. ^ Basmadjian (1922) (in French), Histoire moderne des Armeniens, Paris, p. 45.
14. ^ Istoria Romaniei, Vol II, p. 440, 1960
15. ^ Florescu, Radu R.; Raymond McNally (1989). Dracula, Prince of Many Faces: His Life and His Times.
Boston: Little, Brown & Co..
External links
• Battle map (Hungarian)
• Imber, Colin (July 2006). "Introduction" (PDF). The Crusade of Varna, 1443–45. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 0-7546-
0144-7. http://www.ashgate.com/subject_area/downloads/sample_chapters/Crusade_of_Varna_Intro.pdf.
• Ervin Liptai: Magyarország hadtörténete I. Zrínyi Katonai Kiadó, Budapest 1984. ISBN 963-326-320-4
• Battle of Varna animated battle map by Jonathan Webb

The memorial of the battle in Varna, built in an antique Thracian mound tomb, bearing the name of the fallen king

Kronika wszystkiego świata of Bielski, Marcin published in 1564

 Battle of Kosovo (1448)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An Akıncı irregular defeating a Hungarian knight.

Date October 17–20, 1448 (Julian calendar)

Location Kosovo Polje, present-day Kosovo, Serbia (then Serbian Despotate, Ottoman vassal)
Result Decisive Ottoman victory
Belligerents

Ottoman Empire Kingdom of Hungary Wallachia

Commanders and leaders

Murat II John Hunyadi Vladislav II

Strength
~ 40,000[1] to 60,000[2] 24,000[2][3]
Casualties and losses
unknown[4] 17,000[4]
The Second Battle of Kosovo (Hungarian: második rigómezei csata, Turkish: Đkinci Kosova savaşı) (October 17–October 20,
1448) was fought at Kosovo Polje between a coalition of the Kingdom of Hungary and Wallachia led by John Hunyadi,
against an Ottoman-led coalition under Sultan Murad II.
Background At 1448, John Hunyadi saw the right moment to lead a campaign against the Ottoman Empire. After the Defeat
of Varna (1444), he raised another army to attack Ottomans. His strategy was based on an expected revolt of the Balkan
people, a surprise attack, and destroying the main force of the Ottomans in a single battle. Hunyadi was totally immodest and
led his forces without leaving any escort behind. The Albanian leader Skanderbeg and his troops moved to join the Hungarian
coalition but they were intercepted and attacked by the Ottoman vassal Đurađ Branković of Serbia, and delayed from
reaching the battlefield. Skanderbeg and his army ravaged Branković's land to punish Serbs for desertion of Christian
cause.[5] In September of 1448 Hunyadi led the Hungarian forces across the river of Danube and camped them in Serbia next
to Kovin, just outside the Serbian capital of Smederevo. For a full month the Hungarians were encamped there awaiting the
German crusaders, the Wallachian Duke and the Bohemians. The Serbian Despot Đurađ Branković reacted ambiguously at
the trespassing and negotiated the terms of joining the Crusade against the Ottomans over that period of time. Hunyadi had
told Brankovic that he had brought 20,000 of his own men, awaiting additional reinforcements, and that he [Brankovic] with
his light cavalry was the only ally necessary to make this a decisive victory. Brankovic was weary, having had his realm
restored after a full-scale Ottoman occupation only in 1444, and, fully aware of the strength of the Ottoman military force,
wanting to keep his throne. Despot Brankovic was also unwilling to set himself under Hunyadi's command under any
condition, as he personally disliked him, considering him of lower stature. The central point of the dispute between Hunyadi
and Brankovic was their personal quarrel. After the Peace of Szeged in 1444 which restored the Serbian Despotate and
Brankovic's reign in it, the Serbian despot had worked on achieving a peace in the region hoping to remove his country from
jeopardy. This had included gifting Hunyadi the Serbian despot's possessions in the Hungarian Kingdom in favor of a pacifist
approach. After Hunyadi eventually joined the warmongering side, Brankovic had asked for the return of his properties,
which Hunyadi rejected. This led to Brankovic's straining away from Hungary and getting into a closer relationship with the
Ottoman Empire, in an effort to protect his realm, as well as to a strong hostility towards Hunyadi and the negotiations ended
as a failure. The Serbian rejection and positioning as a neutral side had led to Hunyadi's fury and the Crusaders' decision to
treat Serbia as hostile territory. At the end of the negotiations, Hunyadi had threatened to kill Brankovic in person after his
country was occupied. In late September of 1448, Hunyadi had amassed 30,000 men and moved southwards. The Crusaders
pillaged and burned across Serbia, but the Serb Despot gave an explicit order of free passage, refusing to mount a reaction.
However, he not only informed Sultan Murat II of the Crusaders' advance, out of both personal interest of friendship with the
sultan and anger towards Hunyadi, but also gave him tactical strategic advices regarding the best way to defeat the Crusaders,
a plan which the Ottomans followed. The idea included letting the Europeans advance deep into Serbian territory, far away
from their homeland and then cut off their supply routes, effectively closing them in from all sides and trapping them.
The battle The Crusaders arrived at the Kosovo Field, the same place the most famous battle in Kosovo, between Serbs and
Ottomans, had occurred, facing an Ottoman army of up to 60,000. Sultan Murad personally commanded a large section of
cannons and janissaries, while his son and successor Mehmed, who faced battle for the first time, led the Anatolian troops at
the right wing. Hunyadi commanded the center of his army at the battle, while the Crusaders right wing was under the
Wallachians. The Hungarians had long barrage cannons. The next day the battle opened when Hunyadi attacked the Ottoman
flanks with mixed cavalry (light and heavy). The Turkish flanks, consisting of soldiers from Rumelia and Anatolia, were
losing until Turkish light cavalry arrived to reinforce them. The Christian flanks were subsequently routed and the survivors
retreated back to Hunyadi's main force. When Hunyadi saw the defeat of his flanks, he attacked with his main force,
composed of knights and light infantry. The janissary corps were not successful and the cavalry made progress through the
Turkish center, but were stopped at the Turkish camp. When the main attack was halted, the Turkish infantry regrouped and
successfully drove the Hungarian knights back. The light cavalry, who were now without the knights' support were also
overcome. Hungarian forces retreated to their camp. During the retreat, the janissaries killed most of the Hungarian nobles
and Hunyadi fled. However, Serbs later captured him. During the night, Turkish infantry fired missiles at the Hungarians who
replied with cannons. On the next day, a final assault totally annihilated the remaining Hungarian army. The two-day battle in
Kosovo saw both sides take heavy casualties but left the Ottoman force in command of the field at the end of second day. The
Hungarians' army possibly amounted to 24,000[1][2][3] and the Turkish between 40,000 to 60,000.[1][2]
Aftermath This battle demonstrated that the Janissary corps, even if their lines were broken through, would not run away
from the field if defending the Sultan himself. Otherwise, one major defeat of the Turkish army could have caused only a
short turmoil - it would have needed several defeats in a series to break the power of the Ottomans. The Christian Balkan
states were unable to resist the Ottomans after this defeat, eventually falling under control of the Ottoman Empire. Hunyadi
successfully defended the Kingdom of Hungary against the Ottoman campaigns. Skanderbeg also successfully continued his
resistance in Albania until his death in 1468, 10 years later the country fell to full Ottoman control.
Notes
1. ^ a b c Bennett, The Hutchinson Dictionary of Ancient & Medieval Warfare, p. 182 "Hunyadi led 24,000 - 30,000
men including 10,000 Wallachians, but should have waited to join Scanderbeg's troops before confronting Murad's
force of 40,000."
2. ^ a b c d Sedlar, East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, p. 248 "Hunyadi,who was now the richest landowner in
Hungary, had raised an army of 24,000 men from his private resources, including German and Bohemian
infantrymen armed with handguns to supplement his Hungarian cavalry. [...]This time the sultan brought on to the
field a force of at least 60,000 men including Janissaries with muskets and a contingent of artillery."
3. ^ a b Turnbull, The Ottoman Empire 1326-1699, p. 36 "Hunyadi led an army of 24,000 men, including 8,000
Wallachians, but suffered another military defeat without even seeing his Albanian allies."
4. ^ a b Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time by Franz Babinger, page 55
5. ^ Kenneth, Setton (1997) [1978]. The papacy and the Levant, 1204–1571: The thirteenth and fourteenth
centuries. II. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. p. 100. ISBN 9780871691279.
http://books.google.com/books?id=0Sz2VYI0l1IC&pg=PA100&lpg=PA100&dq=ragusa+Kastriot+senate#v=onepa
ge&q=ragusa%20Kastriot%20senate&f=false. Retrieved December 8, 2010. "Scanderbeg intended to go
“peronalmente” with an army to assist Hunyadi, but was prevented from doing so by Branković, whose lands he
ravaged as punishment for the Serbian desertion of the Christian cause."
References
• Stephen R. Turnbull, The Ottoman Empire 1326-1699, Osprey Publishing, 2003.
• Jean W. Sedlar, East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500, University of Washington Press, 1994.
• Matthew Bennett, The Hutchinson Dictionary of Ancient & Medieval Warfare, Taylor & Francis, 1998.
External links Second Battle of Kosovo – The Encyclopedia Britannica
 John of Capistrano
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Born June 24, 1386Capestrano, Abruzzi, Kingdom of Naples

Died October 23, 1456 (aged 70) Ilok, Syrmia, Kingdom of Hungary[1]

Honored in Roman Catholic Church

Canonized 1690 or 1724, Rome by either Pope Alexander VIII or Pope Benedict XIII

Feast 14 October; 28 March (General Roman Calendar, 1890-1969)

Patronage Jurists, Belgrade

Saint John of Capistrano (Italian: Giovanni da Capistrano, Hungarian: Kapisztrán János, Polish: Jan Kapistran, Croatian:
Ivan Kapistran, Serbian: Jovan Kapistran) (June 24, 1386 – October 23, 1456) was a Franciscan priest from Italy. Famous as a
preacher, theologian, and inquisitor, he earned himself the nickname 'the Soldier Saint' when in 1456 at age 70 he led a crusade
against the invading Ottoman Empire at the siege of Belgrade with the Hungarian military commander John Hunyadi. Elevated to
sainthood, he is the patron saint of jurists and military chaplains, as well as the namesake of the Franciscan missions San Juan
Capistrano in Southern California and San Juan Capistrano in San Antonio, Texas.
Early life As was the custom of this time, John took his name from his birthplace: the village of Capestrano, in the diocese of
Sulmona in the Abruzzi, Kingdom of Naples. His father had come to Italy with the Angevin court of Louis I of Anjou, titular King
of Naples. He lived at first a wholly secular life, studied law at the University of Perugia under the legal scholar Pietro de Ubaldis,
married, and became a successful magistrate. In 1412, King Ladislaus of Naples appointed him governor of Perugia, a tumultuous
and resentful papal fief held by Ladislas as the pope's champion, in order to effectively establish public order. When war broke out
between Perugia and Sigismondo Pandolfo Malatesta in 1416, John was sent as ambassador to broker a peace, but Malatesta threw
him in prison. During the captivity, in despair he put aside his new young wife, never having consummated the marriage, and
started studying theology with St. Bernardine of Siena.
Friar and preacher Together with St. James of the Marches, Capistrano entered the Franciscan order at Perugia on October 4,
1416. At once he gave himself up to the most rigorous asceticism, violently defending the ideal of strict observance and
orthodoxy, following the example set by St. Bernardine. From 1420 onwards, he preached with great effect in numerous cities and
eventually became well known. Unlike most Italian preachers of repentance in the 15th century, Capistrano was effective in the
north, in Germany, Bohemia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia and Poland. The largest churches could not hold the crowds, so he
preached in the piazzas: at Brescia he preached to a crowd of 126,000.
Reformer When he was not preaching, he was writing tracts against heresy of every kind. This facet of Capistrano's life is
covered in great detail by his early biographers, Nicholas of Fara, Christopher of Varese and Girlamo of Udine. While he was thus
evangelizing, he was actively engaged in assisting Bernardino in the reforms of the Franciscan Order, largely in the interests of
more rigorous discipline in the Franciscan hierarchy. Like St. Bernardine of Siena, he strongly emphasized devotion to the Holy
Name of Jesus, and, together with that saint, was accused of heresy on this account. In 1429, these Observant friars were called to
Rome to answer charges of heresy, and John was chosen by his companions to speak for them. They were all acquitted by the
Commission of Cardinals. He was frequently deployed to embassies by Popes Eugene IV and Nicholas V. In 1439, he was sent as
legate to Milan and Burgundy, to oppose the claims of the Antipope Felix V; in 1446, he was on a mission to the King of France;
in 1451 he went at the request of the emperor as Apostolic nuncio to Austria. Between 1451 and 1453, his fiery sermons against
Jews persuaded many southern German regions to expel the entire Jewish population, and at Breslau some were burned at the
stake.[2][3] During the period of his nunciature, John visited all parts of the Empire, preaching and combating the heresy of the
Hussites; he also visited Poland at the request of Casimir IV Jagiellon. As legate, or inquisitor, he prosecuted the last Fraticelli of
Ferrara, the Jesuati of Venice, the Crypto-Jews of Sicily, Moldavia and Poland, and, above all, the Hussites of Germany, Hungary
and Bohemia; his aim in the last case was to make conferences impossible between the representatives of Rome and the
Bohemians, for every attempt at conciliation seemed to him to be conniving at heresy.
The soldier Saint After the Fall of Constantinople in 1453, Mehmed II threatened Vienna and Rome. In 1454, Pope Callixtus III
sent John of Capistrano, who was seventy, to preach a Crusade against the invading Turks at the Diet of Frankfurt. Capistrano
succeeded in gathering together enough troops to march onto Belgrade, which at that time was under siege by Mehmed II. In the
summer of 1456, these troops, together with John Hunyadi, managed to raise the siege of Belgrade; the old and frail Capistrano
actually led his own contingent into battle. This feat earned Capistrano the moniker of 'the Soldier Priest'. Although he survived
the battle, Capistrano fell victim to the bubonic plague, which flourished in the unsanitary conditions prevailing among armies of
the day. He died at nearby Ilok, Kingdom of Hungary (now a Croatian border town on the Danube). Saint John, in spite of this
restless life, found time to work, both in the lifetime of his mentor St. Bernardine, and after, at the reform of the order of the minor
Franciscans. He also upheld, in his writings, speeches and sermons, theories of papal supremacy rather than the theological
wranglings of councils (see Conciliar Movement).
Sainthood and feast day The year of Saint John of Capistrano's canonization is variously given as 1690, by Pope Alexander VIII
or 1724 by Pope Benedict XIII. In 1890, his feast day was included for the first time in the Roman Catholic calendar of saints and
assigned to 28 March.[4] In 1969, Pope Paul VI moved his feast day to 23 October, the day of his death. Traditionalist Catholics
commemorate his feast day on 28 March, as in the Church's calendar from 1890 to 1969.
Namesake As a Franciscan reformer preaching simplicity, Capistrano became the namesake of two Spanish missions founded by
the Franciscans in the north of the then-Spanish Americas: Mission San Juan Capistrano in today's Southern California and
Mission San Juan Capistrano just outside the city center of today's San Antonio in Texas.[5]
Patron saint He is patron saint of military chaplains and jurists.[6]
See also Church of St. Wojciech, in Krakow, Poland, sermons Mission San Juan Capistrano in Southern California Mission San
Juan Capistrano in San Antonio, Texas
External links Wikimedia Commons has media related to: John of Capistrano Catholic Encyclopedia: St John Capistran
References
1. ^ Biography in Croatian
2. ^ Antisemitism: a historical encyclopedia of prejudice and persecution, Richard S. Levy, published by ABC-
CLIO, 2005, and available here [1]
3. ^ Will Durant, The Reformation, Simon & Schuster (1957), page 731
4. ^ ST JOHN OF CAPISTRANO (A.D. 1456) Retrieved September 13, 2006; Calendarium Romanum (Libreria
Editrice Vaticana, 1969), p. 106)
5. ^ Engelhardt, Zephyrin, O.F.M. San Juan Capistrano Mission. 1922. Standard Printing Co., Los Angeles, CA.
6. ^ Craughwell, Thomas (23 October 2009). "St. John of Capistrano: Patron of Military Chaplains".
CatholicMil.org (reprinted from Arlington Catholic Herald).
http://www.catholicmil.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1524:st-john-of-capistrano-patron-of-
military-chaplains&catid=57:military-saints&Itemid=91. Retrieved 2009-12-28.

Manuscript depicting John of Capistrano, ca. 1470. Statue of John of Capistrano in Budapest, Hungary.

. The saint's coat of arms, with a sword piercing a crescent moon, on the Papal Ombrellino at Mission Basilica San Juan
Capistrano
 Siege of Belgrade (1456)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ottoman miniature of the siege of Belgrade 1456

Date July 4–22, 1456

Location Nándorfehérvár, Kingdom of Hungary (present-day Belgrade, Serbia)
Result Hungarian victory
Belligerents

Ottoman Empire
Kingdom of Hungary Serbs European Crusaders
Commanders and leaders

John Hunyadi Mehmed II

Strength
About 4,000 well-armed and effective troops [1] A motley
30,000;[4] higher estimates of 100,000[5][6] 200
army of some 60,000 (mostly crusader peasants and citizens
vessels[7]
of Belgrade)[2] 200 boats[3]
Casualties and losses
Unknown 28 cannon 100 galleys 13,000 men [8]
The Siege of Belgrade or Siege of Nándorfehérvár occurred from July 4 to July 22, 1456. After the fall of Constantinople in
1453, the Ottoman sultan Mehmed II was rallying his resources in order to subjugate the Kingdom of Hungary. His immediate
objective was the border fort (Hungarian végvár) of the town of Belgrade (in old Hungarian Nándorfehérvár). John Hunyadi, a
Hungarian nobleman and warlord, who had fought many battles against the Ottomans in the previous two decades, prepared the
defense of the fortress. The siege eventually escalated into a major battle, during which Hunyadi led a sudden counterattack that
overran the Ottoman camp, ultimately compelling the wounded Sultan Mehmed II to lift the siege and retreat. From July 22, 2011
the day when Christian forces led by John Hunyadi defeated the Ottoman Turks besieging Nándorfehérvár in 1456, will be
marked as a national memorial day in Hungary.[9]
Preparations At the end of 1455, after a public reconciliation with all his enemies, Hunyadi began preparations. At his own
expense he provisioned and armed the fortress, and, leaving in it a strong garrison under the command of his brother-in-law
Mihály Szilágyi and his own eldest son László, he proceeded to form a relief army and a fleet of two hundred corvettes. As no
other baron was willing to help (fearing Hunyadi's growing power more than the Ottoman threat), he was left entirely to his own
resources. A Franciscan friar allied with Hunyadi, Giovanni da Capistrano, preached a crusade to attract peasants and yeomanry to
Hunyadi's cause. The recruits were ill-armed (many with only slings and scythes) but full of enthusiasm, and they flocked to the
standard of Hunyadi, the core of which consisted of a small band of seasoned mercenaries and a few banderia of noble horsemen.
All in all, Hunyadi managed to build a force of 25–30,000 men.
Siege However, before these forces could be assembled, Mehmed II's invasion army (160,000 men in early accounts, 60-70,000
according to newer research) arrived at Belgrade. On July 4, 1456, the siege began. Szilágyi could rely on a force of only 5,000-
7,000 men in the castle. Mehmed set up his siege on the neck of the headland and started firing on the walls on June 29. He
arrayed his men in three sections. The Rumelian (that is, European) corps had the majority of his 300 cannons, and his fleet of 200
or so river vessels had the rest. The Rumelians were arrayed on the right wing and the Anatolian corps was arrayed on the left. In
the middle were the sultan's personal guards, the janissaries, and his command post. The Anatolian corps and the janissaries were
both heavy infantry troops. Mehmed posted his river vessels mainly to the northwest of the city to patrol the marshes and ensure
that the fortress was not reinforced. They also kept an eye on the Sava to the southwest to avoid the infantry's being outflanked by
Hunyadi's army. The Danube to the east was guarded by the spahi, the sultan's light cavalry corps, to avoid being outflanked on
the right. These formidable forces were resisted by only about 7,000 men in the fortress, while the Serbian nobility being first
cousins of the Ottoman Sultan, stopped the north-east progress of the armies of Skanderbeg, who had come from Albania to honor
his alliance with Hunyadi[citation needed]. This stopped the last chance for a pan-Balkanic alliance against the Ottomans, the
consequence of which would be the conquest and holding of Balkans as a Turkish territory until the mid XIX century.[citation needed]
When word of this reached Hunyadi, he was in the south of Hungary recruiting additional light cavalry troops for the army with
which he intended to lift the siege. Although relatively few of his fellow nobles had been willing to provide manpower, the
peasants were more than willing to do so. Cardinal Giovanni Capistrano had been sent to Hungary by the Vatican both to preach
against heretics, such as Greek Orthodox Christians,[citation needed] and to preach the Crusade against the Ottomans. He managed to
raise a large, albeit poorly trained and equipped, peasant army, with which he left for Belgrade. He and Hunyadi traveled together,
but commanded separately. Between the two of them, they had roughly 40,000-50,000 men. The outnumbered defenders relied
mainly on the strength of the formidable castle of Belgrade which was at the time one of the best engineered in the Balkans. As
Belgrade was designated to be the capital of the Serbian Despotate by Despot Stefan Lazarevic in 1404 after the Battle of Angora,
major work was done to transform the small old Byzantine castle into a more resilient stronghold. As Ottoman raids were
expected after they recovered from the heavy loss against the Mongols, advanced building techniques from Byzantine and Arab
fortress designs were used, which had been learned during the period of Seljuk and Ottoman military conflicts from the mid-11th
century. The castle was designed in an elaborate form with three lines of defence : the inner castle with the palace and huge
Donjon, the upper town with the main military camps with four gates and a double wall, and the lower town with the cathedral in
the urban center and a port at the Danube. The endeavor was one of the most elaborate military architecture achievements of the
Middle Ages. After the Siege the Hungarians reinforced the north and eastern side with an additional gate and several towers, one
of which, the Nebojsa tower, was designed for artillery purposes. On July 14, 1456 Hunyadi arrived to the completely encircled
city with his flotilla on the Danube while the Ottoman navy lay astride the Danube River. He broke the naval blockade on July 14,
sinking three large Ottoman galleys and capturing four large vessels and 20 smaller ones. By destroying the Sultan's fleet,
Hunyadi was able to transport his troops and much-needed food into the city. The fort's defense was also reinforced. But Mehmed
II was not willing to end the siege and after a week of heavy artillery bombardment, the walls of the fortress were breached in
several places. On July 21 Mehmed II ordered an all-out assault which began at sundown and continued all night. The besieging
army flooded the city, and then started its assault on the fort. As this was the most crucial moment of the siege, Hunyadi ordered
the defenders to throw tarred wood, and other flammable material, and then set it afire. Soon a wall of flames separated the
Janissaries fighting in the city from their comrades trying to breach through the gaps into the upper town. The fierce battle
between the encircled Janissaries and Szilágyi's soldiers inside the upper town was turning in favour of the Christians and the
Hungarians managed to beat off the fierce assault from outside the walls. The Janissaries remaining inside the city were thus
massacred while the Ottoman troops trying to breach the upper town suffered heavy losses. When an Ottoman soldier almost
managed to plant the Sultan's flag on top of a bastion, a Hungarian knight[10] named Titus Dugović (Dugovics Titusz in Hungarian)
grabbed him and together they plunged from the wall. (For this heroism John Hunyadi's son, the Hungarian king Matthias
Corvinus (Hungarian Hunyadi Mátyás), made Titus's son a nobleman three years later.)
Battle The next day something unexpected happened. By some accounts, the peasant crusaders started a spontaneous action, and
forced Capistrano and Hunyadi to make use of the situation. Despite Hunyadi's orders to the defenders not to try to loot the
Ottoman positions, some of the units crept out from demolished ramparts, took up positions across from the Ottoman line, and
began harassing enemy soldiers. Ottoman spahis (provincial cavalry) tried without success to disperse the harassing force. At
once, more Christians joined those outside the wall. What began as an isolated incident quickly escalated into a full-scale battle.
John of Capistrano at first tried to order his men back inside the walls, but soon found himself surrounded by about 2,000
Crusaders. He then began leading them toward the Ottoman lines, crying, "The Lord who made the beginning will take care of the
finish!" Capistrano led his crusaders to the Ottoman rear across the Sava river. At the same time, Hunyadi started a desperate
charge out of the fort to take the cannon positions in the Ottoman camp. Taken by surprise at this strange turn of events and, some
chroniclers say, paralyzed by some inexplicable fear, the Ottomans took flight.[11] The Sultan's bodyguard of about 5,000
Janissaries tried desperately to stop the panic and recapture the camp, but by that time Hunyadi's army had also joined the
unplanned battle, and the Ottoman efforts became hopeless. The Sultan himself advanced into the fight and killed a knight in
single combat, but then took an arrow in the thigh and was rendered unconscious. After the battle, the Hungarian raiders were
ordered to spend the night behind the walls of the fortress and to be on the alert for a possible renewal of the battle, but the
Ottoman counterattack never came. Under cover of darkness the Ottomans retreated in haste, bearing their wounded in 140
wagons. They withdrew to Constantinople.
Aftermath The Hungarians had, however, to pay dearly for this victory, as plague broke out in the camp, from which John
Hunyadi himself died three weeks later (August 11, 1456). He was buried in the Cathedral of Gyulafehérvár (now Alba Iulia), the
capital of Transylvania. As the design of the fortress had proved its merits during the siege, some additional reinforcements were
made by the Hungarians. The weaker eastern walls, where the Ottomans broke through into the upper town were reinforced by the
Zindan gate and the Heavy Nebojsa tower. This was the last of the great modifications to the fortress until 1521 when Sultan
Süleyman eventually captured it.
Noon Bell Pope Callixtus III ordered the bells of every European church to be rung every day at noon, as a call for believers to
pray for the defenders of the city.[12][13] The practice of Noon bell is traditionally attributed to the international conmemoration of
the Belgrade victory and to the order of Pope Callixtus III.[14][15][16]
Follow Up The victory stopped the Ottoman advance towards Catholic Europe for 70 years, though they made other incursions
such as the taking of Otranto in 1480–1481 and the raid of Croatia and Styria in 1493. Belgrade would continue to protect
Hungary from Ottoman attacks until the fort fell to the Ottomans in 1521. After the Siege of Belgrade stopped the advance of
Mehmed II towards Central Europe, Serbia and Bosnia were absorbed into the Empire. Wallachia, the Tartar Khanate of Crimea,
and eventually Moldavia were merely converted into vassal states thanks to strong military resistance to Mehmed's attempts at
conquest. There were several reasons why the sultan did not directly attack Hungary and why he gave up the idea of advancing in
that direction after his unsuccessful siege of Belgrade. The mishap at Belgrade indicated that the Empire could not expand further
until Serbia and Bosnia were transformed into a secure base of operations. Furthermore, the significant political and military
power of Hungary under Matthias Corvinus no doubt had something to do with this hesitation. Mehmed was also distracted by
resistance from two semi-independent vassals to the north of the Danube, over whom he was attempting to exercise greater
authority. In Dracula: Prince of Many Faces, by Raymond T. McNally and Radu Florescu, it is claimed that Mehmed wanted to
reconquer Belgrade in order to gain access to Hungary through the Danube River but was prevented from doing[dubious – discuss] so by
a humiliating defeat by Vlad III at The Night Attack. The sultan later came into conflict with Stephen III of Moldavia, resulting in
an even worse defeat at Battle of Vaslui and later a pyrrhic victory at the Battle of Valea Albă. Taking into account his aggressive
ambition and statements suggesting he dreamed of world conquest, most historians agree that Mehmed the Conqueror was initially
interested in occupying Hungary and expanding as far into Europe as possible but was thwarted by the defeat at Belgrade and
contained by Matthias' military strength as well as fierce resistance by Vlach vassals. As McNally and Florescu put it, the sultan
"planned to strike at the pillars of European civilization and bring it tumbling down under his control." While Hunyadi's victory at
Belgrade and the lasting legacy of his political decisions (Vlad III the Impaler and Stephen III both came to power under Hunyadi,
and he went to great lengths to have his son Matthias placed on the throne) rendered the daunting Mehmed II far less of a threat to
Christendom, his ultimate dream of a Christian reconquest of Constantinople would never be realized. Hunyadi had chosen to stay
out of the Siege of Constantinople because he was militarily unprepared to fight Mehmed's mighty army at the time, and instead
opted to protect Hungary and fortify the Balkans. Matthias did not share the concept of a great war against the Ottomans and was
too embroiled in political disputes with the Holy Roman Empire to his West to be the aggressive warrior his father was, so his role
was limited mostly to defending his own territory and letting the Balkan leaders bear the brunt of the struggle against the Ottoman
Empire.[citation needed] While fierce resistance and Hunyadi's effective leadership ensured that the daring and ambitious Mehmed the
Conqueror would only get as far into Europe as the Balkans, the sultan had already managed to transform the Ottoman Empire
into what would be one of the most feared powers in Europe (as well as Asia) for centuries. Most of Hungary was eventually
conquered in 1526 at the Battle of Mohács. Ottoman expansion into Europe continued with menacing success until the Siege of
Vienna in 1529, and Ottoman power in Europe remained strong and still threatening to Central Europe at times until the Battle of
Vienna in 1683.
Crusades portal
References
1. ^ The Papacy and the Levant, Kenneth M. Setton, page 177, 1984
2. ^ The Papacy and the Levant, Kenneth M. Setton, page 177, 1984
3. ^ History of the Ottoman Empire and modern Turkey, Stanford J. Shaw, page 63,1976
4. ^ The Papacy and the Levant, Kenneth M. Setton, page 174, 1984
5. ^ Andrew Ayton; Leslie Price (1998). "The Military Revolution from a Medieval Perspective". The Medieval
Military Revolution: State, Society and Military Change in Medieval and Early Modern Society. London, England: I.B.
Tauris. ISBN 1860643531. http://www.deremilitari.org/resources/articles/ayton1.htm. Retrieved 1 October 2010.
6. ^ John Julius Norwich (1982). A History of Venice. Lecture notes in mathematics 1358. New York, United
States: Alfred B. Knopf. p. 269. ISBN 0679721975.
7. ^ The Papacy and the Levant, Kenneth M. Setton, page 175, 1984
8. ^ The later Crusades, 1274–1580: from Lyons to Alcazar, Norman Housley, page 104
9. ^ Anniversary of 1456 victory over Ottomans becomes memorial day politics.hu
10. ^ Schwicker, Johann Heinrich (1861). Geschichte der Temeser Banats: historische Bilder und Skizzen. p. 86.
11. ^ The Brut, edited by F.W.D Brie, London : EETS, 1908, p. 524
12. ^ Thomas Henry Dyer (1861). The history of modern Europe: From the fall of Constantinople. J. Murray. p. 85.
http://books.google.com/books?id=jBAMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA85&dq=Noon+bell+belgrade&cd=5#v=onepage&q=Noo
n%20bell%20belgrade&f=false.
13. ^ István Lázár: Hungary: A Brief History (see in Chapter 6)
14. ^ Kerny, Terézia (2008). "The Renaissance - Four Times Over. Exhibitions Commemorating Matthias's
Accession to the Throne". The Hungarian Quarterly. Budapest, Hungary: Society of the Hungarian Quarterly. pp. 79–90.
http://www.ceeol.com/aspx/issuedetails.aspx?issueid=36917033-77c7-4622-8f76-dae90f531363&articleId=ca7d4a8b-
cee0-4d8b-beab-fb1536ba3597. "On July 22, 1456, John Hunyadi won a decisive victory at Belgrade over the armies of
Sultan Mehmed II. Hunyadi's feat—carried out with a small standing army combined with peasants rallied to fight the
infidel by the Franciscan friar St John of Capistrano— had the effect of putting an end to Ottoman attempts on Hungary
and Western Europe for the next seventy years. The bells ringing at noon throughout Christendom are, to this day, a daily
commemoration of John Hunyadi's victory."
15. ^ http://www.hungarianhistory.com/lib/hunyadi/hu01.htm
16. ^ http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/CLXVII/sep08/171-d
• ^ Pope Calixtus III account from August 14, 1456 to the Burgundian bishop talking about the saviour of Christianity at
Belgrade Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Siege of Belgrade
• http://www.historynet.com/ottoman-hungarian-wars-siege-of-belgrade-in-1456.htm/5

North wall of the Belgrade Fortress from the 17th century. Part of Belgrade Fortress from the 17th century.

Battle of Nándorfehérvár, Hungarian painting from the 19. century. In the middle Giovanni da Capistrano with the cross in his
hand.Stone in the Kalemegdan park, in Belgrade, with engraved inscription on the place where Christian forces under command
of John Hunyadi won the battle against the Ottomans in the year 1456.
Gothic fresco Siege of Belgrade in Church of Immaculate Conception of Virgin Mary in Olomouc (Czech Republic) from 1468 is
probably the oldest depiction of the battle. It depicts Giovanni da Capistrano in the center and John Hunyadi on the left with flag.

Siege of Belgrade (in Hungarian: Nándorfehérvár) 1456. Hünername 1584. Fortress of Belgrade as it looked in the Middle Ages.
The lower and upper town with the palace are visible.
 Matthias Corvinus (1458-1490)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

King of Hungary and Croatia

Reign 20 January 1458 - 6 April 1490 (32 years, 76 days)
Coronation 1464
Predecessor Ladislaus the Posthumous
Successor Władisław II
Duke of Austria
Reign 1486-1490
King of Bohemia
Reign 1469-1490
Predecessor George of Poděbrady
Successor Ladislaus II

Spouse Catherine of Poděbrady Beatrice of Naples

IssueJohn Corvinus

House House of Hunyadi

Father John Hunyadi
Mother Erzsébet Szilágyi
Born 23 February 1443 Kolozsvár, Hungary (present-day Cluj-Napoca, Romania)
Died 6 April 1490 (aged 47) Vienna
Matthias Corvinus (Hungarian: Hunyadi Mátyás or very rarely Corvin Mátyás) (23 February 1443 – 6 April 1490), also called
the Just in folk tales, was King of Hungary and Croatia from 1458, at the age of 14 until his death. After conducting several
military campaigns he became also King of Bohemia, (1469–1490) and Duke of Austria.[1][2][3]
As King of Hungary, Matthias is considered Matthias I.
Names in other languages Medieval Latin: Mattias Corvinus, Romanian: Matia/Matei/Mateiaş Corvin/Corvinul, Croatian:
Matija/Matijaš Korvin, Czech: Matyáš Korvín, German: Matthias Corvinus, Polish: Maciej Korwin, Rusyn:Матяш
Корвiн/Matiash Corvin, Serbian: Матија Корвин/Matija Korvin, Slovak: Matej Korvín, Slovene: Matija Korvin, Russian:
Матьяш Корвин/Matyash Korvin.
Early life Matthias was born in Kolozsvár (Kingdom of Hungary, now Cluj-Napoca, Romania) in a house now known as the
Matthias Corvinus House. He was second son of John Hunyadi, a successful general of the Kingdom of Hungary,[4] who had
Wallachian ancestry[5] and had risen through the ranks of the nobility to become regent of Hungary. Matthias' mother was
Erzsébet Szilágyi, from a Hungarian noble family. His tutors were the learned János Vitéz, bishop of Nagyvárad (now: Oradea),
whom he subsequently raised to the primacy, and the Polish humanist Gregory of Sanok. Besides the learned languages, he was
acquainted with most of the living tongues of Europe of the time.[6] His military training proceeded under the eye of his father,
whom he began to follow on his campaigns when only twelve years of age. In 1453 he was created count of Beszterce, and was
knighted at the Siege of Belgrade in 1456. The same care for his welfare led his father to choose him a bride from the powerful
family of the Counts of Cilli. Matthias was married to Elizabeth of Celje. She was the only known daughter of Ulrich II of Celje
and Catherine Cantakuzina. Her maternal grandparents were Đurađ Branković and Eirene Kantakouzene. But Elizabeth died at the
age of fifteen on November 6, 1455, before the marriage was consummated, leaving Matthias a widower at the age of twelve.[7]
After the death of Matthias's father, there was a two-year struggle between Hungary's various barons and its Habsburg king,
Ladislaus the Posthumous (also king of Bohemia), with treachery from all sides. Matthias's older brother Ladislaus Hunyadi was
one party attempting to gain control. Matthias was inveigled to Buda by the enemies of his house, and, on the pretext of being
concerned in a purely imaginary conspiracy against Ladislaus, was condemned to decapitation, but was spared on account of his
youth. In 1457, Ladislaus Hunyadi was captured with a trick and beheaded, while the king died suddenly in November that year;
rumors of poisoning were dispelled by research in 1985 which gave acute leukemia as the cause of death. Matthias was taken
hostage by George of Poděbrady, governor of Bohemia, a friend of the Hunyadis who aimed to raise a national king to the Magyar
throne. Poděbrady treated Matthias hospitably and affianced him with his daughter Catherine, but still detained him, for safety's
sake, in Prague, even after a Magyar deputation had hastened thither to offer the youth the crown. Matthias took advantage of the
memory left by his father's deed, and by the general population's dislike of foreign candidates; most the barons, furthermore,
considered that the young scholar would be a weak monarch in their hands. An influential section of the magnates, headed by the
Palatine Ladislaus Garai and by Nicholas of Ilok, voivode of Transylvania, who had been concerned in the judicial murder of
Matthias's brother Ladislaus, and hated the Hunyadis as semi-foreign upstarts, were fiercely opposed to Matthias's election;
however, they were not strong enough to resist against Matthias's uncle Mihály Szilágyi and his 15,000 veterans.
Rule
Early rule Thus, on 20 January 1458, Matthias was elected king by the Parliament. This was the first time in the medieval
Hungarian kingdom that a member of the nobility, without dynastic ancestry and relationship, mounted the royal throne. Such an
election upset the usual course of dynastic succession in the age. In the Bohemian and Hungarian states they heralded a new
judiciary era in Europe, characterized by the absolute supremacy of the Parliament, (dietal system) and a tendency to
centralization. During his reign, Matthias reduced the power of the feudal lords, and ruled instead with a cadre of talented and
highly educated individuals, chosen for their abilities rather than their social status. At this time, the young Matthias was still a
hostage of George of Poděbrady, who released him under the condition of marrying his daughter Kunhuta (later known as
Catherine). On 24 January 1458, 40,000 Hungarian noblemen, assembled on the ice of the frozen Danube, unanimously elected
Matthias Hunyadi king of Hungary, and on 14 February the new king made his state entry into Buda. Matthias was 15 when he
was elected King of Hungary: at this time the realm was environed by perils. The Ottomans and the Venetians threatened it from
the south, the emperor Frederick III from the west, and Casimir IV of Poland from the north, both Frederick and Casimir claiming
the throne. The Czech mercenaries under Giszkra held the northern counties and from thence plundered those in the centre.
Meanwhile Matthias's friends had only pacified the hostile dignitaries by engaging to marry the daughter of the palatine Garai to
their nominee, whereas Matthias refused to marry into the family of one of his brother's murderers, and on 9 February confirmed
his previous nuptial contract with the daughter of Poděbrady, who shortly afterwards was elected King of Bohemia (2 March
1458). Throughout 1458 the struggle between the young king and the magnates, reinforced by Matthias's own uncle and guardian
Szilágyi, was acute. But Matthias, who began by deposing Garai and dismissing Szilágyi, and then proceeded to levy a tax,
without the consent of the Diet, in order to hire mercenaries, easily prevailed. He recovered the Golubac Fortress from the
Ottomans, successfully invading Serbia, and reasserting the suzerainty of the Hungarian crown over Bosnia. In the following year
there was a fresh rebellion, when the emperor Frederick was actually crowned king by the malcontents at Vienna-Neustadt (4
March 1459); Matthias however drove him out, and Pope Pius II intervened so as to leave Matthias free to engage in a projected
crusade against the Ottomans, which subsequent political complications, however, rendered impossible. On 1 May 1461, the
marriage between Matthias and Poděbrady's daughter took place. From 1461 to 1465 the career of Matthias was a perpetual
struggle punctuated by truces. Having come to an understanding with his father-in-law Poděbrady, he was able to turn his arms
against the emperor Frederick. In April 1462 the latter restored the holy crown for 60,000 ducats and was allowed to retain certain
Hungarian counties with the title of king; in return for which concessions, extorted from Matthias by the necessity of coping with
a simultaneous rebellion of the Magyar noble in league with Poděbrady's son Victorinus, the emperor recognized Matthias as the
actual sovereign of Hungary. Only now was Matthias able to turn against the Ottomans, who were again threatening the southern
provinces. He began by defeating the Ottoman general Ali Pasha, and then penetrated into Bosnia, capturing the newly built
fortress of Jajce after a long and obstinate defence (December 1463). On returning home he was crowned with the Holy Crown on
29 March 1464. Twenty-one days after, on 8 March, the 15-years-old Queen Catherine died in childbirth. The child, a son, was
stillborn. After driving the Czechs out of his northern counties, he turned southwards again, this time recovering all the parts of
Bosnia which still remained in Ottoman hands.
Wars in central Europe Matthias gained independence of and power over the barons by dividing them, and by raising a large
royal army, fekete sereg (the King's Black Army of Hungary of mercenaries), whose main force included the remnants of the
Hussites from Bohemia. At this time Hungary reached its greatest territorial extent of the epoch (present-day southeastern
Germany to the west, Dalmatia to the south, Eastern Carpathians to the east, and southwestern Poland to the north). Soon after his
coronation, Matthias turned his attention upon Bohemia, where the Hussite leader George of Poděbrady had gained the throne.
The election took place on a field, in the presence of about 10,000 electors. In order to obtain as many votes as necessary he made
various businesses with the key-persons, but he did not have expected that much electors, so he needed more money. Two of the
most significant persons were Gašpar Ernušt Hampo de Csaktornya, who was a rich wholesaler and who borrowed money to him
to be able to make the businesses there at the election before the coronation and Simon Keglević, who became the commander of
Matthias Corvinus. In 1465 Pope Paul II excommunicated the Hussite King and ordered all the neighbouring princes to depose
him. On 31 May 1468, Matthias invaded Bohemia; however, as early as 27 February 1469, he anticipated an alliance between
George and Frederick by himself concluding an armistice with the former. On 3 May the Bohemian Catholics elected Matthias
king of Bohemia, but this was contrary to the wishes of both pope and emperor, who preferred to partition Bohemia. George
however anticipated all his enemies by suddenly excluding his own son from the throne in favour of Ladislaus, the eldest son of
Casimir IV, thus skillfully enlisting Poland on his side. The sudden death of Poděbrady in March 1471 led to fresh complications.
At the very moment when Matthias was about to profit by the disappearance of his most capable rival, another dangerous
rebellion, headed by the primate and the chief dignitaries of the state, with the object of placing Casimir, son of Casimir IV, on the
throne, paralysed Matthias's foreign policy during the critical years 1470-1471. He suppressed this domestic rebellion indeed, but
in the meantime the Poles had invaded the Bohemian domains with 60,000 men, and when in 1474 Matthias was at last able to
take the field against them in order to raise the siege of Breslau, he was obliged to fortify himself in an entrenched camp, whence
he so skillfully harried the enemy that the Poles, impatient to return to their own country, made peace at Breslau (February 1475)
on an uti possidetis basis, a peace subsequently confirmed by the congress of Olomouc (July 1479). During the interval between
these peaces, Matthias, in self-defence, again made war on the emperor, reducing Frederick to such extremities that he was glad to
accept peace on any terms. By the final arrangement made between the contending princes, Matthias recognized Ladislaus as king
of Bohemia proper in return for the surrender of Moravia, Silesia and Upper and Lower Lusatia, hitherto component parts of the
Bohemian monarchy, till he should have redeemed them for 400,000 florins. The emperor promised to pay Matthias a huge war
indemnity, and recognized him as the legitimate king of Hungary on the understanding that he should succeed him if he died
without male issue, a contingency at this time somewhat improbable, as Matthias, only three years previously (15 December
1476), had married his third wife, Beatrice, daughter of Ferdinand I of Naples. The emperor's failure to follow through on these
promises induced Matthias to declare war against him for the third time in 1481. The Hungarian king conquered all of the
fortresses in Frederick's hereditary domains. Finally, on 1 June 1485, at the head of 8,000 veterans, he made his triumphal entry
into Vienna, which he henceforth made his capital. Styria, Carinthia and Carniola were next subdued; Trieste was only saved by
the intervention of the Venetians. Matthias consolidated his position by alliances with the dukes of Saxony and Bavaria, with the
Swiss Confederation and the archbishop of Salzburg, establishing henceforth the greatest potentate in central Europe.
Wars against the Ottoman Empire In 1471 Matthias renewed the Serbian Despotate in south Hungary under Vuk Grgurević for
the protection of the borders against the Ottomans. In 1479 a huge Ottoman army, on its return home from ravaging Transylvania,
was annihilated at Szászváros (modern Orăştie, 13 October 1479) in the so-called Battle of Breadfield. The following year
Matthias recaptured Jajce, drove the Ottomans from northern Serbia and instituted two new military banats, Jajce and Srebernik,
out from reconquered Bosnian territory. In 1480, when an Ottoman fleet seized Otranto in the Kingdom of Naples, at the earnest
solicitation of the pope Matthias sent the Hungarian general, Balázs Magyar, to recover the fortress, which surrendered to him on
10 May 1481. Again in 1488, Matthias took Ancona under his protection for a while, occupying it with a Hungarian garrison. On
the death of sultan Mehmet II in 1481, a unique opportunity for the intervention of Europe in Ottoman affairs presented itself. A
civil war ensued in Ottoman Empire between his sons Bayezid and Cem; the latter, being worsted, fled to the knights of Rhodes,
by whom he was kept in custody in France. Matthias, as the next-door neighbour of the Ottomans, claimed the custody of so
valuable a hostage, and would have used him as a means of extorting concessions from Bayezid. But neither the pope nor the
Venetians would accept such a transfer, and the negotiations on this subject greatly embittered Matthias against the Papal court.
The last days of Matthias were occupied in endeavouring to secure the succession to the throne for his illegitimate son John;
Queen Beatrice, though childless, fiercely and openly opposed the idea and the matter was still pending when Matthias, who had
long been crippled by gout, expired very suddenly on 6 April 1490, just before Easter.
Policies in Wallachia and Moldavia At times Matthias had Vlad III the Impaler, Prince of Wallachia, as his vassal. Although
Vlad had great success against the Ottoman armies, the two Christian rulers disagreed in 1462, leading to Matthias imprisoning
Vlad in Buda. However, wide-ranging support from many Western leaders for Vlad III prompted Matthias to gradually grant
privileged status to his controversial prisoner. Vlad was eventually freed and married Matthias' cousin, Ilona Szilagy. As the
Ottoman Empire appeared to be increasingly threatening as Vlad Țepeș had warned, he was sent to reconquer Wallachia with
Hungarian support in 1476. Despite the earlier disagreements between the two leaders, it was ultimately a major blow to
Hungary's status in Wallachia when Vlad was assassinated that same year. In 1467, a conflict erupted between Matthias and the
Moldavian Prince Stephen III (Romanian: Ștefan cel Mare), after the latter became weary of Hungarian policies in Wallachia and
their presence at Kilia; added to this was the fact that Matthias had already taken sides in the Moldavian conflicts preceding
Stephen's rule, as he had backed Alexăndrel (and, possibly, the ruler referred to as Ciubăr Vodă), deposing Petru Aron. Stephen
occupied Kilia, sparking Hungarian retaliation, that ended in Matthias' bitter defeat in the Battle of Baia in December (the King
himself is said to have been wounded thrice).
Administrative and legislative activity
Patronage See also: History of Buda Castle and Visegrád Matthias was educated in Italian, and his fascination with the
achievements of the Italian Renaissance led to the promotion of Mediterranean cultural influences in Hungary. Buda, Esztergom,
Székesfehérvár and Visegrád were amongst the towns in Hungary that benefited from the establishment of public health and
education institutions and a new legal system under Matthias' rule. In 1465, he founded a university in Bratislava, the Universitas
Istropolitana which was the third university in medieval Hungary. His 1476 marriage to Beatrice, the daughter of the King of
Naples, only intensified the influence of the Renaissance. During the long reign of emperor Sigismund of Luxemburg, the Royal
Castle of Buda became probably the largest Gothic palace of the late Middle Ages. Matthias rebuilt the palace in early
Renaissance style and further explanded it. His other favourite residence was the summer palace of Visegrád.[8][9] An indefatigable
reader and lover of culture, he proved an extremely generous patron, as artists from the Italian city-states and Western Europe
were present in large numbers at his court. The most important humanists living in Matthias' court were Antonio Bonfini, Galeotto
Marzio, Pietro Ranzano, Marsilio Ficino, Aurelio Lippo Brandolini and the famous Hungarian poet Janus Pannonius. Famous
Italian artists served the king: Filippino Lippi, Verrocchio,[10] Giovanni Dalmata, and Cristoforo Foppa.[11] As Galeotto Marzio
tells us, Hungarian 'heroic sagas', and love songs were often sung on special occasions in the king's court alongside the
international, 'modern' Burgundian-Flandrian music.[12] Astronomer Johannes Regiomontanus built astrolabes for Matthias
Corvinus of Hungary. There he calculated extensive astronomical tables and built astronomical instruments for the king.[13] Like
many of his acculturated contemporaries, he trusted in astrology and other semi-scientific beliefs; however, he also supported true
scientists and engaged frequently in discussions with philosophers and scholars. He endeavored to speak the mother tongues of his
subjects fluently. Beside native Hungarian, he spoke Romanian, Croatian, German and Czech as well as Latin, Italian.
Royal library Matthias Corvinus's library, the Bibliotheca Corviniana, was Europe's greatest collections of secular books:
historical chronicles, philosophic and scientific works in the fifteenth century. His library was second in size only to the Vatican
Library.[14] In 1489, Bartolomeo della Fonte of Florence wrote that Lorenzo de Medici founded his own Greek-Latin library
encouraged by the example of the Hungarian king. Frequently, half his nights were spent in reading, after the labour of his most
strenuous days.[15]
Legacy In the course of his expansion, Matthias strengthened his state's diplomacy. Apart from his regular network of relations
with his neighbours, as well as the Pope and Kingdom of Naples, he established regular contacts with France, Burgundy,
Switzerland, Florence, most German states, Russia and, occasionally, with Persia and Egypt. Matthias's empire collapsed after his
death, since he had no children except for an illegitimate son, John Corvinus, whom the noblemen of the country did not accept as
their king. Matthias' rival as King of Bohemia, Ladislaus II of the Jagiellon line, followed him. High taxes, mostly falling on
peasants, to sustain Matthias' lavish lifestyle and the Black Army (cumulated with the fact that the latter went on marauding across
the Kingdom after being disbanded upon Matthias's death) could imply that he was not very popular with his contemporaries[citation
needed]
. But the fact that he was elected king in a small anti-Habsburg popular revolution, that he kept the barons in check,
persistent rumours about him sounding public opinion by mingling among commoners incognito, and harsh period known
witnessed by Hungary later ensured that Matthias' reign is considered one of the most glorious chapters of Hungarian history.
Songs and tales refer to him as Matthias the Just (Mátyás, az igazságos in Hungarian), a ruler of justice and great wisdom, and he
is arguably the most popular hero of Hungarian folklore. There is a Hungarian proverb still used today saying Matthias has died,
justice is gone (Meghalt Mátyás, oda az igazság). He is also one of the sleeping kings, e.g. as Kralj Matjaž in Slovenia.[16] This
popularity is partially mirrored in modern Romania: 19th century Romantic nationalism invested in Matthias and his fathers'
Vlach roots, their Christian warrior stances, and their cultural achievements.
Titles His titles in the 1486 laws: King of Hungary, Bohemia, Dalmatia, Croatia, Rama, Serbia, Lodomeria, Cumania and
Bulgaria, Prince of Silesia and Luxembourg, Margrave of Moravia and Lusatia [17]
Notes
1. ^ Matthias I. (2009). In Encyclopædia Britannica.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/369772/Matthias-
2. ^ In English, his first name is occasionally given as Matthew, while Corvinus may be rendered as Corwin or
Corvin
3. ^ http://www.nndb.com/people/385/000096097/
4. ^ Stanley Sandler, Ground warfare: an international encyclopedia, Volume 1, ABC-CLIO, 2002, p. 391 [1]
5. ^ János Hunyadi. (2010). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved August 10, 2010, from Encyclopædia
Britannica Online: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/277182/Janos-Hunyadi
6. ^ Charles William Russell, The life of Cardinal Mezzofanti: with an introductory memoir of eminent linguists,
ancient and modern, Longman, Brown, and co., 1858, page 113.[2]
7. ^ Ulrich II of Celje and his children in Medieval Lands by Charles Cawley
8. ^ History section: Miklós Horler: Budapest műemlékei I, Bp: 1955, pp. 259–307
9. ^ Post-war reconstruction: László Gerő: A helyreállított budai vár, Bp, 1980, pp. 11–60.
10. ^ http://www.artist-biography.info/artist/andrea_verrocchio
11. ^ http://www.invaluable.com/artist/caradosso-56zr9byht1
12. ^ Roy Porter, Mikuláš Teich, The Renaissance in national context, Cambridge University Press,1992, page 173
[3]
13. ^ http://press.princeton.edu/books/maor/sidebar_c.pdf
14. ^ Marcus Tanner, The Raven King: Matthias Corvinus and the Fate of his Lost Library (New Haven: Yale U.P.,
2008)
15. ^ Chisholm, Hugh, ed (1911). "Matthias I., Hunyadi". Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge
University Press.
16. ^ Lukács, István. 2010. King Matthias Corvinus in the Collective Memory of the Slovenian Nation. Studia
Slavica 55(2): 371–379.
17. ^ http://www.1000ev.hu/index.php?a=3&param=876
Sources Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Matthias Corvinus of Hungary
• This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed (1911). "Matthias I.,
Hunyadi". Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Further reading
• Christian Gastgeber - Ekaterini Mitsiou - Ioan Aurel Pop - Mihailo Popović - Johannes Preiser-Kapeller - Alexandru
Simon (Hrsg.): Matthias Corvinus und seine Zeit. Europa am Übergang vom Mittelalter zur Neuzeit zwischen Wien und
Konstantinopel. Veröffentlichungen zur Byzanzforschung 27 (Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften).
Vienna 2011, ISBN 978-3-7001-6891-1 (table of contents: http://hw.oeaw.ac.at/6891-
1inhalt/Gastgeber_020_Inhaltsverzeichnis_005-006.pdf)
External links
Hungary portal
• The Squash and the Colt, a folk tale reflecting Matthias' wisdom and sense of justice
• His picture on the Hungarian 1000 forint banknote
• Bibliotheca Corviniana Digitalis - National Széchényi Library, Hungary
• Map of Europe in 1500.
• "Matthias Corvinus". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. 1913.
Matthias Corvinus
House of Hunyadi
Born: 23 February 1443 Died: 6 April 1490
Regnal titles
Preceded by King of Hungary
Ladislaus Posthumus 1458–1490
Succeeded by
King of Bohemia
Preceded by Vladislaus II
(disputed)
George of Poděbrady
1469–1490

Matthias on the 1000 Hungarian forint banknote The Hunyad Castle, where Matthias grew up.Transylvania,present-day Romania

Forints of Matthias Corvinus

Medieval Coat of Arms of Matthias Corvinus, guarded by Black Army heavy infantry men. Matthias Church, Budapest. The
damaged art relic was renovated in 1893. The roughly 50 years old Matthias (contemporary sculpture from Buda Castle) Signature
and the royal stamp
Matthias Corvinus as depicted in Chronica Hungarorum by Johannes de Thurocz Coat of arms John Corvinus (His illegitime son)
triumphed in Vienna in 1485

heraldry and young Matthias as depicted in Johannes de Thurocz's German manuscript (1490)
Western conquests of Matthias Corvinus.
 Black Army of Hungary (1458-1494)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Standard of the Black legion

Active 1458 to 1494 AD[1]

Country Kingdom of Hungary

Allegiance Hungarian, Czech (Bohemian, Moravian, Silesian), Polish, Serbian, German-speaking

Branch Army, Navy

Type Cavalry, Infantry, Artillery, Siege Weapons

Size approx. 28.000

This characteristic flag with a forked

tail was reconstructed after a miniature in Philostratus Chronicle, one of the Corvinas,
Heraldry
representing the 1485 entry of János Corvinus, son of king Matthew, into Vienna. The black
colour of the flag used to be white (argent) in fact, but the argent paint oxidized. The
reconstruction preserves the original colour.

Mascot Raven

Engagements Holy Roman Empire, Bohemia, Serbia, Bosnia, Moldavia, Wallachia, Italy

Disbanded 1494,[1] causes:Financial (disbanded), elimination (due to mercenary uprising)

Commanders

King Matthias Corvinus

Notable
Pál Kinizsi, Balázs Magyar, Imre Zápolya, John Giskra, John Haugwitz, František Hag
commanders
The Black Army (Hungarian: Fekete sereg, pronounced [ˈfɛkɛtɛ ˈʃɛrɛɡ] 'Black Legion' or 'Regiment'—possibly named after their
black armor panoply, see below) is in historiography the common name given to the military forces serving under the reign of
King Matthias Corvinus of Hungary. The ancestor and core of this early standing mercenary army appeared in the era of his father
(John Hunyadi) in the early 1440s.
Hungary's Black Army traditionally encompasses the years from 1458 to 1494.[1] The mercenary soldiers of other countries in the
era were conscripted from the general population at times of crisis and soldiers worked as bakers, farmers, brick-makers, etc. for
most of the year. In contrast, the men of the Black Army fought as well-paid, full-time mercenaries and were purely devoted to
the arts of warfare. It was a standing mercenary army, which conquered parts of Austria, Vienna (1485) and parts of Moravia. The
core of the army originally consisted of 6-8 thousand mercenaries,[2] later increasing to a permanent size of 30.000 men and
doubling during invasions. The soldiers were mainly Bohemians, Germans, Serbs, Poles[3] and, from 1480, Hungarians. Every
fifth soldier in the Black Army had an arquebus in the infantry, which was an unusual ratio at the time. The high price of
medieval gunpowder prevented them from raising it any further.[4] The main troops of the army were the infantry, artillery and
light and heavy cavalry. The function of the heavy cavalry was to protect the light armored infantry and artillery, while the other
corps delivered random, surprise assaults on the enemy. One important victory of the Black Army of Hungary was at the Battle
of Breadfield where the Hungarians defeated the Ottomans. The death of Matthias Corvinus meant the end of the Black Army
since Vladislaus II was not able to cover the cost of the army.[2]
Development of a modern well-organized drafting In the first years of Matthias' rule, the structure of enlisting troops was built
on the legacy of his ancestor Sigismund of Luxembourg. The majority of his army consisted of noble banners[2] and the soldiers
provided and regulated by the Militia Portalis (English: manor militia),[5] which outlined that for every twenty serf-lots (portae) a
noble was ordered to raise and lend one archer to the king. Later, that obligation was reconsidered and the limit was shifted to an
archer per 33 manors and three mounted archers per 100 manors. Those who didn't have serfs but owned manors as a noble had to
join a regional count in state of war. No significant number of mercenaires were present in the Hungarian army during Matthias'
early years. (In the 1463 Janus Pannonius' report of the siege of Jajce Castle, there is no mention of them.) In case of emergency, a
last chance existed for the actual king in power to suddenly mobilize the population. Every noble, no matter his social class, had to
participate in person with his weaponry and all of his personal guards made available. These were the estate armies.[2] Whenever
they were called upon they were not allowed to fight for over 15 days and their field of operations was restricted within the
borders of Hungary. The so-called insurrectio (noble insurrection) was nothing more than an obsolete form of drafting but it was
valid until the Battle of Raab in 1809, mainly because it relieved the participting nobles of paying their taxes. But generally, these
enlisted armada played a minor role in the Black Army since Matthias decreased their participation gradually and called them in in
large numbers early in his reign.[6] In the laws of 1459 of Szeged, he restored the basis of 20 serfs induct an archer (this time it was
based on the numbers of persons). The barons' militia portalis no longer counted in the local noble's banner but into the army of
the county (led by a captain appointed by the king) and could have been sent abroad as well. He also lifted the insurrectio's time
of service from 15 days to 3 months.[7]

From the first mercenaires to regularly paid soldiers

Size of
Country Ruler Deployment Year of military census
army

Kingdom of
Edward I 28,700 Falkirk campaign1 1298
England

Kingdom of Philip IV 44,700 Anglo-Scottish wars2 1340

France

Republic of Doge Tommaso

36,000 peacetime garrison3 15th century
Venice Mocenigo

Filippo Maria
Duchy of
Visconti Duke of 30,000 Battle of Maclodio4 1427
Milan
Milan

Kingdom of King Matthias

28,000 Siege of Vienna5 1486
Hungary Corvinus

Siege of
Ottoman
Sultan Mehmet II 100,000 Nándorfehérvár 1456
Empire
(Belgrade)6

Duchy of
Count Amadeus 3,000 Gallipoli7 1366
Savoy

Taxonomy
Table 1 :Largest Middle Age European armies
Comparison of 15th century armies in focus of their size[8]
1
combined of 3,000 heavy cavalry and over 25,700 infantry
2
consisting of 28,000 men-at-arms and 16,700 foot soldiers
 3
crew of the navy of 3,300 ships[9]
4
estimated[10]
5
(2/3 of which are cavalry)
6
round number
7
:300 Venitian brigandi,[11] English condottiero led by Enguerrand de Coucy[12]
Though these efforts were sound, the way they were carried out wasn't in any way supervised. In 1458, Matthias borrowed as
much as 500 heavy cavalry from George of Poděbrady to strengthen his situation at home against his rival landlords. This marks
the turning-point away from obsolete noble banners to skilled soldiers of fortune (in this case they were remnants of Hussites
whose battle tactics were later adapted by the Black Army).[6] He needed more seasoned veterans so he chose to settle a group of
rogue Czech army deserters led by John Jiskra who were already plundering the northern countryside seeking daily loot. Jiskra
was promised royal pardon in the Peace Treaty of Wiener Neustadt of 1463 and two castles, Solymos and Lippa (now Şoimuş and
Lipova), and his soldiers received a payment of 25.000 ducats. The next year he was stationed in Bosnia to fight the Ottomans.[13]
Previously in 1462, the king sent word to his equerry that he should hire 8 000 cavalry to start a holy war against the Ottoman
Empire only if the Venetians - according to their promise - covered the expenses (unfortunately for the Hungarians, this financial
aid was postponed from time to time). The first major and mass conscription of mercenaries appeared during the Bohemian Wars
(1468–78) whereas the core of his royal infantry a force of 6 000-8 000 armed men were incorporated into the Black Army (the
origins of the moniker could also come from this era)[14]
The term Black Army and its captains Several speculations arose about the army's cognomen. The first recorded accounts using
the "black" attribute appear in written memoranda immediately after his death, when the rest of the army was pillaging the
Hungarian and later Austrian villages when they received no pay. One theory‹See Tfd›[weasel words] suggests that they wore a black
stripe on their shoulder as a sign of mourning. The Italian Medieval historian, Bonfini, used the word only to describe the
"toughness" of veterans serving in their lines. Others‹See Tfd›[weasel words] suppose that Captain Frantisek Hag's black chestplate
inspired the name. A third idea is that they adopted the adjective from another captain, "Black" John Haugwitz, whose nickname
already earned him enough recognition to be identified with the army as a whole.[2]Since no such name as the "Black Army"
existed when Matthias' army was in service, all of his leaders, who were in charge of different army branches, count as Black
Army generals.[clarification needed] Another noteworthy general was Pál Kinizsi who helped Corvinus' successor, Vladislas II of
Hungary, to dissolve what remained of the discontent Black Army.[6]
Funding the army to its greatest extent After Matthias' income increased periodically, simultaneously, the number of
mercenaries increased as well. Historical records vary when it comes to numbers mainly because it changed from battle to battle
and most soldiers were only employed for the duration of combat or a longer conflict. Reckoning the nobility's banners, the
mercenaries, the soldiers of conquered Moravia and Silesia, and the troops of allied Moldovia and Wallachia, the king could have
gathered an army of 90.000 men. (Despite the levies formed mainly by peasants and shepherds, Wallachia and Moldavia remained
vassal countries of Hungary or Poland and, later, the Ottoman Empire.) The nobility's participation in the battlefield were ignored
by the time their support could have been redeemed in gold later on. The cities were also relieved of paying war-levies if they
supplied the craftsmanship and weapon production to equip the military. King Matthias increased the serf's taxes; he switched the
basis of taxing from the portae to the households and, occasionally, they collected the royal dues twice a year during wartime.
Counting the vassals' tribute, the western contributions, the local nobility's war payment, the tithes, and the urban taxes, Matthias'
annual income reached 650.000 florins for comparison the Ottoman Empire had 1.800.000/year[14]. In contrast to popular belief,
historians have speculated for decades that the actual sum altogether could circle around 800.000 florins in a good year at the peak
of Matthias' reign, but never surpassed the financial threshold of one million florins, a previously commonly accepted number.[15]
In 1467, Matthias Corvinus reformed the coin system to see to the easier accumulation of taxes and manageable disbursements
and introduced an improved dinar, which had a finer silver content (500‰) and weighted half a gram. He also re-established its
ratio, where one florin of gold equaled 100 dinars of silver, which was so stable that it remained in place until the mid-16th
century.[16] The army was divided into three parts: the cavalry, paid 3 florins per horse; the pavisors received double the money;
and the archers, light infantry and arquebusiers, with the latter consisting of mostly Bohemian, Germans and Poles (all paid
differently). Medieval gunpowder was quite expensive so the king preferred adapting Hussite tactics to mounted warfare (based
on defense, placing infantry behind wagon blockades or tall pavises, while the cavalry contantly harassed the enemy and guarded
the "middle") and placed archery in favor of fusiliers with the latter being engaged at the very start of the battle. With firearm
production being made available by local marksmen in Transylvania, especially in Braşov,[6][17] [18] these type of ranged infantry
became cheaper to handle for the Hungarians.[7]
Improving the river fleet The river fleet (Hungarian: flottila or naszád) was composed of wooden galleys, rowboats (later
upgraded to gunboats) and smaller ships, which were capable of sailing up the rivers Danube, Tisza and Sava. The victory at the
Nándorfehérvár (Belgrade) in 1456, where the fleet played a significant role in breaking through the Turkish river blockade to
bring relief to the besieged city, showed its importance and signaled the beginning of a recognition of its significance. It also
encouraged King Matthias to build a larger and better equipped navy. Since they were manned by South Slavs, mainly Serbs and
Croats, the two major ports of operations were Nándorfehérvár (Belgrade) and Szabács (Šabac). In 1475, concomitantly with the
introduction of field guns, he ordered the installation of artillery onto the river barges as well as bombards able to shot cannonballs
ranging from 100-200 lb. In 1479, he had a mixed fleet of 360 vessels, a crew of 2600 sailors, and a capacity of 10.000 soldiers on
board.[7][19] Matthias also secured an exit to the Adriatic Sea, the city-port of Zengg from which Balázs Matthias could embark for
his maritime campaigns.[20] Matthias could also monitor the trade going through the Danube delta to the Black Sea from the City
of Kilia, but during his reign, it was seized by the Moldavian army supported by the Ottoman fleet.[21]
Uprisings within the Black Army The disadvantage of having periodically or occasionally paid recruits was that if their money
hadn't arrived on time, they simply left the battlefield or - in a worse scenario - they revolted, as it happened in several instances.
Since they were the same skilled men-at-arms led by the same leaders previously fighting under the Hungarian flag, they were as
difficult to eliminate as the Black Army was to its enemies. However they could be outnumbered since it was always a flank or
division which quit the campaign. An easier solution was when the captain accepted some lands and castles to be mortgaged in
return of service (in one occasion the forts of Ricsó (Hričovský hrad) and Nagybiccse (Bytča) to František Hag). An example of
mass desertion occurred in 1481 when a group of 300 horsemen joined the opposing Holy Roman forces. One of these recorded
insurrections was conducted by Jan Svehla who accompanied Corvinus to Slavonia in 1465 to beat the Ottomans. But when they
were approaching Zagreb, Svehla asked for royal permission to officially quit the offensive with his mercenaries due to financial
difficulty. His request was denied and as a consequence, he and two of his vice-captains left the royal banner along with their
regiments. Following their breakaway George of Poděbrady secretly supported their invasion into the Comitatus of Nitra and their
occupation of the fort of Kosztolány as the army was composed of Czech or Moravian professionals, previously in service for
Podebrad and Frederick III. Apart from the militia, there were religious outcasts (considered heretics) looking for shelter,
including Hussite Brethrens and rogue Moravian Žebraks[nb 1] who favoured pillaging instead of payment. Svehla established an
ad-hoc fort and he appointed Jorig Lichtenburger and Vöttau as comeses for the county. The fort and its looting inhabitants had a
surrounding sphere of influence ranging from the valleys of Váh and Nitra to the eastern provinces of Austria. Matthias realized
the threat and ordered two of his "upper-land" captains to besiege Kosztolany, namely Stefan Zápolya and Ladislaus
Podmaniczky. After returning from Slavonia the King joined the siege. It is worth mentioning that here, among few occasions,
Matthias cooperated with Frederick. He sent a strong armoured mounted troop led by commander Ulrich von Grafeneck to help
wipe out these brigades. When he reached Pozsony (Bratislava), he was reinforced by Knight Georg Pottendorfer with his 600
crusader cavalry. This totaled 8-10 thousand people ready to besiege who began an assault after taking some minor fortifications
on 1 January 1467. The vanguards of the Black Army officers were all present against their former ally. They included the
Palatinate Mihály Országh, Jan Jiskra, Jan Haugwitz, Balázs Magyar, Pál Kinizsi, Nicholaus Ujlaki Ban of Macsó (Mačva), and
Peter Sobi Ban of Bosnia-Croatia-Dalmatia, with the latter-most dying in the assault. Before the siege began, Matthias offered
Svehla the chance to return to his service in exchange for a unconditional surrender on all grounds. After a refusal, he immediately
began the siege and the cannon-firing despite the harsh winter conditions. Svehla and his 2.500 men (and additional citizens)
resisted the superior besiegers, but food storages reached extremely low levels by time and all the efforts to break out were
unsuccessful so he decided to capitulate twice to Matthias with the aforementioned taking his revenge in rejecting it. After three
weeks Svehla feigned a break-out attempt in the front while getting out from the rear through a water channel. Though his
physically weak and exhausted entourage of 2 000 infantry tried to elude the besieging forces, they weren't fast enough to escape
safely. Balázs Magyar and Pál Kinizsi rode down to the fort of Csejte (Čachtice) where they clashed. Almost all of the rioters fell,
only 250 taken as prisoners. Svehla evaded capture again but was put in custody by peasants by the time he was too debilitated to
fight.
Matthias doomed him to be hung up along with the remaining couple of hundred prisoners. This was a rather violent act regarding
the campaigns of King Matthias Corvin. The very next day on 31 January 1467, witnessing the executions, the garrison asked for
mercy and it was granted; and after taking Kosztolány he also offered František Hag - officer member of the resistance group -
captainship in the Black Army since he found him skilled enough. Although in another case in 1474, František Hag revolted due
to lack of pay but the conflict ended without violence and he remained Matthias' subject until his death.[6][20][23]
Branches, tactics, equipments
Heavy Cavalry At the height of the century, the heavy cavalry was already at its peak although it showed signs of declining
tendencies. The striking power and the ability to charge without backup made them capable of forcing a decisive outcome in most
battles. Although they were rarely deployed on their own, if they were, they would take square formations. Such turning-points
occurred at the battle of Breadfield (1479). Usually they made up one-sixth of the army and with mercenary knights were in the
majority. Their armament was well-prepared and of high quality except for the noble banners. This stands for proprietary arms not
the ones provided by the King.
Weaponry
• Lances: The lance was the principal assault weapon of the tilting heavy cavalry. They were up to 4 meters long, ranging
from the classical lance type with a lengthened spearhead (often decorated with animal tails, flags or other ornaments), to the
short conical spearheaded, one designed for piercing heavy armour. A buckler-like vamplate protected the hand and arm. Its
stability was increased with a fastening hook (lance-arret) on the side of the horseman's cuirass.
• Swords: The most common swords of the era originated from Southern Europe.[citation needed] They were 1 meter long with
an "S"-shaped crossguard with an edge designed to slice rather than to pierce because of its rounded pinpoint.[clarification needed]
Its thick pommel was useful for balancing and for whizzing[clarification needed] in close combat. The other version which became
popular in the second half of the century, where the whole body is very similar[clarification needed] except for the quillon, was bent
towards the pin[clarification needed] for the purpose of breaking or clinching the enemy's blade. The 130–140 cm long
bastardswords also came into use. As a companion weapon, daggers of saw-toothed and flame-form type were applied (both
with ring-guard) and a misericordia.
• Apart from these, they carried auxiliary weapons such as Gothic maces, flanged maces, axes and crossbows (balistrero
ad cavallo) and short shields similar in design to the pavise (petit pavois)) for defense.[24]
Light cavalry The traditional hussars were introduced by Matthias; henceforth the light cavalry is called huszár, a name derived
from the word húsz (twenty in English), which refers to the drafting scheme where for every twenty serfs a noble owned, he had to
equip a mounted soldier. After the Diet of Temesvár (Timişoara) of 1397, the light cavalry was institutionalized as an arm
division. They were the second ranked in order within an army and generally considered an elite force. They assembled from the
militia portalis, a significant number of them insurrectios, the Moldavians and Transylvanians with the first having serfs with
lesser accoutrement and the latter generally regarded as good horsearchers. They were divided into groups of 25 (turma) led by a
captain (capitaneus gentium levis armature). Their field of operation was scouting, securing, prowling, cutting enemy supply
lines, and disarraying them in battle. They also served as an additional maneuverable flank (for swooping advance attacks) to
strong centers of heavy cavalry.
Weaponry Helmet, mail shirt, sabre, targe, spear and in some cases throwing axes and topors.
• Sabres (szablya): One type followed the tradition of Southern European longswords ("S"-shaped crossguard), while
gradually transforming into an Eastern style blended (Turkish) sabre. The other type was the so-called huszarszablya
(hussarsabre), a 40mm thick multi-layered sabre stuck with 3–6 rivets.
• Bows: The traditional Magyar composite bow and, due to heavy Eastern influence, the more powerful Turkish-Tatar bow
came into play.
• Axes: Throwing axes could also have had some role in light cavalry weaponry. It was made from one piece of metal,
with a short engraved haft. If the arc of the blade is almost flat or slightly curved, it is called the Hungarian type axe. A
subsidiary to the aforementioned beaked pickaxe was also favored: it had a beak-looking, protruding edge resulting in a
stronger piercing effect.[24]
Infantry Infantry was less important but formed a stable basis in the integrity of an army. They were organized from mixed
ethnicities and were composed of heavy infantry, shielded soldiers, light infantry and fusiliers. Their characteristics include the
combination of plate and mail armour, and the use of the pavises (these painted willow-wood large shields were often ornamented
and covered with leather and linen). The latter served for multiple purposes: to hold enemy attack, cover ranged infantry shooting
from behind (fusiliers engage first, the archer fire constantly), and moveable hussite-style Tabor (with a restricted deployment of
war wagons in number).
Weaponry various long-range weapons including bows, crossbows, arquebuses; all sorts of melee weapons, halberds, pikes, awl-
pikes; hussite/peasant weapons such as slings, frails; handweapons like morgensterns and war-hammers, and classical swords and
sabres.
• Melee weapons: Corseques, glaives, partisans, Friulian spears, and halberds were all adapted depending on the social
class and nationality of the infatrymen. The 15th-century type of halberd was a transition which mixed the hatchet with the
awl-pike, sometimes affixed with a "beak" that was used the pull a knight off his horse and to inrease its piercing impact.
They were covered with metal langlets on the side to prevent being cut in two.
• Archery: The most valuable archers were the crossbowmen. Their number in Matthias' service reached 4 000 in the
1470s. They used sabres as a secondary weapon (which was unusual for infantry in those ages). Their primary advantage was
the ability to shoot heavy armour, while the disadvantages were that they required defense to protect them while moving
slowly in a standing position.
• Arquebusiers: Matthias disfavored them compared to archery. They charged in the early stages of battle. Their aiming
ability, price and the danger of primitive handcannons (self-exploding) prevented them from being highly effective,
especially against smaller groups of people or hand-to-hand combat. A distinctive Hungarian feature was that they didn't use
a fork to stabilize their guns but put it on top of the pavese instead (or in some cases on the parapet of a wagon). Two types
were simoultanously brought to practice, the schioppi (handgun) and the arquebus à croc (not to be confused with cannons).
Three classes of handguns were distinguished: the "bearded" light guns; forked guns; the first primitive muskets (irontube
compounded with wooden grip to be pushed against the shoulder). Their calibers varied from 16 to 24mm.[24]
Arsenal

Glaive. Corseque. Flanged maces- Peasant flail- Pavese shield Bastardsword Blended crossguarded sword Morning Stars
Crossbow and accessories. Parts of a longsword.
The ancient "Roman guards" of the tomb of Jesus Christ were depicted as contemporary infantrymen of the Kingdom of
Hungary. Church of Hronský Beňadik (built around 1470s, then called Garamszentbenedek)
Dissolution of the Black Army Before his death in 6 April 1490 King Matthias asked his captains and barons to pledge an oath to
his son John Corvinus and secure his succession to the throne. Though John was the biggest estate holder in Hungary and had the
command over the Black Army his stepmother Queen Beatrice of Naples invited two heirs the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian
I and Polish prince John I Albert for an inhernheritance assembly to be held at Buda. The first based his claim on the Peace Treaty
of Wiener Neustadt while the latter on his family ties. Furthermore the Hungarian barons invited a third pretender, the King of
Bohemia and brother of John Albert Vladislas II. After the barons double crossed John Corvinus he escaped from the capital and
was up to moving to Pécs, while he was attacked midway at Szabaton village and suffered a defeat, from which he could retreat.
No parts of the Black Army was - yet - involved as their core was stuck in Silesia and Styria. Their famed captains Blaise Magyar
and Paul Kinizsi joined the pretenders' side, John Albert and Vladislas respectively the latter subsequently became the legitime
king.[25] Maximilian immediately attacked the conquested territories of in Austria in 1490. The Black Army fortified itself in the
occupied forts on the western border. Most of them were captured by trick, bribery, citizen revolt in a few weeks without any
major battles. The trenchline along the river Enns, which was built by mercenary captain Wilhelm Tettauer resisted quite
successfully for a month. Due to the lack of payment some of the Black Army mercenaries mostly Czechs switched side and
joined the Holy Roman army of 20.000 men in invading Hungary. They advanced in the heart of Hungary and managed to capture
the city of Székesfehérvár, which he sacked as well as the tomb of King Matthias kept there. Still his Landsknechts were
unsatisfied with the plunder and refused to go for taking Buda. He returned to the Empire in late December but left garrisons of a
few hundred soldiers in those Hungarian cities and castles he occupied.[26] The National Council of the barons decided to
recuperate the cities lost especially Székesfehérvár. The Black Army was put on reserve at Eger but their payment of 46.000
Forints were late again so they robbed the neighboring monasteries, churches, peasantries and lorddoms. After their dues were
paid appointed captain Steven Báthory gathered an army of a total 40.000 soldiers and began the siege in June 1491, which lasted
for a month. More minor cities were regained and without further support from the German nobility Maximilian agreed to
negotiate and in the end he signed the Peace of Pressburg in 1491, which included the ceding the Silesian lands to him.[26] John
Haugwitz never recognized this treaty and held their possessions in Silesia afterwards.[27] Meanwhile disappointed John Albert
gathered an army at the eastern border of Hungary nad attacked the vicinity of Kassa and Tokaj also in 1490. John Corvinus
accepted Vladislaus as his feudal lord and helped him in his coronation (he personally handled the crown to him). Vladislaus
married widow queen Beatrice in order to acquire her assets of 500.000 Forints. This would have allowed him to cover the
expenses of the Black Army stationed in Moravia and upper Silesia and the cost of transporting them home to upper Hungary to
defend it from the Polish army of John Albert.[26]John Filipec on the behalf of the new King helped to convince Silesian Black
Army leader John Haugwitz to return to duty in exchange for 100.000 Forints. The Hungarian-Czech army of 18.000 met the
Polish troops in December 1491 in the Battle of Eperjes (Prešov) which was a decisive victory for the Black Army.[27] John Albert
withdrew to Poland and promised he has no further claims to the throne. The Black Army was sent to the south region to fight the
Ottoman invasions. While waiting for their wages they sought plunder in the nearby villages. The National Council orderer Paul
Kinizsi to stop the plundering at all costs. He arrived to Szegednic-Halászfalu in late August 1492, where he dispersed the Black
Army led by Haugwitz. From the 8000 members 2000 were able to escape to western Styria where they continued to pillage the
countryside.[27] The prisoners were escorted to Buda where the Black Army was officially disbanded and they were allowed to
leave abroad under the condition to never come back and claim their payment. They joined the forces already in Austria.[1] They
confronted count Georg Eynczinger on May 7, 1493. at Thaya, where they were all killed or captured and tortured to death. The
last remaining mercenaries were integrated into local garrisons like the one in Nándorfehérvár (Belgrade) under the leadership of
Balthasar Tettauer, brother of Wilhelm Tettauer. They were so frustrated on their financial status they even blackguardly allied
with Ottoman Mihaloğlu Ali Bey to secretly handle the fort to his Sultan Bayezid II. With their plan surfaced Paul Kinizsi
intervene in May 1494 before their act could take place. He arrested the captain and his crew for treason, and famished them to
death.[1]

Battles and respective captains of the Black Army

List of Battles and respective captains of the Black Army

Against the Czechs

Against the Holy Roman Empire
Against the Ottomans
Against the Moldavians
Against the Papal State
Against Saxony
Against Venice
Against the Kingdom of Poland
Against the Hussites
War/ Type Size Date Location Captain(s) commissioned Outcome
[29]
John Haugwitz
Cz. ۩ 1488 ۩ Głogów, Duchy of Silesia Wilhelm Tettauer Victory
[24]
Francis Haraszthy

Stephen Dávidházy
Victory
HRE ỗ← 1484 Leitzersdorf, Archduchy of Austria
Tobias von Boskowitz und (Details)
Černahora[20]

Stephen Dávidházy†[30]
HRE ۩ 1484 Korneuburg, Archduchy of Austria Victory
Tobias von Boskowitz und
Černahora[20]

Matthias Corvinus[31]
Pł. ۩ 1474 Wrocław, Duchy of Silesia Melchior Löbel Victory
Jan II the Mad[32]
Cz. ỗ← 1468 Olomouc, Margravate of Moravia Matthias Corvinus[33] Victory
Cz. ỗ← 1469 Hradiště, Margravate of Moravia Matthias Corvinus[33] Defeat
Victory
HRE ۩ 1485 Vienna, Archduchy of Austria Matthias Corvinus[20] (Details)

Matthias Corvinus
Emeric Zápolya[34]
Wilhelm Tettauer[35]
Bartholomew Drágffy of
Beltiug
Wiener-Neustadt, Archduchy of Victory
HRE ۩ 1487 Jacob Szekler
Austria (Details)
Ladislaus Kanizsay
Peter Geréb of Vingard
Matthias Geréb of Vingard
Stephen V Báthory
[36]

Stefan Zápolya[22]
HRE ۩ 1480 Radkersburg, Duchy of Styria Victory
Jacob Szekler [37]

Stefan Zápolya Defeat

HRE ۩ 1482 Hainburg, Archduchy of Austria
Wilhelm Tettauer[30] (Details)

Matthias Corvinus Victory

HRE ۩ 1482 Hainburg, Archduchy of Austria
[22] (Details)
Stefan Zápolya

Paul Kinizsi

Victory
Ott. ỗ← 1479 Breadfield, Kingdom of Hungary Stephen V Báthory (Details)
Vuk Grgurević
Basarab Laiotă cel Bătrân

Matthias Corvinus
Defeat
Mld ỗ← 1467 Baia, Principality of Moldavia
(Details)
Stephen V Báthory

Michael Fants[37] Victory

Ott. ỗ← 1475 Vaslui, Principality of Moldavia (modest armed support for (Details)
the main Moldavian core)

Matthias Corvinus
John Kállay V.
George Parlagi Victory
Ott. ۩ 1463 Jajce, Bosnia
(Details)
Paul Kállay I.[38]
Provost Gaspar Bak of Berend[39]
Matthias Geréb of Vingard[40]

Emeric Zápolya[41]
Ott. ۩ 1464 Jajce, Bosnia Jacob Szekler Victory
[42]

Matthias Corvinus
Ott. ۩ 1464 Srebrenik, Bosnia Victory
Emeric Zápolya[43]

Matthias Corvinus
Ott. ۩ 1464 Zvornik, Bosnia Defeat
Emeric Zápolya
 Count Sigismund Szentgyörgyi
Berthold Elderbach
Monyorókeréki
Nicholas Székely Szentgyörgyi
Ladislaus Kanizsay [43]

George Matucsinai

Ott. ỗ← 1476 Šabac, Banate of Bosnia Stephen V Báthory Victory

František Hag†[43]
Sir Richard Champleyn[1]
1481 Victory
Ott. ỗ← ≠ Otranto, Kingdom of Napoli Blaise Magyar[44]
≠ (Details)
Relief troops for his father-in-law
Pope ỗ← ≠ 1488 Naples, Kingdom of Napoli Victory
the Neapolitan King[44]
Victory
Sax. ỗ← ≠ 1487 Sankt Pölten, Archduchy of Austria Matthias Corvinus[45] (Details)

Simon Nagy Szentmártoni

HRE ỗ← 1459 Körmend, Kingdom of Hungary Defeat
Michael Rozgonyi† [46][nb 2]
HRE ỗ← 1459 Upper Pannonia, Kingdom of Hungary Simon Nagy Szentmártoni [46][nb 2] Victory
HRE ۩ 1484 Bruck, Archduchy of Austria Stephen Dávidházy [35] Victory

Ott. ỗ← 1484 Temesvár, Kingdom of Hungary Paul Kinizsi[49] Victory

Ott. ỗ← 1463 Temesvár, Kingdom of Hungary Ladislaus Pongrácz[50] Victory

Béla Nagy Demeter

Jaksics
Ambrus Nagy
Francis Arifti
Peter Dóczy
Jan Adei
Ladislaus
Dóczy Sebastian
Ott. ỗ← 1476 Pančevo, Despotate of Serbia Victory
Abraham
Francis Dóczy
Michael Pétsei
Emeric Nifor
Markus Henei
Jan Chepely
Ladislaus
Vuk
Henei[52]
Grgurević[50][51]

Paul Kinizsi
Ott. ỗ← 1482 Zrenjanin, Despotate of Serbia Peter Dóczy Victory
Vuk Grgurević[50]
Cz. ỗ← 1469 Vilémov, Margravate of Moravia Matthias Corvinus (surrender)[nb 3] Defeat
Cz. ỗ← 1469 Uherský Brod, Margravate of Moravia Matthias Corvinus[54] Defeat
Špilberk Castle, Margravate of
Cz. ۩ 1469 Matthias Corvinus[55] Victory
Moravia
Ott. ỗ← 1481 Bosnasaray, Ottoman Empire Matthias Corvinus[56] Victory

Ven. ỗ← 1479 Veglia, Principality of Krk Blaise Magyar[57] Defeat

Matthias Corvinus
Pł. ۩ 1471 Nitra, Kingdom of Hungary Victory
Emeric Zápolya[nb 4]
Pł. ۩ 1473 Michalovce, Kingdom of Hungary Matthias Corvinus Victory
 Demeter Jaksics
Michael Csupor†

[62]

Matthias Corvinus
Pł. ۩ 1473 Humenné, Kingdom of Hungary Victory
[62]

hss ۩ 1460 Salgó Castle, Kingdom of Hungary Matthias Corvinus[28] Victory

hss ۩ 1460 Zagyvafő Castle, Kingdom of Hungary Matthias Corvinus[28] Victory

hss ۩ 1459 Sajónémeti, Kingdom of Hungary Matthias Corvinus[28] Victory

Sebastian Rozgonyi
hss ۩ ≠ 1459 Hlohovec, Kingdom of Hungary Victory
bishop Ladislaus Héderváry[59]

Sebastian Rozgonyi
hss ۩ ≠ 1458 Vadna, Kingdom of Hungary Victory
bishop Ladislaus Héderváry[28]

Sebastian Rozgonyi
hss ۩ 1459 Sárospatak, Kingdom of Hungary bishop Ladislaus Héderváry Victory
Blaise Magyar[28]

Matthias Corvinus
hss ۩ ≠ 1460 Gyöngyöspata, Kingdom of Hungary Sebastian Rozgonyi Victory

bishop Ladislaus Héderváry[28]

hss ۩ ≠ 1458 Jasov, Kingdom of Hungary Sebastian Rozgonyi[63] Victory

Sebastian Rozgonyi
hss ۩ ≠ 1458 Nižná Myšľa, Kingdom of Hungary bishop Ladislaus Héderváry Victory
Blaise Magyar[64]
Kežmarok Castle, Kingdom of
hss ۩ 1462 Stefan Zápolya[28] Victory
Hungary

Sebastian Rozgonyi
hss ۩ ≠ 1458 Sečovce, Kingdom of Hungary Victory
Blaise Magyar[64]
hss ỗ← 1458 Rimavská Seč, Kingdom of Hungary Sebastian Rozgonyi[28] Victory

Mld ۩ 1462 Kiliya, Voivodate of Wallachia Vlad Tepes[65] Victory

(Hungarian garrison)
Mld ۩ ≠ 1465 Kiliya, Voivodate of Wallachia (Hungarian garrison)[21] Defeat
unknown, bishopric castle
Ott. ۩ ≠ 1474 Várad, Kingdom of Hungary Def. Vic.
personnel[nb 5]
Cz. ỗ← 1488 Thomaswalde, Duchy of Silesia John Haugwitz[67] Victory
hss ۩ ≠ 1458 Plaveč, Kingdom of Hungary Emeric Zápolya[28] Victory

Pł. ۩ ≠ 1474 Árva, Kingdom of Hungary Matthias Corvinus[68] Victory[nb 6]

Pł. ۩ ≠ 1474 Likavka, Kingdom of Hungary Matthias Crovinus[68] Victory

HRE ۩ 1480 Maribor, Archduchy of Austria Stefan Zápolya Defeat

Wilhelm Tettauer[69]
Ott. ≠ Neumarkt in Steiermark, Archduchy of
۩ [nb 7] 1480 John Haugwitz[71] Victory
HRE Austria
HRE ۩ ≠ 1477 Stein, Archduchy of Austria Johann Zeleny of Schonau[72] Defeat
 HRE ۩ ≠ 1477 Gozzoburg, Archduchy of Austria Johann Zeleny of Schonau [72] Defeat

Matthias Corvinus
HRE ۩ 1486 Eggenburg, Archduchy of Austria Victory
Bartholomew Drágffy of
Beltiug[36]
Laa an der Thaya, Archduchy of
HRE ۩ 1486 Matthias Corvinus[73] Victory
Austria
Victory
HRE ۩ 1486 Retz, Archduchy of Austria Matthias Corvinus[73] (Details)

Matthias Corvinus
Victory
HRE ۩ 1485 Kaiserebersdorf, Archduchy of Austria
Tobias von Boskowitz und (Details)
Černahora[67]
HRE ۩ 1485 Pitten, Archduchy of Austria Matthias Corvinus[74] Victory

†
: Denotes captain deceased in battle Mld : Moldavians
۩ : Denotes a siege (the dates at sieges concerns to the Pope : Papal State
end of siege) Sax. : Saxony
ỗ← : Denotes an open field battle Ven. : Venice
≠ : Denotes a minor conflict involving less than 5000 PŁ. : Kingdom of Poland
Hungarian units hss : Hussites
Cz. : Czechs HUN : Hungary
HRE : Holy Roman Empire
Ott. : Ottomans

Against Hungary
HRE ۩ ≠ 1490 Ernsthofen, Kingdom of Hungary Wilhelm Tettauer[26] Defeat

HRE ۩ 1491 Székesfehérvár, Kingdom of Hungary Stephen V Báthory[26] Victory

(supporting army)

Stefan Zápolya
Pł. ỗ← 1491 Prešov, Hungary John Haugwitz[27] Victory
(supporting army)
HUN ỗ← 1492 Szegednic, Halászfalu; Kingdom of Hungary John Haugwitz[27] Defeat
†[27]
HRE ỗ← ≠ 1493 Thaya, Holy Roman Empire John Haugwitz Defeat
†[1]
HUN ۩ ≠ 1494 Belgrade, Kingdom of Hungary Balthasar Tettauer Defeat

Notes

Military actions of Matthias Corvinus and the Black Army[20] [75]

1. ^ Žebrák (in Hungarian:Zsebrák) is a distinctive historical and military term deriving from the same Czech word meaning beggar. It
refers to Czech booty-hunters ravaging the northern regions of Hungary in the 15th century (but would submit themselves to any
service for proper pay)[22]
2. ^ a b Matthias I was proclaimed king by the Estates, but he had to wage war against Frederick III, Holy Roman Emperor who claimed
the throne for himself.[47] Several magnates, such as the Újlaki family, the Garai family and the Szentgyörgy family, supported the
 emperor's claim and proclaimed him king against King Matthias; the emperor rewarded the brothers Sigismund and John of
Szentgyörgy and Bazin with the hereditary noble title "count of the Holy Roman Empire" in 1459 and they thus were entitled to use
red sealing wax.[47][48] Although the Counts Szentgyörgyi commenced using their title in their deeds, in the Kingdom of Hungary,
public law did not distinguish them from other nobles. The tide turned when they were pleased by Matthias' promises, changed their
affiliation and joined forces with him. The second battle thus was successful in defending the Hungarian crown and the integrity of the
nobility. The precise location of the battle is unknown since the historical records only guess where it could have situated.
3. ^ Matthias' attack followed a papal call for crusade against the heretic Czech king. He was promised that Frederick III would join, but
it remained oral aid. The defeat at Vilémov happened to be a surrender by Matthias without actual battle due to him wrongly choosing
the battleground. He was easily encircled by George of Poděbrady and was left with no option but to set an agreement. They met in a
cottage in Ouhrov where they settled the conflict under the terms by which Matthias would help George's coronation be acknowledged
by Pope Paul II. Furthermore, the succession of the Czech crown was set between the two kings with George ruling until his death and
Matthias inheriting the throne afterwards. Matthias was set free in the counterpart though he abrogated the deal by coronating himself
King of Bohemia shortly after.[50][53]
4. ^ Several sources differ whether a siege, sparse fightings, or retreat caused by famine occurred during the Polish-Hungarian conflict.
Caused and followed by an internal revolt of Hungarian nobles and religious leaders led by Janus Pannonius, János Vitéz, and Emeric
Zápolya. Casimir IV of Poland was invited and supported by the rebelling nobles so he stepped in and sent his son Casimir as a
pretender to the Hungarian throne. He was promised Hungarian reinforcement as the nobles were to join him when he crossed the
border. He led his army of 12.000 men towards Kassa where he was about to take the city without resistance. Meanwhile, Matthias
was able to settle his dispute with the rebelling factions and convinced them to take his side. The parties agreed and so did Zápolya
along with Nicolaus Chiupor de Monoszló who stopped the approaching Polish invasion from attempting to besiege Kassa by taking
the city before him and fortifying themselves in. The prince turned to Nitra instead and occupied it. Matthias arrived there to liberate
the city with his army of 16.000 mercenaries and banderias (banners). From this point on, the events are unclear; what is sure is that
Casimir retreated with an escort cavalry and the rest of the Polish main forces were released shortly after. Finally the conflict was
settled in the Treaty of Ófalu[58] Contemporary historians' presentations differ on the causes of the outcome. Italian historian Antonio
Bonfini commissioned by Matthias refers to it as being a siege, which resulted in heavy loss for the besieged due to famine for the first
wave. He states that the second wave of Poles was slaughtered by peasants and citizents while marching home, while the prince fled
days before, after meeting Matthias and had been spared by him.[59] Hungarian Johannes de Thurocz agrees while adding that a
counterattack followed the events where Hungarians attacked the counties of Zemplén and Sáros still under Polish possession and
drove them out and intruded into Poland as well for prowling (it is worth noting that these events show remarkable similarities to those
that took place two years later).[60] While Polish historian Jan Długosz argues that the incursion happened upon invitation and that no
state of war came into existance. He recalls the nobility's actions as betrayal and Casimir's steps as aid or some sort of help for the
counts of Hungary. He also questions the circumstances of the retreat claiming it was a peaceful return after Casimir IV met with the
Pope Sixtus IV's emissary in Kraków who intervened and urged the maintenance of peace.[61] Based upon the aformentioned, the
causes of retreat might be (any or multiple):
o Famine caused by siege
o Casimir's disappointment with his former Hungarian allies and frustration that the project became more difficult to carry out
o Agreement of military matters with Matthias on diplomatic grounds (status quo)
o Mediation of the pope and his calling for peace
o Casimir's fear of being captured and Matthias' fear of triggering a possible "official" war with Casimir IV (reason for letting
them retreat)
o Intrigue of the nobility to both sides
5. ^ On february 7, 1474, Mihaloğlu Ali Bey's unexpected attack took the town by storm. Ahead of his 7 000 horsemen, he broke through
its wooden fences and pillaged the town, burned the houses and took the population as prisoners. Their goal was to rob the treasury of
the episcopate, but were resisted by the refugees and clergy in the bishop's castle (at the time the bishop's rank was absent, and no
records mention the identity of a possible captain). The town fell but the castle stood, forcing the Turks to give up the fight after one
day of siege. While retreating, they devastated the surrounding areas.[66]
6. ^ In March 1474, Polish booty-hunter mercenary captain Peter Komorovszki had already penetrated into the upper border region of
Hungary and held several forts. He supported Prince Casimir in his attempt to acquire the Hungarian throne. Fed up with his presence
King Matthias launched a campaign to regain his fortresses. The castles of Ružomberok, Hrádek, Sklabiňa, Olováry and Chynadiyovo
surrendered without resistance. The remaining stronghold of Árva had been fortified and Komorovszki defended it himself. The
standoff resulted in Matthias' offer of 8000 gold florins in exchange for the castles, which Komorovszki accepted. He even agreed to
let his mercenaries join the Black Army.[68]
7. ^ In 1480, Ottomans sought an option to plunder Syria. The Austro-Hungarian wars mobilized the Christian troops out of the area thus
the Ottomans chose to interfere. Had being informed of the Ottoman approach Matthias sent John Haugwitz and his 1500 mercenaries
to face the Ottomans. After their arrival Haugwitz realized that the several thousand spahis outnumbered them and chose to occupy the
near fort of Neumarkt in Steiermark, which was still in the hands of the Holy Roman Emperor. The inhabitants sought protection
against the Ottomans and so let Haugwitz's army into the city, successfully repelled the siege. After the relief of the beleaguerment, the
Hungarians continued to hold the city until the death of Matthias in 1490[70]
Name variations
[hide]International usage of historical names
Hungarian
English (given name,
(surname, given Ethnolect (given name, surname)
surname)
name)
Mat(t)hias Rex, Mat(t)hias Czech: Matyáš Korvín, Croatian: Matijaš Korvin, German: Matthias Corvinus,
Korvin Mátyás Corvin, Mat(t)hias Corvinus, Medieval Latin: Mattias Corvinus, Polish: Maciej Korwin, Romanian:
(Mátyás király) Mat(t)hias Hunyadi, Mat(t)hias Matia/Matei/Mateiaş Corvin, Serbian: Матија Корвин/Matija Korvin, Slovak: Matej
Korwin Korvín, Slovene: Matija Korvin, Russian: Матьяш Корвин/Matyash Corvin
Balázs/Balazs Magyar, Blaž the Croatian:Blaž Magyar, Spanish:Blas Magyar, German:Blasius Magyar, Italian:Biagio
Magyar Balázs
Magyar Magiaro
Kinizsi Pál Paul/Pál Kinizsi Romanian:Pavel Chinezul, Spanish:Pablo Kinizsi
(S)Zápolya(i) Imre, Emeric Zapolya, Emeric Polish: Emeryk Zápolya, Slovenian: Imrich Zápoľský, Spanish: Emérico Szapolyai
S)Zapolya(i) Imre, Zapolyai, Emeric Szapolya, (de Szepes), German: Stefan von Zips
Szipolyai Imre Emeric Szapolyai, Emrich of
Zapolya
Czech: Jan Jiskra z Brandýsa, German: Johann Giskra von Brandeis, Italian:Giovanni
Gis(z)kra János John Giskra, John Jiskra
Gressa
Melchior Löbel, Melchior
Löbl Menyhért Loebel, Melchior Löbl, German: Melchior Löbel
Melchior Loebl
Haugwitz János John Haugwitz German: Jan Haugwitz, Czech:Hanuš Haugvic z Biskupic
Báthory István, Stephen V Báthory, Stephen Romanian: Ștefan Báthory, German: Stephan Báthory von Ecsed, Italian: Stefano
Báthori István Báthory of Ecsed Batore
Nicolaus Chiupor, Nicolaus
Csupor Miklós Romanian: Nicolae Ciupor
Csupor
Jaksics Demeter Demetrius Jaksic Serbian: Dmitar Jakšić
Nicholaus of Ujlak, Nicholaus
Újlaki Miklós Croatian: Nikola Iločki
Iločki
Hag Ferenc František Hag German: Franz von Hag, Czech: František z Hája
Table 2
Guide for searching in sources
(information is taken from the corresponding Wikipedia sister language projects and from all references listed below)
See also Hussite Wars Wagon fort Growth of the Ottoman Empire
References
1. ^ a b c d e f g "Mátyás király idegen zsoldos serege [King Matthias' multinational mercenary army]" (in Hungarian).
matyaseve.hu. Budapest, Hungary: Municipality of Budavár. 2008. http://www.matyaseve.hu/Cikk.aspx?NewsID=153a850c-a82f-
4f3a-8beb-9ff89596dc7f&Id=cc20b576-b7dd-4cdf-a441-29773fdc1070. Retrieved June 15, 2011.
2. ^ a b c d e István Tringli (1998). "The Hunyadis and the Jagello age (1437-1526)" (CD-ROM). Encyclopaedia Humana
Hungarica. Budapest: Encyclopaedia Humana Association. http://mek.niif.hu/01900/01919/html/index8.html. Retrieved June 25,
2011.
3. ^ David Nicolle (1988). Hungary and the fall of Eastern Europe 1000-1568. London, England: Osprey Publishing. p. 12.
ISBN 0850458331.
http://books.google.com/books?id=PmZmOkfkr9oC&pg=PA12&dq=serbs+black+army+hungary&as_brr=3#v=onepage&q=serbs%20
black%20army%20hungary&f=false. Retrieved 4 October 2009.
4. ^ Anthony Tihamer Komjathy (1982). "A thousand years of the Hungarian art of war". Toronto, ON, Canada: Rakoczi Press.
pp. 35–36. http://www.hungarian-history.hu/lib/thou/thou05.htm. Retrieved 11 October 2010.
5. ^ Haywood, Matthew (2002). "The Militia Portalis". Hungarian Armies 1300 to 1492. Southampton, United Kingdom:
British Historical Games Society. http://www.warfareeast.co.uk/main/Hungarian_Armies.htm#TheMilitiaPortal. Retrieved 4 October,
2010.
6. ^ a b c d e Péter E. Kovács (2008) (in Hungarian) (pdf). Mátyás, a reneszánsz király [Matthias, the renaissance king].
Budapest, Hungary: Officina Kiadó. pp. 67–94. ISBN 9639705432. http://static.polc.hu/previews/pdf/00/10/51/105111.pdf. Retrieved
1 October 2010.
7. ^ a b c Ian Heath (1984). "Hungary". Armies of the Middle Ages, Volume 2. Cambridge, England: Wargames research group.
pp. 58–62. ISBN B001B3PZTG. http://www.scribd.com/doc/29856399/Armies-of-the-Middle-Ages-2.
8. ^ Andrew Ayton; Leslie Price (1998). "The Military Revolution from a Medieval Perspective". The Medieval Military
Revolution: State, Society and Military Change in Medieval and Early Modern Society. London, England: I.B. Tauris. ISBN
1860643531. http://www.deremilitari.org/resources/articles/ayton1.htm. Retrieved 1 October 2010.
9. ^ John Julius Norwich (1982). A History of Venice. Lecture notes in mathematics 1358. New York, United States: Alfred B.
Knopf. p. 269. ISBN 0679721975.
10. ^ Redaelli, Alberto (1979). Le grandi battaglie della storia bresciana. Brescia, Italy. p. 32.
11. ^ Nicolle, David (1999). Italian Militiaman 1260-1392. Oxford, United Kingdom: Osprey Publishing. p. 28. ISBN
1855328267. http://books.google.com/books?id=he_nAkUEs7EC&printsec=frontcover&hl=hu#v=onepage&q&f=false. Retrieved 21
October 2010.
12. ^ Bárány Attila (2005). "Angol lovagok a nikápolyi csatában [English knoght in the battle of Nicopolis]" (pdf).
Hadtörténelmi Közlemények (Budapest, Hungary: Hadtörténeti Intézet és Múzeum). ISSN 0017-6540.
http://delfin.klte.hu/~history/magykoz/kulpolitika/kotet/II.1.II.%20fejezet.pdf. Retrieved 21 October 2010.
13. ^ Oslansky, František; Stanislav Skorvanek (1996). "The role of John Jiskra in the history of Slovakia". Human Affairs, A
Postdisciplinary Journal for Humanities & Social Sciences (Institute of Historical Studies, Slovak Academy of Sciences) I, 19-33 (6,
1996). ISSN 12103055. http://www.humanaffairs.sk/full/hum196c.pdf. Retrieved 1 October 2010.
14. ^ a b Pál Engel; Andrew Ayton, Tamás Pálosfalvi (2005). The realm of St. Stephen: a history of medieval Hungary, 895-
1526. London, United Kingdom: I. B. Tauris. p. 310. ISBN 185043977X.
http://books.google.com/books?id=vEJNBqanT_8C&pg=PA310&lpg=PA310&dq=%22Franti%C5%A1ek+Hag%22&source=bl&ots
=seXj3GczH5&sig=4cZ9rAkt1lreGObovW-sMJy98-
I&hl=hu&ei=Tk6mTJTOKsuLswbln9WbCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CDAQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f
=false. Retrieved 1 October 2010.
15. ^ Drakóczy, István (2008). ""Mátyás bevételei és a kincstár" ["The incomes of Matthias and the treasury"]". In Farbaky
Péter, Spekner Enikő, Szende Katalin, Végh András (in Hungarian). Hunyadi Mátyás, a király. Hagyomány és megújulás a királyi
udvarban 1458-1490 [Matthias Huniades, the king. Tradition and renewal in the royal court 1458-1490]. Budapest, Hungary:
Budapesti Történeti Múzeum. ISBN 9789639340688.
16. ^ Iliescu, Octavian (2002). "C. Transylvania (including Banat, Crişana and Maramureş)". The history of coins in Romania
(cca. 1500 B.C. – 2000 AD). NBR Library Series. Bucharest, Romania: Editura Enciclopedică.
http://monederomanesti.cimec.ro/art/Iliescu2002.doc. Retrieved 4 October 2010.
17. ^ Beham, Markus Peter (July 23, 2009). "Braşov (Kronstadt) in the Defence against the Turks (1438–1479)" (pdf). Vienna,
Austria: Kakanien revisited. http://www.kakanien.ac.at/beitr/fallstudie/MBeham1.pdf. Retrieved 11 October 2010.
18. ^ Haywood, Matthew (2002). "Wargaming and Warfare in Eastern Europe (1350 AD to 1500 AD )". Mercenary Infantry of
the Hunyadi era. Southampton, United Kingdom: British Historical Games Society.
http://www.warfareeast.co.uk/main/Hungarian_Composition.htm#MercenaryInfantryoftheHunyadiera. Retrieved 4 October 2010.
19. ^ This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed (1911). "Hunyadi
Matthias I". Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/WIL_YAK/XI1I.html.
20. ^ a b c d e f "Miért került bitófára Svehla? [Why does Swehla happened to be hung?]". pp. 19–24.
21. ^ a b Halil Đnalcık; Suraiya Faroqhi, Bruce McGowan, Donald Quataert, Sevket Pamuk (January 27, 1995). An economic and
social history of the Ottoman Empire, 1300-1914. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. p. 290. ISBN
0521343151.
http://books.google.com/books?id=MWUlNdskNfIC&pg=PA289&lpg=PA289&dq=1465+kilia+stephen&source=bl&ots=b0eBouFyh
5&sig=hDSXnCnGUN0Y7qcpUgt1eLVTmR8&hl=hu&ei=Jp6zTI2JFMLLswaNoJ2oCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum
=1&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=1465%20kilia%20stephen&f=false. Retrieved 12 October 2010.
22. ^ a b c Gerő Lajos (1897) (in Hungarian). Pallas Nagylexikon [Grand Lexicon of Pallas]. Budapest, Hungary: Pallas Irodalmi
és Nyomdai Rt. http://mek.niif.hu/00000/00060/html/109/pc010931.html. Retrieved 6 October 2010.
23. ^ Bartl, Július; Dusan Skvarna (2002). "Black Army". Slovak history: chronology & lexicon. Mundelein, Illinois, USA:
Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers. p. 196. ISBN 0865164444.
http://books.google.com/books?id=3orG2yZ9mBkC&pg=PA196&lpg=PA196&dq=%22standing+army+of+Matthias%22&source=bl
&ots=ECSr6_Y1oO&sig=FXfU4A577QyxQNL6hri8rByqjC0&hl=hu&ei=VQarTNTsD83Gswa_4aCtBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct
=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22standing%20army%20of%20Matthias%22&f=false. Retrieved 5
October 2010.
24. ^ a b c d Zarnócki Attila (1992). Mátyás király katonai [Soldiers of King Matthias]. Budapest, Hungary: Libra Kiadó. ISBN
9637663037.
25. ^ József Bánlaky (1929). "Trónöröklési és királyválasztási viszályok Mátyás halála után. A csonthegyi ütközet 1490 július 4-
én. Ulászló királlyá választása. [Feud over the succession and king election after the death of Matthias. The battle of Csonthegy on
July 4, 1490. Vladislas elected King of Hungary.]" (in Hungarian). A magyar nemzet hadtörténelme [Military history of the Hungarian
nation]. Budapest, Hungary: Grill Károly Könyvkiadó vállalata. ISBN 963 86118 7 1.
http://mek.oszk.hu/09400/09477/html/0012/885.html. Retrieved June 16, 2011.
26. ^ a b c d e József Bánlaky (1929). "Ulászló küzdelmei János Albert lengyel herceggel és Miksa római királlyal. Az 1492. évi
budai országgyűlés főbb határozatai. [Struggle of Vladislas against prince John Albert and Holy Roman Emperor Maxinmilan. The
assembly of Buda in 1492 and its sanctions.]" (in Hungarian). A magyar nemzet hadtörténelme [Military history of the Hungarian
nation]. Budapest, Hungary: Grill Károly Könyvkiadó vállalata. ISBN 963 86118 7 1.
http://mek.oszk.hu/09400/09477/html/0012/887.html. Retrieved June 16, 2011.
27. ^ a b c d e f Ágnes Kenyeres (1994). "Haugwitz János (15. sz.): zsoldosvezér [John Haugwitz (15. century): mercenary
captain]" (in Hungarian). Magyar életrajzi lexikon 1000—1990 [Hungarian Lexicon of Biographies]. Budapest, Hungary: Akadémiai
Kiadó. ISBN 963 9374 13 x. http://mek.niif.hu/00300/00355/html/ABC05727/06061.htm. Retrieved June 16, 2011.
28. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Tibor Szabó (September 11, 2010). "Salgótarján, Salgóvár" (in Hungarian). Budapest, Hungary: ELTE.
http://jupiter.elte.hu/salgotarjansalgovar/salgotortenet.htm. Retrieved 10 October, 2010.
29. ^ Tóth Zoltán (1925). Mátyás király idegen zsoldosserege [The foreign mercenary army of Matthias]. Budapest, Hungary:
Stádium Sajtóvállalat Rt.. http://mek.niif.hu/00300/00355/html/ABC05727/06061.htm. Retrieved 2 October 2010.
30. ^ a b Csendes, László (2004). "Hunyadi Mátyás nyugati politikája és hadjáratai [The western policy and campaigns of
Matthias Hunedoara]" (in Hungarian). Játszmák az országért. Budapest, Hungary: Napkút Kiadó.
http://www.napkut.hu/naput_2004/2004_02/051.htm#lj284. Retrieved 25 October 2010.
31. ^ Lynn White, jr. (1973). Viator: Mediaeval and Renaissance Studies Volume 4. Los Angeles, California: University of
California Press. ISBN 0520023927.
http://books.google.com/books?id=PYv9kbfdPNoC&pg=PA293&lpg=PA293&dq=Wroc%C5%82aw+1474&source=bl&ots=tQ3b_N
vRQd&sig=B2Ylc8zck8J9BfKqEj5elVWHL9U&hl=hu&ei=fkenTJmWF5HOswaRkZygDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resn
um=6&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false. Retrieved 2 October 2010.
32. ^ Hermann Markgraf (1881). "Johann II., Herzog in Schlesien [John II, Duke of Silesia]" (in German). Allgemeine Deutsche
Biographie 14. http://www.deutsche-biographie.de/artikelADB_014-402-02.html. Retrieved 13 October 2010.
33. ^ a b Kenneth M. Setton (1978). The papacy and the Levant, 1204-1571, volume 2. Philadelphia, PA: American Philosophical
Society. ISBN 0871691272.
http://books.google.com/books?id=0Sz2VYI0l1IC&pg=PA295&lpg=PA295&dq=%22George+of+Pod%C4%9Bbrady%22+1468&so
urce=bl&ots=4wWqYy6YxN&sig=RIqU2TnT17nRvyaAOO-zXHvaAAI&hl=hu&ei=qEunTJ2FHY-
Pswb6wfSmDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CDQQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=false. Retrieved 2 October
2010.
34. ^ Komlovszki Tibor (1965) (in Hungarian) (pdf). Irodalomtörténeti Közlemények [Literary history announcements]. 69. 3.
Budapest, Hungary: Országos Széchényi Könyvtár. http://epa.oszk.hu/00000/00001/00242/pdf/itkEPA00001_1965_03_323-336.pdf.
Retrieved 2 October 2010.
35. ^ a b Jókai Mór (1860). "Mátyás Bécsben [Matthias in Vienna]" (in Hungarian). A magyar nemzet története regényes
rajzokban [The history of the Hungarian nation depicted in romantic drawings]. Budapest, Hungary: Tóth Könyvkereskedés és Kiadó.
ISBN 9789635965427. http://mek.niif.hu/00800/00840/html/jokai85.htm. Retrieved 4 October 2010.
36. ^ a b Antonio Bonfini (1995) [1568]. "Negyedik tized - Nyolcadik könyv [fourth decade - eighth book]" (in Hungarian).
Rerum Hungaricum Decades [Ten Volumes of Hungarian Matters]. Budapest, Hungary: Balassi Kiadó (reprint). ISBN 9635060408.
http://tortenelmunk.multiply.com/journal?&page_start=120. Retrieved June 30, 2011.
37. ^ a b Ferencz Kállay (1829) (in Hungarian). Historiai értekezés a' nemes székely nemzet' eredetéről: hadi és polgári
intézeteiről a régi időkben [Historical discourse about the origin of the 'magnanimous szekler nation' : military and civil institutes in
the past times.]. Nagyenyed, Hungary: Fiedler Gottfried. p. 247. http://books.google.com/books?id=tDo-
AAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=hu#v=onepage&q&f=false. Retrieved 9 October 2010.
38. ^ Iván Nagy; Stephen Friebeisz (1857-1868) (in Hungarian). Magyarország családai czimerekkel és nemzékrendi táblákkal,
volume 2. [Heraldry of the (noble) families of Hungary with genealogical tables, 2. book] (7th ed.). Pest, Hungary: Ráth Mór, Helikon
Kiadó (reprint). ISBN 9632077741. Archived from the original on 9th March, 2007.
http://www.archive.org/stream/magyarorszgcsal02friegoog/magyarorszgcsal02friegoog_djvu.txt. Retrieved 3 October 2010.
39. ^ József Bánlaky (1929). "Megjegyzések. Elmélkedések. [Notes. Contemplations.]" (in Hungarian). A magyar nemzet
hadtörténelme [Military history of the Hungarian nation]. Budapest, Hungary: Grill Károly Könyvkiadó vállalata. ISBN 963 86118 7
1. http://mek.oszk.hu/09400/09477/html/0011/831.html. Retrieved 27 June, 2011.
40. ^ József Bánlaky (1929). "11. Az 1463. évi délvidéki és boszniai hadjárat. Az ugyanezen évi tolnai országgyűlés határozatai.
[The campaign of 1463 in Bosnia. The measures of the diet of Tolna in the same year.]" (in Hungarian). A magyar nemzet
hadtörténelme [Military history of the Hungarian nation]. Budapest, Hungary: Grill Károly Könyvkiadó vállalata. ISBN 963 86118 7
1. http://mek.oszk.hu/09400/09477/html/0011/830.html. Retrieved 27 June, 2011.
41. ^ Jaques, Tony (2006). Dictionary of Battles and Sieges: A Guide to 8,500 Battles from Antiquity through the Twenty-first
Century, Volume 2, F-O. Santa Barbara, CA United States: Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 484. ISBN 0313335389.
http://books.google.com/books?id=Dh6jydKXikoC&printsec=frontcover&hl=hu&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q
&f=false. Retrieved 21 October 2010.
42. ^ József Bánlaky (1929). "12. Az 1464. évi boszniai hadjárat. [12. The Bosnian campaign of 1464]" (in Hungarian). A
magyar nemzet hadtörténelme [Military history of the Hungarian nation]. Budapest, Hungary: Grill Károly Könyvkiadó vállalata.
ISBN 963 86118 7 1. http://mek.oszk.hu/09400/09477/html/0011/832.html. Retrieved 30 June, 2011.
43. ^ a b c Thallóczy Lajos (1915) (in Hungarian). Jajcza (bánság, vár és város) története 1450-1527 [Jajce (Banate, fort and
city) history 1450-1527]. Budapest, Hungary: Hornyánszky Viktor cs. és kir. udv. könyvnyomdája., Históriaantik Könyvesház Kiadó
(reprint). ISBN 9782253055754. Archived from the original on 24 July 2010. http://www.archive.org/stream/jajczabnsgv00thal.
Retrieved 3 October 2010.
44. ^ a b Sándor Szilágyi (1896). "7, Mátyás hadserege és diplomatiája" (in Hungarian). A magyar nemzet története, 5. kötet [The
history of the Hungarian nation, volume 5.]. Budapest, Hungary: Athenaeum Irod. és Nyomdai Rt. ISBN 1144242185.
http://mek.niif.hu/00800/00893/html/doc/c400292.htm. Retrieved 4 October 2010.
45. ^ This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed (1911). Encyclopædia
Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
http://www.lexcycle.com/library/Project_Gutenberg/The_Project_Gutenberg_EncyclopediaVolume_1_of_28/part5.
46. ^ a b Mórocz Zsolt (August 30, 2008). "Hollószárnyak a Rába fölött [Raven wings above the Rába]" (in Hungarian).
Szombathely: Vas Népe Kiadói Kft.. http://www.vasnepe.hu/hetvege/20080830_holloszarnyak_a_raba_folott_uj_sorozat_la. Retrieved
4 October 2010.
47. ^ a b Benda, Kálmán (editor) (1981) (in Hungarian). Magyarország történeti kronológiája I /A kezdetektől 1526-ig/ [The
Chronology of the History of Hungary /From the beginnings until 1526/]. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. p. 276. ISBN 963 05 2661 1.
48. ^ Fügedi, Erik (1986) (in Hungarian). Ispánok, bárók, kiskirályok [Counts, Barons and Petty Kings]. Budapest: Magvető
Könyvkiadó. p. 381. ISBN 963 14 0582 6.
49. ^ Kenneth M. Setton (1978). The papacy and the Levant, 1204-1571, volume 1. Philadelphia, PA: American Philosophical
Society. p. 400. ISBN 0871691272.
http://books.google.com/books?id=0Sz2VYI0l1IC&pg=PA399&lpg=PA399&dq=1484+Kilia+Akkerman&source=bl&ots=4wWq_vc
YvK&sig=VPD9YPdnV8iKw9agX1ePNGMdVOE&hl=hu&ei=EfupTIaiA8jKswaIkumLDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resn
um=1&ved=0CBcQ6AEwAA. Retrieved 4 October 2010.
50. ^ a b c d Szentkláray Jenő (2008). "Temesvár és vidéke [Timisoara and its surroundings]" (in Hungarian). Az Osztrák-Magyar
Monarchia Irásban és Képben [The Monarchy of Austro-Hungary (presented) in text and pictures]. Budapest, Hungary: Kempelen
Farkas Digitális Tankönyvtár. http://www.tankonyvtar.hu/konyvek/osztrak-magyar/osztrak-magyar-081204-561. Retrieved 4 October
2010.
51. ^ Franz Babinger; Ralph Manheim, William C. Hickman (October 19, 1992). "Mehmed in Wallachia and Moldavia".
Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time. Princeton, New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press. p. 349. ISBN 0691010781.
http://books.google.com/books?id=PPxC6rO7vvsC&printsec=frontcover&hl=hu&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q
&f=false. Retrieved 21 October 2010.
52. ^ Heltai, Gáspár (2009) [1574] (in Hungarian). Magyar krónika, 2. kötet [Chronicles of Hungarians, vol.2]. Kolozsvár,
Hungary: ICON Group International (reprint). pp. 145–146. ISBN 054687357X.
http://books.google.com/books?id=80tDAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=hu&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage
&q&f=false. Retrieved 21 October 2010.
53. ^ "George of Podebrady". Prague, Czech Republic: Government Information Center of the CR. April 26, 2010.
http://icv.vlada.cz/en/tema/george-of-podebrady--71162/tmplid-676. Retrieved 6 October, 2010.
54. ^ Bartl, Július; Dusan Skvarna (2002). "1463". Slovak history: chronology & lexicon. Mundelein, Illinois, USA: Bolchazy-
Carducci Publishers. p. 52. ISBN 0865164444.
http://books.google.com/books?id=3orG2yZ9mBkC&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&dq=%22battle+of+Uhersk%C3%BD+Brod%22&source
=bl&ots=ECSr70T1nM&sig=2tzl80GHvdQn1cCVI51vY0Jsdqo&hl=hu&ei=gcesTLSKCo3Dswb6ocGTBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&
ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Uhersky%20Brod&f=false. Retrieved 6 October 2010.
55. ^ "Spilberk Castle". Brno, Czech Republic: Muzeum města Brna. April 26, 2010.
http://www.spilberk.cz/?lang=en&pg=zobraz&co=spilberk-castle. Retrieved 6 October, 2010.
56. ^ Kristó, Gyula (1988) (in Hungarian). Magyarország története 895-1301 [History of Hungary 895-1301]. 1984/I. 74.
Budapest, Hungary: Osiris Kiadó. pp. 118; 126. ISBN 9789633899700.
http://lexikon.katolikus.hu/B/balk%C3%A1ni%20magyar%20hadj%C3%A1ratok.html. Retrieved 8 October 2010.
57. ^ "Croatia". England: Foundation for Medieval Genealogy. February 12, 2009.
http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/CROATIA.htm. Retrieved 8 October 2010.
58. ^ Csukovits Enikő (2008) (in Hungarian). Mátyás és a humanizmus [Matthias and the humanism]. Nemzet és emlékezet.
Budapest, Hungary: Osiris Kiadó. pp. 92–105. ISBN 9789633899816.
59. ^ a b Antonio Bonfini (1995) [1568] (in Hungarian). Rerum Hungaricum Decades [Ten Volumes of Hungarian Matters].
Budapest, Hungary: Balassi Kiadó (reprint). ISBN 9635060408. http://www.bkiado.hu/doku/html/bonfini.html. Retrieved October 9,
2010.
60. ^ Thuróczy János (2001) [1488] (in Hungarian). A magyarok krónikája és Siralmas ének (Rogerius mester) [Chronicle of the
Hungarians] (spoken word (mp3)). Budapest, Hungary: Osiris Kiadó (reprint). ISBN 9633891299. http://mek.oszk.hu/03000/03094/#.
Retrieved October 9, 2010.
 61. ^ Jan Długosz (in Latin). Historiae Polonicae liber XIII.et ultimus. pp. 470–473. ISBN B001C6WHOI (ASIN).
62. ^ a b Heltai, Gáspár (1981). "XXXV. Rész [part XXXV.]" (in Hungarian). Krónika az magyaroknak dolgairól [Chronicles
about the matters of Hungarians]. Budapest, Hungary: Magyar Helikon (reprint). pp. 360–362. ISBN 9632078403.
http://osbuda.hu/core/dok/heltai_kronikaja.pdf. Retrieved 9 October 2010.
63. ^ "A jászói vár [The fortress of Jasov]" (in Hungarian). Jasov, Slovakia. http://www.jasov.sk/!old/village/fortress-hu.html.
Retrieved October 21, 2010.
64. ^ a b Karl Nehring (1973). "Vita del re Mattio Corvino [Life of Matthias Corvinus]" (in Italian) (pdf). Mainz, Germany: von
Hase & Koehler Verlag. http://www.epa.oszk.hu/01500/01536/00005/pdf/UJ_1973_050-065.pdf. Retrieved October 26, 2010.
65. ^ Delia Grigorescu (January 11, 2010). "Vlad the Impaler, the second reign - Part 4".
http://www.exploringromania.com/vlad-the-impaler.html. Retrieved October 18, 2010.
66. ^ Bunyitay Vincze, (in Hungarian). A váradi püspökség története (Epistolario di Pier Paolo Vergerio) [History of the
episcopate of Várad]. Nagyvárad, Hungary: Episcopate of Várad. http://mek.niif.hu/04700/04735/html/57.html. Retrieved 20 October
2010.
67. ^ a b József Bánlaky (1929). "b) Az 1483–1489. évi hadjárat Frigyes császár és egyes birodalmi rendek ellen. Mátyás
erőlködései Corvin János trónigényeinek biztosítása érdekében. A király halála. [B. The campaign of 1483–1489 against Frederick and
some imperial estates. Struggle of Matthias to secure the throne for John Corvin. The death of the King.]" (in Hungarian). A magyar
nemzet hadtörténelme [Military history of the Hungarian nation]. Budapest, Hungary: Grill Károly Könyvkiadó vállalata. ISBN 963
86118 7 1. http://www.mek.sk/09400/09477/html/0011/878.html. Retrieved 27 June, 2011.
68. ^ a b c József Bánlaky (1929). "Az 1472–1474. évi főbb események. Béketárgyalások Kázmérral és Frigyes császárral. [Main
events of 1472–1474. Peace talks with Casimir and Emperor Frederick.]" (in Hungarian). A magyar nemzet hadtörténelme [Military
history of the Hungarian nation]. Budapest, Hungary: Grill Károly Könyvkiadó vállalata. ISBN 963 86118 7 1.
http://mek.oszk.hu/09400/09477/html/0011/851.html. Retrieved 27 June, 2011.
69. ^ József Bánlaky (1929). "31. Az alkudozások és a kis háborúskodás folytatása Frigyes császárral. Kinizsi 1481–1482. évi
délvidéki hadjáratai. Békekötés Bajezid szultánnal. [31. The bargaining and hostility continues with Emperor Frederick. Kinizsi's
campaign of 1481–1482 to south. Peace treaty with Bayezid II.]" (in Hungarian). A magyar nemzet hadtörténelme [Military history of
the Hungarian nation]. Budapest, Hungary: Grill Károly Könyvkiadó vállalata. ISBN 963 86118 7 1.
http://mek.oszk.hu/09400/09477/html/0011/873.html. Retrieved 28 June, 2011.
70. ^ Ferenc Bánhegyi (2008). "Az osztrák háborúk kezdete [beginning of the Austrian wars]" (in Hungarian). A Hunyadiak
Dicsősége [Triumph of the Hunyadis]. Celldömölk, Hungary: Apáczai Kiadó. ISBN 978-963-465-183-3.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/8830495/Banhegyi-Ferenc-A-Hunyadiak-Dicsosege. Retrieved 30 June, 2011.
71. ^ Elke Feichtinger (2010). "Schloss Forchtenstein [Forchtenstein Castle]" (in German). marktgemeinde-neumarkt.at.
Neumarkt in Steiermark, Austria: Marktgemeinde Neumarkt. http://www.marktgemeinde-neumarkt.at/Sehenswertes.html. Retrieved
June 30, 2011.
72. ^ a b "Zeleny (Selene), ungarischer Hauptmann [Zeleny (Selene), Hungarian captain]" (in German). Regesta Imperii. Mainz,
Austria: Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur. http://regesten.regesta-
imperii.de/register/f_all.php?rpk=13000000&i=45129. Retrieved June 30, 2011.
73. ^ a b Alexander Ganse. "Austro-Hungarian War, 1479-1491". World History at KMLA. Hoengseong, South Korea: Korean
Minjok Leadership Academy. http://www.zum.de/whkmla/military/15cen/austhun14791491.html. Retrieved June 30, 2011.
74. ^ "Geschichte Chronik 987-2009 [History Chronicles 987-2009]" (in German). baderlach.gv.at. Bad Erlach, Austria:
Marktgemeinde Bad Erlach. http://www.baderlach.gv.at/system/web/zusatzseite.aspx?menuonr=218771601&detailonr=217415117.
Retrieved June 30, 2011.
75. ^ Kartográfiai Vállalat (1991). Történelmi világatlasz [Historical Worldmaps] [map], 1 : 10.000.000. p. 112, section V.
ISBN 963-351-696-X-CM.
External links Tactics and structure of the Black Army

A knight from the Black Army

Actions of the Black Army after the death of King Matthias
 Siege of Jajce (1463)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Date September 23, 1463 - December 25, 1463
Location Jajce Fortress, Kingdom of Bosnia
Result Hungarian victory, Yussuf Haram bey joins the Black Army
Territorial
Hungary incorporates Jajce and 60 other minor settlements into the newly formed Banate of Jajce[1]
changes
Belligerents

Kingdom of Hungary Republic of Venice Duchy of Saint Ottoman Empire

[1]
Sava Franciscan Order Republic of Ragusa (logistics, goods)
Commanders and leaders
Matthias Corvinus John V. Kállay [2] George Parlagi[3] Paul Kállay I.[3]
Provost Gaspar Bak of Berend[3] Matthias Geréb of Vingard[3] Stephen
Gerendi[3]
Yussuf Haram bey[5 † Mustafa bey[6]
Vladislav Hercegović[4] Bartholomew Drágffy of Beltiug[3] John
Elias bey[7]
Vitovecz[3] John Pongrácz de Dengeleg[3] Martin Frangepan[3] Stjepan
Frankopan[3] Emerich Zápolya[3] Nicholas of Ilok[3] Mihály Országh of
Gut[3] Bishop John Vitéz[3Bishop Janus Pannonius[3] Stefan of Várad[3]
Units involved
Black Army of Hungary Venetian Arsenal Ottoman Army
Strength
4000 men-at-arms (Setton estimate)[8] 25,000 (Bánlaky estimate)[6] 7000 (Długosz estimate)[6 400 (Fessler
14.000 cavalry 5000 foot soldiers (Tošić estimate)[9] estimate)[6]
[10]
40 Venetian galleys (see note) 1500—2500 (Thallóczy estimate)[4]
Venice launched a diversion operation in the Ionian Sea but didn't participate in the siege.
The Siege of Jajce was a siege in 1463 and was part of the Ottoman–Hungarian Wars. The Hungarian victory meant the
maintenance of Christiandom in Bosnia and - with the repulse of Ottoman forces - the protection of Hungarian territories for the
15th century.[11]
Background Beginning from the diet of Buda of 1462 some Bosnian-Hungarian borderline fortresses were already guarded by
the Kingdom of Hungary and King Stephen Tomašević of Bosnia was accepted as a vassal to her.[12] The Bosnian King refused to
pay tribute to the Porte thereafter. As a consequence both Ottoman and Christian sides began the war preparations.[13] Sultan
Mehmed II gathered an army of 150,000 soldiers in Adrianopolis and departed for the Lower Danube area in April 1463.[14] As a
part of a diversion attack he commanded Ali Bey Mihaloğlu to invade Southern Hungary. The bey crossed to Syrmia, but was
pushed back by Andrew Pongrácz high cup-bearer of Hungary. He suddenly made a flanking move to the heart of Hungary until
he reached Temesvár, where he ran into John Pongrácz Voivode of Transylvania and was defeated in a fierce battle.[15] Meanwhile
Mehmet II advanced to Travnik, which he besieged. Then moved to the capital city Bobovac that fell within three days. Stephen
Tomašević was advised to entrench himself in the high mountains although he chose to withdraw to Jajce and later to Ključ and
burnt the bridges of the roads along.[16] Turahanoğlu Ömer Bey pursued his trail taking Jajce without a fight and pushed to Ključ
through the Sava river and the surrounding mountains despite the marshy ground and the general inaccessibility to the town.
Seeing himself in a dead-end situation Tomašević set his wife and mother to a journey through Raguse to Hungary to find
refuge.[17] He fortified himself in Ključ fortress. After their arrival the Ottomans set fire around the city thus forcing the
inhabitants to surrender in despair. Mahmud Pasha Angelović granted the Bosnian King. He swore an oath to the sultan and
capitulated when he was promised safe retreat in return. He had to spread this agreement to the remaining fort captains in 8 days
and as a result 70 places and one million florins were handed to the Porte. Discontent with this agreement Mehmet rebuke
Mahmud and instructed him to transport the Bosnian King to his court. Stephen Tomašević was double crossed and despite his
oath to the Sultan the last ruler of Bosnia was beheaded at Carevo Polje near Jajce.[18] The sultan divided his expeditionary army
into three led by him, Ömer Bey and Mahmud Pasha respetively and raided the surrounding countries as well as completed the
conquest of Bosnia.[19] Ömer Bey surged in the direction of the Kingdom of Croatia, while Mehmet moved towards the Duchy of
Saint Sava. In Croatia Ömer Bey confronted and slew Paulus de Speranchich Ban of Croatia and his entourage of 800 men.[20]
With the help of the Bosnian Patarenes refugees Stjepan Vukčić Kosača Duke of Sava was able to withstand the intrusion of
Mehmet for a time.[21] After the fall of Blagaj in 1466 and Mostar in 1468 Kosaca had no other choice but to pay tribute to him
and allow him to take his son Stjepan Hercegović as a hostage.
Premise Mehmet II chose not to engage in winter operations and retreated bringing 100,000 prisoners and leaving Mimert
(Minnet) Bey in charge in Bosnia.[20] He also didn't have other choice as their horses were exhausted and the supply lines were
inefficient.[22] King Matthias Corvinus sent a couple thousand ecclesiastic army to the Lower Sava Valley and the Black Army of
Hungary led by John Pongrácz de Dengeleg and supplemented by the Szeklers to the village of Keve. He also envoyed a garrison
to his Adriatic subject, the Republic of Ragusa as a preventive measure.[23] He also commissioned ambassadors to the Signoria of
Venice and Pope Pius II. Both of them promised financial aid, the Holy See granted a sum sufficient for the military service
payment of 1000 cavalry for an year. Venice offered 20,000 ducats for the Anti-Ottoman defense. Matthias ordered all
dispensable transport points to sail to the enlist point at Petrovaradin.[24] Matthias sought a long-term alliance with Venice. In
September 12 just before the launch of the attack Matthias and Venetian orator John Emo in the camp in Petrovaradin.[10] The
terms were[10]:
• They form a mutual protective and offensive alliance against the turks
• They don't conclude peace unbeknownst to the other
• The Republic of Venice provides 40 galleys and puts all of her Dalmatian and Peloponnese captains on a war footing
• The parties involved won't violate each other's territorial integrity
The Duchy of Saint Sava hesitated between the Ottomans, Venice and Hungary to be subjugated to. In October they came to the
decision to offer themselves to Venice. Already an ally to Hungary the Doge of Venice Cristoforo Moro gently replied that
Hungary had already made the necessary steps to relieve Bosnia, her armies entered Bosnia and besieged Jajce as well as the other
fortresses. Following the events Stjepan Vukčić Kosača lended himself to Matthias who accepted his service. In exchange
Vladislav Hercegović was promoted a Hungarian banner lord and reassured the estates of Stjepan. This ancillary alliance was
signed on 6 December.[25]
The siege Matthias branched off his army into two divisions. The first led by Emerich Zápolya was about to approach Jajce from
the North along the Vrbas river, while the other led by the King himself carried the siege weapons and chose the network of paved
roads (kaldrma) from the North-West to Ključ liberating each city connected. The population welcomed the troops and even
joined them as the Franciscan clergy maintained a religious unrest throughout Bosnia. He appointed John Pongrácz de Dengeleg
as the supplies overseer and Provost Gaspar Bak of Berend as the ammunition/siege engines operator. The third contingent was
recruited in Croatia thus it arrived from West from the direction of Bihać and commanded by Martin Frangepan,[26] while the
Saint-Savan reinforcements blocked Jajce the from the South (Prozor, Donji Vakuf) in November[25] Matthias reached the town in
a 4-5 four days march, which is considered quite a fast progress regarding the mediaval infrastructure conditions. Upon the recent
success among the Bosnian population Matthias anticipated local support and so he instantly attacked the town of Jajca in 5–6
October that was subdued for the first try. After a short hand-to-hand combat the Ottoman garrison locked itself in the Jajce
Fortress.[26] The siege possibly started at the confluence of Pliva-Vrbas and the siege machines were installed in the half-circle of
Carevo Polje-Borci-Baščeluci. Though the contemporary cannons could cause little damage to the walls as their fire range varied
from 300 to 900 meters, which was also the range covered by the archery of the defenders. The King exhorted his troops by giving
out letters of land donation to those who emerged in battle. In order to officially induct these manors he set up his own chancellery
in the camp to administrate them. On the day of the planned general offensive the captains of the fortress called for surrender
talks, which led to an agreement the same day. Those who wanted to leave could do so without their slaves the rest was free to
join the Black Army. Around 400 soldiers chose to be drafted into the Hungarian army including the head captain Yusuf Bey.[27]
Aftermath The smaller forts in the region were quickly recovered and were reorganized as a part of the Hungarian Banate of
Jajce.[1][27] He appointed John Székely of Hídvég as the new captain and Emerich Zápolya as the new governor of Bosnia.[27] He
gifted the fortress of Medvedgrad to the Frangepans for their merits in the siege.[28] Stephen Gerendi saved the King's life when he
shot a waylaying Turk during the siege and thus was rewarded the right to bear personal coat of arms.[3] Vladislav Hercegović was
awarded the Župas of Gornji Vakuf-Uskoplje and Prozor-Rama.[25] The Venetian-Ottoman conflict escalated into the Ottoman–
Venetian War.[8]
See also Ottoman–Venetian War (1463–1479)
References
Notes
1. ^ a b c Villari (1904), p. 251
2. ^ Nagy (1868), p. 427
3. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q Thallóczy (1915), p. 97
4. ^ a b Thallóczy (1915), p. 102
5. ^ Zinkeisen (1854), p. 159
6. ^ a b c d Bánlaky (1929), p. 66
7. ^ Thallóczy (1915), p. 105
8. ^ a b Setton (1978), p. 250
9. ^ Tošić (2002), p. 2
10. ^ a b c Thallóczy (1915), p. 93
11. ^ Fodor (2000), p. 10
12. ^ Bánlaky (1929), p. 39
13. ^ Stavrides (2001), p. 146
14. ^ Fessler (1867), p. 103 (a number excluding the infantry and retinues)
15. ^ Borovszky (1898), p. 357
16. ^ Stavrides (2001), p. 147
17. ^ Villari (1904), p. 243
18. ^ Stavrides (2001), p. 148
19. ^ Bánlaky (1929), pp. 60-61
20. ^ a b Zinkeisen (1854), p. 156
21. ^ Zinkeisen (1854), p. 154
22. ^ Hunyadi (2001), p. 179
23. ^ Villari (1904), p. 245
 24. ^ Bánlaky (1929), pp. 56-57
25. ^ a b c Thallóczy (1915), p. 103
26. ^ a b Thallóczy (1915), pp. 94-96
27. ^ a b c Thallóczy (1915), pp. 101-107
28. ^ Thallóczy (1915), p. 336
Bibliography
• Setton, Kenneth Meyer (Gen. Ed.); Hazard, Harry W.; Zacour, Norman P. (Eds.) (1969). "The Ottoman Turks and the
Crusades, 1451–1522". A History of the Crusades, Vol. VI: The Impact of the Crusades on Europe. University of Wisconsin
Press. ISBN 9780299107444. http://books.google.com/books?id=TKaPrQPFIAMC.
• Ludwig Thallóczy (1915) (in Hungarian). Jajcza (bánság, vár és város) története 1450-1527 [Jajce (Banate, fort and
city) history 1450-1527]. Budapest, Hungary: Hornyánszky Viktor cs. és kir. udv. könyvnyomdája [Históriaantik
Könyvesház Kiadó, reprint]. ISBN 9782253055754. http://www.archive.org/details/jajczabnsgv00thal. Retrieved 11 July
2011.
• Iván Nagy; Stephen Friebeisz (1857-1868) (in Hungarian). Magyarország családai czimerekkel és nemzékrendi
táblákkal, volume 2. [Heraldry of the (noble) families of Hungary with genealogical tables, 2. book] (7th ed.). Pest, Hungary:
Ráth Mór, [Helikon Kiadó, reprint]. ISBN 9632077741. http://www.archive.org/details/magyarorszgcsal02friegoog.
Retrieved 11 July 2011.
• József Bánlaky (1929). "11. Az 1463. évi délvidéki és boszniai hadjárat. Az ugyanezen évi tolnai országgyűlés
határozatai. [The campaign of 1463 in Bosnia. The measures of the diet of Tolna in the same year.]" (in Hungarian). A
magyar nemzet hadtörténelme [Military history of the Hungarian nation]. Budapest, Hungary: Grill Károly Könyvkiadó
vállalata. ISBN 963 86118 7 1. http://mek.oszk.hu/09400/09477/html/0011/830.html. Retrieved 27 June, 2011.
• Luigi Villari (2007) [1904]. The republic of Ragusa : an episode of the Turkish conquest. London, United Kingdom: J.M.
Dent & Co. [Kessinger Publishing, reprint]. ISBN 1432640380. http://www.archive.org/details/republicragusaa00villgoog.
Retrieved 11 July, 2011.
• Ignaz Aurelius Fessler (1867) (in German). Geschichte von Ungarn [History of Hungary]. Leipzig, Germany: Friedrich
Arnold Brockhaus. http://www.archive.org/details/geschichtevonung03fessuoft. Retrieved 11 July, 2011.
• Samu Borovszky; János Sziklay, Dezső Csánki (1898). "A mohácsi vésztől napjainkig [from the Battle of Mohács to
present day]" (in Hungarian). Magyarország vármegyéi és városai [Countries and towns of Hungary]. Budapest, Hungary:
Országos Monográfia Társaság,. ISBN 963 9374 91 1. http://mek.oszk.hu/09500/09536/html/0024/14.html. Retrieved July
11, 2011.
• Théoharis Stavrides (2001). "III. 1463: Campaigns in Bosnia and the Morea". The Sultan of vezirs: the life and times of
the Ottoman Grand Vezir Mahmud Pasha Angelovic (1453-1474). Leiden, Netherlands: Koninklijke Drill. ISBN
9004121064. http://books.google.com/books?id=ptXG0uA70lAC. Retrieved July 11, 2011.
• Johann Wilhelm Zinkeisen; Johannes Heinrich Möller (1854). "II. Das Reich auf der Höhe seiner Entwicklung [The
empire at the height of its development]" (in German). Geschichte des osmanischen Reiches in Europa [History of the
Ottoman Empire in Europe]. Hamburg, Germany: Friedrich Andreas Perthes.
http://www.archive.org/details/geschichtedesosm02zinkuoft. Retrieved July 12, 2011.
• Pál Fodor; Géza Dávid (2000). Ottomans, Hungarians, and Habsburgs in Central Europe: the military confines in the
era of Ottoman conquest. Leiden, Netherlands: Koninklijke Drill. ISBN 9004119078.
http://books.google.com/books?id=V9vom-ZAElcC. Retrieved July 14, 2011.
• Zsolt Hunyadi; József Laszlovszky (2001). "XVI.". The Crusades and the military orders: expanding the frontiers of
medieval Latin Christianity. Budapest, Hungary: Central European University Press. ISBN 9639241423.
http://books.google.com/books?id=1m4fbJyQ4pkC. Retrieved July 18, 2011.
• Đuro Tošić (2002) (in Serbian, Summary in English) Učešće Kosača u oslobođenju Jajca od Turaka 1463. godine [Role
of the Kosača family in the 1463 liberation of Jajce] (pdf), ‘Četvrti naučni skup istoričara u Gacku: Kosače – osnivači
Hercegovine’, “Srpska proza danas. Kosače – osnivači Hercegovine (Zbornik radova)”, SPKD Prosvjeta Bileća, SPKD
Prosvjeta Gacko, Fond ‘Vladimir i Svetozar Ćorović’ Beograd, Bileća-Gacko-Beograd. Retrieved July 14, 2011.

Present day Jajce fortress and the surrounding town

Remnants of Bobovac fortress. Travnik fortress

 Battle of Vaslui (1475)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Date January 10, 1475

Location Near Vaslui, present-day Romania
Result Decisive Moldavian victory
Belligerents

Ottoman Empire Wallachia

Moldavia Kingdom of Poland Kingdom of Hungary
Commanders and leaders

Stephen III of Moldavia Mihály Fants[1] Hadân Suleiman Pasha

Strength
40,000 Moldavians 5,000 Székelys 2,000 Polish ~ 60,000 - 80,000 17,000 Wallachians(did not participate
1,800 Hungarians 20 cannons in the battle) 20,000 Bulgarians
Casualties and losses
Unknown 40,000+
The Battle of Vaslui (also referred to as the Battle of Podul Înalt or the Battle of Racova) was fought on January 10, 1475
between Stephen III of Moldavia and the Ottoman Beylerbey of Rumelia, Hadân Suleiman Pasha. The battle took place at Podul
Înalt (the High Bridge), near the town of Vaslui, in Moldavia (now part of eastern Romania). The Ottoman troops numbered up to
120,000, facing about 40,000 Moldavian troops, plus smaller numbers of allied and mercenary troops.[2]
Stephen inflicted on the Ottomans a decisive defeat that has been described as "the greatest ever secured by the Cross against
Islam,"[3] with casualties, according to Venetian and Polish records, reaching beyond 40,000 on the Ottoman side. Mara Brankovic
(Mara Hatun), who had formerly been the younger wife of Murad II, told a Venetian envoy that the invasion had been worst ever
defeat for the Ottomans.[4] Stephen was later awarded the title "Athleta Christi" (Champion of Christ) by Pope Sixtus IV, who
referred to him as "Verus christiane fidei aletha" (The true defender of the Christian faith).[5] According to the Polish chronicler
Jan Długosz, Stephen did not celebrate his victory; instead, he fasted for forty days on bread and water and forbade anyone to
attribute the victory to him, insisting that credit be given only to "The Lord."
Background See also: The Night Attack and Battle of Baia The conflict between Stephen and Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II
worsened when both laid their claims to the historical region of Bessarabia, now known under the name of Budjak. The region had
first belonged to Wallachia, but later succumbed to Moldavian influence under Petru I of Moldavia and was possibly annexed to
Moldavia in the late 14th century by Roman I of Moldavia.[6] Under Alexandru cel Bun, it had become an integral part of
Moldavia and was successfully defended in 1420 against the first Ottoman attempt to capture castle Chilia.[7] The ports of Chilia
and Akkerman (Romanian: Cetatea Albā) were essential for Moldavian commerce. The old trade route from Caffa, Akkerman,
and Chilia passed through Suceava in Moldavia and Lwow in Poland (now in Ukraine). Both Poland and Hungary had previously
made attempts to control the region, but had failed; and for the Ottomans, "the control of these two ports and of Caffa was as
much an economic as a political necessity,"[8] as it would also give them a better grip on Moldavia and serve as a valuable
strategic point from which naval attacks could be launched against the Commonwealth of Poland-Lithuania. This is confirmed by
a German chronicle which explains that Mehmet wanted to turn Moldavia into "some kind of fortress," and from there, to launch
attacks against Poland and Hungary.[9] The Ottomans also feared the strategic position of Moldavia, from whence it would only
take 15 to 20 days to reach Constantinople.[10] In 1448, Petru II of Moldavia awarded Chilia to John Hunyadi, the governor of
Transylvania;[4] and in effect, it gave Hungary control of the strategic area on the Danube, with access to the Black Sea. With the
assassination of Bogdan II of Moldavia in 1451 by his brother Petru Aron, the country fell into civil war, as two pretenders fought
for the throne: Aron and Alexăndrel.[11] Bogdan's son, Stephen, fled Moldavia together with his cousin, Vlad Dracula — who had
sought protection at the Moldavian court — to Transylvania, at the court of Hunyadi.[11] Even though Hungary had made peace
with the Turks in 1451, Hunyadi wanted to transform Wallachia and Moldavia into a barrier that would protect the kingdom from
Ottoman expansion.[12] In the fall of 1453, after the Ottoman capture of Constantinople, Moldavia received an ultimatum to start
paying tribute to the Porte;[13] two years later, on October 5, 1455, Aron sent the first Moldavian tribute to the Porte: a payment of
2,000 ducats.[14] With both Wallachia and Moldavia conducting a pro-Ottoman policy, the plan to install Dracula as prince of
Wallachia began to take shape. Sometime between April to July 1456, with the support of a few Hungarian troops and Wallachian
boyars, Prince Vladislav II was dethroned and slain, as Dracula took possession of the Wallachian throne;[12] and as such, Chilia
became a shared Wallachian-Hungarian possession. In April 1457, Dracula supported Stephen with 6,000 horsemen, which the
latter used to invade Moldavia and occupy the Moldavian throne,[15] ending the civil war as Aron fled to Poland. The new prince
continued sending the tribute that his uncle and Mehmed had agreed upon, and in such way, avoided any premature confrontation
with his enemy. His first priority was to strengthen the country and to retrieve its lost territory. Because Aron resided in Poland,
Stephen made a few incursions in southern Poland. The hostilities ended on April 4, 1459, when in a new treaty between the two
countries, Moldavia accepted vassalage and Poland returned Hotin back to Moldavia; the latter also assumed the obligation to
support Moldavia in retrieving Chilia and Cetatea Albă.[16] It was also in the interest of Poland to have the area belonging to
Moldavia, as it would increase their commerce in the region.[17] On March 2, 1462, in a renewed treaty between the two countries,
it was agreed that no Moldavian territory should remain under foreign rulership, and if such territory was under foreign rulership,
that territory should be regained.[17] Later that year, it is believed that Stephen asked Dracula to return Chilia back to Moldavia —
a demand which was most likely refused.[18] On June 22, when Dracula was fighting Mehmed, Stephen allied himself with the
Sultan and with some Turkish assistance, he launched an attack on Chilia.[19] The fortress, defended by tall stone walls and 12
cannons, was in the middle of the 15th century the strongest fortification located in the Danube area.[20] The Wallachians rushed to
the scene with 7,000 men, and together with the Hungarian garrison battled the Moldavians and the Turks for eight days. They
managed to defend the town, while wounding Stephen in his foot with a shrapnel.[19] In 1465, while Dracula was imprisoned in
Hungary, Stephen again advanced towards Chilia with a large force and siege weapons; but instead of besieging the fortress, he
showed the garrison — who favoured the Polish King — a letter in which the King required them to surrender the fortress. This
they did, and Stephen entered the fortress where he found "its two captains, rather tipsy, for they have been to a wedding."[21]
Mehmed was furious about the news and claimed Chilia for being a part of Wallachia — which now was a vassal to the Porte —
and demanded Stephen to give it over to him. The latter refused, however, and recruited an army, forcing Mehmed — who was
not yet ready to wage war — to accept the situation, if only for the time being.[21] The Moldavian prince, realizing that a future
war with Mehmed could not be avoided, tried to gain time by increasing his tribute to the Porte by 50 percent (to 3,000 ducats);
and also sent an envoy to Constantinople with gifts for the sultan.[22] In 1467, Matthias Corvinus of Hungary launched an
expedition against Moldavia in order to punish Stephen for annexing the region. The invasion ended in a disaster for the
Hungarians as they suffered a bitter defeat at the Battle of Baia, where Corvinus was thrice wounded by arrows and had to be
“carried from the battlefield on a stretcher, to avoid him falling into the hands of the enemy.”[23] In order to secure his southern
frontier from Ottoman threats, Stephen wanted to liberate Wallachia — where the hostile Radu the Handsome, the halfbrother of
Dracula ruled — from Ottoman dominion. In 1470, he invaded the country and burned down the town of Brăila[24] and in 1471,
Stephen and Radu confronted each other in Moldavia, where the latter was defeated.[25] Meanwhile, Genoa, which possessed
several colonies in the Crimea, began to worry about Stephen's growing influence in the region; and ordered her colonies to do
whatever was needed to revenge past mischief from which allegedly, the Genovese had suffered.[25] The colonies in turn pursued
the Tatars to attack Moldavia. Later that year, the Tatars invaded the country from the north, causing great damage to the land and
enslaving many.[25] Stephen replied by invading Tatar territory with Polish assistance. In 1472, Uzun Hassan of Ak Koyunlu
invaded the Ottoman Empire from the east, causing a great crisis to the empire. He was defeated the following year, but this
unexpected event, as it is explained in a contemporary source, encouraged Venice and Hungary to renew their war on the
Ottomans, and Moldavia to free herself from any Ottoman influence.[25] In 1473, Stephen stopped paying the annual tribute to the
Porte[26] and as a reaction to this, an Italian letter, dated from 1473 to Bartolomeo Scala, secretary of the Republic of Florence,
reveals that Mehmed had left Constantinople on April 13 and was planning to invade Moldavia from land and sea.[27] Stephen still
hoped to make peace with Radu and asked the Polish king to work as mediator.[25] The peace attempts failed and the conflict
intensified with three leaders challenging each other for the Wallachian throne: Radu, who was supported by Mehmed; the
seemingly loyal Basarab Laiotă, who at first was supported by Stephen; and Basarab Ţepeluş cel Tânăr—who would gain the
support of Stephen after Laiotă's betrayal.[28] A series of "absurd"[28] clashes followed, starting with another confrontation between
Stephen and Radu on November 18–20, at Râmnicu Sărat, where the latter suffered his second defeat at the hands of the
Moldavian "warlike" prince.[28] A few days later, on November 28, the Ottomans interneved with an army consisting of 12,000
Ottomans and 6,000 Wallachians, but "they incurred heavy losses and fled across the Danube."[28] After capturing the castle of
Bucharest, Stephen put Laiotă on the throne,[24] but on December 31, a new Ottoman army of 17,000 set camp around river
Bârlad, laying waste to the countryside, and intimidating the new prince into abandoning his Wallachian throne and fleeing to
Moldavia.[28] In the spring of 1474, Laiotă took the Wallachian throne for the second time; and in June, he made the decision to
betray his protégé by submitting to Mehmet.[28] Stephen then invested his support into a new candidate, named Ţepeluş (little
spear), but his reign was even shorter, as it only lasted a few weeks after being defeated by Laiotă in battle on October 5. Two
weeks later, Stephen returned to Wallachia and forced Laiotă to flee.[28] Mehmed, tired of what transpired in Wallachia, gave
Stephen an ultimatum to forfeit Chilia to the Porte, to abolish his aggressive policy in Wallachia, and to come to Constantinople
with his delayed homage.[26] The Prince refused and in November 1474, he wrote to the Pope to warn him of further Ottoman
expansion, and to ask him for support.[29]
Preparations for war
Ottomans Mehmed ordered his general, Suleiman Pasha, to end the siege of Venetian-controlled Shkodër[30] (now in Albania), to
assemble his troops in Sofia, and from there to advance with additional troops towards Moldavia. For these already exhausted
Ottoman troops, who had besieged the city from May 17 to August 15,[22] the transit from Shkodër to Moldavia was a month's
journey through bad weather and difficult terrain.[31] According to Długosz, Suleiman was also ordered that after inflicting defeat
on Stephen, he was to advance towards Poland, set camp for the winter, then invade Hungary in spring, and unite his forces with
the army of the Sultan. The Ottoman army consisted of Janissaries and heavy infantry, which were supported by the heavy cavalry
sipahis and by the light cavalry (akinci), who would scout ahead. There were also Tatar cavalry and other troops (such as the
Timariots) from vassal states. Twenty thousand Bulgarian peasants were also included in the army; their main tasks were to clear
the way for the rest of the army by building bridges over waters and removing snow from the roads, and to drive supply
wagons.[32] In total, the Ottoman cavalry numbered 30,000.[33] In September 1474, the Ottoman army gathered in Sofia, and from
there, Suleiman marched towards Moldavia by crossing the frozen Danube on foot.[34] His first stop was Wallachia, which he
entered via Vidin and Nicopolis. His army rested in Wallachia for two weeks, and was later met by a Wallachian contingent of
17,000 under Basarab Laiotă, who had changed sides to join the Ottomans.
Moldavians Stephen was hoping to gain support from the West, and more specifically from the Pope. However, the help that he
received was modest in numbers. The Hungarian Kingdom sent 1,800 Hungarians, while Poland sent 2,000 horsemen.[35] Stephen
recruited 5,000 Székely soldiers.[35] The Moldavian army consisted of twenty cannon; light cavalry (Călăraşi); elite, heavy cavalry
— named Viteji, Curteni, and Boyars — and professional foot soldiers. The army reached a strength of up to 40,000, of whom
10,000 to 15,000 comprised the standing army. The remainder consisted of 30,000 peasants armed with maces,[36] bows, and other
home-made weapons. They were recruited into Oastea Mare (the Great Army), into which all able-bodied free men over the age
of 14 were conscripted.
Battle The invading army entered Moldavia in December 1474. In order to fatigue the Ottomans, Stephen had instituted a policy
of scorched earth[35] and poisoned waters.[34] Troops who specialised in setting ambushes harassed the advancing Ottomans. The
population and livestock were evacuated to the north of the country into the mountains.[37] Ottoman scouts reported to Suleiman
that there were untouched villages near Vaslui, and the Ottomans headed for that region. The winter made it difficult to set camp,
which forced the Ottomans to move quickly and head for the Moldavian capital, Suceava. In order to reach Vaslui, where the
Moldavian army had its main camp, they needed to cross Podul Înalt over the Bârlad River. The bridge was made of wood and not
suitable for heavy transportation of troops.[34] Stephen chose that area for the battle — the same location where his father, Bogdan
II, had defeated the Poles in 1450; and where he, at an age of 17,[38] had fought side-by-side with Vlad 'the Impaler'.[19] The area
was ideal for the defenders: the valley was a semi-oval surrounded on all sides by hills covered by forest. Inside the valley, the
terrain was marshy, which restricted troop movement.[38] Suleiman had full confidence in his troops and made few efforts to scout
the area. On January 10, on a dark and misty[37] Tuesday morning, the battle began. The weather was frigid, and a dense fog
limited vision. The Ottoman troops were exhausted, and the torrent made them look like "plucked chickens."[30] Stephen fortified
the bridge, while setting and aiming his cannons at the structure. Peasants and archers were hidden in the forest, together with
their Prince and his boyar cavalry. The Moldavians made the first move by sending musicians to the middle of the valley. The
sound of drums and bugles made Suleiman think that the entire Moldavian army awaited him there.[39] Instead, the centre of the
valley held the Székely forces and the Moldavian professional army, which were ordered to make a slow retreat when they
encountered the enemy. Suleiman ordered his troops to advance and, when they made enough progress, the Moldavian artillery
started to fire, followed by archers and handgunners firing from three different directions.[30] The archers could not see the enemy
for the fog, and, instead, had to follow the noise of their footsteps. The Moldavian light cavalry then helped to lure the Ottoman
troops into the valley by making hit-and-run attacks. Ottoman cavalry tried to cross the wooden bridge, causing it to collapse.[40]
Those Ottoman soldiers who had managed to survive the attacks from the artillery and the archers, and who did not get caught in
the marshes, had to confront the Moldavian army, together with the Székely soldiers further up the valley. The 5,000 Székely
soldiers were successful in repelling the 7,000 Ottoman infantrymen. Thereafter, they made a slow retreat,[37] as instructed by
Stephen, but were later routed by the Ottoman sipahi,[40] while the remaining Ottoman infantry attacked the Moldavian flanks.
Suleiman tried to reinforce his offensive, not knowing what had happened in the valley, but then Stephen, with the full support of
his boyars, ordered a major attack. All his troops, together with peasants and heavy cavalry, attacked from all sides.
Simultaneously, Moldavian buglers concealed behind Ottoman lines started to sound their bugles, and in great confusion some
Ottoman units changed direction to face the sound.[41] When the Moldavian army hit, Suleiman lost control of his army.[30] He
desperately tried to regain control, but was later forced to signal a retreat. The battle lasted for four days;[42] with the last three
days seeing the fleeing Ottoman army being pursued by the Moldavian light cavalry and the 2,000-strong Polish cavalry until they
reached the town of Obluciţa (now Isaccea, Romania), in Dobruja. The Wallachians fled the field without joining battle and Laiotă
now turned his sword against the Turks, who had hoped for a safe passage in Wallachia; on January 20, he exited his castle and
confronted some of the Turks that were lurking on his land. Thereafter, he took one of their flags and sent it to a Hungarian friend
as proof of his bravery.[43] The Ottoman casualties were counted as 45,000, including four Pashas killed and a hundred standards
taken.[44] Jan Długosz writes that "all but the most eminent of the Turkish prisoners are impaled",[45] and their corpses burned.[35]
Only one was spared — the only son of the Ottoman general Isaac Bey, of the Gazi Evrenos family, whose father had fought with
Mircea the Old.[43] Another Polish chronicler reported that on the spot of the battle rested huge piles of bones upon each other,
next to three immured crosses.[35]
Aftermath After the battle, Stephen sent "four of the captured Turkish commanders, together with thirty-six of their standards and
much splendid booty, to King Casimir in Lithuania", and implored him to provide troops and money to support the Moldavians in
the struggle against the Ottomans. He also sent letters and a few prisoners and Turkish standards to the Pope and King Matthias
Corvinus, asking for support.[46] In response, "the arrogant Matthias writes to the Pope, the Emperor and other kings and princes,
telling them that he has defeated a large Turkish army with his own forces under the Voivode of Wallachia."[47] The Pope's reply
to Stephen denied him help, but awarded him with the "Athleta Christi",[48] while King Casimir pleaded "poverty both in money
and men" and did nothing; his own men then accused him of sloth, and advised him to change his shameful behaviour or hand
over his rule to someone else.[46] Chronicler Jan Długosz hailed Stephen for his victory in the battle:
“ Praiseworthy hero, in no respect inferior to other hero soldiers we admire. He was the first contemporary among the
rulers of the world to score a decisive victory against the Turks. To my mind, he is the worthiest to lead a coalition of
the Christian Europe against the Turks.[49] ”
[25]
Hassan tried to create a new coalition with the European powers, arguing that Mehmed's best troops were lost at Vaslui. Upon
hearing about the devastating defeat, Mehmed refused for several days to give audience to anyone; his other plans of expansion
were put to rest as he planned revenge on Stephen.[4] In the following year, Mehmed invaded the country with an army of 150,000,
which was joined by 10,000 Wallachians under Laiotă and 30,000 Tatars under Meñli I Giray. The Tatars, who called for a Holy
War, attacked with their cavalry from the north and started to pillage the country. The Moldavians took chase after them, and
routed and killed most of them. "The fleeing Tatars discard their weapons, their saddles and clothes, while some, as though
crazed, jump into the River Dniepr."[50] Giray wrote to Mehmed that he could not wage more war against Stephen, as he had lost
his son and two brothers, and had returned with only one horse.[51] In July 1476, after killing 30,000 Ottomans, Stephen was
defeated at the Battle of Valea Albă. However, the Ottomans were unsuccessful in their siege of the Suceava citadel and the
Neamţ fortress, while Laiotă was forced to retreat back to Wallachia when Dracula and Stefan Báthory, Voivode of Transylvania,
gave chase with an army of 30,000.[52] Stephen assembled his army and invaded Wallachia from the north, while Dracula and
Báthory invaded from the west. Laiotă fled, and in November, Dracula was installed on the Wallachian throne. He received 200
loyal knights from Stephen to serve as his loyal bodyguards, but his army remained small. When Laiotă returned, Dracula went to
battle and was killed by the Janissaries near Bucharest in December 1476. Laiotă again occupied the Wallachian throne, which
urged Stephen to make another return to Wallachia and dethrone Laiotă for the fifth and last time, while Dracula's son, Ţepeluş,
was established as ruler of the country. In 1484, the Ottomans under Bayezid II, managed to conquer Chilia and Cetatea Albă and
incorporate it into their empire under the name of Budjak, leaving Moldavia a landlocked principality for many years to come.
Between May and September 1488, Stephen built the Voroneţ Monastery to commemorate the victory at Vaslui; "the exterior
walls — including a representation of the Last Judgment on the west wall — were painted in 1547 with a background of vivid
cerulean blue. This is so vibrant that art historians refer to Voroneţ blue the same way they do Titian red."[53] In 1490, he extended
his work by building another monastery of Saint John the Baptist. These monasteries served as cultural centres; today, they are on
UNESCO's World Heritage List. Stephen's victory at Vaslui is considered one of the greatest Moldavian victories over the
Ottomans, and as such "played a role in universal history" by securing the "culture and civilization of the Christian West from the
onslaught of Islam."[54]
Footnotes
1. ^ Ferencz Kállay (1829) (in Hungarian). Historiai értekezés a' nemes székely nemzet' eredetéről: hadi és polgári
intézeteiről a régi időkben [Historical discourse about the origin of the 'magnanimous szekler nation' : military and civil
institutes in the past times.]. Nagyenyed, Hungary: Fiedler Gottfried. p. 247. http://books.google.com/books?id=tDo-
AAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=hu#v=onepage&q&f=false. Retrieved 9 October 2010.
2. ^ Kronika Polska mentions 40,000 Moldavian troops; Gentis Silesiæ Annales mentions 120,000 Ottoman troops
and "no more than" 40,000 Moldavian troops; the letter of Stephen addressed to the Christian countries, sent on January
25, 1475, mentions 120,000 Ottoman troops; see also The Annals of Jan Długosz, p. 588;
3. ^ The Balkans: A History of Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece, Rumania, Turkey
4. ^ a b c Istoria lui Ştefan cel Mare, p. 133
5. ^ Saint Stephen the Great in his contemporary Europe (Respublica Christiana), p. 141
6. ^ Moldavia in the 11th-14 Centuries, pp. 218-19
7. ^ The Annals of Jan Długosz, p. 449
8. ^ The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age 1300-1600, p. 129
9. ^ Gentis Silesiæ Annales
10. ^ Letter to Leonardo Loredano, written on December 7, 1502
11. ^ a b Studii Noi Despre Probleme Vechi — Din Istoria Evului Mediu Românesc, p. 92
12. ^ a b Studii Noi Despre Probleme Vechi — Din Istoria Evului Mediu Românesc, p. 92-3
13. ^ Studii Noi Despre Probleme Vechi — Din Istoria Evului Mediu Românesc, p. 91
14. ^ The Ottoman Law of War and Peace—The Ottoman Empire and Tribute Payers, p. 164
15. ^ Studii Noi Despre Probleme Vechi — Din Istoria Evului Mediu Românesc, p. 94
16. ^ Studii Noi Despre Probleme Vechi — Din Istoria Evului Mediu Românesc, p. 96
17. ^ a b Studii Noi Despre Probleme Vechi — Din Istoria Evului Mediu Românesc, p. 134
18. ^ Studii Noi Despre Probleme Vechi — Din Istoria Evului Mediu Românesc, pp. 95-6
19. ^ a b c Dracula: Prince of many faces — His life and his times, p. 149
20. ^ Studii Noi Despre Probleme Vechi — Din Istoria Evului Mediu Românesc, p. 97
21. ^ a b The Annals of Jan Długosz, p. 552
22. ^ a b Semnificaţia Haracului în relaţiile Moldo-Otomane din vremea lui Ştefan cel Mare — Câteva Consideraţii
23. ^ The Annals of Jan Długosz, p. 566
24. ^ a b Costin, N. Letopiseţul Ţărîi Moldovei
25. ^ a b c d e f Relaţiile internaţionale ale Moldovei în vremea lui Ştefan cel Mare
26. ^ a b The Ottoman Law of War and Peace—The Ottoman Empire and Tribute Payers, p. 165
 27. ^ Noi Izvoare Italiene despre Vlad Ţepeş şi Ştefan cel Mare; Studies and Materials of Medium History
XX/2002
28. ^ a b c d e f g Mehmed the Conqueror and his time, p. 339
29. ^ Letter of Stephen, Vaslui November 29, 1474
30. ^ a b c d The Chronicles of the Ottoman Dynasty
31. ^ Great Events
32. ^ Istoria lui Ştefan cel Mare, p.127
33. ^ Historia Turchesca
34. ^ a b c Istoria lui Ştefan cel Mare, p. 128
35. ^ a b c d e Kronika Polska
36. ^ Istoria lui Ştefan cel Mare, pp. 127, 130
37. ^ a b c The Ottoman Empire 1326-1699, p. 42
38. ^ a b Istoria lui Ştefan cel Mare, p. 129
39. ^ Grigore U. Letopiseţul Ţărîi Moldovei
40. ^ a b Istoria lui Ştefan cel Mare, p. 130
41. ^ Roumania Past and Present, Chapter XI.
42. ^ Documentary: Amintirile unui Pelerin, Antena 1
43. ^ a b Istoria lui Ştefan cel Mare, pp. 131-32
44. ^ A Documented Chronology of Roumanian History - from prehistoric times to the present day, Oxford 1941, p.
108
45. ^ The Annals of Jan Długosz, p. 588
46. ^ a b The Annals of Jan Długosz, pp. 588-9
47. ^ The Annals of Jan Długosz, p. 589
48. ^ website: Romania Country study, U.S. Library of Congress.
49. ^ Historiae Polonicae, libri XIII, vol. II, note 528, Leipzig 1712.
50. ^ The Annals of Jan Długosz, pp. 592, 594
51. ^ Letter of Giray to Mehmed, October 10–19, 1476
52. ^ Diary of Ladislav, servant of Dracula; August 7, 1476
53. ^ Artistic Route Through Romania
54. ^ Catholic Encyclopedia
References
• Antena 1, Amintirile unui Pelerin (documentary)
• Babinger, Franz. Mehmed the Conqueror and his time ISBN 0-691-01078-1
• Cândea, Virgil. Saint Stephen the Great in his contemporary Europe (Respublica Christiana), Balkan Studies 2004
• Catholic Encyclopedia, Rumania. (source: New Advent)
• Denize, Eugen. Semnificaţia Haracului în relaţiile Moldo-Otomane din vremea lui Ştefan cel Mare — Câteva
Consideraţii.
• Długosz, Jan. The Annals of Jan Długosz ISBN 1-901019-00-4
• Ghyka, Matila. A Documented Chronology of Roumanian History - from prehistoric times to the present day, Oxford
1941
• Florescu, R. Radu; McNally, T. Raymond. Dracula: Prince of many faces - His life and his times ISBN 978-0-316-
28656-5
• Inalcik, Halil. The Ottoman Empire - The Classical Age 1300-1600 ISBN 1-84212-442-0
• Iorga, Nicolae. Istoria lui Ştefan cel Mare, 1904 (new edition 1966), Bucharest.
• Matei, Mircea D.; Cârciumaru, Radu. Studii Noi Despre Probleme Vechi — Din Istoria Evului Mediu Românesc. Editura
Cetatea de Scaun, ISBN 973-85907-2-8
• Nevill Forbes; Arnold J. Toynbee; D. Mitrany, D.G. Hogarth. The Balkans: A History of Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece,
Rumania, Turkey, 2004. ISO-8859-1
• Samuelson, James. Roumania Past and Present, Chapter XI. Originally published London: Longmans, Green, and Co.,
1882. Electronic text archive on the site of the Center for Advanced Research Technology in the Arts and Humanities,
University of Washington.
• Sandberg-Diment, Erik. Artistic Route Through Romania, New York Times, The. 1998
• Sfântul Voievod Ştefan cel Mare, Chronicles. (retrieved)
o Angiolello, Giovanni Maria. Historia Turchesca
o Bonfinius, Antonius. Historia Pannonica ab Origine Gentis AD Annum 1495
o Curius, Joachim. Gentis Silesiæ Annales
o Długosz, Jan. Historiae Polonicae, Leipzig 1712
o Husein, Kodja. Great Events
o Murianus, Mathaeus. Letter to Leonardo Loredano, written on December 7, 1502
o Orudj bin Adil and Şemseddin Ahmed bin Suleiman Kemal paşa-zade. The Chronicles of the Ottoman Dynasty
o Pasha, Lütfi. The Chronicles of the House of Osman (Tevarih-i al-i Osman)
o Hoca Sadeddin Efendi. Crown of Histories (Tadj al-tawarikh)
o Stephen the Great; letter of January 25, 1475
o Stryjkowski, Maciej. Kronika Polska
• Spinei, Victor. Moldavia in the 11th-14 Centuries, Romania 1986
• Panaite, Viorel. The Ottoman Law of War and Peace—The Ottoman Empire and Tribute Payers. ISBN 0-88033-461-4
• Papacostea, Şerban. Relaţiile internaţionale ale Moldovei în vremea lui Ştefan cel Mare
• Pippidi, Andrei. Noi Izvoare Italiene despre Vlad Ţepeş şi Ştefan cel Mare; Studies and Materials of Medium History
XX/2002
• Turnbull, Stephen. The Ottoman Empire 1326-1699 ISBN 1-84176-569-4
• Ureche, Grigore and Costin, Nicolae. Letopiseţul Ţărîi Moldovei
External links
• Detailed article describing the strategy and the units used in the battle
• Brief history of Moldavia covering the Vaslui battle
• Short essay about Stephen the Great with a description of the Vaslui battle
• Short article describing the battle

The last judgment, painted outside the monastery. Statue of Stephen at the Vaslui monument.

Map of the battle.

Stephen the Great — detail of a dedication miniature in the 1473 Gospel at Humor Monastery. Letter of Stephen to European
leaders, January 25, 1475.

Laiotă Basarab at Monastery of Horezu. Mehmed II by Gentile Bellini.

The Fortress of Ackermann

Travnik
 Battle of Breadfield (1479)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Date October 13, 1479

Location The Breadfield (Kenyérmező), in Zsibód, near the River Mureş, Transylvania, Kingdom of Hungary
Result Decisive Hungarian (Christian) victory
Belligerents

Kingdom of Hungary, Serbian Despotate, Vlach volunteers Ottoman Empire Wallachia

Commanders and leaders

Pál Kinizsi Stephen V Báthory Vuk Branković Basarab Laiotă
Ali Kodsha bey Basarab Ţepeluş cel Tânăr
cel Bătrân
Strength
12-15,000 men (Hungarians, Transylvanian Saxons, Serbs, 6,000-20,000 Akıncı, Spakh and Asab, some Janissary
Szeklers and Transylvanian Hungarians) 1,000-2,000 Wallachian infantry
Casualties and losses
3,000 killed 10,000-15,000 Turkish killed 1,000 Wallachian
The Battle of Breadfield (Hungarian: Kenyérmezei csata, Romanian: Bătălia de la Câmpul Pâinii, Turkish: Ekmek Otlak Savaşı)
was the most tremendous conflict fought in Transylvania up to that time in the Hungarian-Turkish Wars taking place on October
13, 1479, on the Breadfield Zsibód (Şibot) near the Maros River. The Hungarian army was led by Pál Kinizsi, István Báthory,
Vuk Branković, and Basarab Laiotă cel Bătrân. The result of the battle was an important victory for the Kingdom of Hungary.
Background Turkish marauders attacked Transylvania and Vojvodina several times between 1474 and 1475. The attacks led to
the depopulation of some areas with a number of villages abandoned by their inhabitants. In the spring of 1479, a major Turkish
army convened under Szendrő, above all Akıncıs. When King Matthias was alerted, he ordered Stephen Báthory, the Voivode of
Transylvania and his general Pál Kinizsi to mobilize. The Turkish army entered Transylvania on October 9, near Kelnek (Câlnic),
led by Ali Kodsha bey. The Akıncıs attacked a few villages, homesteads and market towns, taking a number of Hungarians,
Vlachs and Saxons captive. On October 13, Kodsha bey set up his camp in the Breadfield (Kenyérmező), near Zsibót. Kodsha bey
was obliged into the campaign by the insistence of Basarab cel Tânăr, a Wallachian prince, who himself brought 1,000–2,000
footmen to the cause. The Turks continued pillaging and taking prisoners, while Báthory and Kinizsi made preparations to set
forth against the Turks.
The Hungarian and the Ottoman army The numerical strength of the Turkish army is under debate; one estimate judged them
to be a 60,000, while Hungarian sources placed them closer to 30,000. Jan Długosz, the famous Polish chronicler, estimated the
Ottoman forces to have been 100 thousand men-at-arms, but Matthias Corvinus estimated there were 43,000 45,000 Ottoman and
Wallachian soldiers in his letters. A more probable number for Ottoman forces was between 6-20 thousand soldiers, and 1,000-
2,000 Wallachians. The Ottoman army was almost entirely made up of Akıncıs, rumelian Spakhs and Azaps, with some
Janissaries and possibly some cannon. The Turkish enterprise was not full-fledged war effort, but rather a very substantial raiding
one - the largest expedition Transylvania encountered during a century's worth of Hungarian-Turkish conflicts. Kinizsi's army
consisted of Hungarian, Szekler, Serbian, Transylvanian Saxon forces, and some Vlach volunteers. The latter were commanded by
Basarab cel Bătrân, quondam ruler of Wallachia and archrival to cel Tânăr. Accordingly, cel Tânăr insisted on equality with cel
Bătrân, with only one being tenable to the Wallachian throne. The combined Christian forces totalled approximated 12,000 to
15,000 men. In the judgement of some, Poles, Moldavians, Russians, Lithuanians, Germans and Bohemians were privy in part to
the battle, but rather difficult to substantiate.
The battle Both armies were composed of three columns. The right flank of the Hungarian army was led by Kinizsi, the left was
the Serbian light cavalry under Vuk Branković and Demeter Jakšić with the Saxons and Báthory's forces in the center. On the
Ottoman side, Kodsha bey took the left flank, Isa bey the center and Malkoch Oglu the right flank. The battle commenced in the
afternoon, Báthory fell from his horse and the Ottomans nearly captured him, but a valiant Antal Nagy whisked the voivode away.
Having joined battle, the Ottomans were in ascendancy early on, but Kinizsi charged against the Turks with the Hungarian heavy
cavalry and 900 Serbs under a Jakšić assisted by "numerous courtiers of the king". Ali bey was forced to retreat. Kinizsi moved
laterally to vigorously smash the Turkish center and before long Isa bey also withdrew. The few Turks who survived the massacre
fled into the mountains, where the majority were killed by the local population. The hero of the battle was Pál Kinizsi, the
legendary Hungarian general and a man of Herculean bodily strength in the service of Matthias Corvinus' Black Army of
Hungary.
Aftermath Turkish casualties were extremely high with several thousand men killed, among them Malkoçoğlu and Isa bey along
with together with two beys and a thousand of their Wallachian allies. Hungarian forces lost approximately 3,000 men in the
battle. Scarce few prisoner were liberated and their ransom was immense. In 1480 Kinizsi raided Serbia and several times
defeated Ali Kodsha bey. The Breadfield battle was a great psychological victory for the Hungarians, and as a result the Ottoman
Turks did not attack South-Hungary and Transylvania for many years thereafter.
See also List of battles 1401–1800 Breadfield
References Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Battle of Breadfield
Sources
• Lengyel, Dénes (1972). Régi Magyar mondák. Budapest: Móra Ferenc. ISBN 963-11-2928-4.
• Csorba, Csaba; János Estók and Konrád Salamon (1998). Magyarország Képes Története. Budapest: Hungarian Book-
Club. ISBN 9635489617.
• Babinger, Franz. Mehmed the Conqueror and his time. ISBN 0-691-01078-1.
External links
• Ferenc Szakály Ferenc and Pál Fodor: The Battle of Breadfiled, October 13 1479. Military notice, 111. class (1998.)
2.numb. (Hungarian)
• Battle of Breadfield, October 13 1479. (Hungarian)

The Breadfield in 1870.

 Ottoman invasion of Otranto (1480-81)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Date 1480-1481
Location Otranto, Italy
Result Ottoman forces seize the city; Christian forces recapture the city
Belligerents

Ottoman Empire Kingdom of Naples Kingdom of Aragon Kingdom of Hungary

Commanders and leaders
Gedik Ahmed Pasha Francesco Largo † Alphonso II of Naples Balázs Magyar
Strength
18,000 infantry 700 cavalry 70 ships (possibly 200 ships?) Unknown Hungary:500 foot soldiers, 300 horsemen[1]
Casualties and losses
Garrisoned forces surrender Unknown
Civilian casualties: 12,000 approx. 1,600 Hungarians (mostly servants)

In 1480 and 1481 the city and fort of Otranto, in Apulia, southern Italy, were held by Ottoman troops.
Attack On July 28, 1480, an Ottoman fleet of 128 ships of which 28 were galleys arrived near the Neapolitan city of Otranto in
the region Apulia. Possibly these troops came from the siege of Rhodes. On July 29 the garrison and the citizens retreated to the
citadel, the Castle of Otranto. On 11 August this was taken by the invaders. According to Christian historiography a razzia was
held to round up the male citizens. Archbishop Stefano Agricoli and others were killed in the cathedral. Bishop Stephen Pendinelli
and the garrison commander, count Francesco Zurlo, were sawn in two alive. On August 12, 800 citizens who refused to convert
to Islam were taken to the Hill of the Minerva and beheaded.[2] Some of the remains of the 800 martyrs are today stored in Otranto
cathedral and in the church of Santa Caterina a Formiello in Naples. The cathedral is said to have been used as a stable after
that.[citation needed] This version has come under severe criticism. From the Turkish side it is disputed that large-scale executions took
place; the bones to be found in the Cathedral of Otranto are claimed to be actually those of fighters killed during the Turkish
invasion. Italian researchers, on the other hand, conclude that some acts of terror were committed by the Turkish invaders to
create panic among the Italians around Otranto. Some citizens were transported to Albania as slaves. In August, 70 ships of the
fleet attacked Vieste. On September 12, the Monastero di San Nicholas di Casole, which accommodated one of the richer libraries
of Europe, was destroyed. In October 1480, the coastal cities of Lecce, Taranto and Brindisi were attacked. Because of lack of
food Gedik Ahmed Pasha returned with most of his troops to Albania, leaving a garrison of 800 infantry and 500 cavalry behind
to defend Otranto. It was assumed he would return after the winter.
Response Since it was only 28 years after the fall of Constantinople, there was some fear that Rome would suffer the same fate.
Plans were made for the Pope and citizens of Rome to evacuate the city. Pope Sixtus IV repeated his 1471 call for a crusade.
Several Italian city-states, Hungary and France responded positively to this. The Republic of Venice did not, as it had signed an
expensive peace treaty with the Ottomans in 1479. In 1481 an army was raised by king Ferdinand I of Naples to be led by his son
Alphonso II of Naples. A contingent of troops was provided by king Matthias Corvinus of Hungary.
Counter attack The city was besieged starting May 1, 1481. On May 3 the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, Mehmed II, died, with
ensuing quarrels about his succession. This possibly prevented the sending of Ottoman reinforcements to Otranto. So in the end
the Turkish occupation of Otranto ended by negotiation with the Christian forces, permitting the Turks to withdraw to Albania.
However, quite a few of them were still taken captives when the Christian troops occupied Otranto again.
Aftermath The number of citizens, said to have been about 20,000 (a figure very much disputed by recent research), had
decreased to 8,000. Out of fear of another attack, many of these left the city.
See also Crown of Aragon History of Islam in southern Italy
References
1. ^ Franz Babinger (1978). "X.". Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time. New Jersey, USA: Princeton University
Press. p. 394. ISBN 0 691 09900 6.
http://books.google.com/books?id=PPxC6rO7vvsC&pg=PA302&hl=hu&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=fa
lse. Retrieved 28 June 2011.
2. ^ Bunson, Matthew. "How the 800 Martyrs of Otranto Saved Rome". Catholic Answers.
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2008/0807fea2.asp. Retrieved 11 August 2011.
External links
• En.otrantopoint.com
• Zum.de
• Borghitalia.it
• Castellipuglia.org
• Uni-mannheim.de
• Cronologia.leonardo.it
• Museomuro.it
• How the Eight Hundred Men of Otranto Saved Rome
• The Crusades Wiki
 Battle of Krbava field (1493)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ottoman Akincis in battle

Date September 9, 1493

Location Krbava field, southern Croatia
Result Decisive Ottoman victory[1]
Belligerents

Ottoman Empire
Kingdom of Hungary Kingdom of Croatia
Commanders and leaders
*Bosnian Sanjak Bey Hadım Yakup Paşa , Gazi Husrev-
*Croatian Ban Mirko Derenčin † *Ivan Frankopan Cetinski †
beg ,*Sanjak Bey Ismail *Mehmed Bey Karlerije ,
*Ferdinand Berislavić †
Staniša Crnojević
Strength
8,000 2,000–3,000 heavy cavalry 8,000 infantry
Casualties and losses
 ? 1,000 killed 8,000–10,000 killed 1,500 POW[2]
The Battle of Krbava field (Croatian: Krbavsko polje, Hungarian: Korbávmezei csata), was fought between the Ottoman Empire
of Bayezid II and a Croatian army of the Kingdom of Hungary on September 9, 1493 in what is today southern Croatia (Lika
region). The Kingdom of Croatia was during this period united under the crown of the Kingdom of Hungary, and the Croatian
lords who fought in the battle were subjects of the unified crown. The battle resulted in the total defeat of the Croatian army led by
Ban Mirko Derenčin, viceroy of King Vladislas II.[3]
Background After the fall of the Bosnian Kingdom into the Ottoman hands in 1463, the southern and central parts of the
Kingdom of Croatia remained unprotected, the defense of which was left to Croatian gentry who kept smaller troops in the
fortified border areas at their own expense. The Ottomans meanwhile reached the river Neretva and having conquered
Herzegovina (Rama) in 1482, they found their way toward Croatia, skillfully avoiding the fortified border towns. Through the
conquest of the Kingdom of Croatia, the Ottoman light cavalry pushed its way towards the towns of Carinthia and Carniola,
threatening thus to a border area of Venice as well.
Preparations In order to stop such invasions, in the summer of 1493 the Croats attempted to rally their troops under the command
of Viceroy Mirko Derenčin at Krbava field (near today's Udbina) in central Croatia, and lay in wait there to trap the Ottomans. In
the meanwhile, the Ottoman Sanjak Bey Hadım Yakup Paşa with some 8,000 Akıncı (Turkish light cavalry) was returning from
an expedition to Styria and Croatian Zagorje. Croatian feudal army under the command of Viceroy Derenčin at Krbava field had
some 2,000 heavy feudal cavalry and some 8,000 infantry from all parts of the Croatia. The Croats overestimated their powers.
Battle The Croatian army rushed at the Ottomans. After first luring Croats into plains, where light cavalry were in advantage over
heavy feudal cavalry, surrounding it from the front, one flank and rear. Croatian army suffered a total defeat in which the cream of
the old Croatian nobility perished to a man, including Mirko Derenčin.[4]
Aftermath The defeat was resounding. In one single day, around 7,000 Croatian soldiers lost their lives, including many of
Croatian feudal nobleman of the time. The defeat at Krbava field shook all the social strata in Croatia; however it did not dissuade
the Croats from making even more decisive and persistent attempts at defending themselves against the attacks of the much more
powerful enemy. Following the battle, scores of Croatian refugees moved toward Austria while others migrated to Italian coastal
areas.[4]
Notes
1. ^ Eastern Europe: An Introduction to the People, Lands, and Culture By Richard C. Frucht, pg. 422
2. ^ Battle of Krbava field (Croatian)
3. ^ Democratic Transition in Croatia: Value Transformation, Education & Media By Sabrina P. Ramet, Davorka
Matic, pg. xii
4. ^ a b Croatia: A History By Ivo Goldstein, Nikolina Jovanovic, pg.31
Military history of the Ottoman Empire portal
References
Fred Singleton, A Short History of the Yugoslav Peoples. Cambridge University Press, 1989.
 Vladislaus II of Bohemia and Hungary
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

King of Hungary
Reign 1490 – 1516
Predecessor Matthias Corvinus
Successor Louis II
King of Bohemia
Reign 1471 – 1516
Predecessor George of Podebrady
Successor Louis II
Spouse Barbara of Brandenburg Beatrice of Naples Anne de Foix
IssueAnne, Queen of the Romans Louis II of Hungary

House Jagiellon dynasty

Father Casimir IV Jagiellon
Mother Elizabeth of Bohemia
Born 1 March 1456 Kraków, Kingdom of Poland
Died 13 March 1516 Buda, Kingdom of Hungary
Burial Székesfehérvár
This article refers to the 15th century Jagiellon monarch. For his grandfather who founded the dynasty, see Władysław II
Jagiełło. For other monarchs with similar names, see Ladislaus Jagiello (disambiguation) or Ladislaus
(disambiguation).
Vladislas II, also known as Ladislaus Jagiellon (Czech: Vladislav Jagellonský, Hungarian: II. Ulászló, Polish: Władysław II
Jagiellończyk, Croatian: Vladislav Jagelović, Slovak: Vladislav Jagelovský); (1 March 1456, Kraków, Poland – 13 March
1516, Buda, Hungary) was King of Bohemia from 1471 and King of Hungary from 1490 until his death in 1516.[1] He was
also a knight of the Order of the Dragon.
Biography Vladislaus was born on 1 March 1456, the son of King Casimir IV of Poland and Great Duke of Lithuania, the
then head of the ruling Jagiellon dynasty of Poland, and of Elizabeth of Bohemia, daughter of Albert II of Germany. He was
christened as the namesake of his grandfather King Władysław Jagiełło of Poland, maternal uncle King Ladislaus the
Posthumous of Bohemia and his late paternal uncle Władysław III of Poland, an earlier king of Hungary. He was proposed
for the Bohemian throne by the widow of the previous king, George of Poděbrady, and was crowned the King of Bohemia
(Vladislav) on 22 August 1471. He was crowned King of Hungary on 18 September 1490, in succession to Matthias
Corvinus, who had also claimed the Bohemian throne. No regnal number was used by Vladislaus at the time, but works of
reference retrospectively assigned him various ordinals for each of his kingdoms. The most usual number is II because before
him there was only one Władysław on the Hungarian throne, his paternal uncle. Though counting the Hungarian and
Bohemian translations of his name he was also the seventh Ladislas (VII) on the Hungarian throne and the fifth Vladislav (V)
on the Bohemian throne. The period after the death of George of Poděbrady was a time of conflict for the Bohemian throne
and Vladislaus was unable to confront it. At the time of his arrival in Prague, he was only fifteen years old and significantly
dominated by his advisers. The succession conflict was settled in 1479 in the Peace of Olomouc, which allowed both
Vladislaus and Matthias Corvinus to use the title "King of Bohemia." Vladislaus would reign in Bohemia proper, while
Matthias gained Moravia, Silesia, and the two Lusatias. The deal also stipulated that in case of Matthias' death, Vladislaus
would pay 400,000 gold (contemporary currency, not "gold") for the entirety of the Bohemian lands. However, this payment
was not made once Vladislaus became King of Hungary after the death of Matthias. The "Kutnohorian deal" in 1485
practically eliminated Vladislaus' power and granted it to the nobles. The deal in its original form would have been in effect
for 31 years, but was extended in 1512 to "all times." He was a cheerful man, nicknamed "Vladislaus Bene" (Polish:
Władysław Dobrze, Hungarian: Dobzse László, Czech: král Dobře) because to almost any request he answered, "Bene" (Latin
for "(It's) well"). During his reign (1490–1516), the Hungarian royal power declined in favour of the Hungarian magnates,
who used their power to curtail the peasants’ freedom.[2] His reign in Hungary was largely stable, although Hungary was
under consistent border pressure from the Ottoman Empire and went through the revolt of György Dózsa. On March 11, 1500
Czech Council adopted a new municipal constitution that limited royal power and Vladislav signed it in 1502 (hence it is
known as Vladislav municipal constitution).[3] Additionally, he oversaw the construction (1493–1502) of the enormous
Vladislav Hall atop the palace at the Prague Castle.
Marriages and issue He was married three times, first in 1476 at Frankfurt/Oder to Barbara of Brandenburg, daughter of
Albert III Achilles, Elector of Brandenburg, child widow of Silesian Piast Henry XI of Głogów, then to the widow of
Matthias, Beatrice of Naples, daughter of Ferdinand I of Naples. His third wife, Anne de Foix, was crowned on September
29, 1502 when she about 18 years of age and he was 46. She gave birth to his only surviving legitimate children, Anna of
Bohemia and Hungary and Louis II of Hungary and Bohemia and died less than 4 years later in 1506, from complications
resulting from the birth of Louis. Vladislaus himself died on 13 March 1516, and was buried in Székesfehérvár. Vladislaus'
ten-year-old son Louis succeeded him on the thrones of both Bohemia and Hungary. His daughter Anna was married in 1515
to the future emperor Ferdinand of Austria, a grandson of Emperor Maximilian I Habsburg. Therefore, after the death of
Louis at the Battle of Mohács, the succession devolved through Anna to the cadet line of eastern Habsburgs.
Titles His titles according to the laws in 1492: King of Hungary, Bohemia, Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, Rama, Serbia,
Galicia, Lodomeria, Cumania and Bulgaria, Prince of Silesia and Luxembourg, Margrave of Moravia and Lusatia.[4]
AncestorsAncestors of Vladislaus II of Bohemia and Hungary

16. Gediminas, Grand Prince of Lithuania

8. Algirdas, Grand Prince of Lithuania
17. Jewna
4. Władysław II Jagiełło
18. Aleksandr Mikhailovich of Tver
9. Uliana of Tver
19. Anastasia Yuryevna of Halych
2. Casimir IV Jagiellon
20. Ivan Olgimuntovich of Halshany
10. Andrew of Halshany
21. Agrippina Sviatoslavovna of Smolensk
5. Sophia of Halshany
22. Dimitri Semenovich, Prince of Drutsk
 23. Anastasia Olegovna of Ryazan
1. Vladislas II of Bohemia and
Hungary
24. Albert III, Duke of Austria
12. Albert IV, Duke of Austria
25. Beatrix of Nuremberg
6. Albert II of Germany
26. Albert I, Duke of Bavaria
13. Johanna Sophia of Bavaria
27. Margaret of Brieg
3. Elisabeth of Austria
28. Charles IV, Holy Roman Emperor
14. Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor
29. Elizabeth of Pomerania
7. Elisabeth of Bohemia
30. Hermann II, Count of Celje
15. Barbara of Cilli
31. Anna of Schaunberg
References
1. ^ Encyclopedia Britannica
2. ^ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/170596/Dozsa-Rebellion
3. ^ Buchvaldek, Miroslav (1987) (in Czech). Československé dějiny v datech (2nd ed.). Prague: Svoboda. pp. 714.
4. ^ 1000ev.hu (Hungarian)
Vladislaus II of Bohemia and Hungary
House of Jagiellon
Born: 1 March 1456 Died: 13 March 1516
Regnal titles
Preceded by King of Bohemia Succeeded by
George of Podebrady 1471–1516 Louis II
Preceded by King of Hungary Succeeded by
Matthias Corvinus 1490–1516 Louis II
 György Dózsa (1470-1514)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The native form of this personal name is Dózsa György. This article uses the Western name order. György Dózsa (or György
Székely,[note 1] Romanian: Gheorghe Doja; 1470 - 20 July 1514) was a Székely Hungarian man-at-arms (and by some accounts, a
nobleman) from Transylvania, Kingdom of Hungary who led a peasants' revolt against the kingdom's landed nobility. He was
eventually caught, tortured, and executed along with his followers, and remembered as both a Christian martyr and a dangerous
criminal. During the reign of king Vladislas II of Hungary (1490–1516), royal power declined in favour of the magnates, who
used their power to curtail the peasants’ freedom.[1]
Outbreak of the rebellion Born in Dálnok (today Dalnic), Dózsa was a soldier of fortune who won a reputation for valour in the
wars against the Ottoman Empire. The Hungarian chancellor, Tamás Bakócz, on his return from the Holy See in 1514 (with a
papal bull issued by Leo X authorising a crusade against the Ottomans[2]), appointed Dózsa to organize and direct the movement.
Within a few weeks he had gathered an army of some 100,000 so-called kuruc, consisting for the most part of peasants, wandering
students, friars, and parish priests - some of the lowest-ranking groups of medieval society. They assembled in their counties, and
by the time Dózsa had provided them with some military training, they began to air the grievances of their status.No measures had
been taken to supply these voluntary crusaders with food or clothing; as harvest-time approached, the landlords commanded them
to return to reap the fields, and, on their refusing to do so, proceeded to maltreat their wives and families and set their armed
retainers upon the local peasantry. The rebellious, antilandlord sentiment of these “Crusaders” became apparent during their
march across the Great Alföld, and Bakócz canceled the campaign.[3] Instantly, the movement was diverted from its original
object, and the peasants and their leaders began a war of vengeance against the landlords.
Successes By this time, Dózsa was losing control of the people under his command, who had fallen under the influence of the
parson of Cegléd, Lőrinc Mészáros. The rebellion became more dangerous when the towns joined on the side of the peasants, and
in Buda and other places the cavalry sent against the Kuruc were unhorsed as they passed through the gates. The rebellion spread
quickly, principally in the central or purely Magyar provinces, where hundreds of manor houses and castles were burnt and
thousands of the gentry killed by impalement, crucifixion, and other methods. Dózsa's camp at Cegléd was the centre of the
jacquerie, as all raids in the surrounding area had it as their starting point. In reaction, the papal bull was revoked, and King
Vladislaus II issued a proclamation commanding the peasantry to return to their homes under pain of death. By this time the rising
had attained the dimensions of a revolution; all the vassals of the kingdom were called out against it, and soldiers of fortune were
hired in haste from the Republic of Venice, Bohemia and the Holy Roman Empire. Meanwhile, Dózsa had captured the city and
fortress of Csanád (today's Cenad), and signaled his victory by impaling the bishop and the castellan. Subsequently, at Arad, Lord
Treasurer István Telegdy was seized and tortured to death. In general, however, the rebels only executed particularly vicious or
greedy noblemen; those who freely submitted were released on parole. Dózsa not only never broke his given word, but frequently
assisted the escape of fugitives. He was unable to consistently control his followers, however, and many of them hunted down
rivals. At first, it also seemed as if the powers in the Kingdom were incapable of coping with him.
Downfall, execution In the course of the summer he took the fortresses of Arad, Lippa (today also called Lipova) and Világos
(today also called Şiria), and provided himself with cannons and trained gunners; and one of his bands advanced to within 25
kilometers of the capital. But his ill-armed ploughmen were overmatched by the heavy cavalry of the nobles. Dózsa himself had
apparently become demoralized by success: after Csanád, he issued proclamations which can be described as millenarian.[citation
needed]
As his suppression had become a political necessity, he was routed at Temesvár (today Timişoara) by an army of 20,000[4]
led by John Zápolya and István Báthory. He was captured after the battle, and condemned to sit on a heated smoldering iron
throne with a heated iron crown on his head and a heated sceptre in his hand (mocking at his ambition to be king). While Dózsa
was suffering, a procession of 9 fellow rebels, who had been starved beforehand, were led to such throne. In the lead was Dózsa's
younger brother, Gergely, who was cut in three before Dózsa despite Dózsa asking for Gergely to be spared. Next, executioners
removed hot pliers from fire and forced them into Dózsa's skin. After pulling flesh from him, the remaining rebels were ordered to
bite where the hot iron had been inserted and to swallow the flesh. Those who refused, about 3 or 4, were simply cut up which
prompted the remaining rebels to do as commanded. In the end, Dózsa died on the throne of iron from the damage that was
inflicted while the rebels who obeyed were let go without further harm.[5] The revolt was repressed but some 70,000 peasants were
tortured.[6] György's execution, and the brutal suppression of the peasants, greatly aided the 1526 Turkish invasion as the
Hungarians were no longer a politically united people. The Ottoman Turks were thus able to enter the country. Another
consequence was the creation of new laws, an effort in the Hungarian Diet led by István Werbőczy. The resulting Tripartitum
elaborated the Doctrine of the Holy Crown but also greatly enhanced the status of nobility, erecting an iron curtain between
Hungarians until 1848 with the abolishment of serfdom.[7]
Legacy Today, on the site of the martyrdom of the hot throne, there is the statue of The Virgin Mary, built by architect László
Székely and sculptor György Kiss. According to the legend, during György Dózsa's torture, some monks saw in his ear the image
of Mary. The first statue was raised in 1865, with the actual monument raised in 1906. A square, a busy six-lane avenue next to
Hősök tere and a metro station in Budapest (Dózsa György út) bear his name, and it is one of the most popular street names in
Hungarian villages (alongside Sándor Petőfi's and Lajos Kossuth's). Hungarian opera composer Ferenc Erkel wrote an opera about
him (see Dózsa György). A number of streets in several cities of Romania were named Gheorghe Doja, and his revolutionary
image and Transylvanian background were drawn upon during the Communist regime of Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej. Also, a
number of streets in serval cities of Serbia were named "Ulica Doža Đerđa". "The Hungarian national component of the
movement led by him was de-emphasized, while its strong antifeudal character was highlighted.[8]
Notes ^ appears as "Georgius Zekel" in old texts
References
1. ^ Britannica Dózsa Rebellion
 2. ^ Molnar p. 82
3. ^ http://www.history.com/topics/hungary/page4
4. ^ Molnar, p. 82
5. ^ Barbasi p. 263-266
6. ^ http://www.walkinhungary.com/history.html
7. ^ Molnar p. 83
8. ^ (Romanian) Emanuel Copilaş, "Confiscarea lui Dumnezeu şi mecanismul inevitabilităţii istorice", Sfera
Politicii 139, September 2009
Sources
• Molnar, Miklos (2001). A Concise History of Hungary. Cambridge Concise Histories (Fifth printing 2008 ed.).
Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521667364.
• This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed (1911). Encyclopædia
Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
• Barabási, Albert-László (2010). Bursts (First ed.). New York, United States: Penguin Group. ISBN 0525951601.

Dálnok in 1900

Apátfalva Kalocsa Nagylak, work by Lapis András Dózsa's portrait on the former 20 forint banknote

György Dózsa's anachronistic picture (1913) György Dózsa

Dózsa, in a portrait by Gyula Derkovits. Dózsa's execution (contemporary woodcut)
 First Congress of Vienna (1515)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Meeting of the Holy Roman Emperor, Maximilian I, and the Jagiellonian brothers, Vladislaus II, King of Hungary and King of
Bohemia, and Sigismund I, King of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania, by Jan Matejko (1838-1893)

Woodcut by Albrecht Dürer commemorating the double wedding at the First Congress of Vienna, on 22 July 1515. From left to
right: Maximilian I; Maximilian's granddaughter, Mary and Vladislaus's son Louis; Vladislaus II; Vladislaus's daughter, Anna;
Vladislaus's brother, Sigismund I.
For the congress held in 1815, see Congress of Vienna.
The First Congress of Vienna was held in 1515, attended by the Holy Roman Emperor, Maximilian I, and the Jagiellonian
brothers, Vladislaus II, King of Hungary and King of Bohemia, and Sigismund I, King of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania. It
was a turning point in the history of central Europe, ultimately increasing the power of the Habsburgs and diminishing that of the
Jagiellonians. Maximilian had been supporting Vasili III of the Grand Duchy of Moscow against the Jagiellonian rulers of
Lithuania, Poland, Hungary and Bohemia, to advance the Habsburg claims to the succession in Hungary and Bohemia. The
Jagiellonians had been facing simultaneous threats on all fronts, from the Emperor, the Russians, the Teutonic Order under Albert
of Prussia, and the Crimean Tatars. The city of Smolensk fell to the Russians in 1514, and Maximilian planned a congress to
cement his claims in central Europe. However, Lithuanian and Polish forces decisively defeated the Russian army at the Battle of
Orsha on 8 September 1514, changing the balance of power. The Congress opened at the Emperor's border, at Pozsony (Pressburg
or Bratislava) in Hungary, where Maximilian's representative met Vladislaus and Sigismund, and concluded after they travelled
together to Austria where the two kings met the emperor and went on to Vienna. The Emperor promised to cease his support of
Moscow against Lithuania and Poland, and to arbitrate in disputes between the Teutonic Order and Poland under the Second
Treaty of Thorn. The Habsburg claims to the succession in Hungary and Bohemia were advanced substantially - Vladislaus's only
son, Louis, married the Emperor's granddaughter Mary; and her brother, Archduke Ferdinand, married Vladislaus' daughter, Anna.
A woodcut by Albrecht Dürer commemorates the double wedding on 22 July 1515. Vladislaus died on 13 March 1516, and
Maximilian died on 12 January 1519, but his designs were ultimately successful: on Louis's death in 1526, he was succeeded as
King of Bohemia by Maximilian's grandson, Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor.
References Borderlands of Western Civilization: A History of East Central Europe, Oskar Halecki, 1952. ISBN 096657348X.
 Louis II of Hungary (1516-1526)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

King of Hungary and Croatia

Reign 1516–1526
Predecessor Ladislaus II
Successor Ferdinand I John Zapolya
King of Bohemia
Reign 1516–1526
Predecessor Ladislaus II
Successor Ferdinand I
Spouse Mary of Habsburg
Issue Illegitimate son: János Wass (from his mistress, Angelitha Wass)

House Jagiellon dynasty

Father Vladislas II of Hungary
Mother Anne de Foix
Born July 1, 1506 Buda (now Budapest), Kingdom of Hungary
Died August 29, 1526 (aged 20) Mohács, Kingdom of Hungary
Louis II (Hungarian: Lajos, 1 July 1506, Buda – 29 August 1526, Mohács) was King of Hungary, Bohemia and Croatia from
1516 to 1526.[1]
Early life Main article: First Congress of Vienna Louis was the son of Ladislaus II Jagiellon and his third wife, Anne de Foix.
After his father's death in 1516, the minor Louis II ascended to the thrones of Hungary and Bohemia. Upon his father's death
Louis had been adopted by Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I in 1515. When Maximilian I died in 1519, Louis was raised by his
legal guardian, his cousin Georg von Hohenzollern, margrave of Brandenburg-Ansbach.
Reign In 1522 Louis II was married to Mary of Habsburg, a Habsburg princess, granddaughter of Maximilian I, as stipulated by
the First Congress of Vienna in 1515. His sister Anne was married to Archduke Ferdinand of Austria, then a governor on behalf of
his brother Charles V, and later Emperor Ferdinand I. On 29 August 1526, Louis led his forces against Suleiman the Magnificent
of the Ottoman Empire in the disastrous Battle of Mohács. During the retreat, the nineteen-year-old king died in a marsh.[2] As
Louis had no legitimate children Ferdinand was elected as his successor in Kingdoms of Bohemia and Hungary, but the Hungarian
throne was contested by János Szapolyai, who ruled the areas of the kingdom conquered by the Turks as an Ottoman client.
Ancestry
[show]Ancestors of Louis II of Hungary

16. Algirdas, Grand Prince of Lithuania

8. Władysław II Jagiełło
17. Uliana of Tver
4. Casimir IV Jagiellon
18. Andrew Ivanovich of Halshany
9. Sophia of Halshany
19. Alexandra Dimitrievna of Drutsk
2. Vladislas II of Bohemia and Hungary
20. Albert IV, Duke of Austria
10. Albert II of Germany
21. Johanna Sophia of Bavaria
5. Elisabeth of Austria
22. Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor
11. Elisabeth of Bohemia
23. Barbara of Cilli
1. Louis II, King of Hungary
and Bohemia
 12. John de Foix, 1st Earl of
Kendal
25. Marguerite of Albret
6. Gaston de Foix, Count of Candale
26. Sir Thomas Kerdeston
13. Margaret de la Pole, Countess
of Candale
27. Elizabeth de la Pole
3. Anna of Foix-Candale
28. John I, Count of Foix and Bigorre
14. Gaston IV, Count of Foix
29. Joan of Albret
7. Catherine of Foix
30. John II of Aragon
15. Eleanor of Navarre
31. Blanche I of Navarre
Jagiellons in Natural Line Although Louis II's marriage remained childless, he probably had an illegitimate child with his
mother's former lady-in-waiting, Angelitha Wass before his marriage. This son was called John (János in Hungarian). This name
appears in sources in Vienna as either János Wass or János Lanthos. The former surname is his mother's maiden name. The latter
surname may refer to his occupation. "Lanthos" means "lutenist", or "bard". He received incomes from the Royal Treasury
regularly. He had further offspring.
References
1. ^ Louis II. (2009). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved April 24, 2009, from Encyclopædia Britannica
Online: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/348775/Louis-II
2. ^ Library of World History. VI. Western Press Assoc.. 1914. p. 2582.
http://books.google.com/books?id=Z88GAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA2582.
Bibliography
• Takáts, Sándor: II. Lajos király fia (A Son of King Louis II Jagiellon), Századok (Periodical Centuries), pp. 183–185,
1903
Names in other languages
• Turkish: II.Layoş
• Hungarian: II. Lajos
• German: Ludwig II.
• Czech: Ludvík
• Slovak: Ľudovít II
• Croatian: Ludovik II.
• Polish: Ludwik II.
External links Media related to Louis II of Hungary at Wikimedia Commons
Preceded by King of Bohemia Succeeded by
Ladislaus II 1516–1526 Ferdinand I
Succeeded by
Preceded by King of Hungary
Ferdinand I and
Ladislaus II 1516–1526
John I

Louis owed allegiance to the Imperial Habsburgs as a member of the Order of the Golden Fleece. Coin of Louis II of
Hungary with the inscription in Latin: "Louis by the grace of God King of Hungary, Dalmatia, Croatia"
Statue of Louis II of Hungary in Mohács Louis II painted by Titian.

Young Louis (right in the front) and the family of Emperor Maximilian I Woodcut by Albrecht Dürer commemorating the double
wedding at the First Congress of Vienna, on 22 July 1515. From left to right: Maximilian I; Maximilian's granddaughter, Mary
and Vladislaus's son Louis; Vladislaus II; Vladislaus's daughter, Anna; Vladislaus's brother, Sigismund I of Poland.
 Battle of Mohács 1526
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Battle of Mohács 1526, anachronistic painting by Bertalan Székely

Date August 29, 1526

Location Mohács, Baranya, south of Budapest, Hungary
Decisive Ottoman victory; End of Ottoman-Hungarian Wars, Start of Ottoman-Habsburg Wars,
Result
Collapse of Medieval Hungary
Belligerents

Kingdom of Hungary Kingdom of Croatia Kingdom of Bohemia

Ottoman Empire
Holy Roman Empire Bavaria Papal States Kingdom of Poland
Commanders and leaders
Louis II of Hungary †
Suleiman I Pál Tomori †
György Zápolya
Strength

~55,000[1][2] ~35,000-40,000 (26,000 arrived on the battlefield) [1][2]Gendarme

heavy knights, (bore type) 85 cannons (but only 53 being used in the
• 45,000 regulars
actual battle [5]) with explosive iron cannonballs and arquebusiers
• 10,000 irregulars
János Szapolyai[6][7]'s 10,000, Croatian count Frankopan's 5,000 men-
• 160 (cast type) cannons (stone strong army and the Bohemian troops all did not arrive to the
cannonballs)[3][4] battlefield in time.
Casualties and losses
[1][2]
1,500 ~ 14,000 to 20,000[1][2]
Mohaç Meydan Savaşı; Croatian: Bitka na Mohačkom polju) was fought on August 29, 1526 near Mohács, Hungary. In the battle,
forces of the Kingdom of Hungary led by King Louis II of Hungary and Bohemia were defeated by forces of the Ottoman Empire
led by Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent. The Ottoman victory led to the partition of Hungary for several centuries between the
Ottoman Empire, the Habsburg Monarchy, and the Principality of Transylvania. The death of Louis II as he fled the battle marked
the end of the Jagiellon dynasty in Hungary and Bohemia, whose dynastic claims were absorbed by the Habsburgs via the
marriage of Louis' sister.
Background
Decline of Hungary (1490-1526) After the death of the absolutist king Matthias Corvinus, the Hungarian magnates, who did not
want another heavy-handed king, procured the accession of Vladislaus II (reigned 1490–1516), king of Bohemia, because of his
notorious weakness: he was known as King Dobže, or Dobzse in Hungarian orthography (meaning “Good” or, loosely, “OK”)
from his habit of accepting without question every petition and document laid before him.[8] The freshly elected King Vladislaus II
donated most of the royal estates, régales and royalties to the nobility. By this method, the king tried to stabilize his new reign and
preserve his popularity amongst the magnates. After the naive fiscal and land policy of the royal court, the central power began to
experience severe financial difficulties, largely due to the enlargement of feudal lands at his expense. Vladislaus became the
magnates' helpless "prisoner"; he could make no decision without their consent.[9] The Black Army - which was the largest
standing mercenary army in Europe - was dissolved by the aristocracy. The magnates also dismantled the national administration
systems and bureaucracy throughout the country. The country's defenses sagged as border guards and castle garrisons went
unpaid, fortresses fell into disrepair, and initiatives to increase taxes to reinforce defenses were stifled.[10] Hungary's international
role declined, its political stability shaken, and social progress was deadlocked. In 1514, the weakened old King Vladislaus II
faced a major peasant rebellion led by György Dózsa, which was ruthlessly crushed by the nobles, led by János Szapolyai. After
the Dozsa Rebellion, the brutal suppression of the peasants greatly aided the 1526 Turkish invasion as the Hungarians were no
longer a politically united people. The resulting degradation of order paved the way for Ottoman pre-eminence. In 1521, the
strongest Hungarian fortress in the South, Nándorfehérvár (modern Belgrade) fell to the Turks. The strongest nobles were so busy
oppressing the peasants and quarrelling with the gentry class in the parliament that they failed to heed the agonized calls of King
Louis II against the Turks. The early appearance of protestantism further worsened the internal relations in the anarchical country.
The Hungarians had long opposed Ottoman expansion in southeastern Europe, but the fall of Nándorfehérvár(hu), (present-day
Belgrade, Serbia) and Szabács in 1521 meant that most of southern Hungary was left indefensible. King Louis II of Hungary and
Bohemia, King of Hungary and Bohemia, entered into marriage with Mary of Habsburg in 1522. The Ottomans saw that growing
alliance as a threat to their power in the Balkans and worked to break this alliance. After Suleiman I came to power, the High
Porte made the Hungarians at least one and possibly two offers of peace. It is unclear why Louis refused the offer. It is possible
that King Louis was well aware of Hungary's situation (especially after the Battle of Chaldiran and Polish-Ottoman peace from
1525) and he believed that war was a better option than peace. Even in peacetime the Ottomans raided Hungarian lands and
conquered small territories (with border castles), but a final battle still offered a glimmer of hope. To such ends, in June 1526, an
Ottoman expedition advanced up the Danube River.
European events, and the Franco-Ottoman alliance King Francis I of France was defeated at the Battle of Pavia on February
24, 1525, by the troops of Habsburg H.R. Emperor Charles V. After several months in prison, Francis I was forced to sign the
Treaty of Madrid. In a watershed moment in European diplomacy, Francis came to an understanding with the Ottoman Empire,
which then led to a formal Franco-Ottoman alliance. The objective for Francis I was clearly to find an ally against the powerful
Habsburg Emperor Charles V, in the person of Ottoman Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent. The Ottoman-French strategic, and
sometimes tactical, alliance lasted for about three centuries.[11] It did however cause quite a scandal in the Christian world. To
relieve the Habsburg pressure on France, Francis asked Suleiman to make war on the Holy Roman Empire, and the road from
Turkey to the Holy Roman Empire led across Hungary. The request of the French king coincided nicely with the ambitions of
Suleiman in Europe and gave him an incentive to attack Hungary in 1526, leading to the Battle of Mohács.[11]
Preparations The loss of Belgrade (Nandorfehervar) in 1521 caused great alarm in Hungary, but the too-late and too-slowly-
recruited 60,000 strong royal army – led by the king - forgot to take food along, so therefore the army disbanded spontaneously
under the pressure of hunger and disease without even trying to recapture Belgrade, the southern key of Hungary, from the newly
installed Turkish garrisons. In 1523, Archbishop Pál Tomori, a valiant priest-soldier,[dubious – discuss] was made Captain of Southern
Hungary. The general apathy that had characterized the country forced him to lean on his own bishopric revenues when he started
to repair and reinforce the second line of Hungary’s border defense system. Three years later, an Ottoman army set out from
Constantinople on April 16, 1526, led by Suleiman the Magnificent personally. The Hungarian nobles, who still did not realize the
dimensions of the approaching danger, did not heed their King's call to the colours. Louis II ordered them to encamp on July 2,
but no one reported on that day – not even the King. Only when Louis himself furnished an example with his appearance in the
camp did things start to move. The Hungarian war council – without waiting for their reinforcements only a few days march away
– made a serious tactical error by choosing the battlefield near Mohacs, an open but uneven plain with some swampy marshes.
The Hungarian army was divided into three main units: the Transylvanian army under John Zápolya, charged with guarding the
passes in the Transylvanian Alps, with between 8,000 and 13,000 men; the main army, led by Louis himself (beside numerous
Spanish, German, Czech and Serbian mercenaries); and another smaller force, commanded by the Croatian count Christoph
Frankopan, numbering around 5,000 men. Due to geography, the Ottoman army's ultimate goal could not be determined until it
was crossing the Balkan Mountains. Unfortunately for the Hungarians, by the time the Ottoman army had crossed, the
Transylvanian and Croatian army was further from Buda than the Ottomans were. Contemporary historical records, though sparse,
indicate that Louis preferred a plan of retreat, in effect ceding the country to Ottoman advances, rather than directly engaging the
Ottoman army in open battle. The Hungarian forces chose the battlefield, an open but uneven plain with some swampy marshes
near Mohács leading down to the Danube. The Ottomans had been allowed to advance almost unopposed. While Louis waited in
Buda, they had besieged several towns and crossed the Sava and Drava Rivers. Louis assembled around 25,000 to 30,000 soldiers
(with Croatian and Polish contingents and about 800-1000 soldiers of the Papal States) while the Ottoman army numbered around
50,000.[3][4] The Ottomans are said to have numbered over twice as many — though this figure is exaggerated — and had up to
160 cannon. "[12] The Hungarian army was arrayed to take advantage of the terrain and hoped to engage the Ottoman army
piecemeal. The only advantage the Magyars had that day was that their troops were well-rested, while the Turks had just
completed a strenuous march in scorching summer heat. But rather than attacking their fatigued enemy then, the Hungarians just
watched as they struggled through the marshy terrain. It would have been "unchivalrous" to attack the enemy when they were not
yet ready for battle.[13]
Battle Hungary built up an expensive but obsolete army, structured similarly to that of King Francis I at the Battle of Pavia mostly
reliant on old fashioned heavily armoured knights on armoured horses (Gendarme knights ). The Hungarian line consisted of two
lines, the first with a center of mercenary infantry and artillery and the majority of the cavalry on either flank. The second line was
a mix of levy infantry and cavalry.[14] The Ottoman army at the time was one of the most modern and professional armies in
Europe[dubious – discuss], reliant on disciplined firearm-equipped infantry and artillery. To make up numbers the Ottomans deployed
large numbers of irregular auxiliaries drawn from local provinces, but their effectiveness was limited and they were usually
considered cannon fodder by the Ottoman commanders[citation needed]. Like the uncertainty over the number of actual combatants,
there is debate over the length of the battle. Its starting time is generally placed between 1:00 PM and 2:00 PM, but the endpoint is
difficult to ascertain. While some historians[who?] have placed the length of the battle at two to three hours, this seems unlikely
given several important factors. The Ottoman army did not retreat from the field and enter camp after the battle; instead, they
remained on the field all night without food, water, or shelter. Given that the Ottoman historians all note that it was raining, it
seems likely that had the battle been short and ended early in the afternoon, by 5:00 PM at the latest, the Sultan would have
ordered his army to camp or at least to return to their baggage. The few reliable sources indicate that Louis left the field at twilight
and made his escape under cover of darkness; since the sun would not have set until 6:27 PM on August 29, 1526,[15] this would
imply that the battle lasted significantly longer than two to three hours (perhaps as long as four or five), and so is one of the
shortest-lasting of the history. As the first of Suleiman's troops, the Rumelian army, advanced onto the battlefield, they were
attacked and routed by Hungarian troops led by Pál Tomori. This attack by the Hungarian right was successful in causing
considerable chaos among the irregular Ottoman troops, but even as the Hungarian attack pressed forward, the Ottomans rallied
with the arrival of Ottoman regulars deployed from the reserves. While the Hungarian right advanced far enough at one time to
place Suleiman in danger from Hungarian arrows that struck his cuirass, the superiority of the Ottoman regulars and the timely
charge of the Janissaries, the elite troops of the Ottomans, probably overwhelmed the attackers, particularly on the Hungarian left.
The Hungarians took serious casualties from the skillfully handled Turkish artillery. The Hungarians could not hold their
positions, and those who did not flee were surrounded and killed or captured. The result was a disaster, with the Hungarians
advancing into withering fire and flank attacks, and falling into the same trap that John Hunyadi had so often used successfully
against the Ottomans.[16] The king left the battlefield sometime around twilight but was thrown from his horse in a river at Csele
and died, weighed down by his heavy armor. Some 1,000 other Hungarian nobles and leaders were also killed. It is generally
accepted that more than 14,000 Hungarian soldiers were killed in the initial battle.[1][2] In the aftermath, Suleiman gave orders to
keep no prisoners. Next day he wrote in his diary: "The Sultan, seated on a golden throne, receives the homage of the viziers and
the beys, massacre of 2,000 prisoners, the rain falls in torrents." Reportedly among those 2,000 were several notable Hungarian
leaders.[17] Suleiman could not believe that this small, "suicidal" army was all that once powerful country could muster against
him, so he waited at Mohacs for a few days before moving cautiously against Buda.[18]
Aftermath Main article: History of Ottoman Hungary The victory did not give the Ottomans the security they wanted. Though
they entered the unguarded evacuated Buda and pillaged the castle and surroundings, they retreated soon afterwards. It was not
until 1541 that the Ottomans finally captured and occupied Buda (see main article) without fight. However, to all intents and
purposes, the Battle of Mohács meant the end of the independent Kingdom of Hungary as a unified entity. Amid political chaos,
the divided Hungarian nobility elected two kings simultaneously, János Szapolyai in 1526, and Ferdinand I of Habsburg in 1527.
The Ottoman occupation was contested by the Habsburg Archduke of Austria, Ferdinand I, Louis's brother-in-law and successor
by treaty with King Vladislaus II. Bohemia fell to the Habsburgs, who also dominated the Northern and western parts of Hungary
and portions of today's Croatia (Royal Hungary), while the Ottomans held central Hungary and suzerainty over semi-independent
Transylvania. This provided the Hungarians with sufficient impetus to continue to resist the Ottoman occupation, which they did
for another seventy years. The subsequent near constant warfare required a sustained commitment of Ottoman forces, proving a
drain on resources that the largely rural and war torn kingdom proved unable to repay. Christian armies besieged Buda several
times during the 16th century, and Suleiman himself died of natural causes in Hungary during the Battle of Szigetvár in 1566;
there were also two unsuccessful Ottoman sieges of Eger, which did not fall until 1596, seventy years after the Ottoman victory at
Mohacs. The Turks proved unable to conquer the Northern and Western parts of Hungary which belonged to the Habsburg
monarchs.
Legacy Mohács is seen by many Hungarians as the decisive downward turning point in the country's history, a national trauma
that persists in the nation's folk memory. For moments of bad luck, Hungarians still say: "more was lost at Mohács" (Több is
veszett Mohácsnál). Hungarians view Mohács as marking the end of an independent and powerful European nation. Whilst
Mohács was a decisive loss, it was the aftermath that truly put an end to independent Hungary. The ensuing two hundred years of
near constant warfare between the two empires, Habsburg and Ottoman, turned Hungary into a perpetual battlefield. The
countryside was regularly ravaged by armies moving back and forth, in turn devastating the population. Only in the 20th century
would Hungary regain its political independence, but it has never regained its former political power. The battlefield became an
official national historical memorial site in 1976 on the 450th anniversary of the battle. The memorial was designed by architect
György Vadász.[19]
Notes
1. ^ a b c d e Turner & Corvisier & Childs, A Dictionary of Military History and the Art of War, pp. 365–366 "In
1526, at the battle of Mohács, the Hungarian army was destroyed by the Turks. King Louis II died, along with 7 bishops,
28 barons and most of his army (4,000 cavalry and 10,000 infantry)."
2. ^ a b c d e Minahan, One Europe, many nations: a historical dictionary of European national groups, p. 311 "A
peasant uprising, crushed in 1514, was followed by defeat by the Ottoman Turks at the battle of Mohacs in 1526. King
Louis II and more than 20,000 of his men perished in battle, which marked the end of Hungarian power in Central
Europe."
3. ^ a b Stavrianos, Balkans Since 1453, p. 26 "The latter group prevailed, and on August 29, 1526, the fateful
battle of Mohacs was fought: 25,000 to 30,000 Hungarians and assorted allies on the one side, and on the other 45,000
Turkish regulars supported by 10,000 lightly armed irregulars."
4. ^ a b Nicolle, David, Hungary and the fall of Eastern Europe, 1000-1568, p. 13 "Hungary mustered some 25,000
men and 85 bore cannons (only 53 being used in actual battle), while for various reasons the troops from Transylvania
and Croatia failed to arrive.
5. ^ David Nicolle,Angus McBride: Hungary and the fall of Eastern Europe 1000-1568
6. ^ The nobleman arrived late in the day and retreated to claim the throne,
7. ^ Stephen, Turnbull (2003). The Ottoman Empire 1326 - 1699. New York: Osprey. p. 49.
8. ^ "Hungary - Britannica Online Encyclopedia". Britannica.com.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/276730/Hungary#tab=active~checked%2Citems~checked&title=Hungary%
20--%20Britannica%20Online%20Encyclopedia. Retrieved 2008-11-21.
9. ^ http://www.history.com/topics/hungary/page4
10. ^ "A Country Study: Hungary". Geography.about.com.
http://geography.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/hutoc.html. Retrieved 2010-08-29.
11. ^ a b Merriman, p.132
12. ^ Molnár, A Concise History of Hungary, p. 85 "We know fairly accurately that their army, though numerically
superior, was not more than double the size of the Hungarian army: 50,000 men against 25,000."
 13. ^ "Chapter 9". Hungarian-history.hu. http://www.hungarian-history.hu/lib/timeless/chapter09.htm. Retrieved
2010-08-29.
14. ^ The Battle of Mohacs: The Fall of the Hungarian Empire, by Richard H. Berg, published in Against the Odds,
Volume 3, Number 1, September 2004
15. ^ Cornwall, C., Horiuchi, A., and Lehman, C. Sunrise/Sunset Calculator. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. Accessed August 31, 2008, using the Gregorian date of the battle, September 8, 1526. Also entered were
the coordinates 45° 56′ 29″ N, 18° 38′ 50″ E and a "time zone" of 1.243 hours before Greenwich, since at the time of the
battle, time zones had not been invented.
16. ^ David Nicolle and Angus McBride: Hungary and the fall of Eastern Europe 1000-1568 PAGE: 14
17. ^ "PRE-20TH CENTURY GENOCIDE AND MASS MURDER". Hawaii.edu.
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/DBG.CHAP3.HTM. Retrieved 2010-08-29.
18. ^ ZOLTÁN BODOLAI: The timeless nation (Sydney, 1978)
19. ^ "Historical Memorial at Mohács". Hungarystartshere.com. http://hungarystartshere.com/gen?genid=11372.
Retrieved 2010-08-29.
References
• Stavrianos, L.S. Balkans Since 1453, C. Hurst & Co. Publishers, 2000.
• Nicolle, David, Hungary and the fall of Eastern Europe, 1000-1568, Osprey Publishing, 1988.
• Stephen Turnbull, The Ottoman Empire 1326–1699, Osprey Publishing, 2003.
• Molnár, Miklós, A Concise History of Hungary, Cambridge University Press, 2001.
• Minahan, James B. One Europe, many nations: a historical dictionary of European national groups, Greenwood Press,
2000.
• Palffy, Geza. The Kingdom of Hungary and the Habsburg Monarchy in the Sixteenth Century (East European
Monographs, distributed by Columbia University Press, 2010) 406 pages; Covers the period after the battle of Mohacs in
1526 when the Kingdom of Hungary was partitioned in three, with one segment going to the Habsburgs.
• Lord Kinross, The Ottoman Centuries: The Rise and Fall of the Turkish Empire (1977) ISBN 0688080936
• History Foundation, Improvement of Balkan History Textbooks Project Reports (2001) ISBN 9757306916
• John Killson, "The Sublime Porte" (2002) ISBN 0075434536776
External links
Military history of the Ottoman Empire portal

• Media related to Battle of Mohács at Wikimedia Commons

• Battle of Mohács video with realistic period dresses and military units
• The Fall of The Medieval Kingdom of Hungary: Mohacs 1526 - Buda 1541

Battle Monument in Mohács.) Hungary around 1550

 The battle of Mohács, on an Ottoman miniature

General Pál Tomori, the captain of the army, in his golden renaissance armour (1526) Suleiman the Magnificent. Louis II of
Hungary and Bohemia the young king, who died at the Battle of Mohács, painted by Titian
 John Zápolya (1526-1540)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

King of Hungary
Reign 1526 – 1540
Coronation 11 November 1526
Predecessor Louis II
Successor Ferdinand I John II Sigismund Zápolya
Voivode of Transylvania
Reign 1511 – 1526
Successor Stephen Báthory
Spouse Isabella Jagiellon
IssueJohn II Sigismund Zápolya

Father Stephen Zápolya

Mother Hedwig of Cieszyn
2 February 1487 Szepesváralja, Kingdom of Hungary (present-day Spišské Podhradie,
Born
Slovakia)
Died 22 July 1540 Sebeş, Transylvania (today, Romania)
John Zápolya (Croatian: Ivan Zapolja, Hungarian: Szapolyai János or Zápolya János, Romanian: Ioan Zápolya, Slovak: Ján
Zápoľský, Serbian: Jovan Zapolja/Јован Запоља; 2 February 1487 – 22 July 1540) was King of Hungary from 1526 to 1540.
His rule was disputed by Archduke Ferdinand I, who also claimed the title King of Hungary between 1526 and 1540.[1] He
was the voivode of Transylvania before his coronation.
Biography He was born at Castle of Szepes in Upper Hungary (now known as Spiš Castle in Slovakia). Vladislaus II of
Bohemia and Hungary wrote many letters with the same text to many of the Hungarian nobility in the year 1490, before he
became the king of Hungary. He wrote that -Beatrice of Naples had written to him that- Matthias Corvinus and Beatrice had
decided that Stephen Zápolya, the father of John Zápolya should become the next duke of Austria after Matthias Corvinus.
John beggan his public career in 1505 as a member of the Diet of Rákos; it was upon his motion that the Diet voted that no
foreign prince would ever again be elected king of Hungary after the death of King Vladislaus II.[2] Appointed voivode
(governor) of Transylvania in 1511 John Zápolya used the turbulent times of his era to enrich himself and secured a power
base in Transylvania. When he was tasked with defeating the peasant rebellion of 1514 led by György Dózsa he used extreme
cruelty. On 29 August 1526, the army of Sultan Suleyman I of the Ottoman Empire inflicted a decisive defeat on the
Hungarian forces at Mohács. Zápolya was en route to the battlefield with his sizable army but did not participate in the battle
for unknown reasons. The youthful King Louis II of Hungary and Bohemia fell in battle, as did many of his soldiers. The
Ottomans proceeded to invest and ransack the royal capital of Buda and occupied Syrmia, then withdrew from Hungary. The
last three months of the year were marked by a vacuum of power; political authority was in a state of collapse, yet the victors
chose not to impose their rule. Two candidates stepped into the breach. One was Zápolya, Transylvania's voivode and
Hungary's most prominent aristocrat as well as commander of an intact army. The other was Archduke Ferdinand of Austria,
the late king's brother-in-law and the brother of the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V. Their contest for power would
determine the course of Hungary's history, and that of Transylvania as well. The majority of Hungary's ruling elite backed
Zápolya, who for fifteen years had been playing a leading role in Hungarian political life. Part of the aristocracy
acknowledged his leadership, and he enjoyed the enthusiastic support — not always reciprocated — of the lesser nobility.
Most of his opponents succumbed at Mohács: the Hungarian branch of the Jagiellon dynasty became defunct, and its pro-
Habsburg following was decimated.
A small minority of aristocrats sided with Ferdinand. The German dynasty's main argument — one that many historians
would judge to be decisive — was that it could assist Hungary against the Ottoman Turks, although, in 1526, the promise
rang empty. Hungary had been fighting the Ottomans for over a century, during which time the Holy Roman Empire and the
House of Habsburg had offered much encouragement but no tangible help. The likelihood of assistance was further reduced
by the conflict of Ferdinand's older brother, Emperor Charles V, and King Francis I of France that once again flared into open
war in the summer of 1526. This circumstance led the voivode to discount the threat lurking behind the Habsburgs'
candidacy: that Hungary would have to contend not only with the Ottomans, but also with an attack from the west. Thus
Zápolya took no notice of his rival's protests, nor of those voiced by the few Hungarians who rallied to Ferdinand. On 10
November 1526, Szapolyai had himself proclaimed king by the diet at Székesfehérvár, and he was duly crowned the next day
under the name King John I of Hungary. Profiting from nine months of relative calm, King John I strove to restore state
authority. He drew on his vast private wealth, the unconditional support of the lesser nobility, and the assistance of some
aristocrats to impose his policies in domestic affairs. However, in the crucial sphere of foreign relations, success eluded him.
He sought an entente with the Habsburgs, proposing to form an alliance against the Ottomans, but Archduke Ferdinand, who
had himself elected king by a rump diet in Pozsony in December 1526, rejected all attempts at reconciliation. Hungary's
envoys fanned out across Europe in quest of support. Only in France did they find a positive response, but even that was
ineffective since Francis I was intent not on reconciling Hungary and the Habsburgs, but on drawing Hungary into a war
against Charles V and his family. Europe's political balance underwent a major shift in the summer of 1527, when, in a
somewhat unplanned operation, mercenary forces of the emperor occupied Rome and drove Pope Clement VII, one of
France's principal allies, to capitulate. This development freed Ferdinand — who also acquired the Bohemian throne in late
1526 — from the burden of assisting his brother. By then, Ferdinand had developed a Hungarian policy that was fully in
keeping with the interests of his realms. He judged that if Hungary, unable to resist the Ottomans, took action independently
of Austria and Bohemia, it might well enter into an alliance with the preponderant Ottoman Empire against its western
neighbours. It was therefore in the interest of the Austrian hereditary provinces and of the Bohemian crown lands that the
Habsburgs gain control of Hungary, by force if necessary. In July 1527, an army of German mercenaries invaded Hungary.
The moment was well chosen, for the forces of Szapolyai were tied up in the southern counties, where Slavonic peasants,
incited by Ferdinand, had rebelled; the revolt was led by the 'Black Man', Jovan Nenad. In one sweep, the invaders captured
Buda. Szapolyai hurriedly redeployed his army, but on 27 September, near Tokaj, at the Battle of Tarcal, it suffered a bloody
defeat. In 1528 he escaped Hungary and dwelled in castle in Tarnów in Poland, hosted by Jan Amor Tarnowski.[3] Szapolyai
managed to get a sizable following as King of Hungary, despite the association with the Ottomans which tainted him at the
time. In 1538, by the Treaty of Varad, Ferdinand was designated as Szapolyai's successor, after his death. After Zápolya's
death in Szászsebes (Sebeş), his son John II Sigismund Zápolya succeeded him as King of Hungary and an Ottoman vassal.
He is also well-known among the Turks, who considered him a loyal friend of Suleiman the Magnificent. Married to the
Polish Princess Isabella Jagiełło he had a son John II Sigismund Szapolyai of Hungary. As dowager queen, she claimed the
throne as electus rex, in order to retain it for their son, until her death in 1559.[citation needed] Their son John II was King of
Hungary from his father's death in 1540 until 1570.
Ancestors

4. László Zápolya
2. Stefan Zápolya
5. Dorothea
1. John Zápolya
24. Przemyslaus I Noszak, Duke of Cieszyn
12. Boleslaus I, Duke of Cieszyn
25. Elisabeth of Bytom
6. Przemyslaus II, Duke of Cieszyn
26. Siemowit IV, Duke of Masovia
13. Euphemia of Masovia
27. Alexandra of Lithuania
3. Hedwig of Cieszyn
28. Bolesław III of Warsaw
14. Bolesław IV of Warsaw
29. Anna of Halshany
7. Anna of Warsaw
15. Barbara of Ruthenia
See also Beatrice of Naples Ivan Karlović Petar Keglević
References
1. ^ Britannica
 2. ^ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/304576/John
3. ^ Zdzisław Spieralski, Jan Tarnowski 1488-1561, Warszawa 1977, p. 124-125.
External links Wikimedia Commons has media related to: János Szapolyai
János I Szapolyai
House of Szapolyai
Born: 1487 2 February Died: 1540 22 July
Regnal titles
Preceded by Voivode of Transylvania Succeeded by
unknown 1511–1526 Stephen Báthory
King of Hungary Succeeded by
Preceded by
contested by Ferdinand I John II Sigismund
Louis II
1526–1540 contested by Ferdinand

Suleiman receiving Isabella and her infant son Sigismund, circa 1540. Suleymanname, circa 1558. John Zápolya 18th century
depiction János Szapolyai royal coat of arms.

Franco-Hungarian Treaty of alliance, 1529.

Map of the 1514 campaign of Szapolyai against the peasant uprising.
 Hungarian campaign of 1527–1528
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Date 1527–1528
Location Hungary
Result Austria occupies Győr, Komárom, Esztergom, Buda and Szekesfehervar
Belligerents

Habsburg Austria Holy Roman Empire Spain

Bohemia Kingdom of Croatia (Habsburg) Papal States Ottoman Turks Moldavia Hungary
(Kingdom of Szapolyai's)
Hungary (Kingdom of Ferdinand's) Voivodian Serbs
Commanders and leaders
Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, Holy Roman John Zapolya Petru Rareş voievod of Moldavia
Emperor Jovan Nenad † Suleiman the Magnificent
Following the Battle of Mohacs, the Ottomans were forced to withdraw as events elsewhere in their now massive Empire required
the Sultan's attention.[1] Seizing upon their absence was Ferdinand I who attempted to enforce his claim as King of Hungary. In
1527 he drove back the Ottoman vassal John Zapolya and captured Buda (now Budapest), Győr, Komárno, Esztergom and
Székesfehérvár by 1528. Meanwhile, the Ottoman Sultan took no action at this stage despite the pleas of his vassal.
Aftermath For the Austrians, the victory here would be a very disappointing one. On 10 May 1529, Suleiman the Magnificent
launched his own counter-attack negating all of Ferdinand's gains. Of greater disappointment was the fact that many of the
recently captured forts surrendered without resistance greatly speeding up the advance. As a result, Suleiman was able to reach
and besiege Vienna.
[edit] Notes
1. ^ Turnbull, Stephen. The Ottoman Empire 1326–1699. New York: Osprey, 2003. pg 49

Battle of Szőlős (1527)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Date May 1, 1527
Location near Csigérszőllős, Romania
Result Serbian victory
Belligerents
Hungarian Kingdom of House Szapolyai Serbian Empire of Jovan Nenad
Commanders and leaders
Péter Perényi of Transylvania Jovan Nenad
Strength
10,000 cavalry, 2,000 infantry + several hundred conscripts 15,000 (infantry and cavalry)
Casualties and losses
3,000 Minimal
The Battle of Szőlős or Battle of Seleš (Hungarian: Szőlősi csata, Serbian: Селешка битка (Seleška bitka)) was fought on May 1,
1527 between the ethnic Serbian Rebels and Hungarian nobility. The commander of the Serb forces was Emperor Jovan Nenad,
while the Hungarians were led by Péter Perényi of Transylvania. The Hungarian army suffered a total defeat while Perényi barely
escaped alive.
Background to battle In late 1526. Bálint Török attacked Subotica, the capital of the newly formed province in the wake of the
Battle of Mohacs, with 67 elite cavalry knights. The Serbs fortified the city and halted the attack. When László Csáky arrived with
another 300 Hungarian cavalrymen, the Serbs retaliated with full force. Csáky was defeated and executed. These events alarmed
the Hungarian nobility and János Szapolyai issued Péter Perényi as leader of an army set to destroy the new state at its heart. In
the meantime, Jovan Nenad, aware of the enemies intentions, mustered a considerable force and marched to meet his enemy.
The battle Perényi's army numbered some 2,000 infantry and 10,000 cavalry (Transylvanian Hungarians and Saxons) together
with few a thousand conscripts and nobbleman from the Tisza area. Jovan's army numbered 15,000 infantry and cavalry. Jovan
attacked first and concentrated his force on the enemies infantry, then the Serbs managed to rout the Transylvanian cavalry.
Around 3,000 Hungarians and Saxons fell in battle while the Nenad's army suffered minimal casualties.
Aftermath After the victory, in order to increase his power, Emperor Jovan Nenad incorporated South-Transylvania into his
empire (Haţeg and the Saxonland).
Sources Military History of Hungary, Editor: Ervin Liptai Zrínyi Military Publisher, Budapest 1985. ISBN 9633263379

Battle of Sződfalva (1527)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Date July 25, 1527
Location Sződfalva, near Szeged, Hungary
Result Decisive Hungarian victory
Belligerents
Hungarian Kingdom of Szapolyai with noblemen and peasants from the surrounding
Voivodian Serbs
countryside Tisza
Commanders and leaders
Péter Perényi voivod of Transylvania, Imre Czibak bishop Jovan Nenad †
Strength
14-16,000 men 8,000
Casualties and losses
less than 100 men approx 5,000
The Battle of Sződfalva or Battle of Sedfal field (Hungarian: Sződfalvi csata, Serbian: Бој на Седфалском пољу (Boj na
Sedfalskom polju)) was fought on July 25, 1527, between voivodian Serbs, under Jovan Nenad, and the Transylvanian army of
(Hungarians and Saxons). Nenad was decisively defeated by a larger force and most of his troops dispersed into the countryside
Syrmia After the defeat Nenad became a fugitive and was assassinated shortly thereafter.
Background In 1526, Jovan Nenad, a mercenary captain of mysterious origins, saw the power vacuum created by the struggle for
the Hungarian throne, and attempted to elevate himself to the status of an independent prince. At first, his rebels supported János
Szapolyai; however, soon the Hungarian king demanded of Jovan Nenad relinquish control of the region he had occupied and
restore properties to nobles and pesants who fled before the Turks. Nenad's response was a shift of allegiance to the side of
Ferdinand of Austria. Jovan Nenad's forces defeated the troop of Hungarian knights led by Laszlo Csaky sent to restore order.
Laszlo Csaky was subsequently executed. Szapolyai, outraged at the murder of his vassal and at the urging of the dispossessed
nobles, sent a large force from Transylvania which was also defeated Battle of Szőlős). After the Szőlős battle, Jovan styled
himself emperor of Voivodina and made a permanent break with Szapolyai who dispatched his main force to subdue the rebellion.
The widespread fear and uncertainty created by Nenad's property confiscations gave popular impetus for the crushing of the
rebellion with many Serbs staying loyal to the crown, particularly the Lipovian Serbs.
The battle After plundering the countryside, the Serbian rebels faced the combined cavalry strength of Transylvania and upper
Hungary. The Hungarian army consisted of mainly of cavalry along with infantry from Transylvania and local gentry and
peasants. The Hungarians led by Péter Perényi caught up with the rebels at Sződfalva, near the town of Szeged. The brief battle
was decided by a charge of armored knights early in the engagement. The following rout lead to Szeged where Jovan sought
refuge in the house of the merchant István Zákány. This is where a soldier named Sebestyén Vid shot Jovan with a musket
mortally wounding him. His men carried him to Tornjoš where he succumbed to his wounds. Bálint Török, one of the Hungarian
commanders recovered the body and Jovan's head was sent to the King.
Aftermath Jovan Nenad's army was shattered and his remaining forces dispersed after his death and the area once again became
subordinate to the Hungarian king.
Sources Military History of Hungary, Editor: Ervin Liptai Zrínyi Military Publisher, Budapest 1985. ISBN 9633263379
 Battle of Tarcal (1527)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Date 27 September 1527
Location near Tarcal, near Tokaj, in Hungary
Result Austrian victory
Belligerents
Hungarian Kingdom of Szapolyai, with Croats Habsburg Monarchy Holy Roman Empire and the Habsburg-party
and transylvanians Hungarians
Commanders and leaders
János Szapolyai Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor, Niklas Graf Salm, Bálint Török
Strength
7-8,000 6,000
Casualties and losses
5,000 Minimals
The Battle of Tarcal or Battle of Tokaj (Hungarian: Tarcali csata) was a battle fought on 27 September 1527 between the
Habsburg-German-Hungarian forces of Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor and an opposing Hungarian army under the command
of János Szapolyai. Taking place near Tokaj, the encounter culminated in the defeat of Szapolyai's forces.
Background Following the death of Hungarian King Louis IIat the Battle of Mohács, Hungarian nobility elected Szapolyai as
their new king. Others,[who?] however, including the Croats, elected then Austrian Archduke Ferdinand to the post, and conflict
began.
The battle Szapolyai's army, numbering around 7-8000 men, consisted of mainly Hungarian, Transylvanian, and Croatian forces.
The army led by Ferdinand, including his own Hungarians supporters, numbered 18 000 men, though 6000 were under the
command of Niklas Graf Salm and Bálint Török. On 26 September Szapolyai encamped near Tokaj. German forces engaged with,
and defeated a small Szapolyai contingent in a skirmish near Sajólád. On 27 September intensive fighting broke out as Szapolyai
attempted to decisively defeat Ferdinand's forces. His attempt was stymied, however, when Croatian troops overwhelmed the
Styrian forces manning his army's right wing, while German and Austrian mercenaries swept through Szapolyai's cavalry.
Hungarian hussars fighting for Ferdinand then broke through the central ranks of Szapolyai's army, seized his camp, and drove his
remaining soldiers to the river Tisza.
Aftermath After his defeat at the hands of Ferdinand's forces, Szapolyai retreated to Oradea, where he raised a new army.
Ferdinand thought he conquered all of Hungary, but in 1528 was confronted by Szapolyai once more, this time coming from from
Transylvania. At the Battle of Szina Ferdinand once again defeated Szapolyai, who fled to Poland. Szapolyai would later ask for
the help of Ottoman sultan Suleiman the Magnificent, who, in 1529, obliged by dislodging the Germans of Hungary and besieging
Vienna.
Sources
• Sándor Szilágyi: History of the Hungarian Nation (A Magyar Nemzet Története)
• Military History of Hungary, Editor: Ervin Liptai Zrínyi Military Publisher, Budapest 1985. ISBN 9633263379
 Battle of Szina (1528)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Date March 20, 1528
Location near Seňa (Szina), near Košice, in Slovakia
Result Decisive Austrian victory
Belligerents
Kingdom of Szapolyai Hungarians; Serb, Transylvanian, and Habsburg Monarchy Holy Roman Empire and
Polish mercenaries the Habsburg-party Hungarians
Commanders and leaders
János Szapolyai Johann von Katzianer,Bálint Török
Strength
15,000 13-14,000
The Battle of Szina (Slovak: Bitka pri Seňa, Hungarian: Szinai csata) took place near Seňa (Hungarian: Szina, now Abaújszina)
in present-day Slovakia. The battle was fought on March 20, 1528, between King János Szapolyai of Hungary, and Austrian
forces under command of Bálint Török and Johann Katzianer, a Styrian mercenary commander of Ferdinand I, Holy Roman
Emperor. The battle was the second military defeat for Szapolyai.
Preparations After the Battle of Mohács, where King Louis II of Hungary was killed, János Szapolyai, voivod of Transylvania,
ascended to the Hungarian throne. However, the Austrian Ferdinand also had a claim to the throne via the House of Habsburgs
intermarriages with Louis II's Jagiellon dynasty. In 1527 Ferdinand mounted an offensive against King János. He was initially
successful, with an early victory in the Battle of Tarcal (near Tokaj). Szapolyai recruited a new army, and in 1528 advanced into
Hungary with an army of approximately 15 thousand men, including Transylvanian, Polish and Serbian forces, but few
Hungarians. The Slovenian-born Johann von Katzianer and Bálint Török marched against Szapolyai with a Hungarian-Austrian-
German army (approximately 13-14 thousand men) and met Szapolyai's army near Košice.
The battle The presence of Török and Katzianer near Košice prevented Szapolyai's army from marching on the capital city Buda.
In the meantime, discord broke out in Szapolya's army between the Serbian and Polish mercenaries. Szapolyai's cavalry and
infantry was less skilled than the German infantry (the landsknechts), but the Polish mercenaries fought gallantly against the
Austrians. In Szapolyai's army, 300 Polish soldiers and a few thousand other men were killed. After Szapolyai's defeat, he was
pursued by Bálint Török and Lajos Pekry; he fled into Poland seeking help. When Polish King Sigismund I the Old declined to
proclaim war against Austria, Szapolyai turned to Suleiman I, Sultan of Ottomans for help. Suleiman then sent Peter, voivod of
Moldavia, into Transylvania. Voivod Peter defeated Ferdinand in the Battle of Feldioara, and the Ottoman army (including
Moldavians and Serbs) lay siege to Vienna.
Sources
• Sándor Szilágyi: History of the Hungarian Nation (A Magyar Nemzet Története)
• Military History of Hungary, Editor: Ervin Liptai Zrínyi Military Publisher, Budapest 1985. ISBN 9633263379
 Franco-Hungarian alliance (1529)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Franco-Hungarian Treaty of alliance, 1529.

A Franco-Hungarian alliance was formed in October 1528 between Francis I of France and John Zápolya, king of Hungary.[1]
Background France had already been looking for allies in Central Europe. His ambassador, Antonio Rincon, was employed on
several missions to Poland and Hungary between 1522 and 1525. At that time, following the 1522 Battle of Bicoque, Francis was
attempting to ally with King Sigismund I the Old of Poland.[2] In 1524, a Franco-Polish alliance was signed between Francis and
Sigismund,[3] but the agreement fell through when Francis was vanquished by Charles V at the Battle of Pavia in 1525.[4]
Alliance with Hungary From 1526, Francis I again started to look for allies in Central Europe, this time turning his attention to
Hungary.[4] In 1528, John Zápolya was in a very vulnerable position, since he had been defeated by Ferdinand of Austria, his rival
claimant to the throne of Hungary, at the Battle of Tokay in August 1527.[1] In addition to the French alliance, Zapolya also chose
to become a vassal to the Ottoman Empire in February 1528, through the negotiations of Jerome Laski.[1][5] Rincon went to
Istanbul to bring the document.[6] This event triggered the development of relations between France and the Ottoman Empire.[1]
The treaty was signed in France at Fontainebleau and Paris on 23 and 28 October 1528.[7] It was then ratified by Zapolya at Buda
on 1 September 1529.[7] Through the treaty Francis promised to help Zapolya financially and through other means. In exchange,
Zapolya agree to continue the fight against Ferdinand of Austria and to provide Hungarian troops to Francis in Italy.[7] In the Little
War in Hungary, France fought side by side with Zapolya and Suleiman the Magnificent against the Habsburg. A French artillery
unit was dispatched to the war in Hungary in 1543–1544 and attached to the Ottoman Army.[8][9][10]
See also Foreign alliances of France Franco-Ottoman alliance
Notes
1. ^ a b c d The companion to British history Charles Arnold-Baker p.537 [1]
2. ^ The Papacy and the Levant (1204–1571) by Kenneth M. Setton p.312 [2]
3. ^ The Cambridge History of Poland by Oskar Halecki p.309 [3]
4. ^ a b The Papacy and the Levant (1204–1571) by Kenneth M. Setton p.312 [4]
5. ^ The Papacy and the Levant (1204–1571) by Kenneth M. Setton p.314 [5]
6. ^ Garnier, p.16
7. ^ a b c The Papacy and the Levant (1204–1571) by Kenneth M. Setton p.322 [6]
8. ^ The Ottoman Empire and early modern Europe by Daniel Goffman, p.111 [7]
9. ^ Firearms of the Islamic world, p.38
10. ^ The Cambridge History of Islam, p.328
References Garnier, Edith L'Alliance Impie Editions du Felin, 2008, Paris ISBN 9782866456788 Interview
 Little War in Hungary (1530-1552)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Date 1530 – c.1552
Location Hungary
Result Indecisive; John Szapolyai recognized as King of Hungary, Ferdinand I's lands in Hungary guaranteed.

Habsburg Austria Holy Roman Empire Spain

Ottoman Empire Moldavia Hungarian
Papal States Bohemia Kingdom of Croatia Kingdom of Szapolyai's Wallachia Serbian
Hungarian Kingdom of Ferdinand's[1] Despotate France[2][3][4]
Commanders and leaders
Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor, John Szapolyai †Suleiman the Magnificent,Vlad Vintilă de la Slatina;
Captain Nikola Jurišić Wallachian voievod, Petru Rareş Moldavian voievod
Strength
Unknown Over 120,000 soldiers[5]
Casualties and losses
Unknown, heavy Unknown, heavy
[6]
The Little War is a name given to a series of conflicts between the Habsburgs and their allies and the Ottoman Empire between
1529 (after the Siege of Vienna) and 1552 (the end of the Siege of Eger). The war saw both sides suffering heavy casualties with
the result that campaigning in Hungary would cease until 1566.
Austrian counter Following Suleiman's unsuccessful Siege of Vienna in 1529, Ferdinand I launched a counter-attack in 1530 to
regain the initiative and avenge the destruction brought by Suleiman's 120,000 strong army. An assault of Buda was driven off by
John Szapolyai, the vassal King of Hungary but Ferdinand was successful elsewhere, capturing Esztergom and other forts along
the Danube river, a vital strategic frontier.
Siege of Kőszeg Main article: Siege of Güns Suleiman's response came in 1532 when he led a massive army of over 120,000
troops to besiege Vienna again. Ferdinand withdrew his army, leaving only 700 men with no cannons and a few guns to defend
Koszeg.[6] The Grand Vizier of the Ottomans, Ibrahim Pasha, did not realize how poorly defended Koszeg was; in fact
Constantinople in 1453 stood a better chance. Nonetheless, thanks to brave leadership by Croatian Captain Nikola Jurišić, the city
fought off every assault. As a result, the city was offered terms; the garrison was spared in return for the surrender of the city.
With the city secured the Ottomans withdrew at the arrival of the August rains.[6]
Peace and War A peace treaty was signed between Ferdinand and Suleiman. John Szapolyai was recognized as King of Hungary
as an Ottoman vassal. However, the Ottomans recognized the land under Habsburg rule in Hungary.[7]
Siege of Osijek Main article: Battle of Đakovo This treaty did not satisfy John Szapolyai or Ferdinand whose armies began to
skirmish along the borders. Ferdinand decided to strike a decisive blow in 1537 at John by sending his "ablest" Generals[7] to take
Osijek, thereby violating the treaty. The siege was a disaster of similar magnitude to that of Mohács with an Ottoman relief army
smashing the Austrians.[7] However, rather than attack Vienna again, Suleiman sent an army of 8,000 light Cavalry to attack
Otranto in southern Italy the same year. The troops were withdrawn from Italy after an expected French invasion designed to
coordinate with Ottoman efforts failed to materialize. Nonetheless, an Ottoman victory at the naval Battle of Preveza in 1538 gave
the Habsburg-led coalition another defeat. A further humiliating defeat was inflicted on the Habsburgs in the Siege of Buda
(1541). John Szapolyai had died in 1540 and his son was only a few weeks old.[7] An Austrian attack on Buda followed the news
of the death of John, but the appeals of John's widow to Suleiman were not unanswered and in 1541 the elderly General
Rogendorf was defeated outside of Buda, before he could even cross the Danube to take it. The next year Ferdinand besieged Pest
but was repulsed.
Campaign of Suleiman (1543) Main article: Siege of Esztergom (1543) In April 1543 Suleiman launched another campaign in
Hungary, bringing back Bran and other forts so that much of Hungary was under Ottoman control. As part of a Franco-Ottoman
alliance (see also: Franco-Hungarian alliance and Petar Keglević), French troops were supplied to the Ottomans in Hungary: a
French artillery unit was dispatched in 1543–1544 and attached to the Ottoman Army.[2][3][4] In August 1543, the Ottoman
succeeded in the Siege of Esztergom[8] The siege would be followed by the capture of the Hungarian coronation city of
Székesfehérvár in September 1543.[9] Other cities that were captured during this campaign are Siklós and Szeged in order to better
protect Buda.[8] A peace agreement lasted between the Habsburgs and the Ottomans until 1552, when Suleiman decided to attack
Eger. The assault was futile; the locals of Eger attribute the victory to the constant stream of "bull's blood" (wine) supplied to
them by the women. The Habsburg/Hungarian victory at Eger came after a period of great losses in Hungary and the survival of
Eger gave the Austrians good reason to believe that Hungary was still a contested ground.
Aftermath Suleiman made one more attack on Hungary in 1566 believing that a victory there might give him the happiness he
needed in his old age. He was far too old to campaign and, although he had died during the Battle of Szigetvár, his campaign was
successful in taking much land from the Austrians in Hungary and inflicting many defeats.
References
 1. ^ http://books.google.com/books?id=4AuJvd2Tyt8C&pg=PA328#v=onepage&q=&f=false
2. ^ a b The Ottoman Empire and early modern Europe by Daniel Goffman, p.111 [1]
3. ^ a b Firearms of the Islamic world, p.38
4. ^ a b The Cambridge History of Islam, p.328
5. ^ Turnbull, Stephen. The Ottoman Empire 1326–1699. New York: Osprey, 2003. pg 50: States that more were
deployed than at Vienna in 1529.
6. ^ a b c Turnbull, Stephen. The Ottoman Empire 1326–1699. New York: Osprey, 2003. pg 51
7. ^ a b c d Turnbull, Stephen. The Ottoman Empire 1326–1699. New York: Osprey, 2003. pg 52
8. ^ a b Ground warfare: an international encyclopedia by Stanley Sandler p.387 [2]
9. ^ Slovak history: chronology & lexicon Július Bartl p.59 [3]
Sources
• Turnbull, Stephen R. (2003). The Ottoman Empire 1326–1699. New York: Osprey Publishing. ISBN 1-84176-569-4.

Ottoman cannon battery at the Siege of Esztergom, 1543 (detail).

Siege of Güns (1532)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Monument of the Siege of Kőszeg, located in the bourg of Kőszeg Statue of Nikola Jurišić in Senj, Croatia

Date 1532
Location Kőszeg, Kingdom of Hungary within Habsburg Monarchy (today's Hungary)
Result Ottoman defeat
Belligerents

Habsburg Monarchy Kingdom of Hungary Kingdom of Croatia Ottoman Empire

Commanders and leaders

Nikola Jurišić Suleiman I Pargalı Đbrahim Pasha
Strength
700-800 120,000–140,000
Casualties and losses
Heavy[1] Appreciable losses[2]
The Siege of Güns or Siege of Kőszeg was a siege of Kőszeg (German: Güns) in the Kingdom of Hungary within Habsburg
Monarchy. In the siege that happened in 1532, Croatian Captain Nikola Jurišić defended the small border fort of Kőszeg with only
700-800 Croatian soldiers with no cannons and few guns, preventing the advance of the Ottoman forces of 120,000-140,000
toward Vienna.[3][4]
Background On August 29, 1526, at the Battle of Mohács, the Christian forces led by King Louis II were defeated by Ottoman
forces led by Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent.[5] After king Louis was killed in the battle, both the Kingdom of Hungary and
Kingdom of Croatia became disputed territories between the Habsburg and Ottoman empires. Habsburg Emperor Ferdinand I
became king of Hungary and Croatia.[6] Following Suleiman's unsuccessful Siege of Vienna in 1529, Ferdinand I launched a
counter-attack in 1530 to regain the initiative and avenge the destruction brought by Suleiman's 120,000 strong army. An assault
of Buda was driven off by John Zápolya, the vassal King of Hungary but Ferdinand was successful elsewhere, capturing Gran
(Esztergom) and other forts along the Danube river, a vital strategic frontier.[3]
Siege Suleiman's response came in 1532 when he led a massive army of over 120,000 troops to besiege Vienna again. Ferdinand
withdrew his army, leaving only 700 men with no cannons and a few guns to defend Kőszeg.[3] The Grand Vizier of the Ottomans,
Đbrahim Pasha, did not realize how poorly defended Kőszeg was. Suleiman I came to join him shortly afterwards, when the siege
already started.[3] For more than twenty-five days without any artillery, Captain Nikola Jurišić and his garrison of 800 Croats held
out against nineteen full-scale assaults and an incessant bombardment by the Ottomans.[4] The outcome has two versions. In the
first version, Nikola Jurišić rejected the offer to surrender on favourable terms, and the Ottomans retreated.[2][4][7] According to a
legend, before the final charge women and children prayed to Saint Martin for two hours, and the final battle started. After ten
minutes of battle the Ottomans retreated, and reported they saw a flaming knight with flaming sword. In the second version, the
city was offered terms for a nominal surender. The only Ottomans who would be allowed to enter the castle would be a token
force who would raise the Turkish flag.[3] Anyway, Suleiman withdrew at the arrival of the August rains[3] and did not continue
towards Vienna as previously planned, but homeward.[1] He had been delayed nearly four weeks, and during this time a powerful
army had been collected in Vienna, which the sultan had not the intention to face.[1] By their heroism, Nikola Jurišić and his men
had saved Vienna from a siege.[1]
See also Little War in Hungary List of campaigns of Suleiman the Magnificent
Footnotes
1. ^ a b c d Vambery, p. 298
2. ^ a b Thompson (1996), p. 442
3. ^ a b c d e f Turnbull (2003), p. 51.
4. ^ a b c Wheatcroft (2009), p. 59.
5. ^ Turnbull (2003), p. 49
6. ^ Corvisier and Childs (1994), p. 289
7. ^ Ágoston and Alan Masters (2009), p. 583
Bibliography
• Ágoston and Alan Masters, Gábor and Bruce (2009). Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire. Infobase Publishing. ISBN
0816062595, 9780816062591.
• Corvisier, André; Childs, John (1994). A dictionary of military history and the art of war. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN
0631168486, 9780631168485.
http://books.google.hr/books?id=nEQ7FUAdmc8C&dq=A+Dictionary+of+Military+History+and+the+Art+of+War,&source
=gbs_navlinks_s.
• Thompson, Bard (1996). Humanists and Reformers: A History of the Renaissance and Reformation. Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing. ISBN 0802863485, 9780802863485.
• Turnbull, Stephen R (2003). The Ottoman Empire, 1326-1699. New York (USA): Osprey Publishing Ltd. ISBN 0-415-
96913-1.
• Vambery, Armin. Hungary in Ancient Mediaeval and Modern Times. Forgotten Books. ISBN 1440090343,
9781440090349.
• Wheatcroft, Andrew (2009). The Enemy at the Gate: Habsburgs, Ottomans, and the Battle for Europe. Basic Books.
ISBN 0465013740, 9780465013746.

Battle of Đakovo (1537)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Date October 9, 1537
Location Đakovo, present day Slavonia, Croatia[citation needed]
Result Decisive Ottoman victory
Belligerents
Holy Roman empire Ottoman Empire
Commanders and leaders
Johann Katzianer, Ludwig Lodron †, Paul Bakicz † Unknown
Strength
Much smaller relief troop,
~ 24,000 (Austrian, Hungarian, German, Bohemian, Italian and Croatian allies)
exact number unknown
 Casualties and losses
~ 20,000+ killed or wounded, Katzianer flees with his cavalry leaving his army to be
minimal
annihilated
The Battle of Đakovo (or Valpovo) (Croatian: Bitka kod Đakova, Hungarian: Diakovári csata, German: Schlacht bei Djakowar,
or Schlacht bei Gorj) was a battle fought on October 9, 1537, as part of the Austro-Turkish War (1526–1552).
Battle After 7 years of war and the failed Siege of Vienna in 1529, the Treaty of Constantinople (1533) was signed, in which John
Szapolyai was recognized by the Austrians as King of Hungary as an Ottoman vassal, and the Ottomans recognized Habsburg rule
over Royal Hungary. This treaty did not satisfy John Szapolyai or Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor, whose armies began to
skirmish along the borders. Ferdinand decided to strike a decisive blow in 1537 at John, by sending an army of 24,000 men
(Austrians, Hungarians, Germans, Bohemians, Italians, Croats) under command of Johann Katzianer to take Osijek, thereby
violating the treaty. Very badly prepared, the siege came to nothing, and the starving allied army which operated in devastated
territories, had to withdraw. They were pursued by an Ottoman relief army led by border commanders and attacked near Đakovo
and Valpovo on the Drava river. Katzianer fled with the cavalry and abandoned his army to be annihilated. A reported 20,000 men
were killed or captured, including generals Ludwig Lodron and Paul Bakicz. This campaign was a disaster of similar magnitude to
that of Mohács and therefore nicknamed the Austrian Mohacs. The news of the defeat came as a shock in Vienna and a new
Treaty of Nagyvárad was signed in 1538.
Source
• Turnbull, Stephen. The Ottoman Empire 1326 - 1699. New York: Osprey, 2003. pg 52
• Dictionary of Battles And Sieges

Siege of Buda (1541)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Siege of Buda (1541).

Date August, 1541

Location Buda, Hungary
Ottoman victory,
Result
Ottomans capture Buda
Belligerents
Ottoman Empire Habsburg Empire
Commanders and leaders
Suleiman the Magnificent Wilhelm von Roggendorf
Strength
Unknown ~ 50,000
Casualties and losses
Unknown ~ 16,000
The Siege of Buda in 1541 resulted in the capture of the city of Buda by the Ottoman Emperor Suleiman the Magnificent, as
he invaded central Hungary. The battle is part of the Little War in Hungary.
The Siege In the first phase, an international army under command of Wilhelm von Roggendorf besieged the successors of
the Turkish vassal János Szapolyai. This Hungarian King had died in 1540, and the new King became his underaged son John
II Sigismund Zápolya, under regency of his mother Isabella Jagiellon and Fráter György. This was accepted by Sultan
Suleyman under condition that the Hungarians would continue to pay tribute to the Ottomans. The new King was however
not accepted by Habsburgs. Ferdinand sent an army of 50,000 soldiers commanded by Wilhelm Roggendorf. This army laid
siege of Buda in the summer 1541. The siege was badly managed and several attacks failed with great loss of life.
Battle Suleyman took personal command of the Ottomans relief army. On August 21 the Ottoman relief army reached Buda
and engaged in battle with Roggendorf's army. The Habsburg army was completely defeated and 7,000 men were slaughtered
or drowned in the river. Roggendorf was also wounded in the battle and died 2 days after. Th Ottomans occupied the
celebrating city with a trick and took the infant King John II hostage. This siege of Buda was a considerable Ottoman victory
against Ferdinand of Austria.[1] This battle allowed the occupation of central Hungary by the Ottomans for around 150 years,
and was therefore of an importance comparable to that of the 1526 Battle of Mohács.[2]
The Habsburg army lost a total of 16,000 men.
Aftermath

Buda under Ottoman rule in 1542. After Enea Vico.

Charles V learned about the defeat of his brother Ferdinand upon his arrival in Genoa on 8 September 1541. Thirsty for
revenge, he departed for the Algiers expedition (1541), which also ended in defeat for the Habsburg.[3] Ferdinand would
attempt to recover the cities of Buda and Pest in 1542, in the Siege of Pest, but he was repulsed by the Ottomans.
Notes ^ Garnier, p.200 ^ Garnier, p.200 ^ Garnier, p.201
 Siege of Esztergom (1543)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Siege of Esztergom in 1543, by Sebastian Vrancks.

Date 25 July – 10 August 1543

Location Esztergom, Hungary
Result Ottomans capture Esztergom
Belligerents
Holy Roman Empire Ottoman Empire France
Commanders and leaders
Suleyman the Magnificent
Strength
Artillery unit
The Siege of Esztergom occurred between 25 July and 10 August 1543, when the Ottoman emperor Suleyman the Magnificent
besieged the city of Esztergom in modern Hungary. The city was captured by the Ottomans after two weeks.[1]
Background The siege was part of a struggle between the Habsburgs and the Ottomans following the death of the ruler of
Hungary, John Zápolya, on 20 July 1540.[2] This is part of the "Age of castle wars" in Hungarian history.[3] Suleiman had captured
the cities of Buda and Pest in 1541, giving him a powerful control over central Hungary.[4] The Province (Beylerbeylik) of Buda
was created in this occasion.[2] As part of the Franco-Ottoman alliance, French troops were supplied to this Ottoman campaign in
Hungary: a French artillery unit was dispatched in 1543-1544 and attached to the Ottoman Army.[5][6][7] Meanwhile, in the
Mediterranean Sea, Suleiman had sent his fleet admiral Hayreddin Barbarossa to cooperate with the French, leading to the Siege
of Nice.[2]
Siege The siege followed the failed attempt by Ferdinand I of Austria to recapture Buda in 1542.[8] It would be followed in turn by
the capture of the Hungarian coronation city of Székesfehérvár in September 1543.[1] Other cities that were captured during this
campaign are Siklós and Szeged in order to better protect Buda.[8] However, Suleiman refrained from moving further on to Vienna
this time, apparently because he had no news of the campaigns of his French allies in western Europe and in the Mediterranean.[9]
After the successful Ottoman campaign, a first truce of one year was signed with Charles V in 1545, through the intermediary of
Francis I of France. Suleiman himself was interested in ending the hostilities, as he had a campaign going on in Persia as well, the
Ottoman–Safavid War (1532–1555).[2] Two years later, Ferdinand and Charles V recognized total Ottoman control of Hungary in
the 1547 Treaty of Adrianople,[10] and Ferdinand even agreed to pay a yearly tribute of 30,000 gold florins for their Habsburg
possessions in northern and western Hungary.[2][8] Following these conquests, central Hungary was to remain under Ottoman
control until 1686.
Notes
1. ^ a b Slovak history: chronology & lexicon Július Bartl p.59
2. ^ a b c d e The Cambridge history of Islam by Peter Malcolm Holt p.328
3. ^ Ottomans, Hungarians, and Habsburgs in Central Europe by Pál Fodor p.164 [1]
4. ^ Emperor Charles V, impresario of war by James D. Tracy p.206
5. ^ The Ottoman Empire and early modern Europe by Daniel Goffman, p.111 [2]
6. ^ Firearms of the Islamic world, p.38
7. ^ The Cambridge History of Islam, p.328
8. ^ a b c Ground warfare: an international encyclopedia by Stanley Sandler p.387 [3]
9. ^ International encyclopaedia of Islamic dynasties by Nagendra Kr. Singh p.516 [4]
10. ^ Cartography in the traditional Islamic and South Asian societies by John Brian Harley p.245 [5]

Cannon battery at the Siege of Esztergom 1543 (detail).

Siege of Esztergom in 1543, Hungarian miniature. Stages and distances to the fortress of Esztergom (Ottoman print).
 Siege of Eger (1552)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Women of Eger by Bertalan Székely Eger Castle Walls

Date 1552
Location Eger, Northern Hungary
Result Hungarian Victory
Belligerents
Ottoman Empire Hungarian defenders
Commanders and leaders
Ahmed Pasha Ali Pasha István Dobó
Strength
In reality 35-40,000 men[1][2] (Gárdonyi's data: 150,000 and 200,000[3] is romantic
Approx 2,100-2,300[4]
exaggeration)
Casualties and losses
Heavy 300-400 killed

The Siege of Eger occurred during the 16th century Ottoman Wars in Europe. It was a major Hungarian victory after a series of
crushing defeats at the hands of Ottoman forces and checked the Ottoman expansion into both Central Europe and Eastern Europe.
Background The Ottoman Sultan, Suleiman the Magnificent, commenced his expansion of the empire in 1520 after the reign of
Selim I. He began assaults against Hungarian and Austrian influenced territories, invading Hungarian soil in 1526. The Hungarian
Army was crushed at the Battle of Mohács and the way was paved for an attack on the Danube Basin. The battle also brought
about the death of the King of Hungary and Bohemia, Louis II, leading to a disputed claim for the throne. The Austrian Emperor
Ferdinand I succeeded to the Bohemian throne but was challenged to the Hungarian throne by the pretender John Zápolya whose
claim was backed by nobles and the Sultan. The power struggle continued beyond John's death in 1540 when his son, John II
Sigismund Zápolya succeeded to the throne. It was not resolved until he renounced the throne in 1563 when he was succeeded by
Maximilian I. The Ottomans met resistance during the Siege of Güns (Kőszeg) in 1532, where a force of 800 men[5] under Miklós
Jurisich managed to hold back the Ottoman armies. However, this only delayed their campaign by 25 days, and they continued to
close in on Buda, finally occupying the capital in 1541. Buda became the seat of Ottoman rule in the area, with the Ottoman
supported John II governing the occupied territories. The loss of Christian forts at Temesvár and Szolnok in 1552 were blamed on
mercenary soldiers within the Hungarian ranks.[6] When the Turks turned their attention to the northern Hungarian town of Eger in
the same year few expected the defenders to put up much resistance, particularly as the two great armies of the Ottoman lords
Ahmed and Ali, which had crushed all opposition previously, united under Eger. Eger was an important stronghold and key to the
defence of the remainder of Hungarian soil. North of Eger lay the poorly reinforced city of Kassa (present day Košice), the centre
of an important region of mines and associated mints, which provided the Hungarian Kingdom with large amounts of quality
silver and gold coinage. Besides allowing a take-over of that revenue source, fall of Eger would also enable the Ottoman Empire
to secure an alternative logistic and troop route for further west-ward military expansion, possibly allowing the Turks to lay sieges
on Vienna more frequently.
Castle The Castle of Eger is located east of the town on a hillside. Its actual location was not ideal from a military point of view -
the castle overlooks only the southern and western parts of the walled town - however, it had the advantage over the Ottoman
forces as it provided excellent locations for gun positions. The castle comprised an inner and outer fortress with a gate tower to the
southeast and 6 bastions on the walls - the Earth Bastion and Prison Bastion to the northwest, Sándor Bastion on the north wall,
Bolyky Bastion on the northeast corner, Bebek Bastion on the eastern corner of the outer fortress and the Dobó Bastion on the
western wall. The Varkoch gate sat on the southern wall of the inner fortress while a further bastion, Church Bastion, lay at the
centre of the wall separating the two parts of the fortress. The fortress of Eger was built on the ruins of an earlier stone fort, which
replaced an ancient earthen encampment, possibly erected by the Huns. This made Eger's foundations stronger than usual and
greatly hindered the work of Ottoman miners. As was usual during sieges at that time, both the attackers and the defenders tried to
dig tunnels under the walls and plant gunpowder charges to either open gaps into the fortress or destroy the attacker's trenches.
None of these attempts were successful during the siege of Eger.
Siege The old hungarian data and Gárdonyi's roman about the number of the Ottoman Army (150-200,000 men) is romantic
exaggerates. In reality the Ottoman army was number to 35-40,000 men from the Rumelian army (and some Anatolian contingent)
and the troops of Ahmed Pasha from Buda.[7] The Ottomans had 16 zarbuzans (very large siege cannons) as well as 150 medium
and smaller pieces of artillery and a fleet of two thousand camels, which proved to be highly useful in the collection and
transportation of wood to the site used for the construction of temporary siege platforms. The defenders had 6 large and about a
dozen smaller cannons and some 300 trench guns with ample supplies of ammunition. Despite the difference in troop numbers,
Eger's strong walls and the high morale of its defenders allowed the fortress to withstand five major assaults and continuous
cannonfire (excluding the ones stuck in the walls of the stronghold, almost 12,000 cannonballs landed inside the fortress before
the siege ended). The fortress was defended by 2,100-2,300 people, a mixture of professional soldiers, insurgent peasants and a
few dozen women. Among the approximately 1,530 combat-ready personnel there were only a handful of foreign mercenaries:
Dobó had hired six cannonmasters from Germany in order to make the most efficient use of Eger's artillery. The defenders were
commanded by István Dobó and his deputy István Mekcsey, who had assumed command in 1549. Another noted officer, famous
in Hungarian literature and folklore, was Gergely Bornemissza. He commanded a detachment of 250 hungarian infantry, however
it was his skill with explosives that was to make this young officer's name. During the siege Bornemissza devised primitive but
lethal grenades and powder keg sized bombs to use against the attackers as well as a water-mill wheel packed with gunpowder
which he rolled into the Ottoman ranks. His secret lay in the gunpowder not simply exploding but sparking even more fire. He
loaded these weapons with oil, sulfur and flint in order to shower the enemy with burning missiles. The Ottomans had expected an
easy victory, but the bravery of the castle's defenders, as well as Dobó's inspired leadership, resisted and repulsed repeated
Ottoman assaults. Even after the storage tower containing 24 metric tons of black gunpowder exploded and caused extensive
structural damage, the invaders still could not find a way into the castle compound. After 39 days of bloody, brutal and intense
fighting the Ottoman Army withdrew, beaten and humiliated. The defenders' losses amounted to about one third of their ranks,
including those killed and permanently maimed in combat. Dobó lost both of his squires. According to modern historical research,
several external factors contributed the defenders' success. There was significant in-fighting between the two Ottoman leaders,
Pasha Ali and Pasha Ahmed. Ahmed was the senior and contributed twice as many troops to the united army, but Ali showed
more strategic talent and proved his skill in artillery, heavily damaging the castle walls with his battery of just four large siege
guns. During the siege, the Ottoman army ran out of gunpowder and cannonballs (which were carved out of marble) at least twice,
limiting Ahmed's use of heavy artillery for a week or more. The end of autumn arrived earlier than usual with heavy rain and
freezing nighttime temperatures. Reduced rice rations and allegations of corruption among the officers caused discontent among
the Ottoman troops. After the victory Dobó and his officers resigned, in order to protest King Ferdinand's refusal to contribute any
material help to the defence. Gergely Bornemissza was appointed to take over command of the fortress. He was later ambushed,
captured and hanged by the Ottomans. The fortress of Eger remained defiant of Ottoman attacks until 1596 when 7,000 defenders,
mostly foreign mercenaries, capitulated to the Ottoman forces personally commanded by the Sultan, Mehmed III. The town
remained in Ottoman hands for 91 years. Eger has become an emblem of national defence, a symbol of patriotic heroism, and the
superiority of a national army over an unmotivated foreign mercenary force.
In art and literature Earliest records of the siege were recorded by the chronicler Sebestyén Tinódi Lantos in 1554 who wrote
musical verses of the exploits of the people of Eger. It was not until the 19th century that the siege was seized upon by Hungarian
writers as the basis of fictional accounts. The first was the poem Eger by Mihály Vörösmarty in 1827. The most famous account
was by author Géza Gárdonyi who wrote his popular 1899 historical novel Egri csillagok about the events of this period. It
chronicles the events leading up to and including the siege and tells the tale of Gergely Bornemissza, as well as Captain Dobó, and
his co-commander István Mekcsey. During the 1960s the novel was adapted into a feature-length film, which is still regularly
shown on Hungarian television. Bertalan Székely's painting Az Egri Nők (Women of Eger) depicts the defence of the fortress,
especially by the womenfolk, and hangs in the National Art Gallery in Budapest.
References
1. ^ László Markó: A Magyar Állam főméltóságai, 1999. ISBN 963-548-961-7
2. ^ Magyarország hadtörténete, Zrínyi katonai kiadó, Budapest 1985. szerk.: Liptai Ervin ISBN 963-32-6337-9
3. ^ Gárdonyi, Géza. Egri Csillagok (vol. 2). Európa Könyvkiadó, Budapest. 2000. pages 17, 49.
4. ^ Magyarország hadtörténete, Zrínyi katonai kiadó, Budapest 1985. szerk.: Liptai Ervin ISBN 963-32-6337-9
5. ^ Çiçek,, Kemal; Ercüment Kuran, Nejat Göyünç, Đlber Ortaylı (2000). The Great Ottoman-Turkish Civilisation
(3 ed.). University of Michigan: Yeni Türkiye, 2000 Item notes.
6. ^ Fallon, Steve; Neal Bedford (2003). Hungary (4 ed.). Lonely Planet. pp. 331. ISBN 1740591526,
9781740591522.
7. ^ Magyarország hadtörténete, Zrínyi katonai kiadó, Budapest 1985. editor.: Liptai Ervin ISBN 963-32-6337-9
 Siege of Szigetvár Szigeth (1566)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Johann Peter Krafft: Zrinsky's charge from the fortress of Szigetvár (1825)

Date 6 August 1566 – 8 September 1566

Location 46°03′02″N 17°47′50″E46.050663°N 17.797354°ECoordinates: 46°03′02″N 17°47′50″E46.050663°N

17.797354°E, Szigetvár, Baranya, Hungary, Habsburg Monarchy
Result Ottoman pyrrhic victory[1][2][Note 1]
Belligerents

Habsburg Monarchy Kingdom of Hungary

Ottoman Empire Moldavia
Kingdom of Croatia
Commanders and leaders

Nicholas Zrinsky †
Suleiman I † Grand Vizier Sokollu Mehmet Paşa
 Strength
2,300[3]–3,000[4] Croats and Hungarians[5][Note 2]
600 100,000[7]–300,000[8][Note 3]
80,000 Ottomans 12,000–15,000 Tatars
able-bodied men by the end of the siege[6] 7,000 Moldavians
Casualties and losses
Heavy; Nicholas Zrinsky dies in the final battle. Almost entire Heavy; Suleiman dies during siege of natural causes.
garrison wiped out. 2,300–3,000 killed in combat. 20,000[4]–30,000[9][10] killed or died of sickness.
The Siege of Szigetvár or Battle of Szigeth (Hungarian: Szigetvári csata, Croatian: Bitka kod Sigeta or Sigetska bitka, Turkish:
Zigetvar Savaşı) was a siege of the Szigeth Fortress in Baranya (near the present Hungarian/Croatian border) which blocked
Suleiman's line of advance towards Vienna in 1566 AD.[11] The battle was fought between the defending forces of the Austrian
Habsburg Monarchy under the leadership of Croatian ban Nicholas Zrinsky (Croatian: Nikola Šubić Zrinski, Hungarian: Zrínyi
Miklós), and the invading Ottoman army under the nominal command of Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent (Ottoman Turkish:
‫ليمان‬ÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕ‫ س‬Süleymān).[11] After the Battle of Mohács in 1526, which resulted in the end of the independent Kingdom of Hungary,
Ferdinand I was elected King by the nobles of both Hungary and Croatia.[12] This was followed by a series of conflicts with the
Habsburgs and their allies, fighting against the Ottoman Empire. In the Little War in Hungary both sides exhausted themselves
after sustaining heavy casualties. The Ottoman campaign in Hungary ceased until the offensive against Szigetvár.[13] In January
1566 Suleiman went to war for the last time.[14] The siege of Szigetvár was fought from 5 August to 8 September 1566 and,
though it resulted in an Ottoman victory, there were heavy losses on both sides. Both commanders died during the battle—Zrinsky
in the final charge and Suleiman in his tent from natural causes.[6][Note 4] More than 20,000 Turks had fallen during the attacks and
almost all of Zrinsky's 2,300 man garrison was killed, with most of the final 600 men killed on the last day.[4] Although the battle
was an Ottoman victory, it stopped the Ottoman push to Vienna that year. Vienna was not threatened again until the Battle of
Vienna in 1683.[6] The importance of the battle was considered so great that the French clergyman and statesman Cardinal
Richelieu was reported to have described it as "the battle that saved civilization."[3] The battle is still famous in Croatia and
Hungary and inspired both the Hungarian epic poem Siege of Sziget and the Croatian opera Nikola Šubić Zrinski.[15]
Background See also: Ottoman–Habsburg wars On 29 August 1526 the Hungarian forces led by King Louis II were defeated at
the Battle of Mohács by Ottoman forces led by Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent.[16] Louis was killed in the battle which resulted
in the end of the independent Kingdom of Hungary, as he died without an heir. Both Hungary and Croatia became disputed
territories with claims from both the Habsburg and Ottoman empires. Ferdinand I from the House of Habsburg, brother of Holy
Roman Emperor Charles V, married the sister of Louis II[13] and was elected King by the nobles of both Hungary and
Croatia.[12][17][Note 5] The throne of Hungary became the subject of a dynastic dispute between Ferdinand and John Zápolya from
Transylvania. Suleiman had promised to make Zápolya the ruler of all Hungary.[18] Ferdinand set out to enforce his claim on
Hungary and captured Buda from John Zápolya in 1527, only to relinquish his hold on it in 1529 when an Ottoman counter-attack
stripped Ferdinand of all his territorial gains during 1527 and 1528.[13] The Siege of Vienna in 1529 was the first attempt by
Suleiman the Magnificent to capture the Austrian capital. This siege signalled the pinnacle of Ottoman power and the maximum
extent of Ottoman expansion in central Europe.[13]
Little War in Hungary Main article: Little War in Hungary The years from 1529 to 1552 were known as the "Little War in
Hungary". Following Suleiman's unsuccessful siege of Vienna in 1529 Ferdinand launched a counter-attack in 1530 to regain the
initiative. An assault on Buda was driven off by John Zápolya, although Ferdinand was successful elsewhere—capturing Gran
(Esztergom) and other forts along the Danube river, a vital strategic frontier.[13] Suleiman's response came in 1532 when he led a
massive army of over 120,000 troops to besiege Vienna again. Ferdinand withdrew his army, leaving only 700 men with no
cannons and a few guns to defend Güns (Koszeg)[13] although Ibrahim Pasha, the Grand Vizier of the Ottomans, did not realize
how poorly defended Koszeg was. Suleiman came to join him shortly after the siege had started.[13] For more than twenty five
days Croatian captain Nikola Jurišić and his garrison of 800 Croats held out against nineteen full-scale assaults and an incessant
bombardment by the Ottomans.[5] As a result the city was offered a surrender on favourable terms and, although the offer was
rejected, the Ottomans retreated[5][19][Note 6] leading to a peace treaty between Ferdinand and Suleiman. John Zápolya was
recognized as the King of Hungary by the Habsburgs, although as an Ottoman vassal.[13] The treaty did not satisfy either John
Zápolya or Ferdinand and their armies began skirmishes along the borders. In 1537 Ferdinand attacked John’s forces at Osijek in
violation of the treaty. The siege was a disaster of similar magnitude to that of Mohács, with an Ottoman relief army smashing the
Austrians. Rather than attack Vienna again Suleiman attacked Otranto in southern Italy. Nonetheless, an Ottoman victory at the
naval Battle of Preveza (1538) gave the Habsburg-led coalition another defeat.[20] John Zápolya died in 1540 and was succeeded
by his infant son John II Sigismund Zápolya. For much of his reign the country was governed by his mother Isabella Jagiellon,
with continued support from Suleiman. John II remained as nominal King of Hungary until he abdicated in 1570 and returned the
country to Habsburg rule.[20] A further humiliating defeat was inflicted on the Habsburgs in the Siege of Buda (1541) when the
Ottomans responded to a request for help from Isabella Jagiellon. In April 1543 Suleiman launched another campaign in Hungary,
taking back Bran and other forts so that much of Hungary returned to Ottoman control. In August 1543 the Ottomans succeeded in
the Siege of Esztergom (1543) which was followed by the capture of three Hungarian cities: Székesfehérvár, Siklós and Szeged,
offering better security for Buda.[20] Another peace agreement between the Habsburgs and the Ottomans lasted until 1552 when
Suleiman decided to attack Eger. The siege proved futile and the Habsburg victory reversed a period of territorial losses in
Hungary. The survival of Eger gave the Austrians good reason to believe that Hungary was still a contested ground and the
Ottoman campaign in Hungary ceased, until its revival in 1566.[20]
Campaign of 1566 See also: List of campaigns of Suleiman the Magnificent In January 1566 Sultan Suleiman I had ruled the
Ottoman Empire for 46 years and went to war for the last time.[14] He was 72 years old and, although having gout to the extent that
he was carried on a litter, he nominally commanded his thirteenth military campaign.[14] On 1 May 1566 the Sultan left
Constantinople at the head of one of the largest armies he had ever commanded.[14] His opposite number, Count Nicholas Zrinsky,
was one of the largest landholders in Croatia, a seasoned veteran of border warfare, and a Ban (Croation royal representative)
from 1542 to 1556.[21] In his early life he distinguished himself in the Siege of Vienna and pursued a successful military career.[7]
Suleiman's forces reached Belgrade on 27 June after a forty nine day march. Here he met with John II Sigismund Zápolya who he
earlier promised to make the ruler of all Hungary.[18] Learning of the Zrinsky's success in an attack upon a Turkish encampment at
Siklós, Suleiman decided to postpone his attack on Eger (German: Erlau) and instead attack Zrinsky's fortress at Szigetvár to
eliminate him as a threat.[22][7]
Siege The advanced guard of the Turks arrived at on 2 August 1566 and the defenders made several successful sorties causing
considerable loss to the Turks.[10] The Sultan arrived with the main force on 5 August[10][11] and his big war tent was erected on the
Similehov hill, giving him a view of the battle. The Sultan had to stay in his camp where he received verbal battle progress reports
from his Grand Vizier Sokollu Mehmed Pasha, the real operational commander of the Ottoman forces.[23] Count Zrinsky found
himself besieged by a hostile army of at least 150,000 soldiers with powerful artillery.[10] Zrinsky had assembled a force of around
2,300 Croatian and Hungarian soldiers prior to the siege.[5] These consisted of his personal forces and those of his friends and
allies.[24] The majority of the defenders were Croatian, with a significant Hungarian contingent represented in both the men-at-
arms and the leadership.[24][5] Szigetvár was divided into three sections divided by water: the old town, the new town and the
castle—each of which was linked to the next by bridges and to the land by causeways.[11] Although it was not built on particularly
high ground the inner castle, which occupied much of the area of today's castle, was not directly accessible to the attackers. This
was because two other baileys had to be taken and secured before a final assault on the inner castle could be launched.[11] When
the Sultan appeared before the Fortress he saw the walls hung with red cloth, as though for a festive reception, and a single great
cannon thundered once to greet the mighty warrior monarch.[25] The siege began on 6 August when Suleiman ordered a general
assault on the ramparts,[10] although the attack was successfully repulsed.[10] Despite being undermanned, and greatly
outnumbered, the defenders were sent no reinforcements from Vienna by the imperial army.[10] After over a month of exhausting
and bloody struggle the few remaining defenders retreated into the old town for their last stand. The Sultan tried to entice Zrinsky
to surrender, ultimately offering him leadership of Croatia under Ottoman influence,[25][26] Count Zrinsky did not reply and
continued to fight.[26] The fall of the castle appeared inevitable but the Ottoman high command hesitated. On 6 September the
Suleiman died in his tent[6] and his death was kept secret at great effort[6] with only the Sultan's innermost circle knowing of his
demise. A courier was dispatched from the camp with a message for Suleiman's successor, Selim. The courier may not even have
known the content of the message he delivered to distant Asia Minor within a mere eight days.[6]
Final battle The final battle began on 7 September, the day after Suleiman's demise. By this time, the fortress walls had been
reduced to rubble by mining with explosives and wood fueled fires at the corners of the walls. In the morning an all-out attack
began[4] with fusillades from small arms, "Greek fire", and a concentrated cannonade.[Note 7] Soon the castle, the last stronghold
within Szigetvár, was set ablaze and cinders fell into the apartments of the count.[4] The Ottoman army swarmed through the city,
drumming and yelling. Zrinsky prepared for a last charge addressing his troops:
“ ...Let us go out from this burning place into the open and stand up to our enemies. Who dies – he will be with God. Who
dies not – his name will be honoured. I will go first, and what I do, you do. And God is my witness – I will never leave
you, my brothers and knights!... ”
[7]
Zrinsky did not allow the final assault to break into the castle. As the Turks were pressing forwards along a narrow bridge the
defenders suddenly flung open the gate and fired a large mortar loaded with broken iron, killing 600 attackers.[7] Zrinsky then
ordered a charge and led his remaining 600 troops out of the castle.[7] He received two musket wounds in his chest and was killed
shortly afterwards by an arrow to the head.[7] Some of his force retired into the castle.[7] The Turks took the castle and most of the
defenders were slain. A few of the captured defenders were spared by Janissaries who had admired their courage,[7] with only
seven defenders managing to escape through the Ottoman lines. Zrinsky's corpse was beheaded and his head taken to the
Emperor[27] while his body received an honourable burial by a Turk who had been his prisoner, and well treated by him.[7]
Powder magazine explosion Before leading the final sortie by the castle garrison, Zrinsky ordered a fuse be lit to the powder
magazine.[4][Note 8] After cutting down the last of the defenders the besiegers poured into the fortress. The Ottoman Army entered
the remains of Szigetvár and fell into the booby trap,[6] thousands perished in the blast when the castle's magazine exploded.[28]
The Vizier Ibrahim's life was saved by one of Zrinsky's household who warned him of the trap when the Vizier and his troops
searched for treasure and interrogated the survivors. While inquiring about treasure the prisoner replied that it had been long
expended, but that 3,000 lbs of powder were under their feet to which a slow match had been attached.[7] The Vizier and his
mounted officers had just enough time to escape but 3,000 Turks perished in the explosion.[5][7][10][29]
Aftermath See also: Treaty of Adrianople (1568) Almost all of Zrinsky's garrison was wiped out after the final battle.[4] Ottoman
casualties were also heavy. Three pashas, 7,000 Janissaries and 28,000 other soldiers are said to have perished.[7] Sources vary on
the exact number with estimates ranging from 20,000–35,000.[4][7][9] After the battle the Grand Vizier forged bulletins in the
Sultan's name, proclaiming victory.[6] These announced that the Sultan regretted that his current state of health prevented him from
continuing with the successful campaign.[6] His body was returned to Constantinople while the inner circle of officials pretended
to keep up communication with him.[6] Turkish sources state that the illusion was maintained for three weeks and that even the
Sultan's personal physician was strangled as a precaution.[6] It is likely that the long journey and the siege had a detrimental effect
on the Sultan's health.[6] His death meant that any advances were postponed as the Grand Vizier had to return to Constantinople
for the succession of the new Sultan, Selim II.[6][29] Even if Suleiman had lived his army could not have achieved much in the short
time that remained between the fall of Szigeth and the onset of winter.[30] The prolonged resistance at Szigeth delayed the Ottoman
push to Vienna.[30] Two ambasadors were sent by Emperor Maximilian: Croatian Antun Vrančić and Styrian Christoph
Teuffenbach. They arrived in Istanbul on 26 August 1567 and were well received by Sultan Selim II.[31] An agreement ending the
war between the Austrian and Ottoman empires was reached on 17 February 1568, after five months of negotiations with Sokollu
Mehmed Pasha.[31] The Treaty of Adrianople was signed on 21 February 1568.[31] Sultan Selim II agreed to an eight-year truce,[8]
although the agreement brought 25 years of (relative) peace between the Empires until the Long War. The truce was conditional
and Maximilian agreed to pay an annual tribute of 30,000 ducats.[30]
Depictions in art The Croatian Renaissance poet and writer Brne Karnarutić, from Zadar, wrote The Conquest of the City of
Sziget (Croatian: Vazetje Sigeta grada) sometime before 1573.[32] His work was posthumously published in 1584 in Venice.[32]
This is the first Croatian historical epic dealing with national history and the Battle of Szigetvár. It was inspired by Marulić's
Judita.[32][33] The battle was also immortalized in the Hungarian epic poem Szigeti Veszedelem ("Peril of Sziget"), written in fifteen
parts by Zrinsky's great-grandson Nicholas VII of Zrin (also a Ban of Croatia) in 1647 and published in 1651.[15] This was one of
the first such epics in the Hungarian language and was also inspired by Marulić's Judita.[32][33] Kenneth Clark's renowned history
Civilisation lists the Szigeti Veszedelem as one of the major literary achievements of the 17th century.[15] In spite of the author and
other members of Zrinsky family being fierce enemies of the Turks, the poem never demonizes them.[34] The Turks are portrayed
as human beings and a love story between Deliman the Tatar and the Sultan's daughter Cumilla is interwoven into the main
plot.[34] Peter Zrinsky (Croatian: Petar Zrinski, Hungarian: Zrínyi Péter), the brother of Nicholas VII of Zrin, published Opsida
Sigecka (1647/8) in the Croatian language—not surprising since the Zrinsky family were bilingual.[15] Another Croatian nobleman
warrior-poet Pavao Ritter Vitezović (1652–1713) wrote about the battle.[35] His poem Odiljenje sigetsko ("The Sziget Farewell"),
first published in 1684, reminisces about the event without rancour or crying for revenge.[35] The last of the four cantos is titled
"Tombstones" and consists of epitaphs for the Croatian and Turkish warriors who died during the siege, paying equal respect to
both.[35] Ivan Zajc's 1876 opera Nikola Šubić Zrinski is his most famous and popular work in Croatia. This recounts the heroic
defiance of the Croats towards the Turks, as a metaphor for their later nationalist impulses within the Habsburg monarchy.[36]
Zrinski is depicted in the plot as a 16th-century Croatian hero who defeated the Turks a couple of times before perishing
sacrificially, along with his family and close supporters, in the siege of Szigeth castle.[15][36] The opera is patriotic with a famous
aria "U boj, u boj".[15][36]
Notes
1. ^ Although the Turks won the battle, the outcome can be seen as a "pyrrhic victory", because of a heavy Turkish
casualties and the death of Sultan Suleiman. Moreover, the battle delayed the Ottoman push for Vienna that year and
suspended the Ottoman expansion in Europe.
2. ^ The majority of the defenders were ethnic Croats, which is clearly mentioned in the only first-hand report of
the siege, written in "Podsjedanje i osvojenje Sigeta" by Franjo (Ferenc) Črnko, Zrinsky's chamberlain, and one of the
surviving soldiers from the battle. Later works "Vazetje Sigeta grada" (1573) by Brne Karnarutić, "Szigeti veszedelem"
(1647) by Nicholas VII Zrinsky, and "Opsida Sigecka" (1647) by Peter Zrinsky, also prove that Croats were a majority
among the defenders.
3. ^ The number of 300,000 Ottomans mentioned by some chroniclers, is probably overestimated. There is some
tendency by some historians to exaggerate these figures to overstate the bravery of the outnumbered defenders of
Szigetvár. Although, on 1 May 1566, Suleiman did left Istanbul at the head of one of the largest armies he had ever
commanded, the number of his forces was probably closer to 100,000 than to 300,000.
4. ^ It is generally accepted that Suleiman died in his tent behind the siege lines from natural causes, before the
Turks achieved victory. According to George F. Nafziger, Suleiman died of a heart attack when learned of his victory.
According to Stephen Turnbull, several contemporary accounts, such as the ones used later by Nicholas VII Zrinsky for
his epic, attribute Suleiman's death to Zrinsky's hand.
5. ^ On 1 January 1527, the Croatian nobles at Cetin unanimously elected Ferdinand, Archduke of Austria as their
king, and confirmed the succession to him and his heirs. In return for the throne, Archduke Ferdinand, at Parliament on
Cetin (Croatian: Cetinski Sabor), promised to respect the historic rights, freedoms, laws, and customs the Croats had
when united with the Hungarian kingdom and to defend Croatia from Ottoman invasion. (R. W. Seton -Watson:The
southern Slav question and the Habsburg Monarchy page 18)
6. ^ According to Stephen Turnbull, the city was offered terms for a nominal surender. The only Ottomans who
would be allowed to enter the castle would be a token force who would raise the Turkish flag. Anyway, Suleiman
withdrew at the arrival of the August rains, and did not continue towards Vienna as previously planned, but homeward.
7. ^ According to Robert William Fraser, more than 10,000 large cannon balls where shot into the fortress during
the siege.
8. ^ According to Francis Lieber, explosion of the powder magazine is somewhat disputable.
References
Footnotes
1. ^ Kohn (2006), p. 47.
2. ^ Lázár and Tezla (1999), p. 70.
3. ^ a b Timothy Hughes Rare & Early Newspapers, Item 548456. Retrieved 1 December 2009.
4. ^ a b c d e f g h Lieber (1845), p. 345.
5. ^ a b c d e f Wheatcroft (2009), pp. 59–60.
6. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m Turnbull (2003), p. 57.
7. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Shelton (1867), pp. 82–83.
8. ^ a b Elliott (2000), p. 117.
9. ^ a b Tait (1853), p. 679.
10. ^ a b c d e f g h Coppée (1864), pp. 562–565.
11. ^ a b c d e Turnbull (2003), p. 56.
12. ^ a b Corvisier and Childs (1994), p. 289
13. ^ a b c d e f g h Turnbull (2003), pp. 49–51.
14. ^ a b c d Turnbull (2003), p. 55.
15. ^ a b c d e f Cornis-Pope and Neubauer (2004), pp. 518–522.
16. ^ Turnbull (2003), p. 49
17. ^ Milan Kruhek: Cetin, grad izbornog sabora Kraljevine Hrvatske 1527, Karlovačka Županija, 1997, Karlovac
 18. ^ a b Turnbull (2003), pp. 55–56.
19. ^ Ágoston and Alan Masters (2009), p. 583
20. ^ a b c d Turnbull (2003), p. 52.
21. ^ Krokar Slide Set #27, image 42
22. ^ Setton (1991), pp. 845–846.
23. ^ Sakaoğlu (1999), pp. 140–141.
24. ^ a b Perok (1861), pp. 46–48.
25. ^ a b Roworth (1840), p. 53.
26. ^ a b Pardoe (1842), p. 84.
27. ^ Sakaoğlu (1999), p. 141.
28. ^ Dupuy (1970), p. 501.
29. ^ a b Nafziger & Walton (2003), p. 105
30. ^ a b c Elliott (2000), p. 118.
31. ^ a b c Setton (1984), pp. 921–922.
32. ^ a b c d Karnarutić (1866), pp. 1–83.
33. ^ a b Lökös, István (April 1997). "Prilozi madžarskoj recepciji Marulićevih djela [A Contribution to the
Hungarian Reception of Marulić’s Works]" (in Croatian) (PDF). Colloquia Maruliana 6.
http://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=14696. Retrieved 3 December 2009.
34. ^ a b Anzulovic (2000), p. 57.
35. ^ a b c Anzulovic (2000), pp. 57–58.
36. ^ a b c Rockwell, John (29 April 1986). "Opera: Zajc's 'Nikola Subic Zrinski'". The New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/1986/04/29/arts/opera-zajc-s-nikola-subic-zrinski.html. Retrieved 3 December 2009.
Bibliography
• Ágoston and Alan Masters, Gábor and Bruce (2009). Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire. Infobase Publishing. ISBN
0816062595, 9780816062591.
• Anzulovic, Branimir (2000). Heavenly Serbia: From Myth to Genocide. Pluto Press Australia. ISBN 186403100X,
9781864031003.
• Coppée, Henry (1864). The United States service magazine. 2. New York: C. B. Richardson.
• Cornis-Pope and Neubauer, Marcel and John (2004). History of the literary cultures of East-Central Europe: junctures
and disjunctures in the 19th and 20th centuries. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Jonh Benjamins Publishing Company. ISBN 90-
272-3452-3.
• Corvisier, André; Childs, John (1994). A dictionary of military history and the art of war. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN
0631168486, 9780631168485.
http://books.google.hr/books?id=nEQ7FUAdmc8C&dq=A+Dictionary+of+Military+History+and+the+Art+of+War,&source
=gbs_navlinks_s.
• Dupuy, R. Ernest; Dupuy, Trevor (1970). The Encyclopedia of Military History. New York: Harper & Row. ISBN 0-06-
011139-9.
• Elliott, John Huxtable (2000). Europe divided, 1559–1598. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 0631217800, 9780631217800.
• Fine, John Van Antwerp (1994). The Late Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Late Twelfth Century to the
Ottoman Conquest. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press. ISBN 0-472-08260-4, 0-472-10079-3.
• Karnarutić, Brne (1866) (in Croatian). Vazetje Sigeta grada. Zagreb: Narodna tiskarnica.
• Kohn, George C. (2006). Dictionary of wars. Infobase Publishing. ISBN 0816065772, 9780816065776.
• Krokar, James P. (DePaul University) (1997) The Ottoman Presence in Southeastern Europe, 16th–19th Centuries: A
View in Maps, Chicago: The Newberry Library. viewable online
• Lázár and Tezla, István and Albert (1999). Illustrated history of Hungary. Corvina. ISBN 9631348873, 9789631348873.
• Lieber, Francis (1845). Encyclopædia Americana: A popular dictionary of arts, sciences, literature, history, politics, and
biography. 13. Philadelphia: Columbia University Library.
• Nafziger & Walton, George F. & Mark W. (2003). Islam at War: A History. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN
0275981010, 9780275981013.
• Pardoe, Julia (1842). The Hungarian castle. 3. London: Princeton University Library.
http://www.archive.org/stream/hungariancastle03pard#page/n5/mode/2up.
• Perok, Slavomil (1861) (in Croatian). Zivotopisne crte grofa Nikole Subića-Zrinjskoga Sigetskoga. Narodna tiskarnica L.
Gaja.
• Roworth, C (1840). The foreign quarterly review. 24. London: Black and Armstrong.
• Sakaoğlu, Necdet (2001). Bu Mülkün Sultanları: 36 Osmanlı Padişahi. Oğlak Yayıncılık ve Reklamcılık. ISBN
9753292996, 9789753292993.
• Shelton, Edward (1867). The book of battles: or, Daring deeds by land and sea. London: Houlston and Wright.
http://books.google.com/books?id=S7oBAAAAQAAJ.
• Setton, Kenneth Meyer (1984). The Papacy and the Levant, 1204–1571: The Sixteenth Century. IV. Philadelphia: The
American Philosophical Society. ISBN 0-87169-162-0.
• Tait, William (1853). Tait's Edinburgh magazine. 20. Edinburgh: Sutherland and Knox.
• Turnbull, Stephen R (2003). The Ottoman Empire, 1326–1699. New York (USA): Osprey Publishing Ltd. ISBN 0-415-
96913-1.
• Wheatcroft, Andrew (2009). The Enemy at the Gate: Habsburgs, Ottomans, and the Battle for Europe. Basic Books.
ISBN 0465013740, 9780465013746.
Further reading
• Fraser, Robert William (1854). Turkey, ancient and modern: a history of the Ottoman Empire from the period of its
establishment to the present time. A. & C. Black.
External links Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Battle of Szigetvár
Military history of the Ottoman Empire portal
• (Croatian) Animation of the Battle of Szigetvár
• (Hungarian) Hungarian epic poem "Peril of Sziget", written by Nicholas VII Zrinsky
• (Croatian) Nicholas Zrinsky and Battle of Szigeth

Cover of the first edition of Vazetje Sigeta grada, 1584. Turkish–Hungarian Friendship Park in Szigetvar Nicholas Subich
Zrinsky, preparing for the final battle, by Oton Iveković

Szigetvár Fortress today Artistic impression of the battle of Szigetvár Siege of Szigetvár Fortress by overwhelming Ottomans
The largest expansion of Turks (1683)