DOCSLIB.ORG

Romanian Warfare in the Austrian-Turkish War of 1715-1718

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Romanian Warfare in the Austrian-Turkish War of 1715-1718 ANDREI POGĂCIAȘ Independent Researcher Romanian Warfare in the Austrian-Turkish War of 1715–1718 Die rumänischen Provinzen Walachei und Moldau befanden sich im 18. Jahrhundert unter osmanischer Oberhoheit und wurden somit in die Kriege zwischen der Hohen Pforte und den großen europäischen Mächten einbezogen. Die vom Autor gefundenen Quellenbestände zeigen anhand des österreichisch-osmanischen Krieges von 1715– 1718, wie die Armeen dieser Provinzen organisiert waren und welche Rolle sie in den militärischen Auseinandersetzungen gespielt haben. Den Vorurteilen von einer veralteten Kriegsführung in der Walachei und Moldau setzt der Autor die Darstellung der Truppen, ihrer Waf- fen und Kampfstrategien entgegen, um zu zeigen, dass diese Armeen nach modernen Standards organisiert wurden. Introduction The 18th century in the Romanian Countries – Wallachia and Mol- davia – is regarded by Romanian historiography as one of the dar- kest times in Romanian history. The period known as Phanariote, from 1711 to 1821, meant a powerful decrease in sovereignty, auto- nomy, welfare and statute for the two Romanian Principalities. The five Russo-Austrian-Turkish Wars that occurred in the 18th century and the numerous Tatar raids brought the countries to their knees, affected demography, social structures, the economy, and even terri- torial integrity. 13 Andrei Pogăciaș The Phanariote rulers, mainly Greeks appointed by the Ottomans as administrators of the two Principalities, were usually loyal follo- wers of official politics, with the strong aim to keep the local high nobility, known as boyars (Romanian boieri), under strict observati- on and gather as much money as possible for themselves and for the officials in Constantinople they constantly had to bribe. With the new rulers came a large political, administrative and religious apparatus, again consisting of Greeks, who were acting as conquer- ors, taking control over all matters, foreign and domestic. Romanian historiography avoided the study of this period, and only a few social and economic aspects have been analyzed. Also, very few scholars have studied in detail the political and diplomatic as- pects of the period involving the Romanian countries. Until re- cently, nobody has given attention to the military history of the age and to the armies of the two Principalities. The same is valid for Romanian medieval and early modern armies. The main idea was that, during the 18th century, the Romanian Countries had almost no troops, only a few border and Court guards, acting as police and administration rather than combat troops. Studies developed in the last years by the author of this article and which are yet to be pub- lished, have reversed this theory: internal and external documents and chronicles give detailed accounts of numerous types of troops, important effectives and various purposes they served. This article will discuss the participation of Wallachian and Molda- vian troops in the Austro-Turkish War of 1716–1718. The beginning of the 18th century saw the change of political and international statute for the Romanian Countries, as the Phanariote rulers were installed in 1711 in Moldavia and 1714 in Wallachia due to the dan- gers local rulers would pose, now that the two Christian empires, Austria and Russia, were closing in on the Ottoman borders and the Danube. 14 Romanian Warfare in the Austrian-Turkish War of 1715–1718 The Troops As in the rest of Europe, the Romanian rulers had employed foreign mercenaries in the Middle Ages and the practice went on into the Modern Age. The percentage and importance of these mer- cenaries are largely unknown and internal chronicles speak of many nationalities employed as fighters. The era of “national” ar- mies in the Romanian Countries had ended however at the end of the 16th and the beginning of the 17th century, from the times of the Wallachian ruler (voievod) Michael the Brave, the conqueror of Mol- davia and Transylvania. Large numbers of foreigners from the Bal- kans, Eastern Europe, but also Transylvania and even Western Eu- rope were employed during the 17th century both in Moldavia and Wallachia. It is difficult to present the evolution of the armies employed by the rulers of the Romanian Countries without serious research on the matter. For the end of the 17th and the beginning of the 18th centuries, contemporary sources give a very colorful image of many types of troops, cavalry, infantry and some artillery, with many diffe- rent names, tasks, equipment, commanders, uniforms and organiza- tion. The Phanariote rulers employed all these types of troops and tried to keep them satisfied. Some were paid by the state, others were exempted from paying taxes in exchange for military service; some received clothing from the ruler, others received only the money necessary to buy clothes that had to match in color and model; so- me had military roles, others only administrative; some were guar- ding the borders, others were guarding just the mountain passes; some were permanent, others not; some were staying only in the capital or in the main towns, others in the whole of the country etc. It would be natural for this period of decadence to have only few types of troops, if any at all, but a count1 gives the astonishing number of 27 types of troops, some of the names coming from the classical period of the Romanian medieval armies. 15 Andrei Pogăciaș First of all, the guards protecting the Prince and his wife stayed at the Court and in the capital, and were both infantry and cavalry. They had the role to watch over the ruling family, accompany the Prince at official meetings, religious ceremonies or whenever he had to go somewhere. They also participated in war, together with the Prince. They were paid by the state and also had many privile- ges. There were many types of troops among them, such as seimeni, bostangii, arnavuts, panţîri, ciohodari, paici, ceauşi,2 etc. The rest of the troops were spread all over the country and consis- ted mainly of cavalry, more than 65 percent. There were 15 distinct types of troops among the cavalry, such as călăraşi (riders), roşii (reds), Cossacks, mounted dorobanţi/darabans, catane (perhaps Hun- garian/Transylvanian mercenaries), ulans, hajduks, lipcani (Tatars), poteraşi (light irregular cavalry), potecaşi (mounted border guards in the mountains), mounted pandurs, saragele (the yellows), levenţi (mounted volunteers), drăgani (dragoons), panţîri (cuirassiers). The infantry was composed of seimeni, dorobanţi, panduri, tălpaşi, vînători, plăieşi, martalogi, mocani, panduri, and the artillery corps. In case of need, peasants were recruited and organized separately. There were no garrison troops since the two Romanian countries had not been allowed to erect and maintain fortifications by the Ottomans.3 The only fortified places to use in case of need were the fortified monasteries, around 150 in both countries. Many of them had been built in the 17th century, a few in the 18th, and provided good refuge at least for a short period of time. The main weapons were cutting weapons. Internal chronicles and especially foreign travelers insist on the fact that the Romanians didn’t like to use fire weapons, as they considered them unworthy and preferred hand-to-hand fight. These weapons were also much easier to produce and repair. All the guards were armed with swords and lances, but they also had and used fire arms. The rest of the army usually relied on swords, lances, knives, axes, war ham- mers and, until the middle of the century, bows and arrows. Slowly but surely, from the middle of the century onwards, the number of 16 Romanian Warfare in the Austrian-Turkish War of 1715–1718 fire weapons began to increase. Cannons are also mentioned all along this period, in battle or at various ceremonies. As protection, metal helmets were worn by parts of both infantry and cavalry, although the majority of soldiers had headgear made of animal (bear, sheep) fur. The color of the uniforms takes us back to the Byzantine times. The soldiers in the Romanian countries in the 18th century wore mainly green and blue uniforms, while the color red was reserved for the ruling family. Over the course of the period, this “monopoly” disap- peared and red became the color of officer uniforms and of certain units. Only few units wore yellow, which was also a color for the officer corps. Towards the end of the century, the guards at the pa- lace wore white uniforms. Mountain troops wore brown clothes, while irregulars dressed in traditional Romanian costumes. As symbols, the uniforms had numbers representing the unit, on the headgear the initials of the Prince, each unit had its flag and the coat of arms of the Prince was carried with much attention at ceremonies. The ethnicity of the troops was a true mosaic: beside Moldavians and Wallachians, the Phanariotes employed Albanians, Serbs, Bul- garians, Greeks, Turks, Tatars, Hungarians, Russians, Cossacks and even Germans. It is somehow natural, given the fact that mercena- ries were still present in many armies on the continent. The supreme commander of the army was the Phanariote Prince. Under him, various boyars with traditional military roles and names commanded the units. The soldiers were partly paid by the state, but some of them had to sustain themselves. Sometimes they were given cloth to make uni- forms or gifts consisting in money and were exempted from carry- ing various duties or paying certain taxes. They were also allowed to trade inside the country, respecting the special laws regarding 17 Andrei Pogăciaș them. In case of war, they were allowed to prey on the enemy and keep what they had plundered. As many as they were, the Phanariote soldiers proved efficient only in times of peace. In times of war, except for a few cases, they acted cowardly and didn’t prove to be much of an enemy.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Prague Papers on International Relations
    The Thököly Uprising in Hungary and the Timing of the Nine Years’ War and the Glorious Revolution1 György Borus2 ABSTRACT The Glorious Revolution of 1688–89 has been regarded primarily as an episode in English domestic politics and has rarely been considered as a European event. Since the tercentenary of the Revolu- tion, a lot has been done to correct this picture. Now it is clear, for example, that without Prince Wil- liam’s powerful military intervention, which was carried out with the full support of the States Gen- eral of the United Provinces, the Revolution would have been impossible. It should also be pointed out, however, that if William had succeeded in organising a powerful anti-French alliance during the early 1680s, he may not have intervened in England at the end of the decade. The timing and cir- cumstances of William’s intervention can only be understood within the context of European events, which should not be confined to Western Europe. This article seeks to explain the interrelationships between the parallel events of the 1680s in the eastern and western parts of the Continent. It argues that the Thököly Uprising played a major part in frustrating William’s plans of organising a power- ful anti-French coalition and delayed the Nine Years’ War (King William’s War) against France un- til 1688. KEYWORDS 1680s; Louis XIV; William of Orange; Count Imre Thököly; Ottoman Empire; Nine Years’ War; Glo- rious Revolution INTRODUCTION The Glorious Revolution of 1688–89 was one of the greatest turning-points in world history. The dethroning of the Catholic James II (1685–88) by his own nephew and son-in-law, William of Orange, the leading political figure of the United Provinces, was to have far-reaching consequences not only for Britain but the whole of West- ern Europe as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Ottoman History of South-East Europe by Markus Koller
    Ottoman History of South-East Europe by Markus Koller The era of Ottoman Rule, which began in the fourteenth century, is among the most controversial chapters of South-East European history. Over several stages of conquest, some of them several decades long, large parts of South-Eastern Europe were incorporated into the Ottoman Empire, or brought under its dominion. While the Ottomans had to surrender the territories north of the Danube and the Sava after the Peace Treaty of 1699, the decline of Ot- toman domination began only in the nineteenth century. Structures of imperial power which had been implemented in varying forms and intensity in different regions were replaced by emerging nation states in the nineteenth century. The development of national identities which accompanied this transformation was greatly determined by the new states distancing themselves from Ottoman rule, and consequently the image of "Turkish rule" has been a mainly negative one until the present. However, latest historical research has shown an increasingly differentiated image of this era of South-East European history. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Military and Political Developments 2. The Timar System 3. Ottoman Provincial Administration 1. Regional Differences in the Ottoman Provincial Administration 4. Islamisation 5. Catholic Christianity, Orthodox Christianity and Judaism 6. Urban Life 7. Appendix 1. Bibliography 2. Notes Indices Citation Military and Political Developments The Ottoman Empire had its roots in North-West Anatolia where in the thirteenth century the Ottoman Emirate was one of numerous minor Turkmen princedoms.1 The expansion of territory started under the founder of the dynasty, Osman (ca.
    [Show full text]
  • Hungary DSP Case Study Final
    Anti-refugee and Anti-migrant speech in Hungary Dr. Anna Szilágyi and Marcell Sükösd-Kósa January 23, 2018 Summary The case study explores Hungarian anti-refugee and anti-migrant propaganda discourses from 2016 and 2017. The speakers are all powerful actors, including the country’s prime minister Viktor Orbán and the director of the governing Fidesz party Gábor Kubatov. We also analyze the textual component of a meme that was publicized on a blog by one of the celebrities of the local propaganda empire. Although they vary in terms of explicitness, the discourses in question are textbook examples of dangerous speech. The analyzed texts promote and reinforce the hostile, degrading, and inhumane perception and treatment of refugees and migrants as well as set people against those who aim to assist them in any way. Dangerous Speech Framework Analysis Social and Historical Context In September 2017, a rage-filled town meeting took place in Őcsény, a small village of 2,400 in southwest Hungary. During the meeting, furious locals clashed with a guesthouse owner who had offered to let refugee families stay at his guesthouse for a few days. Migration Aid, a local NGO working with migrants and refugees, had organized the short holiday for mostly women and children who were officially granted asylum by the Hungarian government. Many of the locals, however, feared the refugees would bring crime, violence, and disease to Őcsény, rape their children, and generally unsettle the peace of their village. Although the town meeting was organized to establish a platform for mutual understanding between the people of Őcsény and the guesthouse owner, Zoltán Fenyvesi, he was unable to properly explain his stance, as the villagers shouted constantly during the meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Hungary in Central Europe the Strategic Situation in Central Europe the Case of Hungary
    Studien und Berichte zur Sicherheitspolitik 5/2003 Nicolaus Rockberger Hungary in Central Europe The Strategic Situation in Central Europe The Case of Hungary Dr. Nicolaus Rockberger, former Professor at the Swedish National Defence College, is an expert on the history of Central Europe in Sweden. He has pub- lished several books and many articles on the history and politics of Central Europe. Impressum: Schriftenreihe der Landesverteidigungsakademie – Studien und Berichte zur Sicherheitspolitik Medieninhaber: Landesverteidigungsakademie Wien/Büro für Sicherheitspolitik Herausgeber: Hon.Prof. DDr. Erich Reiter und General Raimund Schittenhelm Für den Inhalt verantwortlich und Redaktion: Mag. Walter Matyas Technische Redaktion und Korrektorat: Doris Washiedl Grafik: Dipl.Graph. Franz Stierschneider und Doris Washiedl Druck: Druck- und Kopierstelle Landesverteidigungsakademie Alle: Amtsgebäude Stiftgasse 2a, 1070 Wien ISBN: 3-902275-10-3 2 Inhalt _______________________________________________ HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 5 Creation of the Hungarian State 5 Medieval Times 6 Hungary in Three Parts 6 Under the Habsburg's Sceptre 8 Reform and Revolt 10 The Austro-Hungarian Monarchy 11 Between the Great Wars 13 World War II 14 Communist Times 16 HUNGARY TODAY 19 The Liberation 19 The Political Map 20 Principles of Foreign Policy 21 Hungarian Minorities 22 The Road to Europe 1990–2004 24 NATO Membership 25 Enlargement of the European Union 27 REGIONAL CO-OPERATION 31 Alps Adriatic Working Community 31 The Central-European Initiative (CI) 31 The Carpatho-Euro
    [Show full text]
  • HARVARD UKRAINIAN STUDIES Volume X Number 3/4 December 1986
    HARVARD UKRAINIAN STUDIES Volume X Number 3/4 December 1986 Concepts of Nationhood in Early Modern Eastern Europe Edited by IVO BANAC and FRANK E. SYSYN with the assistance of Uliana M. Pasicznyk Ukrainian Research Institute Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts Publication of this issue has been subsidized by the J. Kurdydyk Trust of the Ukrainian Studies Fund, Inc. and the American Council of Learned Societies The editors assume no responsibility for statements of fact or opinion made by contributors. Copyright 1987, by the President and Fellows of Harvard College All rights reserved ISSN 0363-5570 Published by the Ukrainian Research Institute of Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A. Typography by the Computer Based Laboratory, Harvard University, and Chiron, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts. Printed by Cushing-Malloy Lithographers, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Articles appearing in this journal are abstracted and indexed in Historical Abstracts and America: History and Life. CONTENTS Preface vii Introduction, by Ivo Banac and Frank E. Sysyn 271 Kiev and All of Rus': The Fate of a Sacral Idea 279 OMELJAN PRITSAK The National Idea in Lithuania from the 16th to the First Half of the 19th Century: The Problem of Cultural-Linguistic Differentiation 301 JERZY OCHMAŃSKI Polish National Consciousness in the Sixteenth to the Eighteenth Century 316 JANUSZ TAZBIR Orthodox Slavic Heritage and National Consciousness: Aspects of the East Slavic and South Slavic National Revivals 336 HARVEY GOLDBLATT The Formation of a National Consciousness in Early Modern Russia 355 PAUL BUSHKOVITCH The National Consciousness of Ukrainian Nobles and Cossacks from the End of the Sixteenth to the Mid-Seventeenth Century 377 TERESA CHYNCZEWSKA-HENNEL Concepts of Nationhood in Ukrainian History Writing, 1620 -1690 393 FRANK E.
    [Show full text]
  • The Budapest Chain Bridge
    The Budapest Chain Bridge Amelie Lanier, author of a book on the Viennese banker, Georg Sina, recalls the building of a landmark which links Sina to his arch-rival Salomon von Rothschild The pontoon bridge across the Danube, for centuries the only link between Buda and Pest (Duna Muzeum, Esztergom) The building of the Chain Bridge which connects Buda to Pest is first and foremost connected with the name of Count Istvan (Stephen) Széchenyi (1791-1860), remembered today by his fellow countrymen as the “Greatest Hungarian”. His father Ferenc (Francis) had already distinguished himself by his patriotic convictions and deeds; his name is connected with the foundation of the Hungarian National Library, for example. At the beginning of his career, Istvan led the typical life of a Hungarian nobleman of his time: he joined the army and lived a lavish and rather superficial life in the palaces and ballrooms of Vienna and Budapest. But in the early 1820s he began to change his attitude towards society, under the influence of two people he came to know at the time: his future wife, Crescentia von Seilern, and the cleric Stanislaus Albach. The latter impressed upon Széchenyi the idea that God had chosen every man to fulfil a special task in life. Széchenyi’s love for Crescentia, whom he wanted to convince of his worth, led to his choice of a life’s work: to become the benefactor of Hungary by modernising it in every possible sphere and to raise it to the level of other, more 30 developed European countries. His model was England, and this it remained till the end of his life.
    [Show full text]
  • Hungarians and Rumanians in the Torrents of History
    Hungarians and Rumanians in the Torrents of History Translated from a Hungarian translation of the original Rumanian text Romani si Maghiari in Vartejul Istoriei By Alain Du Nay Editura Matthias Corvinus Buffalo, Toronto 2001 Translator: Bogsányi Dénes HUNGARIANS AND RUMANIANS IN THE TORRENTS OF HISTORY 1 ROMANI SI MAGHIARI IN VARTEJUL ISTORIEI 1 RUMANIANS AND HUNGARIANS IN THE TORRENTS OF HISTORY 5 By Alain Du Nay 5 INTRODUCTION 5 1. THE ETHNOGENESIS OF THE RUMANIAN LANGUAGE AND PEOPLE 5 The Emergence of the Rumanian Language 6 Changes to the Latin Language in the 5th - 7th Centuries 7 Albanian Contacts 7 Homes of the Ancestors of the Albanians 8 Rumanian Dialects 8 The Balkan Linguistic Community 8 Slav Influence on the Rumanian Language 9 Vlachs in Serbian Documents (12th - 15th Centuries) 9 2. HOW DID THE POPULATION OF TRANSYLVANIA DEVELOP? 10 3. THE FIRST RUMANIAN KENEZSHIPS ON THE SNOWY PLAINS 12 4. THE MONGOL INVASION 12 5. THE RUMANIANS 13 The Number of the Rumanian Population in Transylvania 14 6. FEUDALISM 14 7.THE REBELLION OF THE SERFS IN 1437 - THE PACT OF KÁPOLNA 15 8. THE TURKS 15 János Hunyadi 15 The situation of the serfs in the Rumanian principalities during the Turkish reign. 17 9. THE INDEPENDENT PRINCIPALITY OF TRANSYLVANIA 17 Mihály Vitéz in Transylvania 18 10. AFTER THE EVICTION OF THE TURKS 22 11. THE RUMANIAN PRINCIPALITIES: THE ERA OF THE FANARIOTS 22 12. RELIGIOUS UNION IN THE HABSBURG EMPIRE 22 13. THE FREEDOM FIGHT OF FERENC RÁKÓCZI II 23 The Peril of Mádéfalva 23 2 14. PEASANT REVOLTS 23 The Condition of the Peasants in Europe 23 The Rumanians of Transylvania in the 18th Century 23 The Condition of the Peasants in Transylvania.
    [Show full text]
  • RÁKÓCZI EMLÉKKÖNYV RÁKÓCZI EMLÉKKÖNYV Tartalomjegyzék
    RÁKÓCZI EMLÉKKÖNYV RÁKÓCZI EMLÉKKÖNYV Tartalomjegyzék Köszöntő - 7 Előszó - 9 Pálffy Géza: Egy elbukott, mégis sikeres függetlenségi mozgalom – A Rákóczi-szabadságharcról hosszabb történelmi távlatban - 15 Czigány István: Aszimmetrikus háború, aszimmetrikus hadsereg a Rákóczi-szabadságharc idején - 31 Ságvári György: Köntös és mundér – Viseleti rend a kuruc seregben - 57 Kovács S. Tibor: Fegyverek a Rákóczi-szabadságharcban - 79 Mészáros Kálmán: Háború és magánélet – A kuruc tábornoki kar A kötetet szerkesztette: Bódvai András családi háttere a Rákóczi-szabadságharcban - 93 Tervezte és tördelte: Novák Fanni Gyulai Éva: Zboró (Zborov) és a Rákóczi-család - 129 Kontrollszerkesztő: Murányi Tibor Reisz T. Csaba: II. Rákóczi Ferenc alakja Illusztrációk beszerzése: Jenik András Dudits Andor festőművész munkásságában - 179 Tóth Ferenc: Köszönetet mondunk Gaal Gergelynek, Gödölle Mátyásnak, Horváth Róbertnek „A bujdosásban is bujdosnunk kell” – és Mészáros Kálmánnak a könyv előkészítésében nyújtott segítségért A Rákóczi-emigráció története és jelentősége - 209 Kincses Katalin Mária: © Szerzők, 2020 A Rákóczi-kultusz - 229 © Bódvai András, 2020 © V4 Együttműködés Kulturális és Közéleti Egyesület, 2020 Tüskés Gábor: Magyarország képe II. Rákóczi Ferenc önéletrajzi műveiben - 245 Kiadó: V4 Együttműködés Kulturális és Közéleti Egyesület, Budaörs, 2020 Időrendi áttekintés - 264 Felelős kiadó: Sánta Áron Illusztrációk jegyzéke - 266 Nyomda: Premier Nyomda Felelős vezető: Király Attila Résumé - 270 ISBN 978-615-00-8407-7 Az emlékkönyv szerzői - 275 5 Tóth Ferenc „A bujdosásban is bujdosnunk kell” A Rákóczi-emigráció története és jelentősége Rákóczi Ferenc fejedelem az általa te, aki végül a távoli Oszmán Birodalom terü- vezetett szabadságharc (1703–1711) letén talált végső menedéket. Tanulmányunk- II. bukása után hosszú száműzetésbe kényszerült, ban szeretnénk II. Rákóczi Ferenc fejedelem amely előbb Lengyelországba, majd azután életének e szakaszát bemutatni és kifejteni, Franciaországba, végül török földre vezette.
    [Show full text]
  • Hungary Between East and West: the Ottoman Turkish Legacy
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Repository of the Academy's Library Pál Fodor Hungary between East and West: The Ottoman Turkish Legacy In terms of geography, Hungary, or, in a wider sense, the Carpathian Basin, is held to lie in the heart of Europe, insofar as Europe is conceived in the traditional way as stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Ural mountains. Yet it is also commonly said that the territory of Hungary straddles the “highway of peoples”, as the westernmost plain of the great Eastern Steppe, for it was through this area that the peoples passed on their way from East to West in the Middle Ages, some of them settling here only to disappear in the ruins of history (such as the Sarmatians, the Gepids, the Huns, the Avars and others). Magyars ( Hungarians) are likewise a people of eastern origins, which, according to the most recent scholarly view, was formed sometime during the fi rst half of the fi rst millennium B. C., and thus can look back on some three thousand years of history. This ethnic group changed its way of life at least twice thereafter, undergoing a transformation fi rst from a society of hunters and fi shers into nomadic horsemen and then gradually turning from nomads into settled farmers. Their settlement area also changed frequently. Beginning with an original homeland beyond the Ural mountains, they spent a long time in the steppe area of present day Russia and the Ukraine before crossing the Carpathian mountains to settle in their present homeland at the end of the ninth century.1 Their culture was accordingly exposed to multiple external infl uences, and as a result the people itself was profoundly transformed (in terms of material culture, music and religious beliefs) from Finno-Ugrian to Turkic nomad.
    [Show full text]
  • Annales Collegii Nobilium Opolienses Ferenc Tóth* the Voivode
    Annales Collegii Nobilium Opolienses 8 (2019) Ferenc Tóth* Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary The Voivode Józef Potocki and the Prince Francis Rákóczi II Abstract: The recent revival of studies on the Hungarian War of Independence led by Francis Rákóczi II (1703-1711) since the last international conferences on this topic encouraged research on the most important events of European diplomacy in the period of the Spanish Succession War. The importance of the Hungarian War of Independence consists in its capacity of forcing the Habsburg Empire to open a secondary war in Hungary and thus improving France’s military dispositions. Prince Francis Rákóczi II, who is internationally by far the best-known member of his family, is one of the most popular national heroes. Keywords: Francis Rákóczi II, Hungarian War of Independence, Spanish Suc- cession War The recent revival of studies on the Hungarian War of Independence led by Francis Rákóczi II (1703–1711) since the last international confer- ences1 on this topic encouraged research on the most important events of European diplomacy in the period of the Spanish Succession War. The importance of the Hungarian War of Independence consists in its capacity of forcing the Habsburg Empire to open a secondary war in * [email protected], Tóth, F. (2019). The Voivode Józef Potocki and the Prince Francis Rákóczi II. Annales Collegii Nobilium Opolienses, 8, pp. 43–57. 1 The most important event was the international conference “Europe and Hungary in the Age of Ferenc II Rákóczi” organized by the University of Reformed Church Gáspár Károli of Budapest on 24–26th September 2003 (published in Studia Caroliensia 2004/3–4).
    [Show full text]
  • Hungarian History
    Hungarian History Long form Richard Berry (CRCEES) 2 Heart of Europe: a brief history of Hungary by Richard Berry The Carpathian Basin has been home to many different peoples, among them Illyrians, Thracians, Scythians, Celts and Dacians. The Romans established the provinces of Pannonia and Dacia (corresponding roughly to Transdanubia and Transylvania), which became the demarcation line between Rome and the “barbarians”. Hungarians Linguistic evidence places the Hungarians in the Uralic language family (often still referred to as Finno-Ugric), the origins of which lie in the area around the Ural mountains some five or six thousand tears ago. While their nearest linguistic kin, the Ostyaks and the Voguls, moved to the region of the River Ob in Siberia, the ancestors of the Hungarians began their journey westwards in the first centuries of our era. In 896, under their military chieftain Árpád, the Hungarians flooded into the Carpathian Basin, defeating Bulgars, Franks and Bavarians. The highly skilled Magyar horsemen and bowmen presented a challenge to European princes, hence the Swiss monks' prayer: “From the arrows of the Magyars, Lord, deliver us.” Magyar incursions into Italy, France and Germany and even Spain terrified Europe. However in 955 they were defeated at Augsburg by Otto I, founder of the Holy Roman Empire. 3 The reign of Stephen and the Árpád dynasty Under István (Stephen, later St Stephen), the first King of Hungary (crowned AD 1000), Hungary became a Christian country, adopting the Latin rite of the Western Church. Stephen’s ruthless campaigns against the remnants of paganism resulted in the pope granting him the title of “apostolic king” and the right to use the apostolic double cross.
    [Show full text]
  • In Their Progressive Conquest of South Eastern Europe, the Turks Were
    In their progressive conquest of South Eastern Europe, the Turks were aiming at conquering Vienna, capital of the Holy Roman Empire, as door to Central Europe and also because it was built around the Danube River, the most important waterway between the Black Sea, on whose shores Constantinople, aka Istanbul, capital of the Turkish (aka Ottoman) Empire was located, and Central Europe. The Ottoman army had already besieged Vienna for 2 months in August 1683, two years before Ascanio Guadagni’s birth, but it had been defeated on September 12, 1683, by an Army of the Holy Roman Empire allied to the Holy League of Poland and Lithuania. Battle of Vienna, September 12, 1683 However, in 1716, the Ottoman Army was coming back trying to regain some of the territories lost in the Peace Treaty of Karlowitz (1699), following their defeat at Vienna in 1683. So Prince Eugene of Savoy, at the head of the Austrian army, in which captain Ascanio Guadagni had just enlisted, marched towards them (Austro-Turkish War 1716-1718). In 1716, Grand Vizier Damat Ali (second in command in the whole Ottoman Empire, which spread across 3 continents: Europe, Asia and Africa), gathered a 150,000 strong Ottoman army at Belgrade, at that time part of the Ottoman Empire, at the core of which were 40,000 Janissaries [the Janissaries were chosen before they reached adulthood from among the Christian population living in the European Provinces and Anatolia of the Muslim Ottoman Empire to become the elite fighting force of the Ottoman Empire], 20,000 Sipahi [Ottoman cavalry] and 10,000 Tatars (Volga River Cavalry aka “Golden Horde”) together with some renegade Kuruc cavalry (Hungarian anti-Hapsburg rebels, some of whom were Protestants rebelling against the Catholic Hapsburg Monarchy).
    [Show full text]