[HISTORICAL ISSUE] - Greatest defeats of the Ottomans in the Tsardoms timeframe

[Diodredai]

Is there any info about those Ahmed and Ali Pashas ?

Interestingly enough, there is no Wikipedia article about them, and a quick search in Hungarian regarding the two Ottoman generals yielded little result, only mentioning that they were the leaders of the siege, but nothing else.
Now of course If I'd do a more detailed search in literature regarding Ottoman defeats in Hungary, I would be able to mine up some result, is it important?

[saneel]

lol christian propaganda doing their work. 1000 vs 60 000 ? lol haha my opinion is that copying from wikipedia should be forbiden here, because its full of crap.

[Tureuki]

@Diodredai

I asked because knowing who are they is important to estimate numbers of forces.

[Diodredai]

lol christian propaganda doing their work. 1000 vs 60 000 ? lol haha my opinion is that copying from wikipedia should be forbiden here, because its full of crap.

I only added the Wikipedia article so those who do not know about the battle could understand the basics.
I'd be happy to cite literature regarding the subject both "christian" and "muslim" if that is your preference. Regarding your comment of "1000 vs 60000" I said historians estimate that the number of participants in the siege were ranging from 1000-2150. vs 35-60000. Adressing your comment of "christian propaganda", do you doubt the battle took place? Even with the highest estimates of 2150 vs 35000, that is still a heroic victory, wouldn't you agree? Regarding your "lol haha my opinion is that copying from wikipedia should be forbiden here, because its full of <I'm not going to recite your expletitive">" I agree that Wikipedia is in no way a credible source, as anybody can edit it, but it is the most easily reachable source.

Also: "christian propaganda doing their work"? That sentence is hard for me to evalute, I'll have you know that I am in no way a fundamentalist christian, or a practicing christian at that, let alone some fool who distorts historical fact due to some religious adherence.

If you have a different view, or different sources please feel free to share, if not, then I'd advise you to start reading some "christian propganda" instead of other books.

~ Diodredai
Note: see my signature. If that doesn't tell you a little bit about my historical background, then I'd suggest you visit the DotS forums. Have a nice day.

@Diodredai

I asked because knowing who are they is important to estimate numbers of forces.

Dear Tureaki!

The Ottoman commanders were:
Kara Ahmed (pasha) leader of the siege
Szokoli Mohamed (beglerbey)
Khadim Ali (pasha of Buda)

[saneel]

I dont say the battle didnt took place, but numbers of troops are just "not normal" in any way. You could at least put some explanation there, but anyway, forget it. The Turks were monsters who ate live childreen and there were millions of them, they were winning by pure numbers etc. With that 1000 vs 60 000 you are saying just that and thats a fact.

[Tureuki]

Numbers are not unbelievable since numbers generally lost its importance againts strong walls.

But as I said I asked who are these Ahmed and Ali Pashas because it will be give us a clue about the numbers.

[Diodredai]

I dont say the battle didnt took place, but numbers of troops are just "not normal" in any way. You could at least put some explanation there, but anyway, forget it. The Turks were monsters who ate live childreen and there were millions of them, they were winning by pure numbers etc. With that 1000 vs 60 000 you are saying just that and thats a fact.

Even if you take the most conservative estimates you will still get 35000 vs 2150. Explanation? Several accounts were recorded by the surviving defenders, and reports that survived to the King about the battle. Even a song was written by Tinódi Lantos Sebestyén, who was present at the siege, defending the walls.
"The Turks were monsters who ate live childreen and there were millions of them, they were winning by pure numbers etc."
I detect a large hint of sarcasm in your comment. More like genius strategy and incredible manpower. Not to mention the infrastructure of the Ottoman empire. Do you really think every European has a view of the Ottomans as savage beats that looted burned and killed their way through the Balkans? Every campaign in world history did that.
Yet again you do not cite me correctly. I never stated that as a fact.

Tureuki check out my last post.

Edit: The correct form in English is: Kara Ahmed grand vezir, Szokollu Mehmed rumelian and Hadim Ali beglerbey (of Buda). I cited a Hungarian source, where it seems the term vezir was translated wrongly.

[Tureuki]

Numbers are normal then, although looks like Eger was an addition, the aim in that campaign was Timișoara, after that they moved to Eger.

Kara Ahmed Pasha become Grand vizier after that campaign, he was a normal Pasha appointed to command of Timișoara front.

[Diodredai]

Numbers are normal then, although looks like Eger was an addition, the aim in that campaign was Timișoara, after that they moved to Eger.

Kara Ahmed Pasha become Grand vizier after that campaign, he was a normal Pasha appointed to command of Timișoara front.

Thanks for the confirmation, and the information!

[uB1C4]

Wow very impressive battle,this battle should be in mode but speaking of propaganda in the Turkish sources the Battle of Maritsa said that there were 70 000 Serbian soldiers,and I wanted to ask Does this battle ever happened i never heard of it before Battle of Sırp Sındığı http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_...B1%C4%9F%C4%B1

[Son of Serbia]

Battle of Sırp Sındığı

Apparently Turkish sources (although I don't know which exactly) are the only ones that refer to double battle of Maritsa river (I mean - the same scenario, nearly the same location in time and geographical sense, rather obscure data on the former of the two battles). This battle was also discussed on this forum before, on another thread, starting from this post: #495, although not too many participants of discussion expressed interest in it, and there was no conclusion. Perhaps it will change. I would also like to know more.

[Tureuki]

That battle confuse me too, these are two different battles with 7 years of difference in Turkish sources, partipiciants are same but are they defeated by the same scenario 2 times ?

[Son of Serbia]

Perhaps the most peculiar thing is that it was an allied army (composed of, as described, Serbs, Bosnians, Bulgarians, Wallachians and above all - Hungarians, led by Louis I himself) that got defeated by the Turkish forces, yet the toponym is strictly specific (and reminiscent of a real battle we all agree took place in the following decade, for that matter): Sırp Sındığı...

Edit:

To throw some light on the locality in question:

This is the modern tri-border area of Greece, Bulgaria, and Turkey, with river of Maritsa dominating the locality. Marked settlements are:
1. Sarayakpınar (minor Turkish settlement with old name of Sırp Sındığı, as stated in Wikipedia article; however, on other pages I even read that Sırp Sındığı is supposedly a completely different locality, a village near Sarayakpınar)
2. Ορμένιο (Chernomen, the toponym Bulgarian sources relate the battle of Marica river with)
3. Edirne (Adrianople, which alleged allied army was going for)

Now, in the lower-left hand corner of the picture you can see the scale of the map. The straight line distance between Chernomen and Sarayakpınar is about 22 km. The battle of Maritsa river was fought at exact location of neither. It is only said that it was fought near Chernomen. So, the area of two battles matches perfectly. Along with perfect match of scenario (one must simply wonder: how come Vukašin and Uglješa learnt nothing from the first defeat and allowed the luxury of loosing the same battle twice? ). And obscure data. And 7 years discrepancy on a time scale (which is all too common for birth, battle and death dates in the timeframe (what I mean is - we can often find that a person was born twice, thrice or even four times, browsing through various sources (a figure of speech, of course); it's the same with battles, so I'll repeat my opinion stated in the thread I've linked above: after date started changing, along with pumping up/decreasing numbers, unwittingly or on purpose, the battle of Maritsa eventually became two battles)).

Also, a funny thing. I had no idea about the degree of importance Turks used to give to us Serbs. Along with toponym Sırp Sındığı, I've also heard of Sirp Gazi in Asia Minor, named so in honor of heroic cavalry of despot Stefan Lazarević that took part in battle of Ankara in 1402. Even more - the level of pertinence remains up to date - there appears to be Sırpsındığı Sk (Sırpsındığı sokak, sokak meaning street in Turkish) in Istanbul.

[uB1C4]

"Also Serbian casualties in this battle was one of the main reasons for Battle of Maritsa that Serbians tried to take a revenge of this battle" So Serbs wanted revenge and 7 years later they raise army and they made same mistake again making camp with no guards and defence and both times most of the drowned in river same place etc .i think this is same battle to much similaritys

[Wallachian]

Don't know if it's already been mentioned in the thread, but: The Siege of Eger

The siege of Eger wasn't mentioned purely because it's not in the Tsardoms timeframe (it occured after 1530).

"Also Serbian casualties in this battle was one of the main reasons for Battle of Maritsa that Serbians tried to take a revenge of this battle" So Serbs wanted revenge and 7 years later they raise army and they made same mistake again making camp with no guards and defence and both times most of the drowned in river same place etc .i think this is same battle to much similaritys

Yes it's too much of a coincidence, it must be the same battle. There are several instances where two battles were merged into one, this seems to be the reverse when one battle was split into two.

[Tureuki]

Perhaps the most peculiar thing is that it was an allied army (composed of, as described, Serbs, Bosnians, Bulgarians, Wallachians and above all - Hungarians, led by Louis I himself) that got defeated by the Turkish forces, yet the toponym is strictly specific (and reminiscent of a real battle we all agree took place in the following decade, for that matter): Sırp Sındığı...

Edit:

To throw some light on the locality in question:
This is the modern tri-border area of Greece, Bulgaria, and Turkey, with river of Maritsa dominating the locality. Marked settlements are:
1. Sarayakpınar (minor Turkish settlement with old name of Sırp Sındığı, as stated in Wikipedia article; however, on other pages I even read that Sırp Sındığı is supposedly a completely different locality, a village near Sarayakpınar)
2. Ορμένιο (Chernomen, the toponym Bulgarian sources relate the battle of Marica river with)
3. Edirne (Adrianople, which alleged allied army was going for)

Now, in the lower-left hand corner of the picture you can see the scale of the map. The straight line distance between Chernomen and Sarayakpınar is about 22 km. The battle of Maritsa river was fought at exact location of neither. It is only said that it was fought near Chernomen. So, the area of two battles matches perfectly. Along with perfect match of scenario (one must simply wonder: how come Vukašin and Uglješa learnt nothing from the first defeat and allowed the luxury of loosing the same battle twice? ). And obscure data. And 7 years discrepancy on a time scale (which is all too common for birth, battle and death dates in the timeframe (what I mean is - we can often find that a person was born twice, thrice or even four times, browsing through various sources (a figure of speech, of course); it's the same with battles, so I'll repeat my opinion stated in the thread I've linked above: after date started changing, along with pumping up/decreasing numbers, unwittingly or on purpose, the battle of Maritsa eventually became two battles)).

Also, a funny thing. I had no idea about the degree of importance Turks used to give to us Serbs. Along with toponym Sırp Sındığı, I've also heard of Sirp Gazi in Asia Minor, named so in honor of heroic cavalry of despot Stefan Lazarević that took part in battle of Ankara in 1402. Even more - the level of pertinence remains up to date - there appears to be Sırpsındığı Sk (Sırpsındığı sokak, sokak meaning street in Turkish) in Istanbul.

A total mess there is world wide respected ones among Turkish historians, personally I don't believe that they can make such a mistake.

Btw, Sırp Sındığı means the place where Serbs got broken, chopped, cutted or any close meaning I didn't heard anything about Sırp Gazi though

[Son of Serbia]

I don't see what's a mess. Besides, I've clearly stated that this is my own opinion, based on the evidence pointed in that article, known historical facts about 1371. battle, and comparison of the two, not de facto truth. I know what Sırp Sındığı means, it's explained in the article, after all. That remark at the end was a joke.

Edit: in that joke, I've mentioned Sırp Gazi (now I see it was also mentioned on page 5 of this thread), which you said you've never heard of. I never heard of it from any official sources, either, rather read about it in some unofficial documents. Can someone who is familiar with the place in question point me to valid documents? If there are such, of course.

[stoogeofstooges]

Okay, I know Eger is not going to be in the game, but just to make a final clear up of the accepted facts This is from the introduction of the Hungarian Book Eclipse of the Crescent Moon. The book itself is a piece of 19th century Hungarian Romanticism/adventure. The introduction is written by the man who did the English Translation of the copy I picked up in Budapest, George Cushing.

"The Hungarian Defenders, including civilians, numbered about 2,000. They successfully held out unaided for thirty nine days against a Turkish force at least twenty times as great which also had immense superiority in weapons. During their summer campaign that year, two Turkish Armies had captured thirty nine Hungarian fortresses with comparative ease; now they combined in a final attack on Eger to open a route northwards...It was the first successful attempt to oppose the Turks in Hungary since the disastrous Battle of Mohacs in 1526 had opened the way for their domination of the Danube Basin, something they were achieving with slow but inexorable determination. True, Miklos Jurisich and his 800 men had held a huge Turkish Army at bay for twenty five days at Koszeg in 1532, but the encounter had ended with a feigned capitulation. Eger had an exceptional commander, Istvan Dobo, who was not only a skillful tactician but a fine leader too."

It goes on a little about his co-commander, then this:

"Yet against all odds the Hungarians survived to see their besiegers withdraw, defeated by a combination of circumstances: the unexpectedly resolute resistance of the defenders, the lack of adequate food supplies and the early onset of winter."

In one of Dobo's letters to Archduke Maximilian for reinforcements, another name pops up: Gergely Bornemissza, a "deak", or scholar. He was sent with 250 riflemen to Eger before the siege.

"But he (Gergely) won fame as an explosives expert. With great ingenuity he used the limited resources of the fortress to keep the Turks in continual fear of devices they had never before encountered. These ranged from straw rings dipped in pitch to delayed action grenades and a huge wheel studded with broken rifle barrels packed with gunpowder; this he rolled down a painstakingly constructed earth rampart into the advancing Turkish troops."

First known eyewitness recording (not saying that all the facts from this guy are true): 1554, chronicler Sebestyen Tinodi.

There you have it.

[Son of Serbia]

Really now? Well, that would be another reason for me to consider it unreasonable that Turks attributed the toponym Sırp Sındığı to Maritsa battle...

[NikeBG]

(one must simply wonder: how come Vukašin and Uglješa learnt nothing from the first defeat and allowed the luxury of loosing the same battle twice? ).

Nothing unheard of - f.e. in 996 tsar Samuil suffered one of his greatest defeats at Spercheios, because he camped near the overflowing river without really caring to place guards, although the forces of Nikephoros Ouranos were camping right at the other bank (and, respectively, during the night they managed to cross the river and Samuil barely managed to save his life). Only seven years later, in 1003, Basil II went against Skopie, but Samuil trusted the overflowing waters of the Vardar river, camped freely and got beaten very much the same way. Some people just never learn...

Also, a funny thing. I had no idea about the degree of importance Turks used to give to us Serbs. Along with toponym Sırp Sındığı, I've also heard of Sirp Gazi in Asia Minor,

Hehe, reminds me of us and the Byzantines, with their Bulgarophygon (the rout of the Bulgars, although later Simeon routed them in the same place). I've also heard there was a mountain in Asia Minor called Bulgar Dag (Bulgarian mountain, apparently the Karaman-name speaks of a small Bulgarian state in that area), renamed in Ataturk's times to Bolkar Daglari (Snowy mountains). Have you heard of it, Tureuki?