Szep, siege of Eger? Were there any Serbs involved ( on both sides ), perhaps some sajkas, river sailors?
1552. The turks had 70 000 men, the hungarians 2500. Eger was the key of Slovakia, in North Hungary so its not likey that serbs were involved since they were active near the Danube and in the south, like Szeged. I have sources though about Cerni Jovan (Black John or the Black man as he was called then, like a blues player) and other 16th century serbs.
Uh there were sajkas garrisons in practicaly every fort on Danube up to Komarom and Gyur. Jovan Nenad, Homo Niger ( thats N-word, I think that it will be censored), so called emperor in the Hungarian time of troubles was indeed interesting man, I believe that he was killed by Valentin Torok's man cause he usurpated his fief Subotica.
Jovan was defeated at Szögyfalva in 1532 by Imre Czibak, the most talented general of that age in Hungary. (hehe same first name like mine) He escaped and a man named Urban wounded him with an arqebusier in Szeged. Then Bálint Török (as you said) cut his head off as he was lying wounded, near Subotica, in Tornyos. He sacked Szeged (which the serbs tried to sack earlier but were denied) and amongs crimes he joined Ferdinand thus became a traitor.
Bálint was a strange man. Great ambition and power, and dubious morality. He allowed turks to cross his lands to forage in Austria but upon returning he ambushed and massacred them. Once cut a soldier in half because he gave an infant for a horse.
Yeah I wondered about that, who was legit king of Hungary: Ferdinand or Zapolya? I mean what's the official stance of historiography about that?
A legitimate king is according to the recent( then recent) law book, Werbőczy, is who is crowned by the Holy Crown in the capital by the archbishop of Esztergom. In certain cases the prequisites were altered by noble parliaments to allow cheating an opponent who had the crown in his hands. (like Frederick III) The crown's "holy power" thus comes from the natio hungarorum, that is the nobility. Pro forma both king was crowned legally as far as I know. Szapolyai was elected by the nobility but Ferdinand was supported by some of them too. Plus Maximillian had an agreement with the Jagellos that if they die out Habsburgs inherit Hungary. Szapolyai was a weak king, a troublemaker, who kissed the ring of the sultan at the battlefield of Mohacs Contemporary nobles called him "King Catherine "because he was weak and his voice was thin like a woman's. Also he late from the battle of Mohacs...ppl. suspected treason. Some of the hungarians though wished a hungarian king and suspected Habsburgs the worst.
Wasn't there a law that foreigner can't be elected as king, Habsburg and Jagiellons had a private deal about mutual inheritance but it couldn't precede the law of the country.Anyway which king is legit according to modern Hungarian history? Ferdinand, cause he was crowned first and not according with countrie's laws or Zapolya who was elected by the majority of nobles and crowned as well as Ferdinand. I believe that later Ferdinand also accepted to pay tribute to sultan as his vassal, altough he didn't kiss his hand.
Historians as far as I know never decided it who was legal king. You can't decide it now. Legality in this case matters little. Hungary had perfectly legal kings who lost the crown because few people supported them (Otto the bavarian, Václav the Premysl) In 1505 the Parliament of Rákos made a law that no foreigner can be crowned to be king in Hungary. However, King Ulaszlo II (Wlaydslaw) was against it -of course, and the law violated the peace of Pozsony, made in 1491. Ferdinand payed money for the sultan, in return of peace, but he wasnt a vassal, maybe the sultan considered him to be, but in reality Ferdinand would never aid the sultan or obey him, whereas Szapolyai had to.
I guess that sultan considered paying tribute as sign of vassalage, I even recall seeing that somewhere, but as you said correctly that didn't make HR emperor an Ottoman vassal.
I think he did but that matters little. Nationalist hisatorians and communist favored "Katherine" Szapolyai back then, but nowadays people are neutral. I favour Ferdinand, the Habsburgs may had done less than they could but only they had the resources to do anything, no one else. Szapolyai was a traitor and thus he deserved to be cut into three pieces. If the turks can control entire Hungary soon they would turn it into a sandjak, destroying the kingdom.
What is everyone's education level in history? Mine is high school & the Internet sprinkle on lots of documentaries and a few books
I completed a B.A. in history in december 2007 but I didn't like the way they forced us to take lots of courses which I didn't always liked. Lots of Canadian history, normal since I live there, but for God's sake, I had Canadian history since I am 12! Can't they let us do what we like after at least the first year of Uni? And because of this, as I already said, my level of knowledge of medieval history is not very good since I only got four courses about this time period. Two of them very general, and the other two focused on a particurlar subject. One was about popular religion and the other one about culture, languages (such as the role of french, anglo-french and latin) and society in France and England during the Later Middle Ages. I'm now doing an M.A. on the Late Roman Army in IVth century Gaul and at the same time working on what I wish I learned (or improved) during the B.A., i.e. greek, german and epigraphy. And Odovacar, if you need help about french, I would be happy to help you
Mmm... I remember English military system in late Medieval time was quite different than most others... May be an interesting subject to study...
Thanks a lot Flavius..as a matter of fact I dont even know german at the level I desire it to know...If Cinna doesnt help me I would provide a very raw german text as my dissertation plan for my Vienna stipendium. I have no formal university grade from history alas...as yet. I was two examen away from completed 4th year, when I was discharged for taking up two courses twice, having not finished them. I was very depressed then, so I didnt mind. I do mind now
BA and starting the MA studies now.
What is the subject of your M.A. Clandestino?
Haven't decide yet, something from national mediaeval history probably.
"I. Clandestino, future king of Subotica. A monography about the future. "
Hey, emperor, not king!
