Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)
Battle at Kosovo Polje/Kosovo Field; 1389 |
Post Reply 
|
Page <12345 6> |
| Author |
 Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search  Topic Options
|
|
Guests 
Guest 
|
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Battle at Kosovo Polje/Kosovo Field; 1389Posted: 27-Jun-2007 at 21:44 |
|
|
Tvrtko already had been crowned the legitmate king of Serbia and Bosnia, maybe his status as King made him omit Lazar as a mere prince doing his bidding among a whole pack of noblemen he had already sent out to Kosovo to participate in the battle.
|
||
 |
||
|
Larus
Knight 
Joined: 28-Apr-2007 Location: Bosnia Hercegovina Online Status: Offline Posts: 54 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jun-2007 at 06:27 |
|
|
What he also mentioned in his letters along with "defeating the infidels" was that he personally killed Murad (source- Rade Mihaljčić, "Junaci kosovske legende", page 10, BIGZ, 1989, Beograd). Certainly, this was a propaganda, but I just mentioned it for the sake of my previous argument regarding the myth of Milos Obilic and the battle itself. On the other hand, any one of his subjects fighting the battle could've easily been the one who killed Murad and according to the standards of that era killing would be attributed to Tvrtko himself. Certainly, these statements do not prove a thing, so they can only be treated as pure speculation, but I found them interesting enough to be mentioned.
svantoVID-I didn't however had the opportunity to read those Ottoman sources regarding the battle of Kosovo, so I would appreciate if you could mentioned a few in order for me to look them up (I'm sure most of them are available in English). I must admit this is the first time I heard about Lazar's capture "after the battle while fleeing" and would be eager to learn more about it. As for your statement regarding Tvrtko "not mentioning Lazar in his letter"- well, that has probably nothing to do with one's importance on the battlefield but rather the fact that Tvrtko had it's eyes on vacant Serbian throne and logically recognized Stefan Lazarevic as the arch rival. Therefore, he had a good reason not to mention his father. Cheers, Larus Edited by Larus - 27-Jun-2007 at 06:29 |
||
|
||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jun-2007 at 21:10 |
|
|
tvrtko's letter to the municipality of trogir from 1389.08 appears to be the ONLY direct and contemporary source about the battle
the letter is written in latin, and tvrtko simply wrote, among others, something like
I defeated the Infidel at kosovo
later, he gave the full credit to his Commander-in-Chief Veliki Vojvoda Vlatko Vukovic Kosaca, and explained, that although fully involved on the organization level, and financing, he (Tvrtko) did not personally go to kosovo polje
tvrtko's statements are in full agreement with logistic of events occuring before and after the battle
interestingly, it appears, between august and october, when tvrtko received the answer(s) from florence to his letter(s),
the news about murad's death and 12 brave men, like 12 disciples, started spreading ... etc
as like someone was spinning the story
florence official(s) congratulated tvrtko on his victory, the excellent news,
which they confirmed via independent sources
lazar was not mentioned at all, as if, he did not participate on tvrtko's winning side ? or played rather minor role ?
at least some ottoman sources from 15 ct mention that murad died between the end of august and beginning of september of the same 1389
those reports used lunar islamic calendar, which is more natural than gregorian one, thus less prone to errors
this appears to be in full agreement with the logistics after the battle
same sources also mentioned saruce pasa, who, days or weeks after the battle, captured lazar who was then on the run,
most probably around novo brdo area ?, which was still under the control of retreating ottoman armies
|
||
|
||
|
Larus
Knight
Joined: 28-Apr-2007 Location: Bosnia Hercegovina Online Status: Offline Posts: 54 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 08:27 |
|
|
First of all, battle at Kosovo in 1389. was nowhere near as important as the battle of Marica some twenty years earlier. Combined Serbian and Bulgarian forces outnumbered Turkish troops in that particular battle, but thanks to the military brilliance of Sahin Pasha Turks won the battle which was crucial for the further development of war.
Serbian knights at Kosovo fought bravely together with their Christian allies and they weren't defeated as the popular culture says today- most likely it was a tie, since Turks retreated immediately after the battle just to bring reinforcements later and force Serbian nobles to become their vassals who suffered loses alike their enemies but were not able to recover in numbers for future stuggle. Regarding Milos Obilic, that person never existed- it is a mythical hero created in popular literature thanks to Marvo Orbin, historian from Dubrovnik, many years later. How did Amurad/Murad/Murat died is very hard to say. Maybe he was killed by his son, maybe he was killed prior to the battle or after the battle since most historians agree it was impossible for an enemy to approach his tent during the battle. As far as his killer is concerned the only contemporary person to the battle of Kosovo who ever claimed to be the killer of the Sultan was King Stefan Tvrtko I of Serbs and Bosnia and the Seaside and the Western Lands. |
||
|
||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Jun-2007 at 20:51 |
|
yes
as a part of the preparation for the battle,
murad signed treaties with venice and genoa (pera)
on a number of occasions, including during earlier wars between venice and genoa,
murad rented to venice a few thousand archers
venice were returning the favor
obviously, such things were rather secretly done, nothing in writing ... only some post action reports by third parties
navaresse, catalans, condottieries ...
florentines in greece were on good terms with evrenos beg
yet, officially, they were vassals of d'anjou louis > maria > tvrtko ?
anyone knows any detail about firenze_florence - tvrtko connections ? correspondance ? |
||
|
||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Jun-2007 at 16:18 |
|
|
one could start with von Hammer, follow his references, expand ...
(at least some) knowledge of arabic, ottoman, persian ... would be beneficial
|
||
|
||
|
Kapikulu
Arch Duke 
Retired AE Moderator Joined: 07-Aug-2004 Location: Berlin Online Status: Offline Posts: 1914 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Jun-2007 at 11:31 |
|
From where have you created those illusions
 |
||
|
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough; we couldn't find neither; we made up sorrows for ourselves; we couldn't be consoled; A Strange Orhan Veli |
||
|
||
|
kurt
Consul 
Joined: 17-Apr-2007 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 358 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Jun-2007 at 00:29 |
|
I have never heard of this. Are you making this up? Where did you learn this? I have heard a wide range of accounts regarding Bayezid, the battle of Ankara and his captivity under Timur, but never have i heard this.
|
||
|
||
|
vranakonti
Samurai 
Joined: 11-Jun-2007 Location: Albania Online Status: Offline Posts: 117 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Jun-2007 at 19:52 |
|
|
Of course both armys were multiethnical.For example even italian soldiers are mentioned as mercenarys in the ottoman army.
Edited by vranakonti - 22-Jun-2007 at 19:54 |
||
|
Ti Shqipri m ep nder...
|
||
|
||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 23:28 |
|
|
kosovo polje 1389 June-September
let assume ottomans were able to come near kosovo polje with an army of about 40000
they came from the east and secured all territories south of danube and east of (velika morava, juzna morava), including mountains just east of kosovo polje around novo brdo
thus, to put in field about 40000 men, ottomans needed resources from a huge territory of south eastern balkans and bigger and reacher asia minor,
i.e., rumelia and anadolia
it would be a common sense to expect from their opponent(s) to have similar resources at his_their disposal
who the opponent(s) of ottomans might had been ?
|
||
|
||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 22:03 |
|
|
it appears, bayezid i might have been injured in the battle of cibuk plane near ankara
he was carried around in a specially made bed placed between two horses
months after the battle, still in anadolia,
there was a big party, a multiple wedding, involving among others
timur's grandsons marrying bayezid's daughters
perhaps, at the same ceremony, two lazar's granddaughters had been married to timur's grandson and son of the timur's general, respectivelly
girls mother, lazar's youngest daughter olivera, might had served wine to her husband bayezid,
which appeared rather strange to some of timur's entourage
some dervish wrote proudly to have had succeeded in converting olivera to islam
bayezid expired during the night of 1403.03.(08-09) in Aksehir Anadolia,
probably of internal injuries sustained in battle(s)
|
||
|
||
|
Kapikulu
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator Joined: 07-Aug-2004 Location: Berlin Online Status: Offline Posts: 1914 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Jun-2007 at 15:59 |
|
There are speculations on this matter that has been turning around for years, the poison hidden inside his ring story being the most common, but as far as I know, none of them are proven yet and still only a speculation.
And at later phases of his captivity, it is accounted that Tamerlane treated him very well due to his personal respect, despite humiliating him in the first phase of his captivity.
|
||
|
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough; we couldn't find neither; we made up sorrows for ourselves; we couldn't be consoled; A Strange Orhan Veli |
||
|
||
|
Sarmat
Caliph 
Joined: 31-May-2007 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 3113 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Jun-2007 at 14:23 |
|
Bayezid commited a suicide in Samrkand because he wasn't able to stand constant humiliation at the Timur's Royal court anymore. Timur put him in the iron cage, so Bayezid killed himself by breaking his head against the cage's bars. Edited by Sarmat12 - 18-Jun-2007 at 14:23 |
||
|
Σαυρομάτης
|
||
|
||
|
Kapikulu
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator Joined: 07-Aug-2004 Location: Berlin Online Status: Offline Posts: 1914 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Jun-2007 at 08:01 |
|
1. Bayezid died with his own fate in captivity, not killed.
2. There has been a civil war in Ottoman country after Tamerlane's victory Bayezid's captivity. The former "bey"s of Anatolian "Beylik"s took the power back in the territories they ruled before, with support of Tamerlane. And the sons of Bayazid fell into a long civil war(which took 11 years). The victory was won by Mehmed I, one of the sons of Bayazid and he managed to unify the Ottomans again, then helping it to return back to its former status. Though The Battle of Ankara, 1402, has very longlasting effects. The Anatolian lands, which was mostly unified under Ottoman rule during Bayezid's time, was divided once again and it took more than 50 years to make a reunification.
|
||
|
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough; we couldn't find neither; we made up sorrows for ourselves; we couldn't be consoled; A Strange Orhan Veli |
||
|
||
|
The Hidden Face
Chieftain 
Ustad-i Azam Joined: 16-Jul-2005 Location: Mexico Online Status: Offline Posts: 1379 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Jun-2007 at 10:12 |
|
|
I never knew Murad such important to Balkans. He was merely a Beg of small Ottoman sultanate at those times.
|
||
|
||
|
violentjack
Earl 
Joined: 10-May-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 269 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Jun-2007 at 11:24 |
|
More or less, you are right.Even Franks send contingent of army there Remember after Maritza 1371, more Europeans came to portray Ottomans, as global European issue, and they acted that way.Best example of that unity, would be Battle of Varna, or Varna disaster, when crusaders were about to defeat Ottomans.And guess who saved them.Serbs Loooooool |
||
|
Bosnjaci,probudite se ili nestanite
|
||
|
||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Jun-2007 at 14:24 |
|
|
Hi,may i join the debate? The only certain thing is that the battle was cruel and both leaders Murad and Lazar died,And the turkish army won,but they didnt took at once the control of the province,for example Bayzid returned to instambul immediately with all his army to secure his throne,and the Lazars son stefan accepted the turkish vasallage. The principal elements in the Ballkanic army were the lazars men(lord of central serbia),Brankovics men(lord of Kosovo),bosniaks under the command of Vukovic(one of the Tvrtkos generals),albanians under the lead of Teodor Muzaka,and many other nationalities like hungarians(some fonts say:czechs,valachians,franchs,bulgarians ecc) The same with the Turkish Army serbs,bulgarians,greeks,albanians fought on their side. Army numbers Turks vs Serbs 40000/60000 vs 100000turkish version 40000 vs 25000 27000/30000 vs 15000/20000both serbian version the second one is accepted from the principal western scholars. About the battle,i guess it was just a battle and not that important,what we have today is much more a myth than a historical event,for example the importance of the second battle of Kosovo(were the Serbian role wasnt that positive) or of the precedent battle near the Marica river were an entire Serbian army were destroyed by an surprise nocturnal attack is bigger.
|
||
|
||
|
Aster Thrax Eupator
Suspended
Suspended Joined: 18-Jul-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1929 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Jun-2007 at 09:27 |
|
|
Wasn't he killed in Samarkand by Tamerlane soon after his soon Murad took the throne?
|
||
|
||
|
Bosniakum
Knight
Joined: 12-May-2006 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 76 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Jun-2007 at 22:37 |
|
|
Saying that Tvrtko I Kotromanic was from a serbian royal line is a bit misleading, because Tvrtko like any monarch in medieval europe had blood ties to multiple monarchs. Which in Tvrtko's case were to to the serbian family of Nemanjic, but also even more to the croatian family os Subic and and Hungarian royal family. As far as Bosniaks not existing is not quite accurate. The term Bosniak did not exist at that time, unstead the term Bosnjan (I hope you see the relation) was used in multiple bosnian royal documents describing the inhabitans of Bosnia proper.
As far as Bosnia being a serbian kingdom, that is just nonsense, and is just based on the serbian assumption that all south slavs are originally serbs, which is very flaud, since originally the modern notion of nationality did not even exist. The only senseable coclusion that could be made about about the inhabitants of medieval bosnia, serbia, and croatia is that they were south slavs, speaking a south slav tounge, and that they were seperated by by borders, that were changeing constantly, and religion.
Also the popular assumption about many bosnians (bosnjani) being bogomils is falud. Most modern historians disagree with that. the more recent theories say that besides being chatolic and orthodox many bosnians belonged to the bosnian church, which is just an off shoot of the Chatolic church due to the remoteness of the bosnian terrain.
|
||
|
"I krv svoju za Bosnu moju"
|
||
|
||
|
Theodore Felix
General 
Joined: 10-Jan-2006 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 769 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Jun-2007 at 04:11 |
|
Actually, lower-central Albanians. They were under the leadership of a member of the Muzaka family. He reportedly died during the battle. Edited by Theodore Felix - 08-Jun-2007 at 04:15 |
||
|
||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <12345 6> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz
This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz
This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.
