Gjergj Kastrioti (Skenderbey)

 

Those who do claim Scanderbeg as their own are Macedonians, Serbs & Greeks. It must be noted, however, that we are speaking of sensationalists and not professional historians. Respected historians from the above mentioned nations know better than to claim a well-defined medieval personality as the case of George Kastrioti Scanderbeg, especially when dealing with some weak and easily dismissable arguments.

 

Nevertheless, Scanderbeg's ferocious resistance did the job instead. And for that, he deserves praise. I mean, in practice, he bought precious time for Rome and Western Europe alonside other generals, of whom most noteworthy were Jan�s Hunyadi and Stefan the Great from Transylvania and Moldavia respectively. That is also why Scanderbeg was praised by the Pope and much of contemporary Europe, through ballads and poems. That is why he earned prestigious titles.

 

Regarding the Ottomans not being powerful, I am bound to disagree. Their losses at the hand of Scanderbeg were not the result of them being weak, but rather the excellence and brilliance of Kastrioti, who in a most tactical manner combined the flexibility of his forces with the country's mountainous nature, so as to make advantage of whatever factor he could benefit from and simultaneously make the Ottoman numerical superiority as unimportant as possible. One must remember that it was Mehmed II 'Fatih' (the conquoror) who sacked Constantinople 1453 -- the same man who was Scanderbeg's main enemy. Though the consequences of the crucial defeat the Ottomans had suffered at the hands of Timur Leng 1402 were longlasting, the Ottomans were nonetheless a powerful empire by the time Scanderbeg's men rose to rebellion, 1443. The Ottomans could summon massive armies to their disposal, as was the case in 1453 during the siege of Constantinople, when the Sultan made use of circa 200,000 men to sack Byzantium (modern researchers put the figure at 80,000-100,000 men, which nevertheless, is an impressive figure for those times). They also prooved their power when defeating the crusaders at the battle of Varna, where the Christian army (20,000-30,000 men) was headed by the king of Poland, Wladyslaw III, and the most competent general from Transylvania, Jan�s Hunyadi (Iancu de Hunedoara in Romanian); the Turkish army consisted of 60,000 men. The result was a total defeat -- the Polish king died alongside half of his multi-national army, November 10, 1444.

 

The Ottoman realm under Mehmed II is considered an empire, as far as I know. It extended over two continents and essentially covered what had once been the Byzantine empire. Its Sultans could summon massive forces, as mentioned above. Turkish warriors were excellent combatants, and their Janissaries accumulated a(n in)famous reputation of being vicious fighters. The light Ottoman cavalry was also relatively superior to the heavily armoured Christian knights of the West. Conclusively, they were a factor to reckon with, and be afraid of. That is why Pope Pious was so anxious to aid Scanderbeg with a new crusade. To say that Scanderbeg's task of fencing off the Ottomans was an easily matter is delusional; otherwise, if indeed what he delt with were 'border skirmishes' and nothing more, I doubt he would have gained such fame and popularity in medieval Europe, to the point where Englishmen came all the way from Britain to enlist in Scanderbeg's army.

 

George Kastrioti was always outnumbered; sometimes 1 to 3-4, other times 1 to 10. His capital, Croia (Kruja) was under Ottoman siege thrice (1450, 1466 & 1467). During those times, Ottoman armies reached the figure of 100,000-150,000 men, and were assisted by the artillery. Under those sieges, Scanderbeg left a garrison inside the castle (1,500 men) commanded by his officers, Count Vrana and Andrew Thopia, whilst himself leading a force of 8,000 men outside the walls, continuously harassing the Ottomans. In other occasions, he delt with the Ottomans directly. In the battle of Uj�bardha ('white waters'), 1457, his army of 12,000 men decisively crushed the Ottoman army of 80,000 men, capturing even one of the Ottoman generals. I will write below about his first battle, that of Torviolli 1444 (sometimes known as the 'Battle of Valikardi'), for the sake of demonstrating some of his tactics.

 

The Sultan, enraged by the recent developments in Albania, sent an army of 25,000 men under the command of Ali pasha. Scanderbeg himself raised an army of 14,000 men, of whom 1/2 were cavalry. Instead of letting the Turks advance into the country, Scanderbeg marched with his army towards his homeregion, Dibra, which was along the border. He chose a perfect narrow field, surrounded by thick forest, to fight the battle; there, th Turks could not make much use of their numerical superiority. In order to lure the Turks, Scanderbeg sent some 400 riders under the command of Moisi Golemi to engage the Turks. The Albanians acted defeated and fled; the Turks pursued and arrived at the narrow field, where Scanderbeg was waiting with the rest of his army. On higher points, Scanderbeg positioned his main army -- behind him, on lower grounds making them invisible, stood the reserves. Finally, a large segment of his army were hidden in the dense forest on both sides. After some cavalry skirmishes, the Turks charged; the Albanians, who till then oftenly fought more traditionally and disorganized, now functioned as a single body under their new commander. They did not break their lines, despite heavy casualties, and a wild fight ensued. The cavalry at the sides pressed the Turkish cavalry back and started encircling the Turks. Finally, the hiding warriors in the forests were deployed, and the Turkish ranks fell into confusion and panic. When Scanderbeg finally ordered the 'invisible' reserves to join in the fight, the Turkish army collapsed and fled disorganized, resulting in a massacre.

 

The result was ca 7,000 Turkish casualties (this according to new research; old sources put the figure higher), 2,000 war-prisoners, ca 20 captured banners and a clear victory. The Albanians' casualties are disputed; some claim that as many as 3,000 died, whereas others say that as little as 500 men fell.

 

Well, if Scanderbeg's tactics were 'oriental', it would not surprise me. Afterall, he was a hostage in the Sultan's court and served as an Ottoman soldier and general for much of his life. Though traditional story-tellers like to say he was 'abducted' at age nine, new evidence point towards the fact that he became a hostage at the age of 18. He then fought for the Ottomans in military campaigns in Anatolia & Europe. Naturally, he knew how their armies functioned and acted thereafter.

 

Though personally, I sense he was quite original in his tactis and made use of the indigenous warlike mentality and shaped it into a fighting machine. Among his most powerful weapons was his light cavalry.

The church was destroyed and burned for real, its ruins are now a national monument in Lezha regarding the bones, tales and songs say that they were collected as amulets, this story is reported even by early historians, but I dont know how credible it could be.

 

Pjet�r, what about the new evidence regarding Gjergj Kastrioti recruted at 18?

 

Regarding the religion, Scanderbeg was originary from Mat, and some say from todays Hasi region. Almost two centuries later a prominent albanian from the same region, Pjet�r Bogdani, the catholic archbishop of Shkup, (Skopje) preoves that the populace of those "eastern" regions were of catholic faith, not?