Serbian Warriors, Defenders of Christian

The seklers are hungarians, but created by the first hungarian kings as an autonom military and administrative group after the  oguz principe (7 groups, with 4-4 clans), made of different hungarian, pecheneg, kabar, onogur bulgar groups.

Edited by Tar Szer�nd - 08-Dec-2007 at 11:42

Harassment was usually the most successful approach to holding back Ottoman armies. In the mountainous terrain of the Balkans, its not too difficult.

In attacking Albania, Ottoman armies would often face continuous strikes from hill top archers, hit-and-run cavalry, poisoned wells, barren fields, etc. On occasion, the more skillful captains would try and lure Ottoman detachments into narrow spots where the number superiority and organization of the Ottoman force would be compromised.

I would think that this is the reason why more fertile states such as Serbia fell first; whereas territories like the Peloponnese, Albania etc. were continuous battlegrounds.   

Edited by Theodore Felix - 12-Dec-2007 at 05:24

Serbian Warriors, "Defenders" of Christian

What about the serbs foughting bravely(since they won)in the other camp,by following your reasoning we should name them "Defenders of Islam"?!

Originally posted by Yugoslav According to sources I know, there were only Bosnian forces next to the Serbian, and most probably a contingent of Croats. There is no historical evidence for others. Also, where did you get that? I've read from countless sources and they all agree that the Turkish forces outnumbered the Serbian (and not by small). Only in one single Turkish source it is said that the Ottomans faced a grandiose Christian coalition in Kosovo of half of Europe which was between 10 and 20 times larger than their own force, an obvious result of the victory's showing to the world.

There were albanians in the balcan coalition,under the lead of Teodor Muzaka,an albanian noble,killed during the battle.And probably the turkish coalition was superior in numbers but not that much,the armies strength was comparable.

Yes, it depends on what you mean by an important defeat. Scanderbeg, Hunyadi, and Vlad all contributed to halting the Ottoman advance, but in the end their lands were overrun. Likewise, the Moldavian victory was great enough, but they too were later defeated and forced to accept Ottoman suzereignty.

Not all of them fell to the ottomans as you sugest.Skanderbeg never fell to the ottomans,he fought and defeted them for 28 years,and after his natural death,the ottomans conquered Albanian lands,but,many regions,remained quasi-independent,and many others remained under ottoman rule,but not with an ottoman presence in their region,and many other regions remained in constant uprisings.

Originally posted by Reginmund Yes, it depends on what you mean by an important defeat. Scanderbeg, Hunyadi, and Vlad all contributed to halting the Ottoman advance, but in the end their lands were overrun. Likewise, the Moldavian victory was great enough, but they too were later defeated and forced to accept Ottoman suzereignty.

Only Skanderbeg has stature in Vatican and several capitals of Europe

Originally posted by es_bih And yet Ottoman-Balkan culture is so vibrant within Albania today as it is throughout Turkey-BiH-Serbia-Greece, ... Yes the invincible Scanderbeg saved all Albania.... Nationalism and history do not coincide. They did lose, if they had not, then the Ottoman state would not have had such a strong base in the Balkans and Anatolia for five centuries.

Its not about nationalism,its a fact that Scanderbeg fought for 25years and his army was defeated only two times,and in these particular occasions he wasn't even on the lead,because he used to divide it in two brunches.The Ottomans took kruja,his city 12 years after his death.In conclusion,of course he saved Albania,during his segment of history though,and maybe he was not invincible,but a winner for sure.


Edited by vranakonti - 18-Dec-2007 at 02:59

Originally posted by GoldenBlood Originally posted by Reginmund Yes, it depends on what you mean by an important defeat. Scanderbeg, Hunyadi, and Vlad all contributed to halting the Ottoman advance, but in the end their lands were overrun. Likewise, the Moldavian victory was great enough, but they too were later defeated and forced to accept Ottoman suzereignty. Only Skanderbeg has stature in Vatican and several capitals of Europe

In the end however they still were futile. A few statues do not change the fact that their efforts were nulled through the Ottoman war machine that subdued those lands under Ottoman control.


The Austrians were the only ones with allied help of course that were able to stop an overstretched Ottoman Empire not Scanderbeg or Kosovo, etc...

True, many states can claim being defenders of christianity. Hungarians held that title for a while. Poles took that title, and would argue that they are the true defenders of christianity after their relief of Vienna in 1683.

Originally posted by GoldenBlood Only Skanderbeg has stature in Vatican and several capitals of Europe