The Battle of the Bosnian Highlands
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: General History
Forum Name: All Battles Project
Forum Discription: Forum for the All Battles military history project
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11510
Printed Date: 14-May-2024 at 04:03
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: The Battle of the Bosnian Highlands
Posted By: Decebal
Subject: The Battle of the Bosnian Highlands
Date Posted: 05-May-2006 at 13:13
|
I recently came across this entry in wikipedia about a great battle between the Bulgarian Empire and the Croatian Kingdom in 927. It says that the Croatian army had 160,000 soldiers, which is an enormous number, that seems to me greatly exaggerated. Does anyone know more about this battle, including accurate figures? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Bosnian_Highlands - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Bosnian_Highlands ------------- What is history but a fable agreed upon? Napoleon Bonaparte Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi 
|
Replies:
Posted By: Bulgarian Soldja
Date Posted: 05-May-2006 at 19:51
|
The figures about the Croatian army at the time are abit over exaggerated yeah, even croat historians say so. We were greatly outnumbered though, but ..... I can tell you that much ... it simply shattered Tsar Simeon I's dreams of conquerin constantinople. Tomislav scared our army. |
Posted By: Maljkovic
Date Posted: 06-May-2006 at 10:47
|
Constantine Porfirogenet recorded that Croatia under Tomislav had 100.000 infantry and 60.000 cavalry. I think it's because that was still a tribal army, where every able bodied man was required to fight. But the battle with the Bulgarians was probably an ambush in some rivine, a common practice in the medevil Balkans. |
Posted By: Decebal
Date Posted: 06-May-2006 at 21:05
|
It seems to me that this may actually have been a decisive battle in world history: had the Bulgarians not lost, they would have turned to Byzantium next. Who knows what the consequences may have been? Although in fairness, Byzantium was notoriously difficult to conquer. ------------- What is history but a fable agreed upon? Napoleon Bonaparte Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi
|
Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 07-May-2006 at 02:03
|
From what I understand, Symeon undertook this campaign simply because
year after year of waiting outside the walls of Constantinople was
unprofitable and demoralizing for his army. Emperor Romanus I Lecapenus
was so unconcerned by the Bulgar army sitting outside the walls, that
he was still giving orders for the Byzantine army in Asia to continue
conquering more land from the petty Arab emirates on the border. I
think that after many years of impotently sitting outside
Constantinople, Symeon realised he needed to keep his army active and
engaged. Constantinople was not to be taken without a fleet, something
Symeon simply could not muster in sufficient quality or quantity. Having subjugated nearly the whole of the Balkan, the only place really left for him to turn to was his western frontier. From what I understand the Croats were indeed a highly militaristic people at this stage and thanks to that managed to defeat Symeon's attack. I don't see how conquering Croatia would have helped Symeon take Constantinople, if anything it would probably drain his military manpower as he had to garrison occupied territory against Croat rebellions and the Catholic powers further west. ------------- |
Posted By: Maljkovic
Date Posted: 07-May-2006 at 06:47
| Actually, what happened was that Byzantines convinced Tomislav to aid them in the struggle with the Bulgarians. He did this by helping Serbian zupan (no translation for the word) Zacharias in his rebelion against Simeon. Since this rebelion was a threat to the Morava-Vardar trade route, the life line of the Balkans, Simeon had to fight Zacharias. And he did. After the fall of Serbia, Zacharias and many of his people sought refuge in Croatia. Simeon asked that Tomislav hand over Zacharias, Tomislav refused and they went to war. |
Posted By: the Bulgarian
Date Posted: 07-May-2006 at 07:44
|
The war with Croatia was not decisive for Byzantium's fait, but Symeon's death. Constantine X² is right to point out that a land army, no matter how strong, is useless without a fleet at the walls of Constantinople. Symeon realized this and sent a mission to the Arabs, offering them a summ they couldn't resist in the exchange of the use of their fleet. Luckily for the Greeks the missionaries were captured and Symeon died before sending someone else. Had he lived five more years or his first mission to the Arabs been successful I'm pretty confident he would have taken Constantinople. |
Posted By: Bulgarian Soldja
Date Posted: 07-May-2006 at 09:44
|
I agree with your first suggestion maljkovic .... and i agree with u aswell bulgarian |
Posted By: NikeBG
Date Posted: 07-May-2006 at 13:51
|
Hah, I just read another topic about this campaign in one Bulgarian history forum. What a coincidence! Anyway, Simeon's campaign to Croatia was basically to cover his rear. And even after this "great defeat" we see nothing really changed, we lost no land and we aimed at Byzantium again. Btw, Constantine XI, I believe Simeon was smart enough to know what he's doing. And he also knew the defences of Constantinople well enough - don't forget that he was raised there (and was even called demi-Greek by the Byzantines themselves). But there are more ways to do a pressure than to simply siege or conquer a city. F.e. I believe that during the war, Simeon didn't allow Byzantine traders, diplomats etc. to cross his borders. And at that time he was at three seas, covering nearly all of the Balkans and especially the main trade routes (including the Balkan part of the Silk route). That's only one possible side... ------------- |
Posted By: violentjack
Date Posted: 11-May-2006 at 13:38
|
Presumed battle was near Vrhbosna area,or just bit bellow near town of Prozor. This was battle between old Samuel 893-927 Bulgarian monarch that brought christianity and increased Bulgarian tertory and abolished tribal systems Bulgars had and proclaimed himself Tzar,before title was Khan like Khubrat or Khrum. By that time Croatia and Bulgaria were biggest state in the Balkans,and on plains of Bosnia,presumed Croatia won against udnefeated Samuel 893-927,around year 926 Ad. Tomislav will die around 930 and he is most famous for bringing Christianity into Croatia,though most of Croatia was christian then,with some paghan influence. So,Croat victory ------------- Bosnjaci,probudite se ili nestanite |
Posted By: Digenis
Date Posted: 11-May-2006 at 15:39
No.Obviously a medieval chronicler's exaggeration. |
Posted By: violentjack
Date Posted: 11-May-2006 at 16:17
|
All those started from Jordanes 1 century Ad,as sometimes historians
got bit carried away in writing..100 000 soldiers i seriously doubt at
that time,more then millenium ago,though Croatia was superpower along
with Bulgaria,but that many soldiers and what ruler would be foolish
enough to risk it all in one battle ?.Remember Basil around 1018
what he did to those Bulgarians,he wasnt Basil Bulgar slayer for
nothing.So, yes sometimes history is just a bit exaggeration and
sometimes truth.If i missed a few years my mistake. Thanks ------------- Bosnjaci,probudite se ili nestanite |
Posted By: NikeBG
Date Posted: 12-May-2006 at 06:19
|
violentjack, to correct some things: "This was a battle between old Simeon 893-927 - Bulgarian monarch, whose father brought christianity, and increased Bulgarian teritory and abolished tribal systems the Bulgars had (which had been dealt with a long time ago, at least since the time of Khan Omurtag) and proclaimed himself Tzar, before the title was Khan like Kubrat or Krum. By that time Croatia and Bulgaria were biggest states in the Balkans, and on plains of Bosnia, presumed Croatia won against udnefeated Simeon 893-927, around year 926 AD." And while looking at http://s49.photobucket.com/albums/f266/NikeBG_History/Historical%20maps/?action=view¤t=448px-Bulgaria-893-927-TsarSimeon-b.png - this map , I don't really see Croatia as "superpower" on the peninsula... Btw, I think that an interesting discussion might appear here! What do you, people, think - why does it appear that Simeon lost in Croatia and despite of this everything continued, as if nothing happened? Reminds me of a case with his father, Kniaz Boris I Mikhail, who was fighting the Romeans (Byzantines) and lost by them, fighting the Serbs and lost by them too, his country was hit by famine and 40 days of earthquakes, and still not only that he didn't lose anything, but he actually received new lands! Usually, when a country is losing the war, and especially if it's in such a hard situation, it's supposed to lose and not to gain territory... ------------- |
Posted By: the Bulgarian
Date Posted: 12-May-2006 at 06:29
| Croatia was no superpower. King Tomislav had won a deffensive war, thus saving his country from becoming another Bulgarian province, and nothing more. He had no means of taking the initiative. In the end Symeon was the one calling the shots in Southeastern Europe. |
Posted By: Digenis
Date Posted: 12-May-2006 at 08:43
Well this map is an exaggeration -Bulgaria's control in the darker marked area was impermanent,and didnt recognised by a treaty. Its wrong for maps to present invasions as status quo. Anyway,the fact is that during Symeon's reign Bulgaria's military power was really great enough to threaten Byzantine Empire. On the other hand,calling Croatia a "superpower" makes words t oloose their true meaning.Croatia was never a superpower. |
Posted By: the Bulgarian
Date Posted: 12-May-2006 at 08:54
|
Yes, Digenis, you're right about the map. These territories were only temporarily occupied (Serbia was annexed for a while though). The map has one more inaccuracy - Hungary was not around by that time. The Magyar state emerged in 1000 AD. Bulgaria bordered the Frankish Empire at the time. |
Posted By: NikeBG
Date Posted: 12-May-2006 at 10:06
|
Well, if you don't like that map, here's another one: http://picvalley.net/files/2006/05/12/669da03cf0e6c7a66765b78716a2f873.jpg">  ------------- |
Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 12-May-2006 at 10:24
|
Posted By: violentjack
Date Posted: 13-May-2006 at 00:27
|
At that time it was,as during that time Europe didnt have 1001 country or state Croatia under Tomislav stretched throughout much of Bosnia and trully was superpower of the day Why else would Samuel in its dying days come and fight against Croats? For Twix?  ------------- Bosnjaci,probudite se ili nestanite |
Posted By: NikeBG
Date Posted: 13-May-2006 at 01:35
|
Uhm, uhm! Once again - it's not Samuil, it's Simeon! This is http://picvalley.net/files/2006/05/12/669da03cf0e6c7a66765b78716a2f873.jpg - Simeon the Great (893-927), this is http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f266/NikeBG_History/Historical%20maps/Encyclopaedia%20History%20of%20Bulgaria/10-VoinitenaTsarSamuil976-1014Padan.jpg - Samuil (997-1014) - more than half a century distance. And Simeon went against Croatia due to several reasons, but mainly to cover his rear, so that he could then concentrate on Byzantium. Definitely not because "Croatia was a superpower". Edit: Here's from Wiki in brief: "The reason might have been that Tomislav received and protected the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbs" title="Serbs - Serbs who were expelled by Symeon from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rascia" title="Rascia - Rascia . In all probability, however, the main reason was that Symeon, if crowned by Papal Legate, feared an attack from Byzantine Emperor supported by Tomislav. Emperor Romanus Lecapenus won the friendship of Tomislav some years previously, handing over the Byzantine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalmatia" title="Dalmatia - Dalmatia to Tomislav and recognizing him as King of Croatia (Pope John X recognized Tomislav as King of Croatia in 925). During the summer of 926, Tomislav sent his troops to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italy" title="Italy - Italy to expel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saracens" title="Saracens - Saracens , from the city of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sipontus&action=edit" class="new" title="Sipontus - Sipontus , which belonged to the Byzantine province of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langobardia" title="Langobardia - Langobardia . This event could have been a sufficient proof to Symeon that the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croats" title="Croats - Croats took the side of the Byzantine Emperor and that they would support him actively in the future. Therefore, when in the next spring Symeon sent a great army against the Croats, Bulgarians were met by Tomislav`s army in the mountainous region of Eastern Bosnia on May 27, 927." ------------- |
Posted By: violentjack
Date Posted: 13-May-2006 at 19:35
 Yes SimeonSorry my bad ------------- Bosnjaci,probudite se ili nestanite |
Posted By: Maljkovic
Date Posted: 14-May-2006 at 17:08
|
Most of you seem to be overlooking an engagement fought three years earlier, when Tomislav beat the Magyar tribes so badly they never crossed the Drava river again. Considering the Magyars were at their peak at that time, it is a testament to the strenght of the Croatian army. I don't see why everybody is writing off Porfirogenet as exagerating. The Byzantine intelligence network was one of best in the world at that time, and considering that after the fall of Bulgaria Croatia became a neighbour to the empire, knowing the strenght of it's army was of vital interest to the Byzantines. I don't see how they could be so off in their asessments, or why Porfirogenet would want to put false information in his book about that subject. |
Posted By: NikeBG
Date Posted: 14-May-2006 at 17:32
Croatia - newfound ally, Bulgaria - strong eternal enemy. ------------- |
Posted By: Maljkovic
Date Posted: 15-May-2006 at 06:58
| In Porfirogenets time this was all ancient history. Croatia was a neighbour of the Byzantine empire and a potential enemy just like any other. And his book was meant solely for his heirs to read, not some Croats who may be flattered by Porfirogenets compliments. |
Posted By: Burdokva
Date Posted: 17-Jun-2006 at 09:16
|
Well, as for the magyars Simeon defeated them too.
Correct me if I'm wrong- The initial magyar invasions of Northern Bulgaria proved almost unstoppable and caused havoc in the country. The situation changed complatly when Simeon turned his full strenght against them, defeating them several times and, actually, leading a merciless camapign. The magayrs migrated around (and trough) the northern bulgarian tzardom to what is this days Hungary. As for the battle itself, the numbers seem rather exaggerated. Even at Acheloi in 917, which was probably the largest (or at least among them) battle in Europe during the Xth century there were in total around 100-110 000 soldiers. It's doubtfull that Tomislav could gather such a force, even if Croatia was very powerfull at the time. Oh, and about the Byzantine-Croat relations- remember that there was almost a century between the fall of the First Bulgarian Tzardom, when the two coutries became neighbours, and the Battle of the Bosnian Highlands. Despite it's ability I doubt that the byzantine intelligence could predict things in such a time span... especially considering that at te moment Bulgaria was by far the most powerfull state in the region. ------------- Unity makes Strenght |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 20-Jun-2007 at 23:21
|
may I have a few suggestions
the title itself should be more descriptive, and understandable, "bell ringing" to wider audience which usually does not know what the Bosnian Higlands is, eg.,
Tomislav the Croat - Simeon the Bulgarian Battle of 925, or similarly ...
could someone, probably the person who started the theme,
describe, in details, family background, and relationships of both rulers,
alliances, political, economic and climate conditions of the times, etc.
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 20-Jun-2007 at 23:49
Sounds like anothe homework helper post... you posted the same topic somewhere else...
The Byzantine intelligence network was superb, however, exagarations were common, maybe his army was around 100, 000 that is 60, 000 less, and still a substantial force, considering he held sway over tribal entities that made up his kingdom such a number sounds plausible. He had noblemen, and clans to call upon from Slavonia, Dalmatia, Vrhbosna/ Bosnia proper, Bosnian Krajina, and Hercegovina. That whole area had a population of maybe 1.5 million. Just the slavic clans would be able to muster much of that number.
------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Jun-2007 at 22:00
|
simeon was his monastic name, what was his real name ?
simeon's mother was maria ? were was she from ?
what was the name of simeon's first wife and were was she from ?
who was tomislav's mother ?
who were tomislav's grandparents ? including maternal ?
on which side were magyars and pechenegs ?
croatia-rascia-bulgaria relationships ?
preslav bulgaria vs preslav(grad) = pressburg = bratislava ??
|
Posted By: Liudovik_Nemski
Date Posted: 02-Jul-2007 at 04:00
|
The croat army won thanks to the hilly terrain and at the end they didn't get anything the border remained the same so this battle isn't of any serious significance. Tomislav would never stand a chance waging a prolonged war against the First Bulgarian empire anyway he had nor the manpower nor the recources needed.Not to mention that the Bulgar armies were already battle hardened from the successful wars of Simeon I against the Eastern Roman Empire.Any objections welcome. |
Posted By: jermanicus
Date Posted: 01-Aug-2015 at 03:41
| Well it might make sense the tomislav had no interest in simeons lands. Who knows what the social or economical situations of his kingdom were. but it probably was enough to just defend and call it a day. Really wish i was there. |