Wallachian Swords of the 15th Century: What Types?

Elias Shereider · 14th July 2009, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samik

However from what little I know about Vlad's life , in his early youth he was sent together with his brother to Turkey as a hostage. There he was however trained in Ottoman way of war and Qur'an logic. I even think that his "comeback" arrival home was with an ottoman army ,in order to seize fathers kingdom and to become a sort of a pupper ruler for the ottomans (I am not sure on this story though I would welcome if somebody more familiar with Vlad's life could check it up). Thus one might argue that he could have access to Turkish weaponry, although the lack of evidence is preventing from making any such claims.

Yes Samik,

At the 14 years (its de 'Juvenis' age, a adult man in the XV) Vlad was retained by the Murad II in her court un the Ottoman empire for 4 years 1444-1448.
Vlad return to Vallachia in 1448 after the battle of KosovoJ with 30.000 Turkish soldiers to reign Vallachia in Mullads's name.

This indicates that his first sword was Turkish.

sorry for my bad english,

Elias

Jim McDougall · 15th July 2009, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elias Shereider

Yes Samik,

At the 14 years (its de 'Juvenis' age, a adult man in the XV) Vlad was retained by the Murad II in her court un the Ottoman empire for 4 years 1444-1448.
Vlad return to Vallachia in 1448 after the battle of KosovoJ with 30.000 Turkish soldiers to reign Vallachia in Mullads's name.

This indicates that his first sword was Turkish.

sorry for my bad english,

Elias

Hi Elias, and welcome!!! I'm glad to see you here. I hope you will find the discussion intreresting, and add findings from your research on this topic as well.

While I still have been trying to catch up on the complexity of the history of these regions in these times, and am in complete admiration of the command of it by Samik, as well as Emanuel, I'm still not convinced that Vlad would have carried an Ottoman type sword.

It remains that the German influences in Wallachia were prevalent, and certainly the sword blades were as well. In "Hungary and the Fall of Eastern Europe 1000-1568" by David Nicolle (Osprey, 2001, p.26) the sword of Stephan the Great of Moldavia c.1480 is shown (also seen in post #5 here). It is a standard simple crossguard broadsword with blade believed possibly imported from Germany.
Though obviously suggested, not declared, the note is simply to show that these German blades were straight broadsword forms used apparantly extensively in these regions in these times, and by prominant figures. The influence and import of German arms and armour had prevailed for well over two centuries at this point, and certainly would have been well established.

While Vlad was held by the Ottomans, and certainly did receive training by them, it does not necessarily prove that he subscribed to thier styles and weaponry, despite various suggestions of his doing so by later accounts and particularly artistic interpretations.

I think one strong suggestion for the possibility of Vlad's use of a sabre is probably the noted influences of the Cuman (Kipchak) tribes in Hungary and their use of sabres is of course well known, as was that of other steppes tribes whose ethnic presence throughout these regions is established.
Since Vlads final reign was accomplished in the year of his death 1476 with the help of Hungary, perhaps that light have presented the potential for sabres at his disposal.

As always, looking forward to more from Samik, Emaneul and Elias and others who have far better understanding of this history than I, and thier thoughts.

All the best,
Jim

Samik · 15th July 2009, 11:47 PM

Hello Jim and everybody ,

Thanks Elias for the confirmation on Vlad's early life. Man being 18 years old and already leading an army is something. I am also looking forward for more info coming from you Emanuel

.

Great observation on the weapon carried by Draculas' father Jim. And yeah the Cuman presence was quite heavy in the region. Like Emanuel pointed out , many Vlach rulers saw themselves as being descended from their bloodline ( we mention them so much in this thread that they must be spinning in their graves by now

, but anyway they are a bit overlooked factor imo).

However one has to take into consideration that Vlad II was probably a western styled men at arms , using different tactics and weapons than the Cuman warriors. The reason behind him using a longsword as opposed to a sabre isnt just a thing of fashion. It is imho purely a practical one. Western knightly cavalry (or men at arms) were by no means only reserved to fighting from horseback, they often dismounted and fighted on foot , with the longsword providing an edge (pun intended) in hand to hand combat and for its better reach (as well as handling and power generation coming from the usage of both hands).

The evidence for such tactics are very apparent at Nicopolis where the French crusaders (after smashing through akinji light horse) ended up being trapped at anti-cavalry baricades (spikes coming from the ground and such) ;decided to dismount and had no problems dealing considerable damage to the ottoman footsoldiers (the real trouble came from the shower of arrows that was delivered by Sipahi's that managed to outflank them). Another great example of their versatility is a bit later painting depicting the battle of orsha ( IIRC coming from 1530’s, whlist the battle took place in the 1515)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...4-09-08%29.jpg

I cant stress how much that painting is important both for us arms and armour enthusiast , period military researchers and even HEMA community.( I would like to start a separate threat on this fabulous painting , but for now Dracula has bigger magnitude.) Notice the Polish men-at-arms (in maximilian-esque armour) not only guarding cannons/wagenburgen from behind but also being dismounted and placed on flanks and in between the canons themselves. You can see them fighting off the Muscovy Boyars , that are armed in a pretty much Tatar fashion. Which brings me back to those favourite Cumanians of ours.

They (Cumans) were much more comfortable shooting their bow from horseback and using a sabre as a reserve weapon in h2h combat or when in pursuit of fleeling (already broken) troops (pretty much like the Boyars of Muscovy , depicted at the splendid Orsha painting ). That was their "modus operandi". At this as a "nomadic horse nation" they excelled and earned their place beside (and high regard from) the hungarian king (they had as a ethnic minority priviledges that were preserved till 19th century)

(the guys on the right;the king depicted is Lajos the great; 14th century hungarian illuminated chronicle)
But I am sure you already know that by now

Hence one may conclude that longswords were the tools of men at arms (that like to rumble on foot as well) and the sabres are the weapon of choice for the nomadic cavalry (that liked to stay mounted and fighted at a distance; that however is a bit of oversimplification from my side , there are definetly exception but for the sake of our discussion I will leave it at that point , and might return to it in some other thread. ) I know that i might use the hungary as an example too much but I will take the liberty nonetheless and assume that Wallachia was no different, thus sabres being used by ethnic Cumans (that had probably their own smiths) and Vlach men at arms using western armament (there was AFAIK also a native Vlach light horse, I remember reading something on the web and in Heat’s book, ill post some more on the topic if it is desired and if I will be able to find it) .

At a side note , it is a general consensus that sabres are weapons coming from the steepe. I remember reading an article from a Polish-sabre fencer/historian/re-enactor Rick Orli (not sure if that is his proper name) that mentioned one viewpoint of his that changed my perception of the weapon. That was the fact that (from one of his articles on Polish sabre) the curve on the sabre actually helps one to THRUST better from horseback. (i am only paraphrasing , again i might look it up , see if I can find the article somewhere)

Anyway coming back to our herr Dracula. Like Jim mentioned the later paintings depict him somewhat erroneously in contemporary fashion with a fully developed hungarian (or polish or even a "westernish") sabre. I have even found a 17th century depiction of a Knight of the order of the dragon (that both tepes and his father were a part of; illustration from 'Histoire et Costumes des Ordres Monastiques done by Pierre Helyot)

As you can see most of such paintings are decades (well actually centuries) after Dracula's (and members of the order) death. Now I would like to come back to the sabre vs longsword issue (after a rather longish diverson , that served its purpose nevertheless imo). I have already mentioned that Vlad had recieved training from its Turkish captors. However I personally dont know what that training could specificaly consist of (if anyone does , please dont hesitate to contribute). Was he trained as a Sipahi cavalryman?...Did they even let him to get hold of a sabre in the first place? What if the training was only purely on "strategic" level only. Also remember that as a son of a knight Vlad would probably be instructed in the way of longsword very very early in his life (even well before 14 years of age). There is also a similar story about a son of a Serbian despot , being handed over to Tatars as a hostage a century (or two) ago before Vlad. I dont remember the dates or names (I might check it up if you wish), but he was also planned to be placed on serbian throne back as vassal for tatars. However further bio of his life (escaped the captivity and claiming fathers throne or something in similar lines) suggest that his "knightly" character was pretty much untouched (but one might also argue that tatars had different way of handling prisoners and thus their further vassals than the ottomans ). Answers to the questions about his training with ottomans as well as clarification if he could lean more to the knightly/men at arms way (like his father) might shed more light on it.
I remember reading a similar thread on SFi that discussed similar question about Dracula. One of the posters suggestion was that when Vlad was raiding/scouting he was armed with a saber , and on the other hand when he was going into an allout battle , he would arm himself with a longsword and western armour. I liked the suggestion but would argue at some points. For instance why would a nobleman(and a head of kingdom) have to engage in some skirmishing/raiding when a band of Cumans would do the job just fine? Secondly, why would he need to wield a sabre for such occasion? It is shown in both pictorial evidence (Niccole's work on medieval russians) and in Goliath fechtbuch that fencing/fighting with a longsword from horseback was perfectly normal and I dont see any particular reason why would he have to swap for a saber for such particular purpouse.

Sorry for diverting a bit off topic and focusing a bit too much on Vlad

Cheers ,
Samuel

Edit: Sorry Jim I wasnt able to resize the picture (its gigantic and it just takes ages). Also resizing it would imo just make it too.. intangible i guess. Instead I just posted the link to the wikipedia gallery. Sorry for the inconvenience

Edit 2 : This is the part of the painting that I had in mind (as one can get lost in the picture , as its ..simply big) http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...attle_1514.PNG , notice the Polish men at arms "at work"

Jim McDougall · 16th July 2009, 03:28 PM

Excellent post Samuel!!!! and its fantastic the detail you include, well written and explained.
Any way you could resize that fabulous battle scene? I dont have cinemascope on my computer here so I get dizzy trying to scroll back and forth to read the text

Thanks so much, this topic gets better and better, and its great to finally begin to comprehend some of the complexity of this history.

All the best,
Jim

pallas · 19th July 2009, 11:00 PM

a tidbit on the vlachs not being a "warlike people"

the brothers peter, asen, and kaloyan who defeated the byzantines and refounded the bulgarian empire from 1185-1200 AD where vlachs and much of their infantry where also vlachs

TVV · 19th July 2009, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pallas

a tidbit on the vlachs not being a "warlike people"

the brothers peter, asen, and kaloyan who defeated the byzantines and refounded the bulgarian empire from 1185-1200 AD where vlachs and much of their infantry where also vlachs

Most of this is factually incorrect - the brothers Teodor and Asen were small nobles in the Roman Empire. They may have been of Vlach, Cuman or most likely Bulgarian origin - all we know is that they were Christians and that they were located in Moesia, which is nowadays Bulgaria, with their domains in the Hemus mountains.

Upon the success of their rebellion, they clearly demosntrated that the goal was the reestablishment of the Bulgarian state, as they were crowned as Bulgarian Tsars and Teodor assumed the name of Petar, which was the name of the last Bulgarian ruler in the 11th century. Nothing ever indicated that they thought of themselves as Vlachs, and the state they reestablished was clearly Bulgarian.

As for the infantry, I am afraid we have no certain figures to be able to claim one way or another. One needs to keep in mind that during the Middle Ages chroniclers had little interest in correctly identifying the ethnicity of their adversaries, and Eastern Roman chroniclers in particular used any names they thought were offensive enough. Petar and Asen's men are therefore called Bulgarians, Vlachs, Skythians, Barbarians, rebels, bandits, etc.

But it is correct to point out that the Vlachs of those times were anything but peaceful, and many of them most certainly served in the Bulgarian armies of the late 12th and early 13th centuries.

Regards,
Teodor

Gonzalo G · 20th July 2009, 02:47 AM

I don´t think the ´heavliy armored´europeans from this period and place (Wallachia) were not distinct from the turks or indians, since the armour of the common soldier, cavaly or infantryman, seems to be consisted mainly by maille and plaques or scales, just as the turkish armour was. Only a few nobleman apparently had plaque armour, and not many enough to form a special corps in their armies, with tactics adapted to this kind of armour. I agree with Samik, since I think the first magyar sabre model from Kronckew came probably from the avars and not the turks, and it was an old model already in the 15th Century in Hungary, judging by those found in the exhumations of graves from the 10th Century in the area of Hungary, according with Oakeshott. Some of them are very similar with the one attributed to a Charlemagne´s property. This sabers are the result of a much earlier influence from the east, and not necessarily from the turks. The second sabre from Krockew is turkish style, with the yelman and the languets.

The poor Bram Stoker confussed (and mixed) Vlad II Dracul with his son, Vlad III Tepes, which is typical of the occidental misunderstanding about the history of Central Europe and the orient.

Mircea or Mirça the Old, father of Vlad II Dracul, is represented in a statue (or coffin sculpture) with a straight sword. Jancu of Kunedouara or Iancu Hunedoara, ruler of Transylvania, is represented in a statue with a straight sword medieval european style, and with a plaque armour. Just remember that Jancu was contemporary to Vlad II and III. In fact, according with some historians, he participated in some way in the killing of Vlad II and Mirça II, his eldest son, commited by orders of Jan Hunyadi of Hungary (general of the new hungarian king, Vladislav III, Who had just broked a peace treaty with the turks), and some nobleman and saxon merchants from Wallachia.

Jancu also latter appointed Vlad III Tepes as governor of Wallachia, in which post he only stayed for a month, since the King of Hungary removed him as soon he began to impale the enemies of his dinasty (some nobleman and the merchant saxons, allied with the hungarians), according with the same historians. You have to take on account that the hungarian and german sources do not agree in the enumeration of facts with the wallachian-rumanian historians, since Hungary had historic pretentions to rule at least part of the area of actual Rumania (Transylvania and Wallachia, mainly), meanwhile the princes or voivodas from at least Wallachia, fought all time very hard to maintain their sovereignty and independence from both the hungarians and the ottoman turks, not doubting in using temporary alliances with one or another, according with the political or military needs of the moment. For this reason, you can find many contradictions in the enumerations of the historical facts surrounding all this wallachian dinasty, including the facts of Vlad III´s death, since some historians say he was assesinated, and others that he died in battle . And despite the confussions of Bram Stoker, Vlad Tepes only born and lived some years in exile in Transylvania but he and his family are assimilated mainly to Wallachia´s history, and his castle was constructed in the last principality. The history of this period is not, as many want to describe, the history of Europe Christendom against the Muslim Ottoman (the good and the evil), but the history of feudal lords (christian or not), trying to extend their personal dominions to the expense of other´s. Religion always served as a pretext or as a mean to gain political power.

The area (the Balkans, Hungary, Transylvania, Moldava, Wallachia, Bulgaria et al) neverthless, had oriental influences from early many different ways. Huns were there for a period, but they seem to have used straight swords. Magyars and Mongols (Tatar turko-mongols, to be more precise) were other latter influence over them. Maybe the kazar empire had also a role in this, but I still have no information about the type of swords used by the kazars. Earlier turkish influences, not ottoman, cannot be discarded. The blaci from Transylvania are said to be originally the Vlakhs, or also the Bulaqs, another turkish group. The siculi or Székelys moved from Hungary to Transylvania from the 12th Century onwards and were from probable turkish origin. The bulgars established an empire before the 15th Century with the help of oriental ethnic groups, carrying more oriental influences. The Qumans-Kipçak, form turkish origins, and it seems with the probable inclusion of a small contingent from iranian origins (please see István Vásáry, Cumans and Tatars. Oriental Military in the Pre-Ottoman Balkans 1185-1365, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2005) were also present. The pechengs, also from a turkish origin, also settled in Hungary. In fact, those areas are geographically european, but racially and culturally are a mixture of european and oriental elements, though in their political and militar strugle to be independent sovereign states they were european-orientated at the end, even though in the Balkans some muslim population remains to this day.

According with some sources, the one who arrived with a turkish army and ruled as a puppet, was Vlad III´s brother, Radu, and not Vlad. Following this sources, Vlad and his brother were hostages with the turks as a result of a Vlad II´s secret treaty with them, which was the cause of his killing when hungarians discovered it. And meanwhile Vlad escaped from the turks and ran to Wallachia, his brother the young Radu ´The Handsome´, was acused of having a strange intimate relation with the sultan, who latter enthroned him for a short period of time in which Wallachia declined into the service of the ottoman turks. Vlad was appointed governor of Wallachia for the first time (he was governor of Wallachia three times, according with the same sources) by Jancu, and not by the turks. Matías Corvinus was the king who deprived Vlad III from his corporal liberty, though he was not strictly ´incarcerated´ or jailed, but ´arrested´, as he lived having a castle and it´s surroundings as limits for his movements, and was treated princely.

I have seen representations of Vlad III with a plaque armour and a straight sword, but I think this representation was not made during his life (I have only a video with some of this representations, not the kind of images to bring to this discussion). Maybe the straight sword was a symbol of the anti-turkish resistance and a christian element of identity. Stefan the Great was cousin of Vlad III, and they, along with Matias Corvinus, son of Jancu of Kunedouara, lived together in the same castle for several years before they were kings. If Stefan´s sword is straight, it can give us a clue to answer this point.There is also a painting in the Esterházy castle representing Vlad III armed with a sabre, turkish style, but it was made in the 17th Century. It seems that all, but one, were representations made after his death.

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archivo...s_painting.jpg

It seems that the charges and countless stories agains Vlad III were propeled by the hungarians and germans, who were united in their interests over Wallachia. And also by the turks, as he was their implacable enemy. But the version of Vlad III Tepes enthroned by the sultan, is contradictory with the ferocity he always showed against them, which finally earned him the support of the King of Hungary and the Pope during his last mandate. The enemies of Vlad III, were not exempted of making alliances and peace treaties, or the paying of tributes to the ottoman turks, even against christian princes or kings. Germany, in fact, established a friendship alliance with the ottoman at least to the end of the WWI, against christian european countries. All comes to politics and power.

Sorry if I am a little chaotic in my writting, but I don´t have enough time online to make corrections, and I don´t have more bibliographical references at hand in this moment.
Regards

Gonzalo

PD: The brothers Teodor and Asen are called ´roman´ (christian) in some old sources. In others, they are not. Please see the same book from Vásáry. It seems history has been muddled by political interests, then and now.

15th July 2009, 11:47 PM	#3
Samik Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Slovakia Posts: 48	Hello Jim and everybody , Thanks Elias for the confirmation on Vlad's early life. Man being 18 years old and already leading an army is something. I am also looking forward for more info coming from you Emanuel . Great observation on the weapon carried by Draculas' father Jim. And yeah the Cuman presence was quite heavy in the region. Like Emanuel pointed out , many Vlach rulers saw themselves as being descended from their bloodline ( we mention them so much in this thread that they must be spinning in their graves by now , but anyway they are a bit overlooked factor imo). However one has to take into consideration that Vlad II was probably a western styled men at arms , using different tactics and weapons than the Cuman warriors. The reason behind him using a longsword as opposed to a sabre isnt just a thing of fashion. It is imho purely a practical one. Western knightly cavalry (or men at arms) were by no means only reserved to fighting from horseback, they often dismounted and fighted on foot , with the longsword providing an edge (pun intended) in hand to hand combat and for its better reach (as well as handling and power generation coming from the usage of both hands). The evidence for such tactics are very apparent at Nicopolis where the French crusaders (after smashing through akinji light horse) ended up being trapped at anti-cavalry baricades (spikes coming from the ground and such) ;decided to dismount and had no problems dealing considerable damage to the ottoman footsoldiers (the real trouble came from the shower of arrows that was delivered by Sipahi's that managed to outflank them). Another great example of their versatility is a bit later painting depicting the battle of orsha ( IIRC coming from 1530’s, whlist the battle took place in the 1515) http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...4-09-08%29.jpg I cant stress how much that painting is important both for us arms and armour enthusiast , period military researchers and even HEMA community.( I would like to start a separate threat on this fabulous painting , but for now Dracula has bigger magnitude.) Notice the Polish men-at-arms (in maximilian-esque armour) not only guarding cannons/wagenburgen from behind but also being dismounted and placed on flanks and in between the canons themselves. You can see them fighting off the Muscovy Boyars , that are armed in a pretty much Tatar fashion. Which brings me back to those favourite Cumanians of ours. They (Cumans) were much more comfortable shooting their bow from horseback and using a sabre as a reserve weapon in h2h combat or when in pursuit of fleeling (already broken) troops (pretty much like the Boyars of Muscovy , depicted at the splendid Orsha painting ). That was their "modus operandi". At this as a "nomadic horse nation" they excelled and earned their place beside (and high regard from) the hungarian king (they had as a ethnic minority priviledges that were preserved till 19th century) (the guys on the right;the king depicted is Lajos the great; 14th century hungarian illuminated chronicle) But I am sure you already know that by now Hence one may conclude that longswords were the tools of men at arms (that like to rumble on foot as well) and the sabres are the weapon of choice for the nomadic cavalry (that liked to stay mounted and fighted at a distance; that however is a bit of oversimplification from my side , there are definetly exception but for the sake of our discussion I will leave it at that point , and might return to it in some other thread. ) I know that i might use the hungary as an example too much but I will take the liberty nonetheless and assume that Wallachia was no different, thus sabres being used by ethnic Cumans (that had probably their own smiths) and Vlach men at arms using western armament (there was AFAIK also a native Vlach light horse, I remember reading something on the web and in Heat’s book, ill post some more on the topic if it is desired and if I will be able to find it) . At a side note , it is a general consensus that sabres are weapons coming from the steepe. I remember reading an article from a Polish-sabre fencer/historian/re-enactor Rick Orli (not sure if that is his proper name) that mentioned one viewpoint of his that changed my perception of the weapon. That was the fact that (from one of his articles on Polish sabre) *the curve on the sabre actually helps one to THRUST better from horseback.* (i am only paraphrasing , again i might look it up , see if I can find the article somewhere) Anyway coming back to our herr Dracula. Like Jim mentioned the later paintings depict him somewhat erroneously in contemporary fashion with a fully developed hungarian (or polish or even a "westernish") sabre. I have even found a 17th century depiction of a Knight of the order of the dragon (that both tepes and his father were a part of; illustration from 'Histoire et Costumes des Ordres Monastiques done by Pierre Helyot) As you can see most of such paintings are decades (well actually centuries) after Dracula's (and members of the order) death. Now I would like to come back to the sabre vs longsword issue (after a rather longish diverson , that served its purpose nevertheless imo). I have already mentioned that Vlad had recieved training from its Turkish captors. However I personally dont know what that training could specificaly consist of (if anyone does , please dont hesitate to contribute). Was he trained as a Sipahi cavalryman?...Did they even let him to get hold of a sabre in the first place? What if the training was only purely on "strategic" level only. Also remember that as a son of a knight Vlad would probably be instructed in the way of longsword very very early in his life (even well before 14 years of age). There is also a similar story about a son of a Serbian despot , being handed over to Tatars as a hostage a century (or two) ago before Vlad. I dont remember the dates or names (I might check it up if you wish), but he was also planned to be placed on serbian throne back as vassal for tatars. However further bio of his life (escaped the captivity and claiming fathers throne or something in similar lines) suggest that his "knightly" character was pretty much untouched (but one might also argue that tatars had different way of handling prisoners and thus their further vassals than the ottomans ). Answers to the questions about his training with ottomans as well as clarification if he could lean more to the knightly/men at arms way (like his father) might shed more light on it. I remember reading a similar thread on SFi that discussed similar question about Dracula. One of the posters suggestion was that when Vlad was raiding/scouting he was armed with a saber , and on the other hand when he was going into an allout battle , he would arm himself with a longsword and western armour. I liked the suggestion but would argue at some points. For instance why would a nobleman(and a head of kingdom) have to engage in some skirmishing/raiding when a band of Cumans would do the job just fine? Secondly, why would he need to wield a sabre for such occasion? It is shown in both pictorial evidence (Niccole's work on medieval russians) and in Goliath fechtbuch that fencing/fighting with a longsword from horseback was perfectly normal and I dont see any particular reason why would he have to swap for a saber for such particular purpouse. Sorry for diverting a bit off topic and focusing a bit too much on Vlad Cheers , Samuel Edit: Sorry Jim I wasnt able to resize the picture (its gigantic and it just takes ages). Also resizing it would imo just make it too.. intangible i guess. Instead I just posted the link to the wikipedia gallery. Sorry for the inconvenience Edit 2 : This is the part of the painting that I had in mind (as one can get lost in the picture , as its ..simply big) http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...attle_1514.PNG , notice the Polish men at arms "at work" Last edited by Samik; 16th July 2009 at 06:25 PM.

16th July 2009, 03:28 PM	#4
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	Excellent post Samuel!!!! and its fantastic the detail you include, well written and explained. Any way you could resize that fabulous battle scene? I dont have cinemascope on my computer here so I get dizzy trying to scroll back and forth to read the text Thanks so much, this topic gets better and better, and its great to finally begin to comprehend some of the complexity of this history. All the best, Jim

19th July 2009, 11:00 PM	#5
pallas Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 53	a tidbit on the vlachs not being a "warlike people" the brothers peter, asen, and kaloyan who defeated the byzantines and refounded the bulgarian empire from 1185-1200 AD where vlachs and much of their infantry where also vlachs

20th July 2009, 02:47 AM	#7
Gonzalo G Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Nothern Mexico Posts: 458	I don´t think the ´heavliy armored´europeans from this period and place (Wallachia) were not distinct from the turks or indians, since the armour of the common soldier, cavaly or infantryman, seems to be consisted mainly by maille and plaques or scales, just as the turkish armour was. Only a few nobleman apparently had plaque armour, and not many enough to form a special corps in their armies, with tactics adapted to this kind of armour. I agree with Samik, since I think the first magyar sabre model from Kronckew came probably from the avars and not the turks, and it was an old model already in the 15th Century in Hungary, judging by those found in the exhumations of graves from the 10th Century in the area of Hungary, according with Oakeshott. Some of them are very similar with the one attributed to a Charlemagne´s property. This sabers are the result of a much earlier influence from the east, and not necessarily from the turks. The second sabre from Krockew is turkish style, with the yelman and the languets. The poor Bram Stoker confussed (and mixed) Vlad II Dracul with his son, Vlad III Tepes, which is typical of the occidental misunderstanding about the history of Central Europe and the orient. Mircea or Mirça the Old, father of Vlad II Dracul, is represented in a statue (or coffin sculpture) with a straight sword. Jancu of Kunedouara or Iancu Hunedoara, ruler of Transylvania, is represented in a statue with a straight sword medieval european style, and with a plaque armour. Just remember that Jancu was contemporary to Vlad II and III. In fact, according with some historians, he participated in some way in the killing of Vlad II and Mirça II, his eldest son, commited by orders of Jan Hunyadi of Hungary (general of the new hungarian king, Vladislav III, Who had just broked a peace treaty with the turks), and some nobleman and saxon merchants from Wallachia. Jancu also latter appointed Vlad III Tepes as governor of Wallachia, in which post he only stayed for a month, since the King of Hungary removed him as soon he began to impale the enemies of his dinasty (some nobleman and the merchant saxons, allied with the hungarians), according with the same historians. You have to take on account that the hungarian and german sources do not agree in the enumeration of facts with the wallachian-rumanian historians, since Hungary had historic pretentions to rule at least part of the area of actual Rumania (Transylvania and Wallachia, mainly), meanwhile the princes or voivodas from at least Wallachia, fought all time very hard to maintain their sovereignty and independence from both the hungarians and the ottoman turks, not doubting in using temporary alliances with one or another, according with the political or military needs of the moment. For this reason, you can find many contradictions in the enumerations of the historical facts surrounding all this wallachian dinasty, including the facts of Vlad III´s death, since some historians say he was assesinated, and others that he died in battle . And despite the confussions of Bram Stoker, Vlad Tepes only born and lived some years in exile in Transylvania but he and his family are assimilated mainly to Wallachia´s history, and his castle was constructed in the last principality. The history of this period is not, as many want to describe, the history of Europe Christendom against the Muslim Ottoman (the good and the evil), but the history of feudal lords (christian or not), trying to extend their personal dominions to the expense of other´s. Religion always served as a pretext or as a mean to gain political power. The area (the Balkans, Hungary, Transylvania, Moldava, Wallachia, Bulgaria et al) neverthless, had oriental influences from early many different ways. Huns were there for a period, but they seem to have used straight swords. Magyars and Mongols (Tatar turko-mongols, to be more precise) were other latter influence over them. Maybe the kazar empire had also a role in this, but I still have no information about the type of swords used by the kazars. Earlier turkish influences, not ottoman, cannot be discarded. The blaci from Transylvania are said to be originally the Vlakhs, or also the Bulaqs, another turkish group. The siculi or Székelys moved from Hungary to Transylvania from the 12th Century onwards and were from probable turkish origin. The bulgars established an empire before the 15th Century with the help of oriental ethnic groups, carrying more oriental influences. The Qumans-Kipçak, form turkish origins, and it seems with the probable inclusion of a small contingent from iranian origins (please see István Vásáry, Cumans and Tatars. Oriental Military in the Pre-Ottoman Balkans 1185-1365, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2005) were also present. The pechengs, also from a turkish origin, also settled in Hungary. In fact, those areas are geographically european, but racially and culturally are a mixture of european and oriental elements, though in their political and militar strugle to be independent sovereign states they were european-orientated at the end, even though in the Balkans some muslim population remains to this day. According with some sources, the one who arrived with a turkish army and ruled as a puppet, was Vlad III´s brother, Radu, and not Vlad. Following this sources, Vlad and his brother were hostages with the turks as a result of a Vlad II´s secret treaty with them, which was the cause of his killing when hungarians discovered it. And meanwhile Vlad escaped from the turks and ran to Wallachia, his brother the young Radu ´The Handsome´, was acused of having a strange intimate relation with the sultan, who latter enthroned him for a short period of time in which Wallachia declined into the service of the ottoman turks. Vlad was appointed governor of Wallachia for the first time (he was governor of Wallachia three times, according with the same sources) by Jancu, and not by the turks. Matías Corvinus was the king who deprived Vlad III from his corporal liberty, though he was not strictly ´incarcerated´ or jailed, but ´arrested´, as he lived having a castle and it´s surroundings as limits for his movements, and was treated princely. I have seen representations of Vlad III with a plaque armour and a straight sword, but I think this representation was not made during his life (I have only a video with some of this representations, not the kind of images to bring to this discussion). Maybe the straight sword was a symbol of the anti-turkish resistance and a christian element of identity. Stefan the Great was cousin of Vlad III, and they, along with Matias Corvinus, son of Jancu of Kunedouara, lived together in the same castle for several years before they were kings. If Stefan´s sword is straight, it can give us a clue to answer this point.There is also a painting in the Esterházy castle representing Vlad III armed with a sabre, turkish style, but it was made in the 17th Century. It seems that all, but one, were representations made after his death. http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archivo...s_painting.jpg It seems that the charges and countless stories agains Vlad III were propeled by the hungarians and germans, who were united in their interests over Wallachia. And also by the turks, as he was their implacable enemy. But the version of Vlad III Tepes enthroned by the sultan, is contradictory with the ferocity he always showed against them, which finally earned him the support of the King of Hungary and the Pope during his last mandate. The enemies of Vlad III, were not exempted of making alliances and peace treaties, or the paying of tributes to the ottoman turks, even against christian princes or kings. Germany, in fact, established a friendship alliance with the ottoman at least to the end of the WWI, against christian european countries. All comes to politics and power. Sorry if I am a little chaotic in my writting, but I don´t have enough time online to make corrections, and I don´t have more bibliographical references at hand in this moment. Regards Gonzalo PD: The brothers Teodor and Asen are called ´roman´ (christian) in some old sources. In others, they are not. Please see the same book from Vásáry. It seems history has been muddled by political interests, then and now.