Medieval and Early Modern History by Florin-Nicolae Ardelean
Journal of Balkan and Black Sea Studies, 2024
This article aims to provide an overview of the early modern processes of military innovation and... more This article aims to provide an overview of the early modern processes of military innovation and adaptation in Transylvania, focusing particularly on the influence of foreign practices. A former province of the Hungarian Kingdom, Transylvania underwent significant transformation during the second half of the 16th century, emerging as a distinct polity under the suzerainty of the Ottoman Empire. The political and geographical context of this borderland region, shaped by the intense rivalry between the Ottoman Empire and the Habsburg Monarchy, played a critical role in defining the military organisation of the nascent state. The armed forces of the Transylvanian rulers were marked by enduring medieval traditions and customs, especially in terms of recruitment, mobilization and organization. However, some innovations, coming from neighbouring war cultures, were introduced and adapted during the decades following the Ottoman conquest of Buda (1541). The evolution of recruitment methods, the increasing importance of light cavalry and irregular warfare and the evolution of infantry between western and oriental models are some of the most important topics approached in my analysis.
War&Society, 2024
Download the full text: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/7TJVRYUSXNDQ5Q2DVZ2V/full?target=10.10... more Download the full text: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/7TJVRYUSXNDQ5Q2DVZ2V/full?target=10.1080/07292473.2024.2421641
This article analyses the military conscription of peasants in sixteenth
century Transylvania, in a broader, European context. Regulations issued
by the Diet (assembly of the estates) and fiscal registers provide valuable
data for reconstructing the social and legal mechanisms behind this
military custom. The Transylvanian system of military conscription shares
some basic similarities with other forms of conscription implemented by
most European states during this period but, at the same time, has some
significant particularities. The legal status of peasants (serfs) and the
major role of the local nobility in their mobilisation for military service are
two of the key features of this case study.
Jeremy Black (ed.), Cavalry Warfare from Ancient Times to Today , 2024
Transylvania, like many other East-Central European regions, was a place where cavalry never lost... more Transylvania, like many other East-Central European regions, was a place where cavalry never lost its “supremacy” during the early modern period. The prince of Transylvania was able to muster a large cavalry force given the modest size of his state. This was possible because there was a vast supply of horses available in the principality and in neighboring regions. Smaller but faster and resilient breeds, such as Turkish horses, were favored by the lightly armed Transylvanian riders. Most of the cavalry was provided by local levies (nobility, Szeklers and Hajduks) but foreign mercenaries, Poles, Italians and Germans (especially dragoons) were also employed in the army of the principality. There were, of course, significant changes in the development of mounted combat, determined by the wide spread of firearms, especially in the seventeenth century. Instead of relinquishing his position to infantry the horseman adopted new weapons, gave up on some of his defensive equipment and adapted to new tactics on the battlefield. The cavalry of the Transylvanian principality was a very mobile and versatile force skilled in both shock tactics and ranged combat. They excelled in the various forms of irregular warfare but they became vulnerable in pitched battles, especially when faced with an enemy with superior fire power or with heavy cavalry.
East European History Review, 2022
A few years after the Long Turkish War began, Sigismund Báthory, ruler of the Transylvania, decid... more A few years after the Long Turkish War began, Sigismund Báthory, ruler of the Transylvania, decided to join the Habsburgs and the other members of the Holly League in their war against the Ottomans. Through this political decision Báthory ceased to be a vassal of the Turkish sultan, interrupting thus several decades of good relations between his country and the Porte. Although Transylvania was a rather small state, with limited military and economic potential, Prince Sigismund had great ambitions. He was able to attract the rulers of Moldavia and Wallachia on his side and attacked the Ottoman Empire on three fronts. In this article I will analyse the military operations on the frontier of Transylvania with the Ottoman province (eyalet) of Timișoara (Temeşvar). The various forms of regular and irregular warfare employed by the two opponents show the complexity of this confrontation. Major campaigns and sieges, which involved large numbers of combatants, were accompanied by frequent raids and skirmishes, typical for border warfare. These events also reveal the specific social and economic dynamic of frontiers in early modern Central and South-Eastern Europe.
![Research paper thumbnail of La frontiera de vest a Transilvaniei: Ferenc Némethi și evoluția conflictului Transilvano-Habsburgic între 1557-1565 [ON THE WESTERN FRONTIER OF TRANSYLVANIA: FERENC NÉMETHI AND THE EVOLUTION OF THE TRANSYLVANIAN-HABSBURG CONFLICT BETWEEN 1557-1565]](https://attachments.academia-assets.com/106773360/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Crisia, 2022
Ferenc Némethi of Zétény was one of the most powerful nobles in the Habsburg-Transylvanian border... more Ferenc Némethi of Zétény was one of the most powerful nobles in the Habsburg-Transylvanian borderlands. In 1557 he decided to join the Szapolyai faction in their war with the Habsburgs for the Hungarian Crown. Although he was a descendent of a middle ranking noble family from Zemplén County (in the NorthEastern parts of the Hungarian Kingdom), he managed to acquire an important office in the frontier area, the captaincy of Tokaj fortress. In less than a decade he became a leading figure in the Transylvanian military hierarchy and gained significant wealth as a result of his political and military activity. Ferenc Némethi proved great skill in the conduct of irregular warfare but lacked the ability to lead large armies and win decisive battles. He died in 1565 while trying to defend his main stronghold, Tokaj, against a larger army led by the famous Habsburg commander Lazarus Schwendi. This case study reveals the importance of the frontier nobility (marcher lords) in determining the course of the war between the Habsburgs and Transylvania, in the second half of the Sixteenth century.
Territorial Identity and Development, 2021
The last decades have witnessed an increased interest in the research of territorial delimitation... more The last decades have witnessed an increased interest in the research of territorial delimitations in late medieval and early modern Europe. A significant part of the academic debate has been focused on identifying and defining the process of transition from medieval frontiers, perceived as vague areas of contact, to modern linear borders. The aim of this article is to analyse the organisation of the western confines of the Transylvanian Principality duri ng the decades in which this state was formed, from the Ottoman conquest of Buda (1541) until the ratification of the Speyer Peace Treaty (1571). Throughout this period, the territorial delimitation of Transylvania from the Ottoman Empire and Habsburg Hungary was an ongoing process, marked by both military confrontations and diplomatic negotiations. Through a critical reassessment of the most relevant Romanian and Hungarian literature on this complex subject and the analysis of new data from official and narrative contemporary sources, I have tried to identify which were the most important political and military events that shaped the western borderlands of Transylvania. A fundamental objective of my research is to provide an accurate definition for the western region of the Transylvanian Principality, contributing thus to the general debate on the nature of frontiers/borders in sixteenth century Europe.
Povijesni prilozi, Aug 2, 2021
The article gives the history of the noble Croatian family of Perušić, following the life and car... more The article gives the history of the noble Croatian family of Perušić, following the life and career of its main male representatives across three generations, from its emergence in sources in the mid-15th century up until its extinction in the male line in 1603. All three men - Gaspar (Gašpar) the Elder, Gaspar the Younger, and Matthew (Mate) - had primarily military careers, leading cavalry units and fighting either the Turks or other Christian nobles in civil wars which burdened Croatia, Slavonia, Hungary, and Transylvania from the late 15th to the early 17th century. Gaspar the Elder was the vice-ban of Croatia-Dalmatia and is a relatively well-known figure in Croatian historiography, while the lives of his son and grandson are thoroughly researched for the first time in this article. Gaspar the Younger, initially a supporter of the Habsburgs, was fighting the Ottomans in Croatia until 1532, with significant success, and was later engaged in civil strife in Slavonia, changing the sides he supported several times. He finally opted for King John Zápolya around 1538 and migrated to Zápolya's realm, settling finally in Transylvania, where he gained many estates and served several de jure and de facto rulers, including another fellow Croat - the bishop of Oradea, George Martinuzzi (Juraj Utišenović Martinušević). His son Matthew, the last male member of this line of the Perušić family, spent his lifetime as a military commander for various Transylvanian rulers, almost always joining the winning side in the conflict and gaining the house in the informal capital - Alba Iulia. He died in a battle in 1603, survived by his sisters' (Catherine's and Anna's) descendants.
Politics and Society in Central and South-Eastern Europe (13th- 16th centuries), 2019
During the second half of the Sixteenth century, the Transylvanian
principality was actively invo... more During the second half of the Sixteenth century, the Transylvanian
principality was actively involved in the confrontation between the Ottomans and the Habsburgs. Taking the Ottoman side, the young Transylvanian ruler, John Sigismud Szapolyai, was interested in securing his western border by expanding his dominion in the Partium region. In order to successfully oppose a superior enemy, John Sigismund had to rely on the help of the Ottomans and to mobilize the financial and military resources of the Transylvanian estates. In this paper I have analyzed the way in which the Saxon University contributed to the war effort in1566–1567. The political and military context of the campaigns, the military legislation of Transylvania, mobilization, the payment of wages and the collection of war contributions are some of the particular aspects that illustrate the complex mechanisms of warfare and military organization during this period.
Politics and society in Central and South-East Europe: life under the shadow of the Ottoman Empire's expansion (15th-16th centuries), 2021
The Fifteen Years War (1591–1606), also known as the Long Turkish War, was a military conflict, b... more The Fifteen Years War (1591–1606), also known as the Long Turkish War, was a military conflict, between the Ottoman Empire and the Habsburgs. It was a major political event that involved many other European states, including Wallachia, Moldavia and the Transylvanian Principality. Sigismund Báthory, the ruler of Transylvania, joined the Habsburgs in this conflict although he was an Ottoman vassal. It was an act of defiance that had important consequences for the young Transylvanian state. One of the most important strategic objectives set by Báthory, from the beginning of the negotiations with Rudolf II, was the conquest of Timișoara and its surrounding territories, which were lost to the Ottomans during the Middle of the Sixteenth century and transformed into a distinct province, the eyalet of Timișoara. In the first part of the article I have analysed the military actions that prepared the siege of 1596, during the two previous years. The second part is focused on the analysis of several historical sources that described the siege of 1596, with a special emphasis on the works of Bernardino Beccari da Sacile.
Ulrich A. Wien (ed.), Common Man, Society and Religion in the 16th century/Gemeiner Mann, Gesellschaft und Religion im 16. Jahrhundert Piety, morality and discipline in the Carpathian Basin/Frömmigkeit, Moral und Sozialdisziplinierung im Karpatenbogen (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2021), 2021
This article is based on the premise that some innovative aspects of warfare and military organiz... more This article is based on the premise that some innovative aspects of warfare and military organization are strongly linked to Early Modern Religious Reformation and Counter-Reformation. In order to identify these links I have analysed several military regulations issued by Transylvanian rulers during the Sixteenth and the Seventeenth Centuries. By means of my research I will try to answer two important questions: What were the means used to establish and enforce military discipline in early modern Transylvanian armies? And what was the role of religion in the process of establishing and maintaining military discipline? War and religion in Sixteenth and Seventeenth century Europe have been a constant focus for historians over the last decades generating many insightful monographs and studies. However, the Transylvanian principality in particular, and Central and Eastern Europe in general, received less attention from this point of view.
In 1551–1553 Transylvania and the Banat region were defended by a rather large Habsburg military ... more In 1551–1553 Transylvania and the Banat region were defended by a rather large Habsburg military force led by Giovanni Batista Castaldo. Many historical sources, official documents and narrative sources, offer information about the negative impact of the Habsburg army in Transylvania. Abuses committed by Habsburg soldiers against the local population, the increase of war taxes and contribution and the assassination of local leaders are some of the most common facts emphasized by historians concerned with the exploits of Castaldo in Transylvania. The positive aspects of the Habsburg presence in Transylvania in 1551–1553 have been rarely mentioned. A careful re-examination of sources and their analysis in a wider European context will offer a different image of Castaldo and his army and their role in the military modernization of the Transylvanian principality.
The Habsburg troops in Transylvania were an active factor in the process of transfer of military knowledge and technology. Soldiers of different origins (Spanish, Italian, German, Czech, etc.) fought against or together with Transylvanians sharing thus their knowledge and war experience. The initiative of the Habsburgs to recruit local mercenaries in addition to the foreign ones also contributed to the dissemination of new military ideas. The Habsburgs brought a new model of military organization with a complex hierarchy of officers and civil officials who tended to the diverse needs of a modern army. In the following decades the Transylvanians imitated to a certain extent this model. Castaldo played a decisive role in bringing the New Italian Type fortification to Transylvania. The Italian general brought several Italian architects and craftsmen of different origins to work of the defensive system of Transylvania. At the same time the Habsburg army brought modern weapons and war supplies. One of the most important achievements in this field was the organisation of the Arsenal in Nagyszeben. The purpose of the arsenal was to coordinate the activities of building fortifications and supplying them with weapons and ammunition. In fact the Transylvanian principality benefited from the 1551-1553 Habsburg experience. The failure of Castaldo´s rule and the unimpressive performance of his army was a lesson well learned by the future rulers of the principality. It showed the limits of a centralized political authority and the great financial burden of supporting a large permanent military force.
Banatica, 2018
At the end of the 16th century and during the first half of the 17th century the office of captai... more At the end of the 16th century and during the first half of the 17th century the office of captain general maintained its position at the top of the Transylvanian military hierarchy. It was still regarded as a temporary military office, given to trustworthy nobles, during major military campaigns. Nevertheless, the new political and military context, determined some changes in the status of this leading position in the hierarchy of the Transylvanian army.
Historical sources form this period offer us new data about the attributions of Transylvanian captain generals. Offering exemption from military obligations, the internal organization of the army, elaboration and enforcement of military regulations are some of duties performed by the captain generals during this period. As I have mentioned above, the captain general was considered a temporary military position but, during the reign of Prince Gheorghe Rákóczi I, Sigismund Kornis held this office several times for long periods. The appointment of two captain generals is exceptional (Székely and Csáky during the battle of Guruslău, Kornis and Bornemisza in 1642 and 1644). During periods of political crisis the authority of the captain general was greatly increased (it was the case of Csáky, Gyulaffi and Sigismund Rákóczi).
The careers of the eight captain generals analyzed in this article share many similarities. Seven captain generals are representatives of the nobility while only one of them comes from the Szekler seats, Moise Székely. All the seven noble captain generals have origins outside the former Transylvanian voivodeship (Csáky – Bihor, Gyulaffi – Transdanubia, Sigismund Rákóczi – Borsod, Sennyei – Vas, Zólyomi – Bihor, Kornis – Abauj, Bornemisza – Bihor). Confesion was not an obstacle for those pursuing a military career. Five of the captain generals were calvinists, one unitarian and two were catholics. For most cases (six out of eight) the title of captain general was the highest point in their career. Only Székely and Sigismund Rákóczi were elected Prince of Transylvania. Before reaching the highest position in the military hierarchy most personalities held offices of fortress captain or count (comes).
![Research paper thumbnail of Obligaţiile militare ale nobilimii în Transilvania princiară (1540-1657) [The Military obligations of the nobility in princely Transylvania] , în „Crisia”, XL, Oradea, 2010, p. 193-209.](https://attachments.academia-assets.com/24154215/thumbnails/1.jpg)
The nobility of the Transylvanian Principality maintained, until the second half of the Seventeen... more The nobility of the Transylvanian Principality maintained, until the second half of the Seventeenth century, an important military role. Continuing the medieval tradition established in the early Thirteenth century in the Kingdom of Hungary, each nobleman had the obligation to participate in every defensive expedition organized by the ruler of the country. The Transylvanian princes eluded this old custom, and persuaded the nobility of their country to take part in offensive military campaigns. Most of the nobles afforded enough weapons and equipment, to form decent light cavalry detachments, but some of the lesser nobles were only able to procure infantry equipment. The organization of military units followed regional patterns as all the nobles form one county were reunited under a single flag. Military inspections were organized periodically to observe and maintain the arming standards, and also the man power of each county flag. The survival of the principality was thus ensured by a flexible military organization that combined modern elements such as mercenary service, and traditional military structures such as the noble insurrection.
![Research paper thumbnail of Mercenarii străini şi inovaţiile militare moderne timpurii în Europa central-răsăriteană. Armata lui Castaldo în Transilvania şi Banat, [On the Foreign Mercenaries and Early Modern Military Inovations in East Central Europe. Castaldo´s Army in Transsylvania and the Banat] în „Banatica”, 25, 2015.](https://attachments.academia-assets.com/45988244/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Epoca modernă timpurie a fost adesea caracterizată ca o perioadă a schimbărilor importante în div... more Epoca modernă timpurie a fost adesea caracterizată ca o perioadă a schimbărilor importante în diverse domenii precum cel economic, religios, cultural dar şi militar. Dacă aceste schimbări au fost revoluționare sau nu rămâne încă o problemă dezbătută de istorici. Inovațiile militare, tehnice dar şi organizaționale s-au răspândit cu rapiditate în întreaga Europă şi chiar în afara acestui continent, depăşind cu uşurință obstacolele politice, culturale şi lingvistice. Câțiva dintre cei mai importanți factori ce au contribuit la răspândirea noilor idei şi tehnici au fost: dezvoltarea unei vaste literaturi de specialitate (tratate de artă militară, cărți de exerciții militare, memorii etc.) precum şi circulația intensă şi relativ liberă a specialiştilor războiului şi tehnologiei militare: meşteşugari, arhitecți sau simpli soldați ce îşi câştigau existența în slujba unor principi străini. 1 Europa centrală şi răsăriteană s-a dovedit un spațiu foarte receptiv la noutățile epocii. Starea de război aproape constantă între puterile dominante din regiune (Imperiul otoman, Casa de Habsburg şi Uniunea polono-lituaniană) a oferit un context favorabil adaptării şi implementării noilor tehnologii. Începând cu a doua
Uploads
Medieval and Early Modern History by Florin-Nicolae Ardelean
This article analyses the military conscription of peasants in sixteenth
century Transylvania, in a broader, European context. Regulations issued
by the Diet (assembly of the estates) and fiscal registers provide valuable
data for reconstructing the social and legal mechanisms behind this
military custom. The Transylvanian system of military conscription shares
some basic similarities with other forms of conscription implemented by
most European states during this period but, at the same time, has some
significant particularities. The legal status of peasants (serfs) and the
major role of the local nobility in their mobilisation for military service are
two of the key features of this case study.
principality was actively involved in the confrontation between the Ottomans and the Habsburgs. Taking the Ottoman side, the young Transylvanian ruler, John Sigismud Szapolyai, was interested in securing his western border by expanding his dominion in the Partium region. In order to successfully oppose a superior enemy, John Sigismund had to rely on the help of the Ottomans and to mobilize the financial and military resources of the Transylvanian estates. In this paper I have analyzed the way in which the Saxon University contributed to the war effort in1566–1567. The political and military context of the campaigns, the military legislation of Transylvania, mobilization, the payment of wages and the collection of war contributions are some of the particular aspects that illustrate the complex mechanisms of warfare and military organization during this period.
The Habsburg troops in Transylvania were an active factor in the process of transfer of military knowledge and technology. Soldiers of different origins (Spanish, Italian, German, Czech, etc.) fought against or together with Transylvanians sharing thus their knowledge and war experience. The initiative of the Habsburgs to recruit local mercenaries in addition to the foreign ones also contributed to the dissemination of new military ideas. The Habsburgs brought a new model of military organization with a complex hierarchy of officers and civil officials who tended to the diverse needs of a modern army. In the following decades the Transylvanians imitated to a certain extent this model. Castaldo played a decisive role in bringing the New Italian Type fortification to Transylvania. The Italian general brought several Italian architects and craftsmen of different origins to work of the defensive system of Transylvania. At the same time the Habsburg army brought modern weapons and war supplies. One of the most important achievements in this field was the organisation of the Arsenal in Nagyszeben. The purpose of the arsenal was to coordinate the activities of building fortifications and supplying them with weapons and ammunition. In fact the Transylvanian principality benefited from the 1551-1553 Habsburg experience. The failure of Castaldo´s rule and the unimpressive performance of his army was a lesson well learned by the future rulers of the principality. It showed the limits of a centralized political authority and the great financial burden of supporting a large permanent military force.
Historical sources form this period offer us new data about the attributions of Transylvanian captain generals. Offering exemption from military obligations, the internal organization of the army, elaboration and enforcement of military regulations are some of duties performed by the captain generals during this period. As I have mentioned above, the captain general was considered a temporary military position but, during the reign of Prince Gheorghe Rákóczi I, Sigismund Kornis held this office several times for long periods. The appointment of two captain generals is exceptional (Székely and Csáky during the battle of Guruslău, Kornis and Bornemisza in 1642 and 1644). During periods of political crisis the authority of the captain general was greatly increased (it was the case of Csáky, Gyulaffi and Sigismund Rákóczi).
The careers of the eight captain generals analyzed in this article share many similarities. Seven captain generals are representatives of the nobility while only one of them comes from the Szekler seats, Moise Székely. All the seven noble captain generals have origins outside the former Transylvanian voivodeship (Csáky – Bihor, Gyulaffi – Transdanubia, Sigismund Rákóczi – Borsod, Sennyei – Vas, Zólyomi – Bihor, Kornis – Abauj, Bornemisza – Bihor). Confesion was not an obstacle for those pursuing a military career. Five of the captain generals were calvinists, one unitarian and two were catholics. For most cases (six out of eight) the title of captain general was the highest point in their career. Only Székely and Sigismund Rákóczi were elected Prince of Transylvania. Before reaching the highest position in the military hierarchy most personalities held offices of fortress captain or count (comes).
This article analyses the military conscription of peasants in sixteenth
century Transylvania, in a broader, European context. Regulations issued
by the Diet (assembly of the estates) and fiscal registers provide valuable
data for reconstructing the social and legal mechanisms behind this
military custom. The Transylvanian system of military conscription shares
some basic similarities with other forms of conscription implemented by
most European states during this period but, at the same time, has some
significant particularities. The legal status of peasants (serfs) and the
major role of the local nobility in their mobilisation for military service are
two of the key features of this case study.
principality was actively involved in the confrontation between the Ottomans and the Habsburgs. Taking the Ottoman side, the young Transylvanian ruler, John Sigismud Szapolyai, was interested in securing his western border by expanding his dominion in the Partium region. In order to successfully oppose a superior enemy, John Sigismund had to rely on the help of the Ottomans and to mobilize the financial and military resources of the Transylvanian estates. In this paper I have analyzed the way in which the Saxon University contributed to the war effort in1566–1567. The political and military context of the campaigns, the military legislation of Transylvania, mobilization, the payment of wages and the collection of war contributions are some of the particular aspects that illustrate the complex mechanisms of warfare and military organization during this period.
The Habsburg troops in Transylvania were an active factor in the process of transfer of military knowledge and technology. Soldiers of different origins (Spanish, Italian, German, Czech, etc.) fought against or together with Transylvanians sharing thus their knowledge and war experience. The initiative of the Habsburgs to recruit local mercenaries in addition to the foreign ones also contributed to the dissemination of new military ideas. The Habsburgs brought a new model of military organization with a complex hierarchy of officers and civil officials who tended to the diverse needs of a modern army. In the following decades the Transylvanians imitated to a certain extent this model. Castaldo played a decisive role in bringing the New Italian Type fortification to Transylvania. The Italian general brought several Italian architects and craftsmen of different origins to work of the defensive system of Transylvania. At the same time the Habsburg army brought modern weapons and war supplies. One of the most important achievements in this field was the organisation of the Arsenal in Nagyszeben. The purpose of the arsenal was to coordinate the activities of building fortifications and supplying them with weapons and ammunition. In fact the Transylvanian principality benefited from the 1551-1553 Habsburg experience. The failure of Castaldo´s rule and the unimpressive performance of his army was a lesson well learned by the future rulers of the principality. It showed the limits of a centralized political authority and the great financial burden of supporting a large permanent military force.
Historical sources form this period offer us new data about the attributions of Transylvanian captain generals. Offering exemption from military obligations, the internal organization of the army, elaboration and enforcement of military regulations are some of duties performed by the captain generals during this period. As I have mentioned above, the captain general was considered a temporary military position but, during the reign of Prince Gheorghe Rákóczi I, Sigismund Kornis held this office several times for long periods. The appointment of two captain generals is exceptional (Székely and Csáky during the battle of Guruslău, Kornis and Bornemisza in 1642 and 1644). During periods of political crisis the authority of the captain general was greatly increased (it was the case of Csáky, Gyulaffi and Sigismund Rákóczi).
The careers of the eight captain generals analyzed in this article share many similarities. Seven captain generals are representatives of the nobility while only one of them comes from the Szekler seats, Moise Székely. All the seven noble captain generals have origins outside the former Transylvanian voivodeship (Csáky – Bihor, Gyulaffi – Transdanubia, Sigismund Rákóczi – Borsod, Sennyei – Vas, Zólyomi – Bihor, Kornis – Abauj, Bornemisza – Bihor). Confesion was not an obstacle for those pursuing a military career. Five of the captain generals were calvinists, one unitarian and two were catholics. For most cases (six out of eight) the title of captain general was the highest point in their career. Only Székely and Sigismund Rákóczi were elected Prince of Transylvania. Before reaching the highest position in the military hierarchy most personalities held offices of fortress captain or count (comes).
In the early seventeenth century the Principality of Transylvania was a new state, organised in the decades that followed the dissolution of the medieval Kingdom of Hungary, towards the middle of the sixteenth century. The rulers of Transylvania were vassals of the Ottoman Empire but enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy in matters of domestic policy. The second half of the sixteenth century was a difficult period for the young state, caught between two warring factions, the Ottomans and the Habsburgs.
In the first half of the seventeenth century the Principality of Transylvania underwent a process of international affirmation which culminated with its involvement in the Thirty Years’ War. Prince Gabriel Bethlen (1613– 1629) implemented several military reforms that strengthened the professional elements of the Transylvanian army, and he recruited a regiment of German infantry that was kept in service for several decades. The traditional components of the Transylvanian army, such as the Nobility, the Székely and Saxon levies were maintained but their importance was reduced. George Rákóczi I (1630–1648), continued this policy and fought in the Thirty Years’ War as an ally of Sweden and of France. These two rulers had transformed Transylvania into a regional power while still ensuring peace and prosperity inside the country. In 1657 Prince George Rákóczi II, attempted an ambitious military and diplomatic venture by attempting to take the throne of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. He had a strong army at his disposal; he secured alliances with Sweden, the Cossacks, Moldavia and Wallachia, but it was not enough. The campaign was a military disaster and most of the Transylvanian army was captured by the Tartars. In the meantime the Ottoman Sultan organised a punishment campaign that devastated the whole of Transylvania. In addition, in 1660, Transylvania lost its most important fortification on the Western frontier – the fortress of Oradea. The last decades of the autonomous Principality of Transylvania were marked by desperate efforts for survival under the constant pressure of neighbouring empires. From a military point of view the focus shifted to organising a defensive chain of fortifications provided with permanent garrisons and well supplied with modern weapons. This was not enough to stop the eastern expansion of the Habsburgs who managed, in a few years (1686–1690), to completely occupy Transylvania through shrewd diplomacy and a little military effort.
The first chapter of this book offers a broad overview of the history of Transylvania and its rulers in the seventeenth century. The most important political events are presented in connection with social, economic and military developments. The second and third chapters are dedicated to the military organisation of the Principality with detailed discussion of all its components – the military categories, weapons and equipment, recruitment of troops, mobilisation, motivation and compensation, fortifications, military regulations and justice, et cetera. Campaigns and battles represent the main focus of the fourth and final chapter with detailed descriptions of some of the most important military achievements of Transylvania during the early modern age.
https://www.helion.co.uk/military-history-books/on-the-borderlands-of-great-empires-transylvanian-armies-1541-1613.php?sid=144abdd3561539f88e9f874143c9ff4b
chapter in the history of the Romanian University of Cluj in
the interwar period. Professor Alexandru Borza, director of
the Botanical Garden, Botanical Museum and the Institute of
Systematic Botany, was able to build an impressive network
of foreign partners from Europe, Asia, Africa, America and
Australia. In this article I have analysed the official correspondence
of professor Borza in order to identify the most important
means of cooperation and the extent of his international
network. The letters sent to foreign recipients or received from
abroad, as well as the internal correspondence referring to foreign
relations, indicates that the exchange of publications and
scientific materials (plants, seeds, etc.) were the most common
means of connecting with the international academic community.
At the same time, a quantitative assessment of these historical
sources reveals the strong relations established by Alexandru
Borza with German institutions and scientists.
The East Slovak Museum (Východoslovenské Múzeum), Námestie Maratónu Mieru 2, Košice, Slovakia
The Institute of History of the Slovak Academy of Sciences in cooperation with the East Slovak Museum in Košice, the Slovak Historical Society, Department of Legal History and Comparative Law of the Faculty of Law, Comenius University in Bratislava
The Journal of Balkan and Black Sea Studies is an Istanbul-based publication dedicated to fostering academic exchange among social scientists from Turkey, the Balkans, the Caucasus, and Eastern European countries. We launched the journal in 2018 and have since published twelve issues. The current, thirteenth issue includes five research articles and one book review.
The first two articles in this issue, edited by our guest editor Dr. Adrian Gheorghe, focus on the military history of the Balkans. These papers were initially presented at the international workshop "Culture(s) of War between Transcarpathia and the Bosporus, 14th–16th Century," held online in July 2024 by the Institute for Middle Eastern Studies at Munich University.
This one-day event explored the transformation of war cultures in Eastern and Southeastern Europe during the 14th to 16th centuries, a period marked by the rise of the Ottoman Empire and significant geopolitical upheavals. Adopting a comparative and interdisciplinary approach, the workshop examined the region’s military organizations and warfare practices within a broader transregional framework. Key discussions centred on the evolution of war culture, tracing its shift from pre-Ottoman traditions to its integration into the Ottoman Commonwealth. Participants analysed the interplay between military structures, the transfer of knowledge, and cultural practices of war, highlighting areas of convergence and divergence across the region.
The first article, "Warfare in the Serbian State from the Late 14th to the Mid-15th Century" by Miloš Ivanović, explores the transformation of Serbian military organization under Ottoman pressure. It examines how rulers like Despot Stefan Lazarević restructured local governance and expanded the pronoia system to bolster defences. The study highlights advancements in fortifications and weaponry, as well as the adaptation of military service to meet the demands of Ottoman suzerainty.
The second article, "War, Innovations and Cultural Transfers in East-Central Europe: The Army of Transylvania in the Age of Transition from Voivodeship to Principality" by Florin Nicolae Ardelean, investigates military evolution in Transylvania during the 16th century. It discusses the interplay of medieval traditions with foreign influences, such as Ottoman and Habsburg practices, and the adaptation of recruitment methods, light cavalry, and infantry models. The article situates these changes within the broader political and cultural context of a borderland under Ottoman suzerainty.
In addition to these two thematic contributions, there are three other research articles on various aspects of Southeast European history:
The third article of the issue by Bilgin Çelik on "Some Assessments of the Habsburg Ambassador J.M.V. Pallavicini in the Process of Diplomatic Polarisation in Europe in His Istanbul Mission and Reports before the Balkan War" (in Turkish) discusses Pallavicini's tenure as the Habsburg ambassador in Istanbul during a period of heightened international tension over the Macedonian Question. The article highlights his diplomatic challenges, particularly during the 1908 Bosnian annexation, and his respected role as a senior Great Power diplomat amidst rising tensions before the Balkan War.
The fourth article by Elçin Macar, titled “Shifting Identities as a Strategy to Remain in the Homeland: The Remarkable History of Kurfallı, Eastern Thrace's Last Bulgarian Village,” examines the history of a village inhabited by Bulgarians. Based on Ottoman and Turkish archival sources, it describes the population's response to various population exchange policies. To remain in their village, they initially declared themselves as Greeks. During the population exchange period, they identified as Bulgarians. This strategy allowed them to stay in their village until the 1930s, when they were exchanged with a Muslim village in Bulgaria.
The fifth article of the issue by Tamás Dudlák on "Southern Opening: Turkish Soft Power in Sub-Saharan Africa" examines Turkish policy in Africa from 2002 to 2016, analyzing it from political, economic, and cultural perspectives. It highlights the role of Turkish institutions, including governmental, humanitarian, and public initiatives, in shaping relations. Key to understanding this policy are non-governmental actors, such as the so called Anatolian Tigers, whose influence contributed to Turkey’s broader engagement and the democratization of its foreign policy in Africa.
Finally, Tolga Karpuz offers a comprehensive review of the Turkish translation of Nathalie Clayer`s book “The Origins of Albanian Nationalism: The Birth of a Muslim-Majority Nation in Europe”.