Talk:Battle of Užice

Article

Hi Keremmaarda,

Sorry but I do not know anything about this battle, I do not find anything in the Hungarian military history books, just a campaign again Giskra. Matthias was also 14 years old in 1458. This place was far from Hungary, it should be any mention for a big campaign what allegedly led by the Hungarian king with 50,000 men as you claimed. Even the famous Black Army had only about 28,000 men when Matthias was old and in high power. Could you link readable sources? OrionNimrod (talk) 18:01, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/mehmed-ii The Islamic encyclopedia is one of the highest quality encyclopedias in Turkey. It is a page edited only by historians.The Serbs handed over castles in many places (including Güvercinlik) to Mahmud Pasha in return for some concessions. Upon the threat of an army under the command of the Hungarian King Matthias Corvin on the Smederevo side, Mahmud Pasha withdrew to the vicinity of Nish. Meanwhile, Fatih conquered the places in Morea that once belonged to Despot Constantine and came to Skopje. Mahmud Pasha met the sultan there. Using his father's tactics, Matthias waited for winter to come and the Ottoman army to disperse. Unusually, Fatih remained in Skopje with his army (he was still there in early 862/1458). The king who crossed the Danube and attacked Tahtalu was repelled. The Sultan then returned to Edirne (Safer 863 / December 1458). In the spring of the following year, he personally set out for Smederevo. The Serbs handed him the keys of the castle in Sofia (Şâban 863 / June 1459). Thus, Serbia came under direct Ottoman rule. Since the expedition to Smederevo ended early, they marched on Amasra in the Black Sea in the summer of the same year; The Genoese castle surrendered without a fight. The fall of Samothrace was considered a disaster by the pope, and the Crusade was declared at the Congress of Mantua. Keremmaarda (talk) 18:04, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

This place was far from Hungary, it should be any mention for a big campaign what allegedly led by the 14 years old Hungarian king with 50,000 men as you claimed. Even the famous Black Army had only about 28,000 men when Matthias was old and in high power. OrionNimrod (talk) 18:06, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, the Ottoman claim of 50 thousand seems exaggerated to me too. But since I don't have any other sources, I felt the need to add it. Keremmaarda (talk) 18:08, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

I see things what you claim in that source, just if the king personally let a campaign I think Hungarian sources should know about that.

I am not sure that source is reliable or not, I also do not find there the 50,000 numbers. It seem that Islamic encyclopedia is written by users like Wikipedia. We should use academic historian sources, it is not correct that for example Hungarian or Turkish wikipedia (which also written by users) would be a source for the English wiki.

Perhaps the year of the campaign is different and your encyclopedia talk about a different campaign.

I do not see that campaing here: (based on historical sources)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_wars_of_Matthias_Corvinus_of_Hungary_(1458-1490).png OrionNimrod (talk) 18:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

No, the site I gave is talking about the war I mentioned. I will try to find you other PDF resources. Keremmaarda (talk) 18:23, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Meantime I asked other users what they know about this battle. Still I suppose if a Hungarian king made a royal campaign against Ottomans deep in Serbia with a huge army against Mehmed II, Hungarian historians should know about this. OrionNimrod (talk) 18:28, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello StephenMacky1 If I remember correctly, you should have the PDF version of John Freely's book about Sultan Mehmed. I wonder if you can examine the Tahtalı/Tahtalu battle that took place in 1458? Keremmaarda (talk) 18:36, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Here's a quotation:

The old Despot of Serbia, George Branković, died on 2 May 1457, whereupon his daughter Mara, widow of Murat II, fled to take refuge with Mehmet for fear of her brother Lazar, who succeeded his father. Then on 20 January 1458 Lazar himself died, and a regency was formed by his widow Helena, his blind brother Stephen and Michael Angelović, who had been the Grand Voyvoda, or chief minister, of the late despot. The regents were divided in their political aims, for Helena and Stephen favoured Hungary, while Michael, a brother of Mehmet’s grand vezir Mahmut Pasha, was pro-Ottoman. Michael and his followers began a revolt in Smederova, the Serbian capital, but he was defeated and captured by Helena, who gave him over as a prisoner to the Hungarians. All this led Mehmet to launch an expedition into Serbia under Mahmut Pasha in the spring of 1458, while he himself was campaigning in the Peloponnesos. Mahmut took the lower town of Smederova but he was unable to capture the citadel, so he lifted his siege to attack other places in Serbia as well as the Hungarian fortress of Trnav. He then proceeded to Skopje to meet Mehmet, who had arrived there with his troops after his campaign in the Peloponnesos. Mehmet had planned to demobilise his army in Skopje, but Mahmut Pasha advised him to keep his men under arms because he had learned that the Hungarians were preparing to attack them. News then arrived that a Hungarian force had attacked an Ottoman fortress at Tahtalu, where they were routed by the Turkish defenders. Only then did Mehmet demobilise his army, after which he returned to Edirne to spend the winter at Edirne Sarayı.

That's all there is about Tahtalu in the book. If you intend on using the source, make sure to display part of the quote from the book, so that readers can verify it. StephenMacky1 (talk) 20:15, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much Keremmaarda (talk) 23:26, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

https://www.akademikparadigma.com/fatih-donemi-sirbistan-seferleri/amp/

When Fatih Sultan Mehmet considered the campaigns sufficient and wanted to end this year's campaigns and discharge the soldiers, he postponed this decision with the warning of Mahmut Pasha. Intelligence information that the Hungarians were gathering along the Danube to attack the borders of the state was important in this decision. This fact emerged without much delay. Although the Hungarians who crossed the Danube around Belgrade attacked Tahtalı, one of our border towns, Turkish Forces managed to stop them and push them back. After this incident, Fatih discharged the army and returned.

https://www.tarihselbilgi.com/sirbistan-fethi/

After the death of Despot Lazar in 1458, the problem of inheritance arose among the Serbians. This situation caused the Hungarians and the Ottomans to turn their attention to these lands. The Hungarians implemented the plan to marry the daughter of the deceased despot to the Bosnian king and take her under Hungarian protection. On the other hand, it seems that Serbs are not satisfied with the Catholicization policy of the Hungarians. On the Ottoman side, it was Mahmut Pasha who played the main role in Serbian politics. Pasha, through his brother Mihail Angelovic, took advantage of the Serbs who were against the Hungarians due to his Catholicization policy, and Ottoman supporters became stronger in the region. Although an army led by Mahmut Pasha set out to capture Serbia, the Hungarians acted earlier. However, some castles were taken over by Mahmut Pasha. However, upon the threat of an army under the command of the Hungarian King Matthias Corvin, Mahmut Pasha had to retreat to the vicinity of Nish. Using his father's (Hunyadi Yanoş) tactics, Matthias waited for winter to come and the Ottoman army to disperse. However, Fatih did not disperse the army, contrary to custom. The king who stayed in Skopje with his army and attacked by crossing the Danube was repelled."'

I found a few more articles mentioning the battle of Tahtalu. Keremmaarda (talk) 20:07, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Keremmaarda

An high skilled Hungarian editor sent me a Hungarian history source, probably from the best historian in the subject, it is a long text only the first year of Matthias rule about the events in 1458:

http://real.mtak.hu/19355/1/SzegedtolUjvarigPT_u_172801.964197.pdf

The situation was complicated, the source mention the political situations, motivations, marriages proposal, deals, parties, positions, relationship between Matthias and the Hungarian lords who elected him. Matthias had many problems, Giskra in north Hungary supported by the Polish king who claimed the Hungarian throne, it was conspiracy against Matthias by the lords and Friedrich III wanted to be also Hungarian king and the Holy Crown of Hungary was in his possession (first Matthias was not a legitimate king just elected one, the Hungarian king should be coronated with the Holy Crown + 2 other rules to be rightful king of Hungary, this happened only in 1462), and the Ottoman problems in the souths.

Very fast google translate of some sections, probably the center thick part is the most important but good to read the others to understand the situation:

The background of the matter was that the Serbian despot Lázár Brankovics (Lazar Branković) died without a son a few days before the election of Mátyás (Matthias) (January 20). At that time, the Serbian state was only a faint reflection of itself a hundred years earlier, but the capital, Szendrő (Smederevo), and the territory returned by the Sultan in 1444 with its castles were still of great importance both from the Hungarian and Ottoman point of view. The Serbian court, in accordance with the political reality, was divided between a "pro-Hungarian" and a "pro-Ottoman" party; the former was represented by the widow and brother-in-law of the late despot Lázár, István Vak (son of despot György Brankovics), and the latter by Grandvoivode Mihály Angelovic. The other neighbor, King Tamás of Bosnia (Thomas of Bosnia), was also interested in settling the Serbian issue, who immediately after the death of despot Lázár invaded certain Serbian territories, made peace with the Ottomans, and he began negotiations for the marriage of the late despot's daughter and his own son.

It is easy to see that the Hungarian state had an interest in settling the Serbian problem according to its own criteria, but it was at least as much in its interest to avoid any kind of open conflict with the Ottoman Empire. Szilágyi therefore had to solve a rather complicated case, and it is not clear exactly with what authority he acted. Considering that the governor did not leave Buda until sometime in the second week of March, he hardly had the time mentioned in the letter of March 21 to conclude a truce with the Ottomans. However, we have seen that the Bosnian king did indeed conclude an agreement with the sultan in February, and I do not consider it impossible that he obtained the preliminary consent of the Hungarian government, namely Szilágyi. Especially in light of the fact that not much later at the request of the legate Carvajal, who was staying in Hungary, III. Callixtus took the despotate under the protection of the Holy See. 53 It is therefore possible that the same plan was formulated in Buda at that time, which arose again at the end of the year: namely, to unite the Balkan territories remaining in Christian hands in the hands of the Bosnian heir to the throne. 54 However, the matter took an unexpected turn, when Grandfather Mihály captured Szendrő with Ottoman help. On the one hand, this triggered a counter-action by the pro-Hungarian party, as a result of which the Grand Vojda was imprisoned (Hungarian) and the blind István became the head of the despotate, but on the other hand, it entailed direct Ottoman intervention. Grand Vizier Mahmud Pasha, brother of the prisoner Mihály, led the Ottoman army that wanted to bring the pro-Ottoman party claimant to the throne, the blind Gergely (the other living son of György Brankovics), to power.55 We do not know if Szilágyi had a role in the events in Szendő (Smederevo), but it is certain , that he was forced to go to Nándorfehérvár (Belgrade) to reinforce the castle after the news of the Ottoman attack.

Szilágyi was not only busy with the equipment of Nándorfehérvár; on the pretext of disloyalty, but obviously for strategic reasons, he seized the estates of the abbot of Pétervárad (Petrovaradin). otherwise the illegitimate brother of Miklós Újlaki.57 Sometime around the same time, in the second week of April, he made an agreement with the widow of the despot Lázár: he promised her the handover of three important final castles, Szentlászlóvár, Keve (Kovin) and Galamboc (Golubac) the part of the Hunyadi estates that passed from György Brankovics (Đurađ Branković) to János Hunyadi (John Hunyad) in 1444.58 In order to ratify the agreement, two Serbian envoys went to Buda, where Mátyás and the barons really confirmed it.59 The statement of the Venetian envoy is confirmed by the fact that Erzsébet Szilágyi one month later in his later protest, he himself clearly indicated that Mátyás agreed to the agreement concluded by his uncle.60 That the Serbs were also serious about the agreement is proven by the fact that when the Ottoman army appeared near Galambóc at the beginning of May, the castle lords refused to hand it over, whereupon the attackers moved on.61 After the treaty was ratified, Mátyás made a short escape to Fehérvár (Székesfehérvár). From there, as we have seen, he returned to Buda, certainly because he heard that the Ottomans had captured the castle of Zsarnó (Žrnov), two Hungarian miles from Nándorfehérvár (Belgrade), and he asked Szilágyi for help.62

In the end, Mátyás did not go to Szeged,63 but stayed in Buda, where on June 23, his mother, Erzsébet Szilágyi, protested against the agreement that his own brother made with the Serbian despot, and to which, as we have seen, Mátyás and the royal council agreed.64 Given to the fact that a copy of the protest is still kept in Belgrade,65 it can be assumed that the Serbian ambassadors took it with them to Szendrő. According to András Kubinyi's argument, the estates intended to be transferred were in the hands of Erzsébet Szilágyi, and thus she "justifiably objected to her younger brother's plan".66 However, the argument is lame, as it is inconceivable that Erzsébet Szilágyi would not have known about the ratification of the agreement a few weeks earlier, and yet she did not object to it. . Secondly, it is also hardly believable that Mátyás, who had been exercising all forms of royal power without any restrictions for months, from donating property67 through the transfer of the right of benefice68 to the donation of pallos69, could have been prevented by anyone, even his own mother, from protecting the country with his inherited estates provide for. It is much more likely that Mátyás himself wanted to back out of the agreement and used his mother as a tool for this, not wanting to break his own word and that of the baron. Of course, all this does not change the fact that in June 1458, Serbia in connection with this, Mátyás crossed his uncle's plans for the second time. The young king could not have been surprised that Szilágyi sought contact with Mátyás' baronial opposition after that.

__________

How the relationship between Mátyás (Matthias) and his uncle would have developed in the future, if events had not taken a dramatic turn, we can only guess. However, the turning point occurred during the negotiations with Szilágy, when the Ottomans occupied Galambóc (Golubac) and once again Serbian ambassadors arrived in Buda to ask for help from the Hungarian king on behalf of the despot. The situation was deemed threatening enough in Buda to order a general mobilization, and the king "setting aside all other matters"96 personally head for the southern ends (southern parts of Hungary).

-----------------------------

In the end, the trip to Transylvania did not take place, but it is characteristic of the king's attitude that it came up at all: even if it was only for a short time, he left the war-ready army. According to all sources, a very significant number of armies gathered in Szeged and Pétervárad (Petrovaradin). The already quoted letter speaks of 12,000 horsemen,104 to which Szilágyi's 3,000 men in Nándorfehérvár (Belgrade) must be added.105 Mobilization was complete in Transylvania and Slavonia,106 and there was also the Crusader army recruited by the legate Carvajal, and certainly a large number,107 which for months was waiting to start. Even if it is an exaggeration, it is obviously not a coincidence that the Venetian envoy stated that since the beginning of human history such a large army had not been seen in Hungary.108 Considering to the fact that Sultan Mehmed was fighting in Greece at the time,109 Mahmud Pasha, who led the Serbian campaign, certainly did not have the full force of the Ottoman Empire, and even, according to certain reports, he did not have enough men to occupy the Serbian castles.110 Therefore, the question necessarily arises: why not did Mátyás do anything to protect Serbia, or at least to recapture Galambóc? The answer is quite clear: because he didn't want to. Mátyás left Szeged in the second week of September and, crossing the Danube via Futak (Futog), where the crusaders were encamped, arrived at the beginning of October in Petervaradin, the designated location of the mobilization.111 From there, he sent Szilágyi at the head of troops to Kevére (Kovin) to inspire the despot so that he would not come to terms with the Ottomans out of fear. ,112 himself headed south. The Turkish troops camped north of the Sava fled from the Hungarian army and suffered serious losses while crossing the Sava. At the same time, Mahmud Pasha retreated with the Turkish main army into the interior of Serbia to supplement his army mainly with infantry. Mátyás made arrangements for the reinforcement of Szávaszentdemeter (Sremska Mitrovica) while on the way, then he himself crossed the Sava and entered Nándorfehérvár (Belgrade) .113 He spent almost a full month here, but we do not know of any more significant military movements before the king left the city at the beginning of November to return to Szeged via Temesvár (Timișoara).114

The inaction of the Hungarian army was so obvious that the news spread: Mátyás had secretly concluded an armistice with the Ottomans.115 This was hardly true, but it is clear that the king did not want to do anything that would inevitably trigger a larger-scale Ottoman counter-action. That is why he did not try to recapture Galambóc, for which he would certainly have had enough strength, and therefore he did not try to force the Beglerbey of Rumelia to fight either. The fact that the truce signed with the companies occupying the Upper Parts (north Hungary) expired on September 29th certainly played a role in his decision, and it was possible to fear a renewal of the fighting.116 But a role was also played by the fact that in the fall of 1458 there was a realistic chance to regain the Holy Crown and thus quickly consolidate Mátyás' rule. . And this, according to the signs, took precedence over all other considerations at that time. Mihály Szilágyi fell victim to this.

Emperor Frederick's response to the Hungarian offer already found Mátyás at the southern ends. We do not know what kind of reactions the emperor's response provoked in the Hungarian court, but it is a fact that soon János Vitéz set off again to see Frederick, which is a sign that there was a chance for an agreement.117 In the meantime, however, something else happened: sometime at the end of September, the Bosnians the king's emissaries also appeared before Mátyás.118 The solution they proposed, in the light of later events, could have been the following: the Bosnian heir to the throne marries the daughter of despot Lázár, receives the rest of Serbia with her, recognizes Mátyás as his lord, and breaks with the Ottomans. For Mátyás, the matter would have had two advantages. One is that it would have been possible to settle the Serbian problem without sacrificing the Hunyadi estates, without direct Hungarian intervention. The other is that in the future Bosnia could also be counted on in the fight against the Ottomans. It is likely that the maintenance of Serbian and even Bosnian castles would have been done primarily with Hungarian money, but for this, provided that the an agreement with Frederick and the pacification of the Upper Parts might have been a source.119 At the same time, Bosnia would have provided at least partial protection, if not for Croatia, but for Slavonia, as was warned by the devastating Ottoman invasion from Bosnia in the fall of 1458.120

According to this, the plan did not lack rationality, but it did not coincide with Mihály Szilágyi's ideas. Based on the reports of the Venetian envoy, it is clear that the former governor continued negotiations with the court of the Serbian despot, namely on the basis of half a year earlier: the despot would hand over Szendrő to him, in exchange he would receive the Brankovics estates in Hungary, and then, as soon as Szilágyi regained Serbia, they would exchange again .121 In this situation, if Mátyás wanted to preserve his freedom of action and was determined to support the Bosnian solution, he had no choice but to arrest his uncle. It is hardly a coincidence that we learn about the capture after the arrival of the Bosnian ambassadors; it was not, therefore, that Szilágyi was preparing for some kind of "coup"122 by teaming up with Garai, Újlaki, or both. Let us add that there is no trace of such a thing in our sources

-----------------------------

6 From this point of view, the wording of the royal invitation is interesting, according to which the Bosnian king is preparing for Szeged not only in matters of borders, but also "in altioribus rebus regni" (in altioribus rebus regni);127 and the invitation repeated on November 29 directly states that King István Tamás (Stephen Tomašević of Bosnia) comes to Szeged because of the crown (ex facto dicte corone). 12

Since we know that a few years later, István Tomaševic, who succeeded his father in the meantime, contributed significantly to the redemption of the Holy Crown,129 I think it is conceivable that this formed the basis of the planned agreement in December 1458 as well. In exchange, in addition to Mátyás agreeing to the marriage of the Bosnian heir to the throne with the daughter of the Serbian despot, he could offer him the prospect of setting up a Serbian-Bosnian vassal kingdom, possibly with the transfer of certain Croatian territories.130 He therefore experimented with such a solution, only on a larger scale than later Miklós Újlaki in the case of the Bosnian kingdom created for him.131 I also do not consider it impossible that some kind of coronation was also proposed, since the papal legate Carvajal was still staying at Mátyás's court. Such a contract would have justified the consent of all members of the country's communitas, and thus would explain the ordering of city seals on site. Of course, all of this is just an assumption;132 all we know for sure is that Tamás the Bosnian king hurried from Szeged to Jajca in order to send his son to Szendrő as soon as possible in accordance with the Hungarian king's instructions.133 Mátyás, perhaps as a guarantee, appointed the Bosnian heir to the throne a macho ban.134 However, the latter was forced to take detours due to the raiding Ottoman troops, and by the time he arrived Szendrőbe, the planned bargain became virtually irrelevant. Question why?

-----------------------------

Rozgonyi was among those who swore an oath to Mátyás on February 10, so his departure could only take place after that. There is little doubt that Mátyás, leaving Szeged in a hurry, left most of his army in the Southern Region, and did not want to withdraw troops from there, so he could only send soldiers to the northeastern part of the country.

Finally, I do not see any big battle here. OrionNimrod (talk) 20:43, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

You marked this for the 50,000 Hungarian army: Nişancızade, Mehmed Efendi. Osmanlı Tarihi (1299-1566). p. 175.

Could you show me the exact text? Is this an old document? In this case we could mention the number in the article "that this old document say that" but not in the infobox.

Where is exactly Tahtalu? Which today place? OrionNimrod (talk) 20:50, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Nişancizade Mehmed Efendi is a historian who lived during the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent, so he is an old source. And Tahtalu is somewhere around Užice, or maybe it is Užice, the Ottomans called it Tahtalu. Just like they call Kruje "Akcahisar". It is really interesting that the war is mentioned in Turkish sources but not in Hungarian sources, after all, this is the campaign of one of the greatest kings in the history of Hungary. Maybe the Hungarians were not under Matthias' command. Would you read the article written by Stephen Mackey 1? But I am beginning to agree with you. I believe that if Matthias had had such an expedition, Hungarian sources would have recorded it. Thank you for your research, you can edit the infobox and improve it. Because these are what I know, if I'm wrong, I would be happy if you edit the page. Good day Mr. OrionNimrod <3 Keremmaarda (talk) 23:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Keremmaarda, thanks for the cooperation! Wikipedia is not our personal blog, we need provide the reliable academic sources and modern historian opinions. It is not surpisingly that historians say different, in this way we can provide more opinions from many countries if they are not fringe (like the flat earth theory). For example regarding the Hungarian prehistory many reliable Hungarian historians have many different opinions. So we can present both the Turkish and Hungarian academic sources. It would be good also to know what Serbian historians know about this events.

Meantime I found these things: (again fast translate)

https://mek.oszk.hu/09400/09477/html/0011/816.html

Wanting to settle the conflict with his uncle as peacefully as possible, Mátyás repeatedly entered into negotiations with him, offering him the county of Bésztercze, as well as the supervision of the treasury and the royal castles, if in return he renounced the governorship.[1] Despite Szilágyi's long reluctance, this agreement was reached on May 7, 1458 according to some, and this is more likely,[2] but according to others, it was only at the end of July or the beginning of August[3]. After this happened, the king sent Szilágyi with some troops to the Lowlands (southern Hungary) to keep an eye on the newly moving Turks.[4]

-----------

After the conclusion of this alliance, Szilágyi, leaving his station appointed by the king, hurried to Transylvania to take over the county of Besterce in kind. And when the people of Beszterce, before opening the gates to the new count, asked for confirmation of their liberties, he ordered the troops he had brought with him to attack the town and, having taken it, set it on fire, killed several of the citizens, gouged out the eyes of others, or cut off their hands. Moreover, after this, the people of Sibiu who helped the people of Bészterce were attacked when they returned home after driving a 3,000-strong Turkish team out of Transylvania.[8]

Hearing that Szilágyi had left the Lowlands (southern Hungary) for Transylvania on his own, the king himself went down to the Lowlands at the end of August to personally take the necessary measures against the ever-moving Turks. Arriving in Szeged, Mátyás found out about Szilágyi's atrocities in Bésterce, and perhaps even about the Simontornya alliance. Tüstén therefore assigned his uncle to him, who, appearing before the king on October 8, instead of realizing his mistake, asserting his merits in freeing Mátyás and electing him king, accused his nephew of ingratitude and used other insulting terms, which infuriated Szilágyi immediately. ordered his capture and sending to Világosvár. Here the mayors, Gergely Lábatlani and György Drach (Dóczi) soon received orders to kill Szilágyi, who forgot about himself, but this was later withdrawn after the intervention of the papal envoy Carvajal.[9]

-----------

As a decision of the Parliament of Szeged on January 5, 1459, the following legal provisions were published;[10] a) First of all, the king should field his brigade with the number of personnel that the royal income allows. The field army of the royal estates - 1-1 brave from every 20 fields [11] - should also be attached to this brigade, the royal towns and market towns, on the other hand, are exempted from this obligation, since they are required to issue the artillery necessary to handle the cannons and war machines, and the artillery service are obliged to provide. b) Then the church elders and persons, as well as the ensigns, should display their brigades, and the former according to the register of King Sigismund. If any ecclesiastical person has suffered a decrease in his income since then, he can appeal to the king to reduce the number of soldiers to be deployed. The priestly nobles are obliged to go to war in excess of their numbers. In order to facilitate the formation of their brigades, ecclesiastics are also allowed to call up every twentieth serf under their banner (this was the field army of church elders), but the lords of the banner are not allowed to do this, because they are obliged to pay from the salaries they receive from the royal treasury under this title (in person and 4,000 gold per year) to supplement their brigades through recruitment. c) The brigades of the counties march under the leadership of the chiefs or captains appointed by the king. These are joined by the battalions formed from the serfs of secular lords and nobles, who, in addition to their brigades mentioned under b), were also obliged to exhibit one well-armed horseman for every 20 serf plots (this was the plot army of the secular lords). The number of serf plots and the number of horsemen to be exhibited was determined by the nobles appointed for this purpose by the king in each county. They compiled lists of the census and presented them to the king. No jailers were included in these lists. The county brigades remain at the disposal of the king for three months, who may use them at his discretion and discretion, either at the same time or separately for each county, as required by the circumstances and the need to protect the country. d) At the same time as the previous categories, the armed forces of the Jászs, Kuns, Saxons and other privileged peoples can also be used for the defense of the country. e) If all these developments are not sufficient and the king finds it necessary, then the entire nobility can call to arms and they must rise up, but only for 3 months and only up to the border of the country, including Nándorfehérvár and the castles of Rácoz. In this case, all nobles are obliged to appear in person and cannot exempt themselves from enlistment; the exceptions are widows, orphans, the sick, the lame, and the lords of the castle. Ten of the poor landless nobles can send one horseman together. f) If even this uprising would not be sufficient to protect the homeland, then the inhabitants are individually obliged to take up arms for the duration of the need. g) Everyone who was conscripted had to be in the camp within 25 days after receiving the royal order. Severe punishment awaited those who committed omissions or abuses in the fulfillment of the national defense obligations established as stated above.

The trust inherent in this large-scale offer of an army greatly increased Mátyás's authority and power, both internally and externally against his enemies, to which another lucky coincidence contributed. At the same time, Tamás Osztoja, the valiant king of Bosnia, also appeared in Szeged, who, expressing his homage to Mátyás as a fief, readily offered his cooperation in the war to be launched against the Turks. Mátyás gladly accepted the offer and, in order to bind the Bosnian prince even more to himself, he named Serbia, whose prince, Lázár, the son of György Brankovics, who died in early 1457, died without a son after a few months of reign, and named Tamas Osztoja Szendrő, which also belonged to Serbia, and its region donated it to his son István Tomassevics, who married Lázár's daughter.[12]

The decrees of the Parliament of Szeged incited Garai and Ujlaki, who were already furious because of their loss of office, to even greater anger, who now worked even more hastily to overthrow Mátyás and did everything they could to force Emperor Frederick, who was never able to express decisiveness and determination, to seize the Hungarian throne. These new intrigues did not remain a secret from the young king either, who learned about the new machinations in the second half of January 1459, and on the one hand, III, who died on August 6, 1458. Pope Calixtus' successor, II. Aeneas, who came to the throne under the name Pius, informed Sylvius, stating that under such circumstances he would be forced to stop his ongoing preparations against the Turks, on the other hand, gathering his available troops in Buda, he assigned the ecclesiastical and secular lords loyal to him to discuss the situation.OrionNimrod (talk) 08:51, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

The source says, when Matthias left, the Hungarian troops remained in south Hungary:

...Considering that the main protagonist of the letter is the mentioned Osvá Rozgonyi, and the reported news seems to be very thorough, it is likely that the source was the horse master. Rozgonyi was among those who swore an oath to Mátyás on February 10, so his departure could only take place after that. There is little doubt that Mátyás, leaving Szeged in a hurry, left most of his army in the Southern Region, and did not want to withdraw troops from there, so he could only send soldiers to the northeastern part of the country. This explains why Rozgonyi was found in Forrón in Abaúj county with his new order, and also how they were able to learn about the events in Kassa so quickly. It was therefore not about the "peak performance of contemporary communication",170 but about the fact that the people of Kassia received the news firsthand, even before Rozgonyi had returned to Buda.... OrionNimrod (talk) 09:23, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Keremmaarda,

What about the date? Where did you get the battle was in December? Hungarian sources say Matthias went home in the beginning of November.

Could you quote what exactly Nişancizade Mehmed Efendi say?

You can see the sources mentions a long period and many minor battle events, I suggest to rename the article and write about the complete situation not about only 1 battle which is only the Ottoman sources presented whitout any detail.

I can see there are many things same in the Turkish and Hungarian sources: they both say Matthias gathered army and went to south. Both say Ottoman retreated south of the Danube. Both say Mehmed was far. Both say it was inheritence conflict in Serbia and both Hungarians and Turks wanted to control Serbia and in Serbia it had Ottoman and Hungarian supporter party. Turkish source say that Tahlau was a border fort so it cannot be far from Hungary, and Hungarian sources mention small border conflict, Ottomans took border castles, etc Turkish source say the Hungarian army was repelled by crossing the Danube it confirms Tahlau cannot be far from te border, while Hungarian sources say Matthias did nothing just camped as to show he able to defend the region (and allegedly made agreement with the Ottomans, or he did not want provocate them by attack) later went home.

What do you think? OrionNimrod (talk) 16:04, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Previously, when the sultan intended to go on the expedition mentioned above, he sent Mahmud Pasha with 1000 janissaries to conquer the castles of the remaining provinces (Serbia). Mahmud Pasha, who stayed in Sofia, went to the ordered place with a 10-day journey, and captured 5 castles named Raza[?], Omol, Sava, Gerüce and Brançe, and captured the leaders of the infidels. After that he went to Smederevo and conquered it by fighting and entered into it. He killed many infidels, captured many others, and plundered their property. Since it was difficult to capture the castle of the Citadel, he left it and went to more important services. He conquered Ostrvica, which was previously conquered by the sultan, but later fell into the hands of the infidels. After that, when they set up cannons and beat the Pigeon Fortress, the infidels surrendered the castle. But the castle guards were stubborn and fought hard from the castle, but neither side could win. Pasha also made a plan to capture the castle by cutting the chain that the infidels were hanging from the castle to pull water from the Danube River. Thereupon, some brave men hid under the arch and when the infidels suspended the buckets with chains, they attacked and broke the chains. When the castle guard and others were devastated by thirst, he surrendered the castle. Pasha stayed there for its construction and administration and sent Minnetoglu Mehmed Bey to raid Hungary. Mehmed Bey also crossed the Danube and plundered the province of Trava castle in Hungary, and then the province of Rahava between the Danube and Sava rivers. They captured 200 armored infidels, boarded ships and came to the Pasha. On the other side, the infidels learned about the situation and sent 50,000 armored soldiers. They came in a hurry and when they saw the Muslims gone, they turned back with jealousy, surprise and heartbreak. Pasha met with the sultan in Skopje with his victorious soldiers and plenty of booty. When the news came that the Hungarian soldiers had crossed from Belgrade to this side, he sent pocket money to the Anatolian soldiers. The pioneers of the Islamic soldiers were ordered to go to Polva and see how the situation of the infidels was. The soldiers went and the infidels came to Tahtalı and while they were proudly plundering, they raided them, dispersed them and killed some of them. When they brought their captives and many others to the sultan in chains, all of these captives were killed. After that, the sultan came to Istanbul.

(Nişancizade Mehmed Efendi Osmanlı Tarihi (1299-1566) p.174-175)

And what I think is that Hungarian sources and Turkish sources make independent claims. But if the war had not taken place, Ottoman historians living during the Mehmed period would not have recorded it. If this war was mentioned in only one source, I would argue that it was not real, but this war is included in almost all sources of the period. We need to examine Serbian sources. Or, Matthias Corvinus was not at the head of the Hungarian army, I think it might have been a small army sent. Keremmaarda (talk) 20:06, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Keremmaarda, thanks for the info!

I see in that old Turkish source the 50,000 Hungarians moved south, but it did not say that 50,000 Hungarian army would make the battle of Tahtali which was a later event in your source. Probably this 50,000 army is the same as the Hungarian historian wrote that a huge Hungarian army gathered in the south by Matthias.

Anyway I see many events happened in that year, both Ottomans and Hungarians took some castles, border conflicts, Serbian inheritence conflict, etc. I suggest to rename the article and remove the infobox and write everything in the situation of that year instead of focusing a blurry battle. Even the Ottoman sources has no details about that battle outside mention the name that "a battle was there". OrionNimrod (talk) 08:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

He says that the Hungarians withdrew from the place plundered by Minnetoglu Mehmed Bey with an army of 50 thousand, then crossed the Tunay and attacked Tahtalu. Keremmaarda (talk) 09:06, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Keremmaarda, your source:

"On the other side, the infidels learned about the situation and sent 50,000 armored soldiers. They came in a hurry and when they saw the Muslims gone, they turned back with jealousy, surprise and heartbreak. Pasha met with the sultan in Skopje with his victorious soldiers and plenty of booty. When the news came that the Hungarian soldiers had crossed from Belgrade to this side, he sent pocket money to the Anatolian soldiers. The pioneers of the Islamic soldiers were ordered to go to Polva and see how the situation of the infidels was. The soldiers went and the infidels came to Tahtalı and while they were proudly plundering, they raided them, dispersed them and killed some of them. When they brought their captives and many others to the sultan in chains, all of these captives were killed. After that, the sultan came to Istanbul."

It says 50,000 Hungarian army went to south, but no Ottomans were there and they turned back. The Pasha met with the Sultan in Skopje, which is very far from Hungary, so Mehmed and even the Pasha who went Skopje was not in ther Serbian area. Hungarian soldiers moved south from Belgrade, but the source does not say those was the same as the previous 50,000. And sources say Hungarian plundered Tahtali (still blurry where is this) then Ottomans raided dispersed them and killed some. It does not say the Hungarian would attacked the Ottomans, it cannot be a big battle if the Ottomans just killed some plundering Hungarian units. And Ottomans moved the prisoners to the Sultan who was not there.

I do not see any special or big things which justify a separate article, I suggest to merge the 2 articles: Fall of Serbian Despotate

OrionNimrod (talk) 09:24, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Mehmed is the strategic coordinator of this war and the war was won thanks to his strategies. He was not there in the battle, but the plans and strategies belonged to him. And then he says that the Hungarian army crossed the Danube and attacked Tahtalu. The places mentioned as "withdrawn" are the places where Minnetoglu Mehmed Bey operated. Keremmaarda (talk) 09:33, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

And no, I don't want 2 pages to merge. The Battle of Tahtalu is an important and separate battle for Ottoman historians. In fact, some sources say that even the Hungarian King took part in the battle. This is not a minor war to be overlooked or ignored, at least for Ottoman history. Keremmaarda (talk) 09:35, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Beshogur you are expert Turkish and @Norden1990 in Hungarian history. What is your opinion about this article?

If this a separate battle as Keremmaarda claim, why do we have no detailed informations about this? Even Hungarian sources does not know at all about this. (I asked Hungarian historians, I am waiting for response)

We can see there are many battle articles, Battle of Kosovo, Battle of Varna, Battle of Belgrade, Battle of Breadfield, etc where we have a very very detailed things about the battle by many historians.

I listed the info regarding the battle of Tahtalu from those which were provided by Keremmaarda (According to him this is not a minor war, however I see only 1 sentence in the Turkish sources about this, and out of 5 only 1 claim Matthias was there):

"The king who crossed the Danube and attacked Tahtalu was repelled"

"News then arrived that a Hungarian force had attacked an Ottoman fortress at Tahtalu, where they were routed by the Turkish defenders."

"Although the Hungarians who crossed the Danube around Belgrade attacked Tahtalı, one of our border towns, Turkish Forces managed to stop them and push them back"

"The soldiers went and the infidels came to Tahtalı and while they were proudly plundering, they raided them, dispersed them and killed some of them."

"The king who stayed in Skopje with his army and attacked by crossing the Danube was repelled."' (I suppose the sultan was in Skopje not the Hungarian king)

So we have only this limited thing about this Tahtalu battle, all sources say only 1 sentence, I think this not justify a separate article, I suggest to merge the 2 articles: Fall of Serbian Despotate

I suppose this was just a small raiding conflict, as it was many on those centuries, the provided Hungarian sources also mention some border conflicts and Ottomans or Hungarian occupied same border castles.

I collected above many detailed Hungarian source, this is my conclusion compare with the Turkish sources:

I can see there are many things same in the Turkish and Hungarian sources: they both say Matthias gathered army and went to south. Both say Ottoman retreated south of the Danube. Both say Mehmed was far. Both say it was inheritence conflict in Serbia and both Hungarians and Turks wanted to control Serbia and in Serbia it had Ottoman and Hungarian supporter party. Turkish source say that Tahlau was a border fort so it cannot be far from Hungary, and Hungarian sources mention small border conflict, Ottomans took border castles, etc Turkish source say the Hungarian army was repelled by crossing the Danube it confirms Tahlau cannot be far from te border, while Hungarian sources say Matthias did nothing just camped as to show he able to defend the region (and allegedly made agreement with the Ottomans, or he did not want provocate them by attack) later went home. I also do not think we need for infobox for minor border conflicts, Mehmed and Matthias also was not the commander of this battle of Tahtalu, they were not there. It is also very blurry where is Tahtalu.

Old Turkish chronicle provided by Keremmaarda:

"On the other side, the infidels learned about the situation and sent 50,000 armored soldiers. They came in a hurry and when they saw the Muslims gone, they turned back with jealousy, surprise and heartbreak. Pasha met with the sultan in Skopje with his victorious soldiers and plenty of booty. When the news came that the Hungarian soldiers had crossed from Belgrade to this side, he sent pocket money to the Anatolian soldiers. The pioneers of the Islamic soldiers were ordered to go to Polva and see how the situation of the infidels was. The soldiers went and the infidels came to Tahtalı and while they were proudly plundering, they raided them, dispersed them and killed some of them. When they brought their captives and many others to the sultan in chains, all of these captives were killed. After that, the sultan came to Istanbul."

It says 50,000 Hungarian army went to south, but no Ottomans were there and they turned back. The Pasha met with the Sultan in Skopje, which is very far from Hungary, so Mehmed and even the Pasha who went Skopje was not in ther Serbian area. Hungarian soldiers moved south from Belgrade, but the source does not say those was the same as the previous 50,000. And sources say Hungarian plundered Tahtali (still blurry where is this) then Ottomans raided dispersed them and killed some. It does not say the Hungarian would attacked the Ottomans, it cannot be a big battle if the Ottomans just killed some plundering Hungarian units. And Ottomans moved the prisoners to the Sultan who was not there. OrionNimrod (talk) 09:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks but I'm not an expert lol. I will read the comment when I have time. Beshogur (talk) 09:58, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@Beshogur I collected the informations what we have, the Hungarian sources, Keremmaarda collected the Turkish sources. I ask an a different way, based on you Wikipedia experience, what do you think about this article what should we do if you read the conversation and my summary? (And I wanted involve Turkish and Hungarian users to make the article balanced, sourced and great, btw it would be good to see the Serbian sources as well) OrionNimrod (talk) 10:03, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

The person who manages the war and implements strategic plans is Mehmet. He ensured that the war was won by not dispersing the army and leaving secret soldiers to Tahtalu. If he had not done these, the Hungarians would have achieved their goals there. His absence on the battlefield does not mean that he did not act as a commander. Mehmed is the strategic coordinator of this war. And you didn't show any part about the war, you just talked about the inheritance issues that happened. How much more detail can we go into about the war? Of course, this war is not as big as the Varna and Kosovo wars. But it is not a war to be underestimated or ignored. Would you look at the big claim made by the Turks? Wouldn't the war in which a king was defeated "under the command of Matthias himself" be important for the Ottomans? You only take the Hungarian sources seriously, and I believe that the Serbian sources should also be examined. If there is a Serbian historian, I would like to ask him about the article. Keremmaarda (talk) 10:08, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@Keremmaarda, In all battle articles of the Wiki I see only the commanders in the infobox who were there or participated in the current battle.

I do not say we need to ignore the battle or not to mention, just I said this was just an average raiding conflict, which was made all the time both Hungarians and Ottomans during the centuries, even in peacetime. So we can mention this event but as part of an another article.

"Wouldn't the war in which a king was defeated "under the command of Matthias himself" be important for the Ottomans?"

You provided 6 Turkish sources about the battle, and only 1 say among 5 Turkish sources that Matthias was there, you can see I listed them above. While Hungarian sources say Matthias did not make battle, he camped idle in Belgrade a while then he came home and left his army there. As I said Hungarian sources should know if Matthias would made a battle with an 50,000 army...

"If there is a Serbian historian, I would like to ask him about the article." Please do. OrionNimrod (talk) 10:18, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

So https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Legnica Why is Subutay written as strategic coordinator here? If field battles are won thanks to the commanders who determine the strategy and apply the tactics, the war is considered to be under their influence. Keremmaarda (talk) 10:27, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I am not an expert in 15th-century Ottoman-Hungarian wars, so I cannot take part in this debate. --Norden1990 (talk) 21:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Norden1990, when I mentioned your name on that comment I summarized there briefly the info, I ask your opinion as an experienced Wiki user, based on those info, what shoulld we do with the article? OrionNimrod (talk) 08:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Keremmaarda,

Hungarian sources does not say that Matthias made any battle, moreover this was allegedly very far from Hungary, Hungarian historians should know about it, but they did not know. Also you provided 5 Turkish sources about this Tahtalu battle, only 1 out of 5 mentions the Hungarian king there. So the majority of sources does not support this claim, that is why incorrect to cherry pick only 1 source to overwrite all. Morover all 5 Turkish sources mention only 1 sentence about this. Should we make a separate article for every single border and raid conflict? OrionNimrod (talk) 08:38, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Stop belittling the war by saying just 1 sentence, it has enough information for a classic war. Not every war has to be as big as Varna, Kosovo, Mohács. If this information is insufficient for a war, many war articles on Wikipedia should be closed and only wars such as Varna and Mohács should be added. For example, Skanderbeg has no major wars other than Albulena, so why don't we delete all his war articles? And many of Skanderbeg's wars are raid wars. Did you pay much attention to those articles, Mr. OrionNimrod? Can you argue that they should be combined or that it is unnecessary? The Battle of Tahtalu is an important battle in Ottoman history and Halil İnalcık is the greatest Ottoman historian. Kemalpaşazade also says that Matthias was in the war. But since Wikipedia does not take first-hand sources seriously, I do not cite Kemalpaşazade as a source. And war is not just one sentence, it contains enough information. Keremmaarda (talk) 10:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Only 1 from 5 Turkish sources say Matthias was there, and Hungarian sources does not know about it = Majority of the sources does not support the presence of Matthias. You can mention this in the article which source claim that, but his name should be deleted from infobox. Hungarian sources should know about a king's battle.

Even we do not know exactly where is Tahtalu OrionNimrod (talk) 10:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Give me some time. I'm on the course right now. When I get home, I will focus more on this war and review the books. If I see that Matthias is not mentioned in another modern source, I will remove his name. Keremmaarda (talk) 10:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Articles should be balanced. The key point: Hungarian sources should know a battle of a Hungarian king. But Hungarian sources does not know at all about this.

It is not a problem if you write in the article that X Turkish source claim this, but as we can see even the majority of Turkish sources does not claim this, just only 1. OrionNimrod (talk) 10:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

You wrote in the article "heavy losses in the battle" Turkish sources does not claim that, just "routed" or "repelled" or "killed some plundering Hungarians" It cannot be a big battle and heavy losses if "routed" and only "killed some". OrionNimrod (talk) 10:24, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello OrionNimrod.

I examined the sources a little more and found an excerpt from the work of Müneccimbaşı Ahmed, a historian who lived during the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent.

Mahmud Pasha and his entourage returned to the Sultan in Skopje. Meanwhile, the Sultan wanted to discharge the military. But Mahmud Pasha said that the infidels were too numerous and that it would be more appropriate to postpone this permission until later. Thereupon, spies were sent around. The spies arrived with news that the enemy had crossed the Belgrade pass to the Danube. The Sultan gave the Anatolian soldiers their allowances and sent some soldiers to those who knew this region well to hold the passes through which the enemy would pass. He also started waiting for news. The heralds who came after a while entered the infidel's Islamic land with a heedless and arrogant attitude and scattered around to plunder. They reported that the veterans, who took advantage of this opportunity, attacked them, captured their "commander", killed most of them, and captured those who scattered around. The Sultan was extremely happy with this news. The gentlemen who went to war shortly after the heralds arrived with the captives and booty they had taken. The Sultan ordered the captives to be killed.

Muneccimbasi Ahmed says that their Commander-in-Chief was taken prisoner. So this commander cannot be Matthias. I think you are right in your claims. Keremmaarda (talk) 21:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

And other Turkish sources write that the large Hungarian army turned back when they could not find the Turkish army in Serbia. But they talk about the Tahtalı war separately.. Andre Clot says that the Hungarians came from Belgrade, across the Danube, and that Mahmud Pasha recruited the soldiers and prepared for war, but he does not describe the war. Keremmaarda (talk) 21:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, but a raid war in Albulena and many raid wars have been featured as articles on Wikipedia. Battle of Albulena Keremmaarda (talk) 21:14, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Keremmaarda, thanks to sharing the new source!

It also say it "scattered around to plunder" and Ottomans attacked them, which is not a battle, just a raiding conflict. Also it does not mention the place just that south from Belgrade.

"And other Turkish sources write that the large Hungarian army turned back when they could not find the Turkish army in Serbia. But they talk about the Tahtalı war separately."

Yes I said the same. OrionNimrod (talk) 19:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Name

The title of this article does not match the name defined in the intro, but it looks like this article was moved from Battle of Tahtalu. Is the new title neutral or more accurate? The new name should be in the intro if the article is going to stay here. -- Beland (talk) 08:42, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

As I discussed a lot above, I think this article should be removed and merged to an another campaign, because we have almost zero info about this, just very minimal sentences, even no Hungarian sources know about this “but allegedly the Hungarian king fought deep in Serbia?” Checking more sources together, this was probably just a standard minor border conflict, it does not deserve a separate article. OrionNimrod (talk) 10:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)