Minor est Turchorum potentia, quam fama feratur… Contributions to the History of Bosnia in the...

Историјски институт БеоградЗборник радова, књ. 29

Филозофски факултет у Сарајеву

Филозофски факултет у Бањoj Луци

ПАД БОСАНСКОГ КРАЉЕВСТВА

1463. ГОДИНЕ

Уредници

Срђан РудићДубравко Ловреновић

Павле Драгичевић

Уредник издања

Невен Исаиловић

Београд – Сарајево – Бања Лука2015

UDC: 94(497.6):327(450.341:439:497.6)”1463”

Emir O. FILIPOVIĆ*

MINOR EST TURCHORUM POTENTIA,

QUAM FAMA FERATUR…

CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HISTORY OF BOSNIA

IN THE SECOND HALF OF 1463

Abstract: The author uses several published but hitherto insufficientlyexploited sources in order to describe the situation in Bosnia during the second half ofthe year 1463, immediately after the collapse of the Bosnian Kingdom. This paperfocuses on the attempt of Bosnian nobles to use Venetian assistance to re-establish theBosnian state, as well as on the actions and campaigns of the Hungarian King MatthiasCorvinus in the winter of 1463.

Key words: Bosnia, Hungary, Ottoman Empire, Venice, Stjepan Tomašević,Matthias Corvinus, Mehmed II, Jajce.

In the history of Bosnia the year 1463 is considered as the annusfatalis, the key date which marks the end of the medieval period and thebeginning of Ottoman domination. Even though deep social changes wererarely sudden, historians often use political events to denote the commencementor a completion of a historical process. Since most of the authors dealing withmedieval Bosnian history focused on the period which preceded or broughtabout the fall of the Kingdom in May and June 1463, culminating with thedecapitation of the last Bosnian King Stjepan Tomašević in Jajce, the eventsimmediately thereafter usually remained outside of their establishedchronological boundaries and hence outside of the scope of their work.Consequently, the history of Bosnia during the second half of the year 1463

195

* [email protected]

was somewhat neglected and has never been systematically researched.However, several attempts have been made to shed some light on this topic, andwe must single out the efforts of Lajos Thallóczy,1 Sima Ćirković,2 VelimirStefanović,3 and Đuro Tošić.4 Apart from their works, there are a few othertitles principally concerned with the fall of the Bosnian Kingdom, but whichalso contain useful information on the subsequent events.5

The aim of this paper will be to use several published but hithertoinsufficiently exploited sources in order to describe the situation in Bosniaduring the first six months directly after the collapse of the Bosnian Kingdom.Tracing the contents of these documents we will focus on the attempt of noblesfrom Bosnia to re-establish the Bosnian state using Venetian assistance, as wellas on the actions and campaigns of the Hungarian King Matthias Corvinusduring the winter of 1463, which ultimately resulted in his conquest of Jajceand most of northern Bosnia. These notes, although not extensive, might beuseful for future researchers who will be able to write more thoroughly on thesubject. It is worth pointing out that this period certainly deserves moreattention from historians despite the fact that the available sources seem sparse.

Emir O. Filipović

196

1 L. Thallóczy – S. Horváth, Jajcza (bánság, vár és város) története 1450–1527,Magyar történelmi emlékek, Okmánytárak, Vol. 40, Budapest 1915, LXXXI–CXIX; L.Thallóczy, Povijest (Banovine, grada i varoši) Jajca, Zagreb 1916, 64–87.2 С. Ћирковић, Властела и краљеви у Босни после 1463 године, Историски гласник3 (1954) 123–131. This important article only partially refers to the second half of1463 since its principal aim was to show the activities of nominal Bosnian Kings afterthe collapse of the Kingdom, of which the first one was mentioned in sources in 1465at the earliest. More information on the time frame in question can be found in С.Ћирковић, Херцег Стефан Вукчић Косача и његово доба, Београд 1964, 255–258.3 В. Стефановић, Ратовање краља Матије у Босни и његови односи с папскомкуријом и чешким краљем у ствари акције против Турака, Летопис Матицесрпске 332, 1–3 (1932) 195–213.4 Ђ. Тошић, Ослобађање Јајца од Турака крајем 1463. године, Радови Филозофскогфакултета у Српском Сарајеву 2 (2000) 217–226; Idem, Bosanska vlastela uoslobađanju Jajca od Turaka 1463. godine, Stjepan Tomaševic (1461.–1463) – slomsrednjovjekovnoga Bosanskog Kraljevstva, Zagreb 2013, 99–108.5 V. Klaić, Poviest Bosne do propasti kraljevstva, Zagreb 1882, 341–342; В. Ћоровић,Хисторија Босне, књ. I, Београд 1940, 561–569; С. Ћирковић, Историјасредњовековне босанске државе, Београд 1964, 331–332; M. Šunjić, Bosna iVenecija (odnosni u XIV. i XV. st.), Sarajevo 1996, 373–375; D. Lovrenović, Na klizištupovijesti. Sveta kruna ugarska i Sveta kruna bosanska 1387–1463, Zagreb 2006, 363–374. For a review of the historiography about the Ottoman conquest of Bosnia see E.O. Filipović, Historiografija o padu Bosanskog Kraljevstva, Stjepan Tomašević(1461.–1463) – slom srednjovjekovnoga Bosanskog Kraljevstva, Zagreb 2013, 11–28.

Namely, after the collapse of the Kingdom the domestic royal chancery,understandably, ceased its production, while the Ragusan correspondencebooks were lost, presumably destroyed on purpose since they containedsensitive information.6 Nevertheless, a critical approach and successfulcombination of Venetian, Hungarian and Ottoman sources could prove to besufficient for a future detailed study.

*

The Ottoman conquest of Bosnia, a full decade after the fall ofConstantinople in 1453, represented a significant shift of political and militarystrength in the conflict between the Ottomans and Christians.7 The fact that inless than a month the Ottoman war machine managed to swallow up a kingdomwhich was believed to be able to withstand many years caused considerablepanic among contemporaries who thought that the Sultan would march to Italyand trouble the states on the Apennine peninsula.8 The Ottoman expansion

Minor est Turchorum potentia, quam fama feratur ...

197

6 F. Rački, Dubrovački spomenici o odnošaju dubrovačke obćine nasprama Bosni iTurskoj godine razspa bosanske kraljevine, Starine JAZU 6 (1874) 1–18; Ć. Truhelka,Dubrovačke vijesti o godini 1463, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja 22 (1910) 1–24; Д.Ковачевић, Пад босанске средњовјековне државе по дубровачким изворима,Годишњак Друштва историчара БиХ 14 (1963) 205–220; Z. Janeković Römer, Krajsrednjovjekovnog Bosanskog Kraljevstva u dubrovačkim izvorima, Stjepan Tomašević(1461.–1463) – slom srednjovjekovnoga Bosanskog Kraljevstva, Zagreb 2013, 47–67.7 There is still no modern critical study completely devoted to the Ottoman conquestof Bosnia, but the topic has not been completely overlooked by historians. See M.Šunjić, Trogirski izvještaji o turskom osvojenju Bosne (1463), Glasnik arhiva i Društvaarhivskih radnika BiH 19 (1989) 139–157; Idem, Osvrt na ocjene uzroka i propastisrednjovjekovne bosanske države, Radovi Hrvatskog društva za znanost i umjetnost 2(1994) 25–33; Idem, Uništenje srednjovjekovne bosanske države, Bosna i Hercegovinaod najstarijih vremena do kraja Drugog svjetskog rata, Sarajevo 1998, 83–95; S. M.Džaja, Ideološki i politološki aspekti propasti bosanskoga kraljevstva 1463. godine,Croatica Christiana Periodica 18, X (1986) 206–210; Idem, Osmansko osvojenje Bosnei rimska kurija, Zbornik radova sa Znanstvenog skupa u povodu 500. obljetnice smrtiFra Anđela Zvizdovića, Sarajevo 2000, 219–228; M. Ančić, Renesansna diplomacijai rat. Primjer pada Bosne 1463, Hrvatska srednjovjekovna diplomacija, Zagreb 1999,143–177.8 See E. O. Filipović, Ardet ante oculos opulentissimum regnum… Venetian Reportsabout the Ottoman Conquest of the Bosnian Kingdom, A.D. 1463, Italy and Europe’sEastern Border (1204–1669), Frankfurt am Main 2012, 135–155.

disturbed the delicate balance of power in the region and spurred into action thetwo great countries – Venice and Hungary – whose territorial possessions nowremained vulnerable to further attacks. Feeling threatened by the envisagedOttoman advance, both were interested in reclaiming the ground lost in Bosniaand ensuring themselves against imminent Ottoman danger. Even before themonth of June expired, moves were made to guarantee concrete militarycooperation. Giovanni Emo, the Venetian ambassador to the Hungarian King,was sent instructions to express the will of his government to collaborate inany future anti-Ottoman campaign, as well as authorization to conclude thepotential agreement in case the King, who was planning to march against theTurks soon, consented to this offer.9

Shortly after the fateful events in Bosnia, Venetian ground forces begangathering useful information for the upcoming war against the Ottomans. TheCount of Trogir informed his government by 18 June that the Sultan had exitedthe Kingdom with his military and it seemed to him that slender forces remainedin Bosnia, which could be overtaken with little effort.10 In a letter written on 19July 1463, Melchior de Imola, armorum et in partibus Albanie gubernatorgeneralis, stated that the Sultan had departed Bosnia, leaving behind around20,000 soldiers distributed in 117 Bosnian forts,11 while on 1 August the

Emir O. Filipović

198

9 (29 June 1463) S. Ljubić, Listine o odnošajih izmedju Južnoga slavenstva i Mletačkerepublike, Vol. X, Zagreb 1891, 259 (= S. Ljubić, Listine X). Hopes were expressed asearly as April 1463 that peace would be achieved between the Emperor and the King ofHungary so that they could be united in the defence of Christendom from the Turks.From the report given by Steffan Scheuch from Wiener Neustadt: “Item der legat, derzu Regenspurg was, ist mitsambt herr Friderich Lamberger zu Hungern gewesen vnd amsambstag nechst [April 16] komen; vnd souil als ich merck, so werden die Hungerischenrete auch bald komen vnd ist gute hofnung, es solle zwischen dem keiser vnd denHungern gute einigkeit werden, das gemainen landen vnd der cristenheit gen denDurcken guten nutz bringen mocht” (18 April 1463), Briefe und Acten zurÖsterreichisch-Deutschen Geschichte im Zeitalter Kaiser Friedrich III, A. Bachmann(Hrsg.), Fontes rerum Austriacarum, Zweite Abtheilung, Diplomataria et Acta, Bd.XLIV, Historischen Commission der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften inWien, Wien, 1885, 591. By the end of April Scheuch wrote to Margrave Albrecht ofBrandeburg: “Item der Turck ligt mit grosser macht vor Kriechischen Weissenburg, vndauf sontag schirst werden die Hungarn ein anslag im konigreich machen vnd wil derkonig personlich an den Turcken von stundan cziechen” (29 April 1463), Ibidem, 356.10 M. Šunjić, Trogirski izvještaji, 142.11 “E per dare notitia ala prefata Illustre S. V. de li successi di quello, adviso quella, cheditto Imperator Turcho se levato dy Bossina, et e andato ne la Servia ad uno loco quypropinquo doe giornate, lo quale se chiama Sighiniça e fermo ly cum tutto lo suo exercito,

Signoria sent a letter to its Captain-General Alvise Loredan informing him thatthe Turk withdrew from Bosnia with his army leaving around 2,000 Turksbehind.12 There were even news that the Turks suffered from a lack ofprovisions and nourishment for their half-dead horses.13

The very fact that the Sultan retreated from the warzone was enoughto start devising some kind of counteroffensive strategy against the Ottomantroops that remained in Bosnia. As was the case in previous times, the initiativefor crusade came from the Pope. Sensing the impending danger to the Christianpeople, especially in the famous Kingdom of Hungary which was the“inviolable shield of Christendom”, Pius II immediately conceded indulgencesto all of those willing to participate in the war against the Turks for the defenceof the Catholic faith in the lands beyond the Danube and the Sava.14 He alsocharged Cardinal Bessarion with a mission to persuade the Venetiangovernment to join the common Christian cause.15 The Cardinal arrived inVenice on 22 July and was granted an audience the following day along withan opportunity to briefly express the pain and anxiety because of the “calamitywhich fell upon Christians”.16 He was undoubtedly, at least in one part,


199

salvo che ha lasciato ne la Bossina circa vinte milia persone ala guardia de quelle terreha tolto, che per intelligentia de la S. V. sonno circa cento dexesette terre murate” (19July 1463), V. Macuscev, Monumenta historica Slavorum Meridionaliumvicinorumque populorum, Vol. II, Belgradi 1882, 26 (=V. Macuscev, Monumenta II).The stated number of soldiers and fortresses seems excessive.12 “Preterea ve advisemo che per quanto fin hora sentimo el turco cum lo exercito suoe ussito de bossina et ha lassato in bossina cerca turchi IIM” (1 August 1463), R. Lopez,Il principio della guerra Veneto-Turca nel 1463, Archivio Veneto 15 (1934) 116. Theevident discrepancy in the given numbers seems to be the result of a mistake becauseit is not plausible that the Sultan would leave only 2,000 men to safeguard the fruitsof his recent victory.13 “Pur dichano, che Turchi in Bossnia stano cum grande dixaxio de victuali e cossi delvivere per loro cavalli, i qualli parono mezo morti” (1 July 1463), V. Macuscev,Monumenta II, 159.14 (30 June 1463), A. Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Historica Hungariam SacramIllustrantia, Vol. II, Romae 1860, 378.15 See P. Kourniakos, Die Kreuzzugslegation Kardinal Bessarions in Venedig (1463–1464), unpublished dissertation defended in 2009 at the University of Cologne,Germany.16 The full text of the Cardinal’s report to the Pope, written on 26 July 1463, waspublished by A. Bachmann, Urkundliche Nachträge zur österreichisch-DeutschenGeschichte im Zeitalter Kaiser Friedrich III, Fontes rerum Austriacarum, Diplomataet Acta, Bd. XLVI, Wien 1892, 18–21. Cf. K. M. Setton, The Papacy and the Levant(1204–1571), Vol. II, Philadelphia 1978, 243.

referring to the Ottoman conquest of Bosnia. Despite being met with apparentindifference from the Republic’s higher officials Bessarion did not need muchtime to convince them. Already on 25 July the Venetian Senate met, discussedand reached a conclusion to respond positively to the papal offer of help againstthe Turks, stating: Respublica est semper parata ad ineundum bellum generalecontra Turcam.17 The Venetians were aware that if they did not resume the war,which they considered to have been continually lasting from the fall ofConstantinople, they would undoubtedly lose not only their Dalmatianprovinces, but also the city of Ragusa, the Croatian banate, the counties ofKrbava, Cetina and Senj, and that the Turks would enter even deeper into thecore of Christian lands, thus arriving in the vicinity of the gates and crossingsinto Italy.18 They gave Bessarion a written reply which the cardinal conveyedto the Pope in his report. In their response the Venetians claimed that theyunderstood, from the fact that the Turks occupied so many kingdoms in sucha short period of time, that Venetian dominions would be their next target. Inorder to avert this, they had persistently incurred many expenses, and had theynot done so, the Turk would already have been in Italy. The senators confirmedthat their Republic was always ready, and especially now, for a generalexpedition against the Turks, also declaring that they have already madecontacts with the King of Hungary. Furthermore, they sent one of theirprincipal citizens as an ambassador to Germany, Bohemia and Poland in orderto urge the rulers of those countries to fight against the Turks.19 A short whileafter these events, on midnight of 28 July the Venetians formally declared war

Emir O. Filipović

200

17 (25 July 1463), S. Ljubić, Listine X, 260.18 “Turchus multo penitus in viscera, christianorum ingressus, vicinor factus esset portiset traiecto Italie...” (25 July 1463), Ibidem.19 “Item ea, que per me dicta sunt de libidine dominandi huius Turci et multis regnisinter breve tempus per eum acquisitis et continua oppressione christianorum etinsatiabili desiderio veniendi in Italiam: verissima sunt et illi ea optime intelligunt etantea intellexerunt. Propter quod subierunt continue magnas expensas presertimquehoc tempore, ut furori eius resisterent; quod nisi fecissent, Turcum jam in Italiahaberemus … Idem ad generalem expeditionem semper fuerunt parati et nunc maximesunt, et putant ad hoc omnimodo deveniendum, et ‘utinam’, inquiunt, ‘jam deventumesset’, et quod propter ea maximam fecerunt intelligentiam apud sermum dominumregem Ungarie, primo per nuntium, quem illic assidue detinuerunt, deinde etiam nuperper nobilem oratorem ad hortandam regiam maiestatem, ut forti ac constanti animoperseveret, et quod nunc mittunt ob eandem causam unum ex primariis civibus,dominum Paulum Mauriceno, in Germaniam, Boemiam et Poloniam ad dominos illosadversus Turcom incitandos” (26 July 1463), A. Bachmann, Urkundliche Nachträgezur österreichisch-Deutschen Geschichte im Zeitalter Kaiser Friedrich III, 18–19.

against the Ottoman Empire, thus beginning the arduous sixteen-year conflictwhich deprived them of many colonies and of an equal amount of prestige. 20

However, the beginning of the war seemed to be promising for theVenetians. By early August, on the account of the erstwhile good relationsbetween the Republic of St. Mark and Bosnia, some Bosnian nobles whoescaped to Venetian territory pleaded with the Senate to help them regain thelost Kingdom, stating that they had no other ruler other than the Venetiandominion. If Venice would not want to help them, they seemed to have no otherchoice but to submit to the Turks.21 Moreover, they requested that Venice sendone of her messengers to Duke Stjepan Vukčić Kosača, whose sons werealready successfully engaged in battle with the Turks, reclaiming several lostfortresses in the process.22

Venice had a great deal of interest in the re-establishment of theBosnian Kingdom, so the offer of the Bosnian nobles was considered seriouslyand steps were taken to see whether their suggestions regarding Bosnia werefeasible. Already on 26 August, the messenger Antonio Priulo was on his wayto the lands of Duke Stjepan in order to enquire about the prospect of militaryaction in Bosnia. The envoy was to pass through Split where he would collectintelligence and information about the “state and condition of the province ofBosnia”: he had to find out how many Turks were in Bosnia, how many fortsthey had captured, how many and which forts were in the hands of others, andwhich fortresses were out of Turkish reach. Among the other information hehad to collect, the messenger was additionally supposed to see what were theoverall movements in Bosnia and to inform himself about the living conditionsof Bosnians who had escaped to Split; what was the strength and authority of


201

20 K. M. Setton, The Papacy and the Levant, Vol. II, 244. On the outbreak of this warsee R. Lopez, Il principio della guerra Veneto-Turca, 45–131. Cf. a recent work by S.Stantchev, Devedo: The Venetian Response to Sultan Mehmed II in the Venetian-Ottoman Conflict of 1462–79, Mediterranean Studies 19 (2010) 43–66, who considersthe conflict to have begun much earlier.21 (12 August 1463), S. Ljubić, Listine X, 261. Cf. С. Ћирковић, Историја, 331.22 On 14 July the messenger of Duke’s younger son, Count Vlatko, brought to Ragusathe happy news about the re-conquest of the fort of Ključ: “Prima pars est de donandonuncio comitis Vlatchi Chercegouich qui portauit noua de recuperatione castri Cliuç”(14 July 1463), State Archives of Dubrovnik (= SAD), Consilium rogatorum (= Cons.Rog.), vol. XVII, f. 252v. Four days later his brother Duke Vladislav informed theRagusan government about his success in reclaiming of Ljubuški. “Prima pars est dedonando ambassiatori voyvode Vladissaui qui tulit novum pro Gliubuschi” (18 July1463), Ibidem, f. 253v. Cf. С. Ћирковић, Херцег Стефан, 255.

each one of them, by which means did they intend to reclaim the Kingdom andin whose name should this be done. They were to be persuaded by good wordsand kept happy and confident.23

After reaching Duke Stjepan, the envoy was supposed to talk with himabout the situation in Bosnia, expressing regret and sorrow for what happenedpreviously, congratulating him on his own success against the Turks, but alsourging him to continue working on the recapture of the state. The envoy hadto tell the Duke that the surest way to liberate the Kingdom of Bosnia restedwith the lords and barons of the Kingdom who had the authority andresponsibility to devote themselves to reclaiming their possessions. He had toconvince him that they would be successful especially since the dominance ofthe tyrannical Turk was new and recent in the said Kingdom, and that thebarons, nobles and common people could not be content with a situation inwhich they were reduced to slavery. There could be no doubt that they wouldrise up against such tyranny. He needed to encourage the Duke by saying thathe would surely be helped by other neighbouring lords who would come to hisaid, partly out of respect of him, and partly out of their hatred for and fear ofthe Turk.24 A lot of trust was placed in the discontent of the domestic populationand nobility with the newly established Ottoman government, and this reapeddividends later on.

When the messenger arrived to his destination, he found the Dukebesieging a town occupied by the Turks.25 In his response to the Venetiangovernment from 18 November, Duke Stjepan boasted that he managed to re-conquer all of his possessions which were previously subjugated by the Turks,apart from three towns he hoped he could take later with a somewhat strongerforce.26 He informed Venice that his son was fighting every day against theTurk in the confines of his lands, and that during the month of August, with thehelp of God, he managed to wrest back from the Turks six good castles fromthe lands of the Pavlović family, among which was the most valuable one,

Emir O. Filipović

202

23 (26 August 1463), S. Ljubić, Listine X, 267. Cf. D. Lovrenović, Na klizištu povijesti, 373.24 Ibidem, 268.25 The Duke later wrote to Venice: “Item notifica ala prefata serenita vostra, che siandolui soto uno suo castello, bombardolo e facandoli guerra, e siando li Turchi dentro,vene da parte de la prefata vostro ambassador honorado miser Antonio Priulo” (18November 1463), S. Ljubić, Listine X, 286. Cf. С. Ћирковић, Херцег Стефан, 255.26 “… ma lui cum lo aiuto de dio torno in lo suo paese, e ave li soi castelli excepto tre,che anchora son in le man de li Turchi: se la posanza del predicto can non torna prestoindreto, ha speranza in dio, che ancho hara li predicti castelli in le sue mane”. Ibidem.

presumably Borač.27 Furthermore, the Duke claimed that in the lands of thenoble family of Kovačević, in eastern Bosnia, his son had managed to seizethree towns, of which one was near Srebrenica. Some of the Turks who werein these lands were killed, while the others fled.28

A couple of months later the Milanese envoy Antonio Guidoboni senta letter to Venice saying that before Priulo departed from Duke Stjepan’s lands,the Duke received a letter from his brother announcing that in the confines ofBosnia he had beaten one Turkish pasha in battle, catching and killing around3,000 Turks.29 Since the Duke did not have a brother we know of, it can bepresumed that the letter was in fact from one of his sons.

The extent of these victories and the impact they had on the broaderperception of the general conflict against the Turks is well shown by a recentlypublished letter of an unnamed Venetian consul in Thessaloniki, discovered in


203

27 The noble Pavlović family were executed in the Sultan’s campaign against theBosnian King in May and June 1463. See B. Nilević, Učešće vojvode Petra i knezaNikole Pavlovića u političkom životu srednjovjekovne Bosne, Prilozi XVI, 17 (Sarajevo1980) 66–67. In Ragusa one document from 1467 stated that a certain previous eventhappened “quoniam magnus Theucre cepit dominos Paulouichii et regem Bosne” (23April 1467), SAD, Lamenta de foris, vol. XXXVIII, f. 234v. Cf. E. Kurtović, PoslednjiPavlovići u naučnom opusu Borisa Nilevića, Historijska traganja 5 (2010) 161–162, n.19. About Borač, the erstwhile seat of the Pavlović family, see В. Скарић, Жупа иград Борач у Босни, Прилози за књижевност, језик, историју и фолклор II, 2(1922) 184–188; Đ. Mazalić, Borač, bosanski dvor srednjeg vieka, Glasnik Hrvatskihzemaljskih muzeja u Sarajevu 53 (1942), 31–94; Д. Ковачевић-Којић, Борач –Средиште земље Павловића, Земља Павловића. Средњи вијек и период турскевладавине, Бања Лука 2003, 47–64.28 “Item notifica ala predicta, quando lori fece questa scriptura nova e per mezo deloambassadore vostro, in quella volta non li era presente el suo figliolo Vlatico, che altrevolte fo ala serenita vostra; uno mese avanti lo aveva mandato in el paese suo ali confinidel Turco, et e sta la ogni zorno facando guerra cum li Turchi, et ha tornato indreto elsuo paese e castelli, et ha tolto apresso de quello cum lo aiuto de dio del paese delPaulovich bona parte e sei boni castelli, fra li quali e uno o el meglio havesse; e apressodel paese de Covacevich ha habiute bona parte e tre castelli, uno de li quali e apressode Sebreniza, si che in quella parte ha facto bene, et e sta solicito. Li Turchi, che eranel paese predicto, parte ha morti parte son fuciti”. S. Ljubić, Listine X, 286.29 “E venuto de Bossina, cioe dal Ducha Stefano Messer Antonio de Priolli, oratoremandato la per questa Signoria, dice la sera davanti la sua partita dal dicto DuchaSteffano, chel predetto Ducha hebbe lettere da suo fratello, per le quale gli annunciava,chel haveria roto uno Bassa del Turcho, che era a quelli confini de Bossina et presolloin persona cum Turchi 3.000 tra prexi e morti” (29 December 1463), V. Macuscev,Monumenta II, 159. This letter was wrongly dated to 1464 by the publisher.

the State Archives of Venice. The message dates from 21 August and was sentto Venice via Negropont (Euboea). Amongst other things, it also included thenews that the Sultan had retreated to Edirne via Skoplje, that he did not intendto go to Constantinople for fear of the Hungarian army, and that the whole ofBosnia had rebelled.30 This notification must have been met with great interestin Venice since it suited their projected activities regarding the envisioned re-conquest of Bosnia. The source, previously unknown and unused in domestichistoriography, shows us that the Ottomans had to deal with an extensive andsignificant retaliation in the immediate months after they imposed their rule inBosnia. Although the information given in the source is sparse and says nothingabout the character of this uprising, we can confidently suppose that thisinformation refers to the activities of Duke Vladislav and his brother CountVlatko. The fact that it reached Thessaloniki, Negropont and Venice in a shorttime is a testament to the scale of their military victories, but also to the amountof hope contemporaries invested in their actions against the Turks.

Around this time, news started circulating that King Matthias Corvinuswas ready to join the anti-Ottoman league. While the Sultan was undertakingoperations in Bosnia, he sent a division of his army to the banks of the Danubeto distract the Hungarians and prevent them from inflicting damage to theOttoman plans.31 It is evident that the Hungarian King was not personallyinvolved in these battles, but that he entrusted the defence of the southernborders to his cousin Johannes Pongracz, the Duke of Transylvania.32

Therefore, after heavy fighting on the banks of the Danube, and after the Sultanretreated from Bosnia, the Hungarian King saw an appropriate opening.33 Hewanted to use the particularities of Ottoman combat to his own advantage.

Emir O. Filipović

204

30 “El signor turco partito de Bosina vine a Scopia per dover andar deli parseli meio deandar in Andrinopoli per le nave de ongari e per esser le sue zente afanade lidetalizenzia infina zorni 40 pai debia esser in ardine ad ogni suo comandamento […] Elsignor turco se atrova in Andrinopolli e non va a Constantinopoli per rispeto de ongari.Tuta la Bosina ha rebellado. Fo butade in mar in Zagora galie X sotil et 5 grossi arsilliper cargar bombarde e cavalli e portarli a Constantinopolli” (21 August 1463), S.Karpov, Was Trebizond really captured by Uzun Hasan after 1461? New archivalevidences, Byzantina Mediterranea. Festschrift für Johannes Koder zum 65.Geburtstag, Wien 2007, 300.31 These actions were summarily analysed by L. Thallóczy, Povijest Jajca, 72–74.32 “Interim ver misimus ad inferiorem regni nostri plagam copias pro defensione etprimo occursu sufficientes cum capitaneo Joanne Pongracz cognato nostro…” (May1463), V. Fraknói, Mátyas Király levelei – Külügyi osztály, Vol. I, Budapest 1893, 40.33 В. Стефановић, Ратовање краља Матије у Босни, 201; В. Ћоровић, ХисторијаБосне, 552.

Namely, the Sultan would traditionally lead his army to campaign in spring, sothat the troops were ready to do battle during summer. In the autumn he wouldabandon the battlefield leaving only provisional troops to guard the newpossessions during the winter.34 By attacking in the second half of the yearMatthias would face less resistance and have a bigger chance of success.

Some progress in that sense seems to have been achieved by the middleof August when the Ragusan Senate decided to send a small ship to thecommander of the Venetian fleet in the Adriatic in order to inform him aboutthe “happy news” from Hungary.35 The information must have spread rapidlysince Jacobo de Plaustris, a Venetian wool merchant, sent a letter to his fatherfrom Negropont on 1 September stating that the Hungarian King was nearBosnia and that he would “cut all the Turks into pieces”. “God willing that thisbe true”, concludes Jacobo, “because those would be the best good news”.36

The King, however, was not approaching Bosnia at that specific time. Therewere other issues that needed to be dealt with. Following exhaustingnegotiations and the signing of a truce in Wiener Neustadt between Matthiasand Emperor Frederick III,37 the Hungarian King was free to conclude severalmonths of discussions with the Venetians. Thus an offensive alliance against thecommon enemy, the Turks, was signed between Hungary and Venice on 12September in Petrovaradin.38 Since the agreement was based on the real andurgent interests of both parties, it was realistic and it did not take long for it tocome into effect.39 According to the text of the treaty, the Venetians promisedto start the war on sea with 40 galleys, and on land in Morea and Dalmatia,where their possessions bordered the Ottoman Empire. At the same time the


205

34 J. K. Hoensch, Matthias Corvinus. Diplomat, Feldherr und Mäzen, Graz 1998, 80.35 “Prima pars est de dando libertatem domino rectori et suo minori consilio mitendounam barchettam ad mandatum capitaneum classis Venetorum cum felicibus nouis quehabemus ex Hungaria” (24 August 1463), SAD, Cons. Rog., vol. XVII, f. 269.36 “Item se dice como el Re de Ungaria a presso la Bossena et taiato a peze tutti i turchise a ... tava li, Idio voglia che questo sia vero, perche saria optima et bona nova” (1September 1463), R. Lopez, Il principio della guerra Veneto-Turca, 118.37 See K. Nehring, Matthias Corvinus, Kaiser Friedrich III. und das Reich. Zumhunyadisch-habsburgischen Gegensatz in Donauraum, München 1975, 13–23, 202–217.38 (12 September 1463), A. Theiner, Mon. Hung., Vol. II, 380–382; S. Ljubić, ListineX, 272–274. Cf. V. Fraknói, Mathias Corvinus, König von Ungarn. 1458–1490, Freiburgim Breisgau 1891, 97; K. M. Setton, The Papacy and the Levant, Vol. II, 249. On theinternal developments in Hungary at the time see T. Pálosfalvy, The Political Backgroundin Hungary of the Campaign of Jajce in 1463, Stjepan Tomašević (1461.–1463.) –slom srednjovjekovnoga Bosanskog Kraljevstva, Zagreb 2013, 79–88.39 R. Lopez, Il principio della guerra Veneto-Turca, 135.

King of Hungary had to attack the northern Ottoman provinces. The fact thatboth parties were bound to recognize the territorial integrity of their respectivelands implies that the King acknowledged and accepted the Venetianpossessions in Dalmatia. This likewise indicated that the warzone was dividedand that Bosnia remained outside of the Venetian sphere of influence.40

The importance of this decision is best demonstrated by the followingexample. In his victorious campaign against the Ottoman garrisons stationedin Bosnia, Duke Vladislav, the son of Duke Stjepan Vukčić, proclaimed that allthe lands he conquered were in fact taken in the name of Venice. In doing sohe demonstrated Venetian pretensions on Bosnian territory which in turncaused the dissatisfaction and ire of the Hungarian King.41 The Venetians hadto remind the Duke that the flags of St. Mark he received from them could onlybe used on his own territories, and not in Bosnia, which was now in the sphereof the Hungarian King.42

King Matthias showed determination and decisiveness at a crucialtime. After the treaty of Petrovaradin he accelerated his actions since he wasaware that such favourable moments did not arise often and that an opportunitylike this would not appear again if he delayed his movements.43 Therefore, on29 September he was already in Virovitica, a couple of weeks later he movedsouthwards to Pakrac on his way to the River Sava,44 which he crossed near

Emir O. Filipović

206

40 S. Ljubić, Listine X, 273. Cf. L. Thallóczy, Povijest Jajca, 75; В. Стефановић,Ратовање краља Матије у Босни, 203.41 On 19 October 1463 the Republic took it upon herself to inform the King that thisnews was false. S. Ljubić, Listine X, 281.42 (18 November 1463), S. Ljubić, Listine X, 288. Cf. С. Ћирковић, Херцег Стефан, 256.43 One of the best sources for the subsequent actions of King Matthias in Bosnia is theletter which he sent to Pope Pius II on 24 January 1464, when his successful campaingwas finished. V. Fraknói, Mathiæ Corvini Hungariæ Regis epistolæ ad RomanosPontifices datæ et ab eis acceptæ, Monumenta Vaticana historiam Regni Hungariæillustrantia, Budapest 1891, 25–29; Idem, Mátyas Király levelei, Vol. I, 45–50. The Kingwrites: “Recogitanti quippe mihi et diligentius consideranti, quantum et quale vulnusChristiana respublica in eo casu acceperat, non sinebat necessitas cure differre remedium,sed mox ac simul et parare provisionem, et facere; que si vel menstruo tempore neglectafuisset, nunquam similem opportunitatem redituram, post expertus astruere ausim”, V.Fraknói, Mathiæ Corvini Hungariæ Regis epistolæ ad Romanos Pontifices, 27. 44 Matthias issued a charter in Pakrac on 17 October to Radič Banić in which he statesthat Radič and his retinue approached him at a time when he already sent his armyacross the River Sava in order to fight against the Turks (“… postquam vltra fluuiumZawe gentes nostras contra Turcos versus regnum nostrum Bozne transfretare fecimus…”), E. Laszowski, Prinos historiji bosanskih porodica, Vjesnik Kr. Državnog Arkivau Zagrebu 7 (1937) 29.

Gradiška.45 Continuing further to the interior of Bosnia, Matthias divided hisarmy into two columns which moved along the banks of the rivers Vrbas andSana.46 With a small army, without serious opposition, he managed to relativelyeasily come to Jajce, take the lower parts of the town after four days of fighting,and lay siege to the fortified citadel.47

The news of the King’s progress travelled quickly and excited all thosewho heard of it. On 13 October 1463, the Venetians expressed their joy anddelight to Nicholas, the bishop of Modruš, who acted as the envoy of theHungarian King and who brought to Venice the news of the success of the Kingin Bosnia, even though they had already received the information a few daysearlier.48 On the same day they formulated a response to Duke Vladislav who


207

45 “Idem rex Mathias anno 1463 regnum Bosne ingreditur cum magno exercitu etapparatu bellico in flumine Sauo parato ponte in gradischi Brod transit flumen”. I.Kukuljević Sakcinski, Chronicon breve Regni Croatiae Joannis Tomasich minoritae,Arkiv za povjestnicu jugoslavensku 9 (1868) 19. Cf. V. Fraknói, Mathias Corvinus,König von Ungarn, 97; L. Thallóczy, Povijest Jajca, 75; В. Ћоровић, ХисторијаБосне, 566; P. Ćošković, Susret sa zagubljenom prošlošću. Područje Bosanske Gradiškeu razvijenom srednjem vijeku, Zagreb 2001, 95; R. Horváth, Itineraria regis MatthiaeCorvini et reginae Beatricis de Aragonia (1458–[1476]–1490), Budapest 2011, 75.46 V. Fraknói, Mathias Corvinus, König von Ungarn, 97; L. Thallóczy, Povijest Jajca,77; J. K. Hoensch, Matthias Corvinus, 80.47 “... castrum et oppidum Jaicza nominatum obsidione circumdedi, quod quidem caputregni illius est et locus tam natura ipsa, quam arte et ope inter omnia munitior. Quemcum oppugnare cepissem, primo fere impetu et primo agressu incolas oppidi indeditionem accepi, factaque irruptione in oppidum cum hostibus Turcis armispugnatum est. Hi quoque die eodem, qui quartus erat posite obsidionis, a nostrissuperati, necantur alii, quidam vero in arcem profugere compelluntur”. V. Fraknói,Mathiæ Corvini Hungariæ Regis epistolæ ad Romanos Pontifices, 27. Cf. K. M. Setton,The Papacy and the Levant, Vol. II, 250. As Venetians did in the Morea, the initialsuccesses of Matthias Corvinus must be put down to the fact that the domestic Christianpopulation embraced the Hungarians as liberators and easily exchanged Ottomansubjection with the Hungarian one. This was, of course, only possible, as long as themajority of the Ottoman forces were engaged elsewhere. As soon as reinforcementswere sent to reclaim the lost territories, the Venetians and the Hungarians were forcedon the retreat. Cf. R. Lopez, Il principio della guerra Veneto-Turca, 84.48 “Quandoque his diebus audivimus felices successus suos tam in regno Bossine quamaliter, profecto maximam iocunditatem et letitiam sumpsimus. Et quanto progressusserenitetis sue feliciores et ampliores erunt, tanto siquidem nobis gratiores. Ad ligamet intelligentiam cum sua maiestate devenimus optimo et sincerissimo corde, in qua etin affectione nostra perpetuo perservare disponimus” (13 October 1463), S. Ljubić,Listine X, 278.

urged them to commence military operations in Bosnia. They in turn wrote thatthey had heard from various sources that the most serene King of Hungaryundertook a campaign into Bosnia, that he had captured Jajce, and was preparingto take the rest of the Kingdom.49 The Venetians followed the King’s operationsvery closely and commended their ambassador for the work he was doing.50

Pope Pius II, seemingly aware of the events in Bosnia, issued acrusading bull on 22 October listing all the sultan’s triumphs and wicked waysin which he eliminated his opponents. Of those atrocities the treacherousexecution of the Bosnian King, who was reportedly strangled by the sultanhimself, was especially singled out.51 Despite this, the Pope attempted tostimulate the believers with the claim: Minor est Turchorum potentia, quamfama feratur.52 The events which followed showed that this was only partiallytrue, but even the contemporaries must have been aware that the Turkish mightwould in due time exceed even their worst fears.

By the end of October, information about the advances of theHungarian army in Bosnia also reached Ragusa from where it was distributed

Emir O. Filipović

208

49 “… que commemorari nobis fecit de suscipienda impresia regni Bossine. Et respondentesdicimus, quod pro multa affectione et amore nostro in dominationem suam sumussemperque erimus magnopere cupidi omnis honoris et amplitudinis sui status, sed sicutdiversis modis habetur, serenissimus rex Hungarie iam bonis diebus suscepit impresiamBossine, in quam gentes sue potenter ingresse sunt; et sicut facti sumus certioresobtinuerunt Jaiciam, erantque in procinctu obtinendi reliquum. Ideoque postquam resBossine ita succedunt, non videtur nobis aliter nos impedire” (13 October 1463), S.Ljubić, Listine X, 279.50 (29 November 1463), S. Ljubić, Listine X, 291.51 “Transiverunt et ipsum Dannubium, Valachieque magnam partem occupaverunt,penetraverunt et Savum, atque agros Hungarie longe lateque vastaverunt. Hoc annoBosnam invaserunt universumque Regnum sibi subiecerunt, et Insulam Lesbon.Quanta vero crudelitate in subactis urbibus ac provinciis usi sint, horret animus dicere.In Constantinopoli Grecorum Imperator obtruncatus est, et caput eius hasta suffixumper castra delatum, Rascianis Principibus eruti sunt oculi, in Lesbo multitudo puberumpalo transfixa, in Bosna Regem, qui salutem pactus sese dederat, cum patruo suoMaumethes ipse humano sanguine insatiabilis sua manu, ut fertur, iugulavit …Constantinopolitanus Imperator et Trapezuntius et Rex Bosne et Rascie etiam domini,et alii quamplures Principes capti et crudeliter occisi, quid sit expectandum edocent.Nichil tam contrarium Maumethi quam nomen Regium Orientis adeptus Imperium adoccidentale festinat novam eligere monarchiam, canatur uni Turchorum imperio, etuni Maumethe legi cuncta submittere studet” (22 October 1463), A. Theiner, VeteraMonumenta Slavorum Meridionalium, Vol. I, Romae 1863, 474–475, 478.52 Ibidem, 478.

to Duke Stjepan and Skanderbeg.53 Many Ragusan merchants hoped that theseactions would encompass the whole of Bosnia and would eventually lead to theliberation of all the other places occupied by the Turks. A group of merchantseven went as far as approaching Matthias Corvinus in Jajce in order to requesta confirmation of certain possessions in Srebrenica to which they hadinheritance rights but from which they were recently evicted after the Ottomanconquest of Bosnia. The optimistic King duly obliged and issued a chartergranting them the properties of their predecessors.54

However, not everybody was as confident of success as the HungarianKing. A nobleman from Spalato, Antonio de Zuane, sent a letter from Jajce tohis colleague Nicola Petri at the beginning of December expressing reservationabout the final outcome of these campaigns. He wrote that the King of Hungaryhad with him only a small army which was in a sad state and in desperate needof divine help. On the other hand, 2,000 Ottoman horsemen devastated the landevery day. Zuane finished his letter with the words: “With God’s will this landshall remain Christian, but it is doubtful”.55

Other contemporary reports also testify to the humble number ofsoldiers which Matthias had at his disposal. The Venetian ambassador GiovanniEmo wrote to Venice on 13 December describing the condition of the troopswhich the King of Hungary could take to the field. He claimed that theHungarian King could count on 12,000 horsemen of prelates and barons which


209

53 “Prima pars est de dando libertatem domino rectori et suo minori consilio significandicherzech Stiepano, illustri domino Schenderbegh et aliis quibus opus fuerit de nouisqui habemus ad aduentum majestatis domini nostri in Bosnam” (31 October 1463),SAD, Cons. Rog., vol. XVII, f. 289v. Cf. С. Ћирковић, Херцег Стефан, 258.54 (14 December 1463), L. Thallóczy – J. Gelcich, Diplomatarium relationum ReipublicaeRagusanae cum Regno Hungariae, Budapest 1887, 620–622. See М. Динић, Заисторију рударства у средњевековној Србији и Босни I, Београд 1955, 87; Д.Динић-Кнежевић, Дубровник и Угарска у средњем веку, Нови Сад 1986, 140.55 “Sapi che re de Ungaria sta qui con pocha zente, e casteli non conbati esi non cresoche lu piglara, ma spero in dio che li manchara de aqua si questi zorni non cascha lapioba, da batagla non lu piglara mai. Perche mai in vita mia non viti più tristamenteconbater la terra, ma dio ne agidara … Anchora ve aviso che voivoda di Turchi coeMimgiatovich sta in Bosna con re non a paura circha cavali 2 milia, esi roba ogni di.Dio faca che questo paese fossi de cristiani, ma el dubito. Altro per adesso non dicho,quello che seguirà ve avisaremo” (8 December 1463), G. Praga, Testi volgari spalatinidel trecento, Atti e memorie della Società Dalmata di storia patria, 2 (1927) 124; D.Lovrenović, Na klizištu povijesti, 365–366. Antonio de Zuane (Zuanović) was thematernal uncle of Nicola Testa, the celebrated diplomat of the Bosnian Kings. M.Šunjić, Bosna i Venecija, 334.

were obliged to serve him for three months, but which were supposed to bepaid from his treasury if he wanted to keep them any longer. He also had acourt army consisting of 2,000 cavalry and 5,000 infantry.56

It is, therefore, understandable that King Matthias gladly welcomedany help which might have been offered to him at the time so the support fromthe forces of Duke Stjepan and his son was more than appreciated.57 In a charterissued on 6 December in Jajce, Matthias commended Duke Vladislav for hiscommitment in the fight against the Turk who invaded “our” Kingdom ofBosnia and killed “our” loyal servant King Stjepan. The King also praisedVladislav who did not spare expenses “pro recuperatione dicti regni nostriBozne”.58 In a letter which he sent to Venice Duke Stjepan later declared thatMatthias could not have endured the war with his own small army and that heonly managed to take Jajce “with God’s help and mine”. The Duke claimed that“even today the Great Turk is angry at me, saying that he lost Jajce because ofDuke Stjepan and not because of the King of Hungary”.59

Matthias was also assisted by the troops of Martin Frankopan who wasespecially lauded in a charter issued in “civitate nostra Jaycza” not only for

Emir O. Filipović

210

56 (23 January 1464), I. Nagy – A. Nyáry, Magyar Diplomacziai emlékek – MátyásKirály korából (1458–1490), Vol. I, Budapest 1875, 264. The document was wronglydated by the publisher to 1463.57 See Ђ. Тошић, Ослобађање Јајца од Турака, 217-226; Idem, Bosanska vlastela uoslobađanju Jajca od Turaka, 99–108.58 L. Thallóczy, Studien zur Geschichte Bosniens und Serbiens im Mittelalter, München1914, 418–422. Cf. Idem, Povijest Jajca, 83. In a letter sent on 2 January 1464 from Modonto his father in law, who served as a castellan in Istria, a certain Aloisio da Canal claimed thatthe son of Duke Stjepan went with the King’s captain in search of a Turkish captain in Bosnia.He received this information from Antonio Priulo. Da Canal also stated that Matthias’ menmanaged to beat the Turks and capture some subaşis, and that the King was in “Iaviza”where he laid siege to a fortress defended by 400 Turks. The letter was initially publishedby G. Dennis, Three Venetian Letters from Modon 1400-1401, Byzantium and the Franks1350–1420, London 1982, article XX, 1–13, and analyzed by J. V. A. Fine, Новооткривениизвор о приликама у Босни 1400. године, ГДИ БиХ 38 (1987) 107–109. Both of themtreated the document as if it had been written in 1401. Ђ. Тошић, Ослобађање Јајца одТурака крајем 1463. године, 217–226; Idem, Bosanska vlastela u oslobađanju Jajca odTuraka 1463. godine, 99–108, spotted the mistake and appropriately dated the letter to 1464.59 “Da poi siando vegnudo la sacra sua maista a Jaice, andai da lui cum la mia çente, eli ge feci alguni presenti quelli se rechiedeva ala sua maiesta. Eli per dio e per mi haveJaiçe, perche cum pocha çente non podeva star a campo. Et oçidi el gran Turco hagrandissima ira verso de mi per questa tal cason, digando per el ducha Stefano ho persoJaiçe e non per el re de Hungaria” (10 March 1466), S. Ljubić, Listine X, 351. Cf. L.Thallóczy, Studien zur Geschichte, 198.

repelling a recent Turkish invasion into Croatia, an enterprise in which heincurred many harms, but also for personally bringing “plurimos fideles nostros,dicti regni nostri Croatie barones et nobiles” in order to help in the recuperationof the Bosnian Kingdom.60

Another example worth mentioning here is the remarkable case ofGérard Deschamps (Gerhard des Champs) from Liège who was also involvedin the battles around Jajce during the winter of 1463. This hardened Frenchwarrior received papal blessing in 1459 for his project of the Societas Jesuswhich aimed to recruit crusaders from France in order to lead them to the HolyLand.61 Since his grand plan was ultimately ineffective he took up arms andfought against the Turks in the Balkans. Details of this campaign werepreserved in a letter which he sent from Lyon to the syndics and council ofGeneva on 8 December 1465. According to his own testimony, Deschampspassed through Germany in order to meet up with the army of the HungarianKing who was besieging a place called “Jays” and which he managed to take“par vertu divine”.62 After the successful conquest of Jajce the Hungariansoldiers and the company of Jesus captured many Turkish prisoners.Deschamps sent a Turkish banner and two Turks to France as living proof ofhis triumphs. He presented one of them to the Duke of Savoy in Chamberyand gifted the other one to the King of France. The first Turk was later baptized.For his troubles Deschamps was ennobled and created Count Palatine by theEmperor and the Hungarian King.63


211

60 (23 November 1463), L. Thallóczy – S. Barabás, A Frangepán család oklevéltára,Vol. II, Budapest 1910, 59.61 J. Paviot, Burgundy and the Crusade, Crusading in the Fifteenth Century – Messageand Impact, (ed. N. Housley), Basingstoke – New York 2004, 79, with an account ofthe relevant literature.62 “Passant per les Allemaignes, tousjours en augmentant ma compaignée, que je arivay,le Dieu grace, en l’armée du roy de Hungrie qui tenoit siège en une place à l’encontredes Turqs, nommé Jays, laquelle place par vertu divine se rendit à nous et de laquellej’ay amené le capitaine à Chambéry à monsr de Savoie, lequel l’a fait baptiser avecplusurs aultres que j’ay donnés oú bon m’a semblé” (8 December 1465), Ch. LeFort,Une Société de Jésus au quinzième siècle (Documents inédits des Archives de Genève),Mémoires et documents publiés par la Société d’histoire et d’archéologie de Genève20 (1879–88) 113.63 “Et de toutes les croisiés passés n’est rien venu à perfeccion, fors seullement l’arméedu roy de Hungrie et de la très noble compaignée de Jhésus. Auxi, afin que vous puisséscongnoistre de la conqueste de ladite compaignée, j’ay amené à Chambéry deux Turqs,lesquiex j’ay donnés à monsr de Savoie, lesquilx il a fait baptizer, et des aultres que j’aydonnés au roy de France et à monsr de Charollois, lesquieulx Turqs auxi estoient prisonniers

King Matthias understood the strategic importance of Jajce andBosnia, which were considered to be the keys and door of the region, fromwhere all paths towards the west and north could easily be accessed.64 Hebelieved that the Ottoman conquest of Bosnia was an open wound to the heartof Christendom, which could easily have spread and endangered the whole ofEurope.65 Therefore, he did not intend to spare resources or time to capture it,and finally managed to do so after a hard and arduous three-month siege insevere winter conditions.66 Direct sources which testify to the harsh circumstances

Emir O. Filipović

212

de ladite compaignée de Jhésus, et avec ce j’ay apporté une banière conquestée sur lesTurqs. Et pourtant que puissés savoir plus plainement de nos vertus et de la grace queDieu nous a donnés, l’empereur et le roy de Hungrie m’ont anobly et créé conte palatin,donc je vous mande la coppie des armes et du privilege” Ibidem, 110. See also H. Prutz,Pius II. Rüstungen zum Türkenkrieg und die Societas Jesu des Flandrers Gerhard desChamps 1459–66, Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Bayerischen Akademie derWissenschaften, Philosophisch-philologische und historische Klasse, Jg. 1912, 4.Abhandlung, München 1912, 41–42.64 From Matthias’ letter to Pope Pius II: “Boznam quippe totius Christianitatis, ut itadicam, clavem et portum, et unde quaquaversum in occidentem et septemtrionem adituspatet, gravio meo labore nuper recuperatum, quasi pensitans, quid amiserit, rursusinvasit et omnia illic castra apud manus nostras habita semel obsediti, que licet munitasint, quantum repente muniri potuerunt, tali tamen vi ac tante multitudini resistere diunon possunt, nisi aut eiiciatur inde inimicus, aut retrahatur” (July 1464), V. Fraknói,Mathiæ Corvini Hungariæ Regis epistolæ ad Romanos Pontifices, 30–31; Idem, MátyasKirály levelei, Vol. I, 54. Cf. R. Horváth, The Castle of Jajce in the Organization of theHungarian Border Defence System under Matthias Corvinus, Stjepan Tomašević (1461.–1463.) – slom srednjovjekovnoga Bosanskog Kraljevstva, Zagreb 2013, 89–98. In a lettersent to Emperor Friedrich III in 1464, after the Sultan besieged Jajce for the second time,Matthias wrote: “Nos qui fere soli scimus quanti momenti locus ille sit toti nominiChristiano…” (1464), J. Koller, Historia episcopatus quinqueecclesiarum, t. IV, Posonii1796, 117. On the second siege of Jajce see P. E. Kovács, Jajca 1464. évi ostroma, Azértelem bátorsága. Tanulmányok Perjés Géza emlékére, Budapest 2005, 403–418.65 “Ad utramque autem augendam talis ordo, taliaque principia parata sunt, ut ex eisvulneri huic, quod Christiano corpori ex ruina Bozne inflictum erat, facilius, quamante, salubriusque remedium parari poterit; quandoquidem sane vulnus non iamangulos Europe, non latera sola, sed precordia ipsa attigerit, potuissetque ad omneseius partes infesta correptione dilatari”. V. Fraknói, Mathiæ Corvini Hungariæ Regisepistolæ ad Romanos Pontifices, 28.66 “Restabat iam arx ipsa expugnanda, in cuius oppugnatione trimestri fere spatiomagna solicitudine laborando multa ex celi intemperie, multa ex asperitate hyemis,preterea ex incommoditate varia plurium rerum, plus quam hostilia passus, constantiatandem et perseverantia vicimus; ubi complures ex hostibus conclusis per opportunitatemoppressi fuere, reliqui de vita duntaxat parti, ad dedendum arcem et sese compulsi sunt.

facing the Hungarian army are sparse, but the gravity of the task can becorroborated by the fact that on 4 December Ragusans decided to present theirsuzerain four barrels of gunpowder, each weighing 300 pounds,67 and that acouple of weeks later they responded positively to his request for a surgeon,sending him master Johannes Petri in order to heal the wounded soldiers.68

With the military conquest of Jajce, Matthias himself says that around thirtyother forts surrendered to him.69 There can be no doubt that this was the mostsignificant personal contribution of King Matthias in the wars against the Turks.70

There are some issues as to when the fortress was actually taken. KingMatthias claims on several occasions that the conquest came on Christmas


213

Ex quibus prope quadringentos in vita servatos, bellatores quidem robustos et armisassuetos, mecum eduxi, habiturus eos pro servis ad usum opportunum”. V. Fraknói,Mathiæ Corvini Hungariæ Regis epistolæ ad Romanos Pontifices, 27. Cf. Idem, MathiasCorvinus, König von Ungarn, 95–99.67 “Prima pars est de concedendo de puluere bombardarum maiestati serenissimidomini nostri regis Hungarie. Prima pars est de concedendo dicte regie maiestati salmasquinque dicti pulueris ad libris trecentis qualque salma. Prima pars est de dando dicteregie maiestati dictum puluerem in donum” (4 December 1463), SAD, Cons. Rog.,vol. XVIII, f. 3.68 “Prima pars est de mittendo unum ex medicis nostris ciroicis in campus regiemaiestati causa vulneratorum curandarum ut ambassiatores nostri scribunt se fuisserequisitos a dicta regia maiestate. Prima pars est de mittendo magistrum JohannemPetrum” (19 December 1463), Ibidem, f. 5.69 “Hoc itaque modo et ordine redditis et acceptis castro et oppido Jaicza mox multorumaliorum castrorum deditio secuta est. Jam circiter triginta manibus meis reddita sunt,et totidem vel paulo plura in obedientiam et deditionem accepi; habebamque spemindubiam de ceteris, quod ad hoc usque tempus vel nulla, vel pauca apud manushostium contineri potuissent, si tempestas hyberna maioribus intensa frigoribusampliores mihi labores non interdixissct. Quamobrem consultius visum est reducereexercitum, et ad ea, que uberius agenda supersunt, intendere”. V. Fraknói, MathiæCorvini Hungariæ Regis epistolæ ad Romanos Pontifices, 27.70 “Die Rückeroberung der Festung Jajce, des strategischen Schlüsselpunktes am Vrbas,wurde im Dezember 1463 der bedeutendste Beitrag, den Matthias persönlich zurTürkenbekämpfung leistete”. Nehring, Matthias Corvinus, Kaiser Friedrich III. unddas Reich, 23. “The occupation and retention of the western part of Bosnia constitutedone of the major feats of arms. It was one of the most enduring results of the Matthiasera and of the whole course of Turco-Hungarian hostilities”. F. Szakály, Phases ofTurco-Hungarian Warfare before the Battle of Mohács (1365–1526), Acta OrientaliaAcademiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 33, 1 (1979) 97. On the Turkish policies of KingMatthias see G. Rászó, Die Türkenpolitik Matthias Corvinus’, Acta Historica AcademiaeScientiarum Hungaricae 32, 1-2 (1986) 3–50.

day.71 In one other letter sent to Venice, and dated 29 December 1463, it wasindicated that the King captured the impregnable fort of Jajce and achieveddominance over the whole of Bosnia.72 Some historians considered this tooshort a time for the arrival of news to such a long distance,73 but the dateunquestionably refers to the time the letter was sent, and not when it arrived toits final destination. However, there are still grounds to believe that Jajce fella few days earlier, and that by placing the victory on Christmas day Matthiaswanted to express divine intervention and spiritual approval of his actions.

Buoyed by the triumph of the King, the Venetians decided to send himmore money to supplement his actions. They expressed happiness about hisvictories, praising his role in the campaign and lauding the fact that he managedto conquer Bosnia which was the shield of their possessions in Dalmatia.74 TheVenetians especially pointed out that he had managed to save the Christiansfrom even greater calamities and servitude.75

Emir O. Filipović

214

71 For instance, in a letter to the judge of his royal court, Count Ladislao de Palocz, issuedon 26 December: “Eius summa hoc est, quod heri, in festo natalis dominice, castrumJaycza manibus nostris dedit Deus omnipotens et misericors Deus noster, cui unanobiscum, quesumus, gratias agite. Quem cum idem castrum munitissimum sit et caputregni ipsius, iam Dei gratia habito, speramus habitum esse totum regnum nostrum Bozne,atque a miserabili servitute Turcorum libertatum” (26 December 1463), L. Thallóczy –S. Horváth, Jajcza, 30. The letter was dated wrongly by the publisher to 1464.72 Antonio Guidoboni sent a letter to Venice on 29 December: “… De Schiavonia sonolettere e novelle, chel Rè de Ungaria ha obtignuto in Bossina la rocha de Yayzinexpugnabile et havere del dominio de tutta la Bossina, maxime de quello era del Rède Bossina” (29 December 1463), V. Macuscev, Monumenta II, 159. This letter wasalso wrongly dated to 1464 by the publisher.73 As is suggested by С. Ћирковић, Херцег Стефан, 258 n. 80, and Ђ. Тошић,Ослобађање Јајца од Турака, 223.74 “Non expedit aliter declarare, quantum facit pro statu nostro, proque optato exitusumpte impresie contra Turcum, conservare nobis amicum et propicium SerenissimumRegem Hungarie, quomodo omnium intelligentium firma sententia est, absque Regeipso cum potenti exercitu terrestri Turcum exterminari non posse. Venit Majestas Suain Bossinam subactam per Turcos, ut regnum illud recuperare possit, quod proculdubioest scutum status et locorum nostrorum Dalmatie et sicut habebitur in magnisnecessitatibus constitutus, favores nostros pecuniarum, gentium et pulveris acbombarde sepius requisivit…” (2 January 1464), I. Nagy – A. Nyáry, Mátyás Királykorából I, 262.75 “Quando nobis innotuit Regiam Serenitatem Vestram cum exercitu suo regnumBossine petijsse: magnum profecto gaudium et immensam letitiam cepimus,persvasimus namque nobis Majestatem Vestram pro conveta virtute et magnanimitateSua nihil esse pretermissuram, ut regnum istud a sevissimis crucis hostibus occupatum

The conquest of Jajce and other forts in Bosnia was presented byMatthias as the recuperation of the whole of the Bosnian Kingdom.76 Manywho wrote about those events shared the King’s view. One document fromŠibenik, written at the end of 1464, states that King Matthias managed torecuperate the Bosnian Kingdom “a manibus et potestate impiorum Turchorum”,who seized it during the previous year, slayed King Stjepan and treacherouslycaptured many nobles who persevered in their Christain faith.77 Anothercontemporary even claimed that Matthias managed to conquer the whole ofBosnia, especially the part which once belonged to the Bosnian King.78 Thismust have been partly in connection to the fact that Duke Stjepan Vukčić at thetime acknowledged the seniority of the Hungarian King and submitted his landsto the Hungarian Crown. Therefore, the claims of King Matthias were notcompletely unfounded.79 He could be happy with his achievements,80 whichwere considered to be a great triumph. On 2 March 1464, the Venetiansinstructed their messenger Francisco Justiniano to go to Buda, congratulate theKing on his recent success and urge him to take up arms once again against the“perfidious Turk”.81


215

redimeret, et Christi fideles a tantis calamitatibus liberaret. Et quidem vive affectionisnostre in Serenitatem Vestram, cujus splendorem et gloriam non minus, quam propriamcupimus: nihil est, quod hoc tempore gratius aut jucundius audire possemus, quamistius impresie optatissimum finem”. Ibidem, 262–263.76 Informing the town of Sopron that by the will of God he recaptured Bosnia and thathe will be crowned on 25 March: “Postquam feliciter dono Domini geste sunt res, prorecuperatione regni Bosne, quod infelici casu amissum erat, congruere visum est,presertim publico et pariter honori nostro, ut pro corroboratione bone spei, que ex hiisiam gestis ad futura gerenda nobis a Deo tribuitur” (28 January 1464), L. Thallóczy –S. Horváth, Jajcza, 18.77 Document cited by M. Ančić, Renesansna diplomacija i rat. Primjer pada Bosne1463, 163. Cf. M. Šunjić, Bosna i Venecija, 383.78 (29 December 1463), V. Macuscev, Monumenta II, 159.79 In January 1464 the Ragusan Senate deliberated the request of King Matthias forthe property, house and lands of the Bosnian King in Ragusa, which shows that heconsidered himself to be the legitimate heir to the Bosnian throne. However, theRagusans skilfully evaded these requests. Д. Ковачевић, Пад босанске средњовјековнедржаве по дубровачким изворима, 216–217; Д. Динић-Кнежевић, Дубровник иУгарска у средњем веку, 140.80 “Redii ergo ex Bozna spe priori felix, re presenti multo felicior; sed ad illamopportunitate quadam et diligentia gerendarum rerum incitatus eram, hanc vero divinapropitiatione consecutus sum”. V. Fraknói, Mathiæ Corvini Hungariæ Regis epistolæad Romanos Pontifices, 28.81 (2 March 1464), S. Ljubić, Listine X, 298–299.

As for the actual conquest of the Jajce fortress, the story of how it allhappened is relayed in a letter sent by the royal vice-chancellor Lucas, theProvost of Eger, to the judge of the royal court, Ladislao de Palocz, issued on26 December 1463. According to Lucas’ story, the King and the soldiers werecelebrating mass on Christmas day in the Franciscan Church in Jajce, when asa sign of divine will, an angel descended bringing a positive turn of events.Namely, one of the royal guards came to the King saying that the Turks werelooking for a guarantee for their messengers in order to negotiate surrender.Thus, firstly two Turks approached and then again two, of which one wasElezbeg, the former commander of the Turks. Without any difficulty hesurrendered the fort with all the military equipment, and the same night thearmed troops of Hungarian knights entered the fort and occupied it.82 All theTurks left the fort, leaving only women behind. The Hungarians captured 430Ottoman soldiers who were good at fighting, and the King gave them the optionto enter into his military service, while the others would be given guides sothat they could return to Ottoman territory.83 The commander of the garrisonof Jajce was taken along with four hundred other chosen prisoners to Hungarywhere they were spectacularly paraded in a triumph.84

This version of events seems to have spread very quickly throughoutthe Christian world since it can also be found in a near contemporary account

Emir O. Filipović

216

82 “Quavis et clarius breviter dicam, prompta erant omnia paramenta ad sturmam.Milites statim post confessionem corporis Domini nostri Ihesu Christicommunicaverunt, ut hodie mane sturma fieret. Sed omnipotens Deus videns militessuos cum humilitate paratos esse mori protper fidem eius, preservavit sua clementiailios, ut letos, cum letantes angeli gratias in excelsis Deo et hominibus pacem in terrisnuntiaverunt, gloriosus ipse Deus letitiam cum angelis et pacem nobis dedit cumhominibus. Nam cum maioris misse officio in ecclesia fratrum minorum singuli pro suoposse devote interessemus, venit angelus de celo missus, venit miles quidam a warta,dicens Turcos securitatem petere et fidem, ut mittere possint ad regem pro tractatibushabendis. Fides data est illi. Venerunt nobiles duo Turci et expost alii rursum duo. Exhis unus Elezbeg, qui olim Turcorum preerat, venit, et sine omni dificultate statim seet castrum in manibus domini nostri daturos obtulerunt, omnia ingenia victualia etquecunque bona propter propria relinquentes in castro. Et res statim conclusa est et incontinenti intromiserunt ad Turcum fortiores plures armatos ex nostris, qui hac nocteillam tenuerunt” (26 December 1463), L. Thallóczy – S. Horváth, Jajcza, 31.83 “Hec mane omnes Turci exiverunt, exceptis mulieribus, ut aiunt. Qui exeuntesnumeraverunt viri quadringenti triginta, et re vera optimi milites ad bella doctissimi, hancsecuratatem, ut qui volunt pacifice recedunt et habebunt conductores, ne a communipopulo offendeantur; qui vero volunt, erunt in stipendio domini nostril”. Ibidem, 32.84 K. M. Setton, The Papacy and the Levant, Vol. II, 250.

in a German letter that was not previously used in historical studies. Despite thefact that it was published in 1866, it escaped the attention of Lajos Thallóczyand Sándor Horváth when they compiled their Diplomatarium of Jajce. Theletter in question was written on 25 January 1464 by Johannes Brune, who gavedetails to the city council of Frankfurt regarding his travels and the situation inAustria and Hungary. In the letter he says that the Hungarian King captured thecapital of the Bosnian Kingdom on Christmas, and that while he was therereceiving the holy sacrament, preparing for attack, allegedly 300 Turks camedown from the citadel expressing the desire to appear in front of the King andswitch to his side. Brune concludes that, with the will of God, “there is hope thatthe Hungarian King will re-conquer the Bosnian Kingdom and return it toChristian hands”.85 Less than a month later he wrote again to his superiors inFrankfurt that it was rumoured that the King of Hungary managed to take theBosnian Kingdom from the Turks and bring it into “his own hands”.86

*

One more letter describing the King’s campaigns for Jajce was notincluded in the Diplomatarium of Thallóczy and Horváth, and therefore remainedunnoticed by historians who wrote about these events. It was sent by“thornantmeyster” Johannes von Rossingen from Tata in Hungary on 19November 1463 to Ulrich de Grafeneck in Trautmansdorf,87 and includes detailed


217

85 “Item der kong von Hungern hait uff den heilgen Cristag das heuptsloß im kongrichzu Wossena ingenommen, dann es die Thurcken, als er dar fur lag, mit den sinen dasheilge sacrament entphangen hatte und uff den tag stormen wolte, uffgeben han, unduff iijc redelicher man uß Thurcken, under den die uff dem slosse waren, sollen von denThorcken zu dem konge von Hungern getreten und nu siner parthie sin. Und man hofft,der kong von Hungern werde das kongrich zu Wossen widder erlangen und zu derCristen hand brengen. Das got gebe. Nyt mehe weyß ich achtbarer nuwer mere” (25January 1464), J. Janssen, Frankfurts Reichscorrepondenz nebst andern verwandtenAktenstücken von 1376–1519, Bd. II/1, Freiburg im Breisgau 1866, 239.86 “Auch sagt man, das der kong von Hungern das kongrich von Wossen widder ußder Turcken und in sin hant bracht habe” (16 February 1464), Ibidem, 24187 Ulrich von Graffeneck was a prominent Austrian noble of the 15th century. Hissurname undoubtedly stems from the possessions he held in the municipality ofGrafenegg in the Krems-Land district of Lower Austria. He was killed in 1487 duringthe military operations of the Emperor’s army around the castle of Schottwien in LowerAustria. See J. Christian von Engel, Geschichte des Ungrischen Reichs, III/1, Wien 1813,411. Trautmansdorf is a castle in South Tyrol, northern Italy. Von Graffeneck’s interest

information about the operations of the Hungarian army in Bosnia.88 Because ofits significance I have decided to include it as an appendix to the current work.

There are a number of valuable insights we can learn from this letter.After a brief account of the Ottoman conquest of Bosnia and the beheading ofits King, the destruction of the state and the flight of its inhabitants, Rossingensays that the Sultan left in charge of the newly conquered Kingdom one of hisdukes, named Mongothowith. This was undoubtedly the corrupted name of thefirst Sanjak-bey of Bosnia, Mehmed-bey Minetović (Minnet-oğlu), who washitherto in command of the Smederevo Sanjak.89 The fact that it was knownthat he was the new governor of Bosnia even in Hungary and Austria isindicative of the way information spread at the time. In fact, Rossingen evenindicates that he obtained his intelligence from a messenger who recentlyreturned from the King’s presence.

Emir O. Filipović

218

in Bosnia did not end with this letter. His contemporary Hector Mülich (†1489/1490),a wealthy and respected merchant from Augsburg, writes in his chronicle that manycounts assembled in Nurenberg in November 1466 willing to march against the Turks.Von Graffeneck was apparently supposed to be the leader of this campaign, and wouldin turn be proclaimed as the King of Bosnia: “Anno domini 1466 umb Martini sind vilfürsten und stett zů Nürmberg gewesen von des Türcken wegen. Und ist der Grafnegkerselb da gewesen und solt hauptman sein; man hett im verhaissen, in zů künig in Wossenzů machen”, “Chronik des Hector Mülich, 1348-1487”, in: Die Chroniken derschwäbischen Städte: Augsburg, Bd. III, Die Chroniken der deutschen Städte, Bd.XXII, Leipzig 1892, 208.88 The letter was initially published by A. Bachmann, Urkundliche Nachträge zurösterreichisch-Deutschen Geschichte im Zeitalter Kaiser Friedrich III, 27–28, on thebasis of a copy which was kept in the State Archives in Dresden (Hauptstaatsarchivzu Dresden), filed with the signature: Wittenberger Archiv, Zeitungen, Bl. 4. Accordingto the information which was kindly communicated to me by archivist MarkusSeemann, the letter is not currently in the possession of the Dresden Archives since itwas kept in the part of the Wittenberg Archives confiscated by the Soviet Union afterthe Second World War, and which was not returned in the restitution of 1958. The citeddocument should today be in a special collection of the Russian State Military Archivesin Moscow (Российский государственный военный архив). Unfortunately, ourattempts to contact the archive personnel in Moscow were futile. Seemann also statesthat the document was wrongly attributed in Bachmann’s collection as “Zeitungen, Bl.4”, because the inventory from 1840–1843 in fact lists the document as “Zeitungen, Bl.3”. The former signature of the document in the Wittenberg Archive was “Loc. 4379”.89 H. Šabanović, Bosanski pašaluk. Postanak i upravna podjela, Sarajevo 1982, 40.Cf. Ć. Truhelka, Tursko-slovjenski spomenici dubrovačke arhive, Glasnik Zemaljskogmuzeja 23 (1911) 20.

Rossingen continues his writing asserting that a number of Bosnian noblesimplored the King of Hungary to help them, claiming that with his aid they wouldbe able to purge the Kingdom of the Turks and that the King duly obliged takinghis army to Bosnia. We have no other documents to corroborate the standpoint thatthe Bosnian nobles initiated the King’s actions, but it cannot be completely ruledout that those noblemen who fled to Hungarian territory petitioned for the re-conquest of their Kingdom in the same way that their peers did in Venice.

Further on, the letter states that the Hungarian army was led by theKing himself, the royal treasurer and Jan Jiskra. The treasurer in question isEmeric Zapolya, whose involvement in the campaign is attested by othersources as well.90 In fact, the King later considered him responsible for theaccomplishments in Jajce and Bosnia, and since it “is almost as important toretain the Kingdom, as it was to acquire it”, he named him the governor ofBosnia, ban of Dalmatia and Croatia, as well as Prior of the Hospitaller Prioryin Vrana soon after his coronation.91 In another, undated charter, by which theKing elevated Zapolya to the status of the Count of Spiš, Matthias speaks ofhis actions in the Kingdom of Bosnia where Zapolya exceeded all expectations,especially in the challenging and tiring winter conditions.92

The other piece of information regarding the involvement of thefamous Moravian fighter and strategist Jan Jiskra in the campaign is similarlyinteresting. Even though we do not come across his name in other sources forthe Hungarian campaigns in Bosnia, it is indisputable that he was in the serviceof King Matthias at the time and that he could very well have taken part in thebattles against the Turks in Bosnia.93


219

90 There is yet no modern critical biography of Emeric Zapolya. A very useful biographicaloverview is provided by R. Horváth, Imre Szapolyai (c. 1435 – 12 September 1487),Matthias Corvinus, the King. Tradition and Renewal in the Hungarian Royal Court1458–1490, Exhibition catalogue, Budapest 2008, 269–270. Cf. Thallóczy, PovijestJajca, 86. For the earlier period of his career see R. Horváth, Szatmár és a Szapolyaiak,Erősségénél fogva várépítésre való. Tanulmányok a 70 éves Németh Péter tiszteletére,Nyíregyháza 2011, 345–356. I would like to use this opportunity to thank colleagueRichard Horváth for sending me his works which were not available here in Bosnia.91 C. Wagner, Analecta Scepusii Sacri et Profani, Pars I, Viennae 1774, 144–145; V.Fraknói, Mátyas Király levelei, Vol. I, 134.92 C. Wagner, Analecta Scepusii, Pars I, 146–147.93 After initial conflicts at the beginning of King Matthias’ reign, the two men madepeace during 1462 and Jiskra entered the King’s service with his retinue. Matthiaswrote about this to the Austrian Archduke Albert VI: “Ceterum nova fraternitati vestrehec possumus intimare, quod cum Johanne Giskra et aliis complicibus suis ac etiam hisqui fratres vocantur, bonam dispositionem et concodiam Deo juvante his diebus conclusimus;

The letter further mentions that the army came to the well-fortifiedtown of Jajce, which was the capital of the Bosnian Kingdom in the same waythat Buda was the principal city of Hungary, where they began the siege andfighting. Rossingen also claims that the Hungarian army managed to seize atown called Swetza and to capture its Turkish garrison. This place was probablyZvečaj on the River Vrbas,94 famous for the fact that the commander of thesaid garrison was the janissary Konstantin Mihajlović from Ostrovica, wholater wrote about the event in his oft-published memoirs. According to hisaccount, after the Sultan conquered Bosnia and retreated, he left Konstantinwith 30 other soldiers in Zvečaj. Soon the King of Hungary came “withouthesitation” and laid siege to both Jajce and Zvečaj. Konstantin further relateshow the Bosnians in Jajce, who had submitted to the Ottomans previously,threw down the Turkish flag and switched sides attacking the Turks, thusallowing the Hungarians to capture the lower town, where King Matthiasremained for eight weeks besieging the fort. During that time, the King alsosent cannons to bombard Zvečaj whose walls were very weak so thatKonstantin and his comrades had to fix them. Konstantin asserts that Zvečaj didnot fall before Jajce which was acquired by agreement and that the King coulddevote more time to Zvečaj only after the fall of Jajce.95 However, we now

Emir O. Filipović

220

ita quod castra, castella et omnia que adhuc tenent, ad manus nostras assignabunt etrestituent. Giskra manebit apud nos, eo quod pollicitus est nobis et prefato regno nostropresertim adversus Turcos se perpetuum fideliter serviturum” (May 1462), V. Fraknói,Mátyas Király levelei, Vol. I, 21. See P. Tóth Szabó, A cseh-huszita mozgalmak ésuralom története Magyarországon, Budapest 1917, 324–325. Cf. В. Стефановић,Краљ Матија и Српска деспотовина, Летопис Матице српске 330, 3 (1931) 240.According to Steffen Scheuch’s report from April 1463, Jiskra had 4.000 men withhim: “Die Thonaw ist gantz verspert, das nichtz herab mag. So samet sich derGrafnecker vnd Pawmkircher vnd ist die rede, der Gißgra wolle in von Hungernviertausent man schicken, vnd verstee nicht anders, der keyser wolle mit ernst darzuthun” (18 April 1463), Briefe und Acten zur Österreichisch-Deutschen Geschichte imZeitalter Kaiser Friedrich III, A. Bachmann (Hrsg.), 519. About Jiskra’s involvementin the army of Matthias Corvinus see also F. Oslanský, The Role of John Jiskra in theHistory of Slovakia, Human Affairs 6, 1 (1996) 19–33; G. Rászó, The Mercenary Armyof King Matthias Corvinus, From Hunyadi to Rákóczi. War and Society in LateMedieval and Early Modern Hungary, Brooklyn 1982, 127–128.94 Wrongly interpreted by the publisher as “das heutige Žepce? oder Sarajevo?”. A.Bachmann, Urkundliche Nachträge zur österreichisch-Deutschen Geschichte imZeitalter Kaiser Friedrich III, 28 n. 2.95 K. Mihailović, Memoirs of a Janissary, Ann Arbor, 1975, 141–142. This opinion isrepeated by L. Thallóczy, Povijest Jajca, 85.

know, according to Rossingen’s letter, that the story told by Konstantin is notcompletely true. If the letter was sent on 19 November, that would then be thedefinitive terminus ante quem for the conquest of Zvečaj. If we take intoconsideration that the news needed some time to travel to the north of Hungary,then we can assume that Zvečaj came into Hungarian hands in the end ofOctober or the beginning of November, more than a month before the finalconquest of Jajce. By writing that the fort which he commanded was the lastone in the Bosnian Kingdom to succumb to Hungarian pressure, Konstantinwanted to enhance his own role in the events and suggest that he was a valiantcommander, therefore impressing his readers.

Apart from Jajce and Zvečaj, Rossingen also says that the Hungariansconquered many other fortresses but that he was not aware whether the Kingmanaged to subdue the whole Bosnian Kingdom. He likewise underlines thathe had heard that the King did not want to return to Hungary until hesuccessfully finished all of his work in Bosnia, stressing that the BosnianKingdom was rich in precious metals. But Matthias at the time must havesurely been motivated primarily by strategic and not financial reasons.

The last piece of information contained in the letter is that Hungary wasat present safe from immediate Turkish incursions since Petar de Zakol, i.e. PeterSzokoly,96 Count of Temes had managed to attack and seize parts of Serbia fromwhere many Serbs came over to his side. This was an especially problematicarea for the Hungarians in the past because, as Rossingen states, in the previousnumber of years the Turks often attacked the province of Srem, Belgrade andother forts across the River Sava. Furthermore, just the preceding year Szokolywas forced to do battle with the Ottoman Duke Alibeg in the same warzone.97

Conclusion

The Ottoman conquest of Bosnia appeared to have been comprehensivesince the Sultan beheaded the King and put an end to his Kingdom. However,this event was not ignored by contemporaries and it caused significant reactionsfrom the forces within the country, but also from the regional powers. Soonafter the Sultan left the Kingdom and retreated to Edirne, Duke Stjepan Vukčić


221

96 See I. A. Fessler, Geschichte von Ungarn, Bd. III, Leipzig 1874, 36.97 Cf. L. Thallóczy, Povijest Jajca, 72–74.

Kosača reconciled with his son and began a counteroffensive. These actionsresulted in the retrieving of almost all of the Duke’s territories, as well ascertain possessions in the lands of the Pavlovići and Kovačevići who wereexecuted in the campaign of Mehmed II in May and June 1463. During thesummer months the most interest in the re-establishment of Bosnia was shownby Venice who felt threatened since the Ottomans now had an open road to theDalmatian littoral, and via the Adriatic onto the Apennine peninsula. But afterthe influence spheres of the war were divided in the Petrovaradin agreementbetween Hungary and Venice, the Venetians focused on war at sea and battlein Dalmatia and Morea, whereas the Hungarians commenced battle from thenorth. From that time Venetian sources stop giving extensive information on thesituation in Bosnia. The campaigns of the Hungarian King were concentratedon Jajce and the surrounding area where the domestic population soon threwoff Ottoman rule and embraced the Hungarian King, allowing him to conquerJajce and 30 other fortresses in northern Bosnia. The territorial possessionsacquired in this campaign would serve as a basis for the establishment for theBanate of Jajce, which together with the Banate of Srebrenik, representedsignificant buffer zones and a shield of the Hungarian Kingdom in thefollowing half a century. The importance of the conquest of Jajce is bestdemonstrated by the fact that this fortress managed to hold out and was onlyconquered by the Ottomans after they defeated the Hungarian army at the battleof Mohács in 1526. Due to the circumstance that Duke Stjepan submittedhimself to Matthias’ rule, the King of Hungary could claim that he now ruledover the whole of Bosnia. Furthermore, despite the fact that Venice lost prestigeand colonies, as well as previously undisputed domination on the seas duringthis war, the conflict occupied the Ottomans so much that, apart from the failedsiege of Jajce in 1464, no further important campaigns and conquests to thenorth were made during the reign of Mehmed II.

We can therefore conclude that, despite the collapse of the Kingdomof Bosnia, and the problems it created, Venice, the King of Hungary and DukeStjepan, all ended the year 1463 in a much better position than they had startedit in. However, that advantage did not last as long as they would have hopedfor. The Ottomans were here to stay and it was not long before they managedto recover the lost positions, and even improve their standing by assuming newconquests which took the Ottoman flag further than ever before.

Emir O. Filipović

222

Appendix

Tata (Hungary), 19 November 1463Johannes von Rossingen writes to Ulrich de Grafeneck about the operations of the Hungarian army in Bosnia

Iohannes von Rossingen, thornantmeyster, magnifico Ulrico deGraveneck, Trautmanstorff residenti, fratri dilecto. Magn. frater dilecte!Venerat famulus vester Paulus nomine huc petivitque, ut vobis novitates exparte sermi dni ni gracmi dni Mathie, regis Ungarie, etc. scriberemus. Credimusque,vos non latere, quemadmodum imperator Thurcorum in estate jam proximepreterita cum sua potencia regnum Bossne invadens regem baronesque etnobiles pociores regni ipsius, qui suis manibus obvenerant, decollari faciendoplurimaque castra et civitales optinendo regnum predictum suo subjugaveratdominio. Postea castra obtenta igne cremavi fecit, aliqua tantummodo ex illisincombusta permittens, gentes in eis costituens ex regno illo exivit, quemdamsuum bojwodam, Mongothowith nominatum, capitaneum compestrem regno inpredicto preficiendo. Istis sic peractis regnicole regni Bosne advocaveruntsermum dnum num regem commendantes se ipsos maiestati sue, certificantes eciam,quod si sua celsitudo cum potencia intraret, posset Thurcos e regno illoextirpare. Rebus isto modo transcursis excellencia sua movit se exercitualiterire usque Bosnam. Et ecce, diebus non diu retroactis rediit nunccius noster aserenitate regia, referens, quod sua maiestas elegerat prius dominumthesaurarium et dominum Iohannem Giskra cum exercitu intraturos. Qui eciamintraverunt. Ipsis illic existentibus postea dominus noster rex ad prefatorumdomini thesaurarii et domini Iohannis Giskra intimacionem in propria personasua intravit. Acceptaque est celsitudo sua in civitatem, Iaysa vocatam, que estmuntissima et principalis in illo regno, sicut in Ungaria Ofen. Mox eciamcastrum super illam civitatem habitum, in quo erant Thurci, obsidionecircumfallavit et faciebat [op]pugnare. Et quamvis tunc ipsum castrum nonfuerat obtentum est. Sed et quedam civitas, Swetza vocata, principalis similitera Thurcis recepta est, captivos ex illa captivando. Sunt et preterea et alia pluracastra potestati domini regis assignata, nilque aliud credimus nec intelligimus,quod sua excellencia totum regnum Boznie subjugabit deo properante suodominio. Atque intelligimus non exibit sua serenitas de regno illo, quosquerectificabit ipsum. Scire eciam potestis, quemadmodum predictum regnum


223

Bosne auro, argento et fodinis habundat. Altissimo vero concedente ad presensnon est aliquis timor a Thurcis huic regno Ungarie, quoniam a Nandoralba, ubividelicet fluvius Zaw cadit in Danubium, per plurima loca penes decursumfluvii Zaw perque loca solebant Thurci antea a pluribus annis retroactisprovinciam, Ziruiensem vocatam, ex ista parte Zaw habitam ad devastanduminvadere, fortalicia exigi fecit serenitas regia, locato ibidem pro defensioneillius partis regni Hungarie capitaneo, videlicet domino Petro de Zakol, comiteThemesiensi, qui in estate preterita debellaverat waywodam Alibeg. Iam enimex fortaliciis istis depredantur partes regni Rascie, unde antea invadebatur hocregnum, et nunc ex depredacione regni Rascie reformabitur provinciaZiruinensium, quoniam Ratiani veniunt ad istam partem Zaw ad descendendumdeserta loca. Ex Thata in festo beate Elizabet anno LXIII°.

Urkundliche Nachträge zur österreichisch-Deutschen Geschichte im Zeitalter KaiserFriedrich III, Adolf Bachmann (Hrsg.), Fontes rerum Austriacarum, ZweiteAbtheilung, Diplomata et Acta, Bd. XLVI, Historischen Commission der KaiserlichenAkademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Wien, 1892, 27–28.

Emir O. Filipović

224

Emir O. Filipović

MINOR EST TURCHORUM POTENTIA,

QUAM FAMA FERATUR…

PRILOZI HISTORIJI BOSNE

U DRUGOJ POLOVINI 1463. GODINE

Sažetak

U radu se kroz prizmu nekoliko objavljenih, ali u historiografijinedovoljno iskorištenih izvornih podataka, pokušava predstaviti situacija uBosni tokom druge polovine 1463. godine. Zbog karaktera dostupnih izvorapažnja je, prema njihovom sadržaju, usmjerena prvenstveno na zanimanjemletačkih vlasti za stanje poslije pada Bosanskog kraljevstva, te na pokušajskupine bosanskih plemića da uz pomoć Venecije ponovo uspostavi državnuvlast, zatim na akcije hercega Stjepana Vukčića Kosače i sinova da povrateizgubljene teritorije, kao i na pohod ugarskog kralja Matijaša Korvina u jesen1463. godine, koji je rezultirao osvojenjem Jajca i većeg broja utvrda nasjevernobosanskom području.

Za rasvjetljavanje pojedinosti o akcijama ugarskog kralja u Bosni odposebne koristi je bilo objavljeno ali do sada neprimijećeno pismo Johannesa vonRossingena kojeg je 19. novembra 1463. godine iz Tate u Ugarskoj poslao Ulrichude Grafenecku. Zbog njegovog značaja i sadržaja, tekst pisma je priložen radu.

Osmansko osvojenje se činilo potpunim jer je sultan odrubio kraljevuglavu i uništio njegovo kraljevstvo. Međutim, ovaj događaj nije prošao bezznačajnih reakcija, prvenstveno od snaga unutar zemlje, ali i od regionalnihsila. Uskoro nakon što se sultan povukao iz Bosne, herceg Stjepan je započeoprotunapad koji je rezultirao povraćanjem skoro cjelokupnog njegovogteritorija, kao i nekih dijelova zemlje Pavlovića i Kovačevića koji su stradaliu sultanovom pohodu iz maja i juna 1463. godine. Tokom ljetnih mjesecinajviše interesa za uspostavljanje Bosanskog kraljevstva iskazala je Venecijakoja je bila pod direktnom prijetnjom Osmanlija jer su im padom Bosne biliotvoreni putevi prema dalmatinskoj obali, a preko Jadranskog mora i premaApeninskom poluotoku. Ali podjelom interesnih sfera u Petrovaradinskomugovoru iz septembra 1463, Mlečani su se fokusirali na pomorski rat i sukobeu Dalmaciji i Moreji, dok su Ugri započeli operacije sa sjevera. Od tog vremenamletački izvori ne daju više tako opširne podatke o stanju u Bosni. Pohodi


225

kralja Matijaša su bili koncentrirani na Jajce i okolno područje gdje je domaćestanovništvo uskoro zbacilo osmansku vlast i prišlo ugarskom kralju, omogućivšimu da zauzme Jajce i 30 drugih utvrda u sjevernoj Bosni. Područje koje jezaposjeo u ovom pohodu poslužilo je kao osnova za uspostavljanje Jajačkebanovine koja je, uz Srebreničku banovinu, predstavljala značajnu tampon zonui štit Ugarske kraljevine u narednih pedeset godina. Štaviše, unatoč činjenici daje ovim ratom Venecija dugoročno izgubila dosta ugleda i kolonija, kao i do tadaneosporavanu prevlast na moru, sukob je toliko okupirao Osmanlije da tokomvladavine Mehmeda II nisu više imali značajnih osvajačkih uspjeha prema Zapadu.

Uzevši sve u obzir, može se zaključiti da su, uprkos padu Bosanskogkraljevstva i problemima koje je ono izazvalo, i Venecija, i Ugarski kralj iherceg Stjepan, svi završili 1463. godinu u daleko boljoj poziciji nego što suje počeli. Međutim, ta njihova prednost nije potrajala onoliko dugo koliko suse nadali. Osmanlije su se tu namjeravale zadržati i nije im trebalo mnogovremena prije nego su povratili izgubljene položaje, pa čak ih i poboljšalipoduzimajući nove osvajačke pohode koji su ponijeli osmansku zastavu daljenego ikada do tada.

Ključne riječi: Bosna, Ugarska, Osmansko carstvo, Venecija, Stjepan Tomašević,Matijaš Korvin, Mehmed II, Jajce.

Emir O. Filipović

226

Minor est Turchorum potentia, quam fama feratur… Contributions to the History of Bosnia in the...

Documents

Transcript of Minor est Turchorum potentia, quam fama feratur… Contributions to the History of Bosnia in the...