Zlatitsa döyüşü

Vikipediya, azad ensiklopediya
Naviqasiyaya keç Axtarışa keç
Zlatitsa döyüşü
Varnaya səlib yürüşü
Sredna Qora
Sredna Qora
Tarix 12 dekabr 1443
Yeri Balkan dağlarında Zlatitsa keçidi, Osmanlı imperiyası (indiki Bolqarıstan)
Nəticəsi Osmanlının qələbəsi
Münaqişə tərəfləri

Macarıstan krallığı
Polşa krallığı
Serbiya despotluğu
Papa dövləti

Osmanlı imperiyası

Komandan(lar)

III Vladislav
Yanoş Hunyadi
Georgi Brankoviç
Culiano Çesarini

II Murad
Qasım paşa
Turaxan bəy

Tərəflərin qüvvəsi

naməlum

naməlum

İtkilər

Döyüş və sonrakı geri çəkilmə zamanı ağır itkilər[1]

naməlum

Zlatitsa döyüşü — 12 dekabr 1443-cü ildə[2][3] Osmanlı imperiyası ilə Serbiya və Macarıstan qoşunları arasında baş tutmuş döyüş.[4] Bu, Balkanlarda daha böyük Varnaya səlib yürüşünün bir hissəsi idi. Döyüş Osmanlı imperiyasının Balkan dağlarında yerləşən Zlatitsa aşırımında, Zlatitsa şəhəri (indiki Bolqarıstan) yaxınlığında baş tutmuşdur. Polşa kralının səbirsizliyi və qışın şiddəti Yanoş Hunyadini 1444-cü ilin fevralında öz ölkəsinə qayıtmağa məcbur etmişdi. Buna baxmayaraq, o, Bosniya, Herseqovina, Serbiya, BolqarıstanAlbaniyada sultanın hakimiyyətini tamamilə qırmağa nail olmuşdu.

1440-cı ildə Yanoş Hunyadi Polşa kralı III Vladislavın etibarlı məsləhətçisi və ən nüfuzlu sərkərdəsinə çevrilmişdir. Hunyadi Belqrad qalasının kapitanlığı ilə mükafatlandırılmış və Osmanlılara qarşı hərbi əməliyyatlara rəhbərlik etmişdir. Kral Vladislav Hunyadiyə şərqi Macarıstanda mülklər verməklə onun xidmətlərini tanımışdı. Hunyadi qısa zamanda ixtiyarında olan məhdud resurslarla müdafiəsini gücləndirmək üçün fövqəladə qabiliyyət nümayiş etdirmişdi. O, 1441-ci ildə Semendriyada İshaq bəy üzərində qalib gəlmişdi. Transilvaniyada yerləşən Nadşeben yaxınlığında Osmanlı qüvvələrini məhv etmiş və Macarıstanın Valaxiyaya nəzarətini bərpa etmişdi.[5] 1442-ci ildə Yanoş Hunyadi Osmanlılara qarşı dörd qələbə qazanmışdır və onlardan ikisi həlledici idi.[6] 1442-ci ilin martında Hunyadi Macarıstan krallığının cənubunda, Transilvaniyada Hermanştadt döyüşündə Məzid bəyi və basqın edən Osmanlı ordusunu məğlubiyyətə uğratmışdır.[7] 1442-ci ilin sentyabrında Hunyadi Rumeli regionunun valisi bəylərbəyi Şehabəddinin böyükmiqyaslı Osmanlı ordusunu məğlub etmişdir. Bu, ilk dəfə idi ki, Avropa ordusu təkcə basqınçılardan deyil, öz sancaqbəyilərinin başçılıq etdiyi və çoxsaylı yeniçərilərin müşayiəti ilə vilayət süvarilərindən ibarət belə böyük bir Osmanlı ordusunu məğlub etmişdi.[8] Bu qələbələr Hunyadini Osmanlıların görkəmli düşməninə və bütün xristian aləmində tanınmış şəxsiyyətə çevirmişdi. Bu, kral Vladislavla birlikdə həyata keçirilən Varnaya səlib yürüşü üçün əsas motivasiya olmuşdur və bu ekspedisiyanın ilk toqquşması 1443-cü ildə Niş döyüşü idi. Yürüş zamanı Hunyadini Culiano Çezarini müşayiət etmişdi.[9][10] Döyüş 3 noyabr 1443-cü ildə Bolvani ilə Niş arasındakı düzənlikdə baş tutmuşdur.[3] Osmanlı qüvvələrinə Rumelinin bəylərbəyi Qasım paşa, Turaxan bəyİshaq bəy rəhbərlik edirdi.[11] Osmanlı məğlubiyyətindən sonra Qasım Paşa və Turaxan bəyin geri çəkilən qüvvələri səlibçilərin ərzaq tapmasına mane olmaq üçün Niş və Sofiya arasındakı bütün kəndləri yandırdılar.[12][13] Osmanlı mənbələri Osmanlının məğlubiyyətini müxtəlif komandirlərin rəhbərlik etdiyi Osmanlı orduları arasında əməkdaşlığın olmaması ilə izah edirlər.[14] Qaramanlılara qarşı müharibə aparan Osmanlı sultanı II Murad səlibçilərin paytaxt Ədirnəyə çatmaması üçün müdafiə qurmaq məqsədilə öz Avropa mülklərinə doğru irəliləmişdi. Turaxan bəy Muradı Sofiyanı yandıraraq Bolqarıstan dağlarına çəkilməyə razı salmışdı.[15] Noyabrın sonlarında səlibçilər Sofiyaya daxil olmuşdular.[16][15] Şəhərin alınmasından sonra Hunyadi Transilvaniyanın saks şəhərlərinə sultanın ''dənizə qaçdığını'' və altı-səkkiz gün ərzində Ədirnəyə gedəcəyini bildirmişdi.[15] Sonradan göründüyü kimi, sultan Ədirnəyə aparan iki dağ keçidinin qarşısını kəsməyi üstün tutmuşdu. Onlardan biri Trayan darvazası adlı qədim Roma yolu, digəri isə Zlatitsa keçidi idi.[17]

Zlatitsa döyüşündən və səlibçilərin geri çəkilməsindən sonra döyüş meydanı və ətraf rayonlar tamamilə xabaralıq halına düşmüşdür. Serbiya viran qalmış, Sofiya "qara çöl"ə çevrilərək dağıdılmış və yandırılmış, ətraf kəndlər isə "qara kömür"ə dönmüşdür.[18] 1443-cü il yürüşündən yalnız Georgi Brankoviç mənfəət əldə etmişdi.[19]

Xristianlar öz ölkələrinə doğru yürüş edən zaman Osmanlı qüvvələri geri çəkilən ordunu yaxından izləyirdilər.[20] 24 dekabrda Melstitsa yaxınlığında baş tutmuş qətiyyətsiz toqquşmadan sonra sultan xristainları təqib etməyi Kasım paşaya və Turaxan bəyə həvalə etmiş, geri alınan Sofiyaya qayıtmışdır.[20][21] Bundan az sonra səlibçilər Kunovitsa döyüşündə onları təqib edən Osmanlı qüvvələrini pusquya salaraq məğlub etmişdilər. Burada sultanın kürəkəni və baş vəzir Çandarlı Xəlil Paşanın qardaşı Mahmud bəy əsir götürülmüşdür.[22]

Tarixi mənbələr

[redaktə | mənbəni redaktə et]

Döyüşün təfərrüatları və nəticəsi ilə bağlı tarixçilər arasında bəzi mübahisələr var, çünki müxtəlif mənbələr bir-birinə zidd hesablar təqdim edirlər.[23][24][25] Tarixçi Kolin İmber döyüşün xristian qüvvələri üçün fəlakətli olduğunu iddia edir.[26] O, sonrakı Kunovitsa döyüşündəki qələbənin Zlatitsadakı toqquşmanın xristian zəfəri olduğu illüziyasını yaratdığını iddia etmişdir. Daha sonra ''qələbə illüziyası''nın bir Vladislavın irəli sürdüyünü və xüsusən də Sezarininin bunu davam etdirmək üçün ''narahat' olduğunu bildirmişdir. O, Jan de Vavrenin yazdıqlarına diqqət çəkərək əlavə etmişdir ki, kampaniyadan sonra Sezarini papanın yanına getməli idi. Sesarini keçdiyi hər yerdə kralın türklərə qarşı qazandığı böyük zəfərləri elan etməli, verdiyi itkilər haqqında olan məlumatları gizlətməli idi.[27] Eynilə, Türkiyə tarixçisi Xəlil İnalcık iddia etmişdir ki, döyüşü bir Osmanlı zəfəri kimi təsvir edən anonim Osmanlı salnaməsi "Qəzavatı Sultan Murad bin Mehmed Xan" Zlatitsa döyüşü və Varna döyüşü ilə bağlı hadisələr haqqında bütün Osmanlı salnamələri arasında ən etibarlı məlumatı verir.[28][29] Polşa tarixçisi Yan Dabrovski, əksinə, xristianların türkləri Zlatitsada uğurla qovmağı bacardıqlarını və geri çəkilməzdən əvvəl daha da irəlilədiklərini iddia edir. Bununla belə, onun iddiası tədqiqatçı Con Cefferson tərəfindən "Kral Vladislas və Sultan Muradın müqəddəs döyüşləri" kitabında tənqid edilir. O, Dabrovskinin əsərində Niş və Zlatitsa döyüşlərini qarışdırdığını, Zlatitsada xristianların irəliləməsinin dayandırılması ilə razılaşdığını əlavə edir.[30]

  1. Imber, Colin. The Crusade of Varna 1443-145 (ingilis). Ashgate Publishing. 2006. ISBN 9781472416940. In reality, it had been a disaster. In his account of the Hungarian army's retreat, Długosz describes 'the greater part of the King's army falling in heaps, overcome by hunger, and some soldiers marching with their bodies tottering hither and thither... most of them in truth so exhausted that you would think them to be ghosts devoid of flesh rather than men. His description echoes precisely the account of the army's return in The Holy Wars of Sultan Murad.
  2. Mellersh, H. E. L.; Williams, Neville. Chronology of World History. ABC-CLIO. 1999. səh. 527. ISBN 978-1-57607-155-7.
  3. 1 2 Şablon:Setton-A History of the Crusades
  4. "Battle of Zlatica". Encyclopædia Britannica. 2014. 11 November 2014 tarixində arxivləşdirilib. İstifadə tarixi: 13 November 2014. ...finally defeated Hunyadi at the Battle of Zlatica (İzladi) in 1443
  5. Babinger, Franz. Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time. Princeton University Press. 1992. səh. 25. ISBN 978-0-691-01078-6. John Hunyadi accompanied by the cardinal-legate Giuliano Cesarini.
  6. Jefferson, 2012. səh. 278
  7. Jefferson, 2012. səh. 278–286
  8. Jefferson, 2012. səh. 286–292
  9. Babinger, Franz, Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time, Princeton University Press, 1992, səh. 25, ISBN 978-0-691-01078-6, John Hunyadi accompanied by the cardinal-legate Giuliano Cesarini.
  10. Jefferson, 2012. səh. 292
  11. Babinger, Franz, Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time, Princeton University Press, 1992, səh. 25, ISBN 978-0-691-01078-6, The combined host met Ottoman forces first on November 3, 1443, between the castle of Bolvan (near Aleksinac) and the city of Niš. Here Kasim Bey, then governor of Rumelia, Ishak Bey and other standard bearers were defeated.
  12. Şablon:The Late Medieval Balkans''They then moved on and captured Sofija... It should be stressed, however, that the crusaders' victories were against the armies assigned to garrison the towns and fortresses along this route. They had not yet seen the major Ottoman army... As they withdrew the Ottoman troops burned the environs of Sofija and the lands along the route east, to hinder the crusaders in finding provisions.''
  13. Imber, Colin, The Crusade of Varna, 1443-45, Aldershot ; Burlington (Vt.) : Ashgate, cop., 2006, səh. 16, ISBN 978-0-7546-0144-9, OCLC 470458159, In the course of their flight Kasim and Turahan burned all villages between Niš and Sofia.
  14. Imber, Colin, The Crusade of Varna, 1443-45, Aldershot ; Burlington (Vt.) : Ashgate, cop., 2006, səh. 270, ISBN 978-0-7546-0144-9, OCLC 470458159, The Ottoman sources in general emphasize the disagreement and lack of cooperation between frontier Ottoman forces under Turakhan and sipahi army under Kasim
  15. 1 2 3 Pálosfalvi, Tamás. From Nicopolis to Mohács, A History of Ottoman-Hungarian Warfare 1389-1526. Brill Academic Publishers. 2018. 114. ISBN 9789004375659. The Ottoman Anonymous, openly hostile to Turahan Bey, blames the latter for convincing the sultan to burn Sofia and retreat... At the very end of November, the Christian army accordingly reached Sofia. From there, Hunyadi informed the Saxon towns of Transylvania on 3 December that the sultan had fled "towards the sea," and he was about to follow him and would be in Edirne within six or eight days
  16. Şablon:The Late Medieval Balkans''They then moved on and captured Sofija... It should be stressed, however, that the crusaders' victories were against the armies assigned to garrison the towns and fortresses along this route. They had not yet seen the major Ottoman army... As they withdrew the Ottoman troops burned the environs of Sofija and the lands along the route east, to hinder the crusaders in finding provisions.''
  17. Pálosfalvi, Tamás (2018). p. 116, ''it led through the pass known as Trajan's Gate. The other, which was even more difficult to pass so late in the season, crossed the mountains in a north-south direction at Zlatitsa... instead of choosing the most commonly used route leading through Trajan's Gate, Hunyadi opted for the Zlatitsa Pass, probably still hoping that he would be able to overcome the Ottomans by a swift and unexpected move... By the time the Christians reached the Zlatitsa Pass sometime in the middle of December, it had also been blocked, and was guarded by Murad in person. The pass was obstructed with both stone and felled trees... After the rumours about the sultan's flight, this situation may have come as a surprise to many in the Christian army. Nevertheless, on 12 December, using artillery and trusting in the superior armour of his troops, Hunyadi tried to break through the pass. His efforts proved futile, however, and the voevode himself almost fell into Ottoman hands. Then it was decided that the king and part of the army, together with the wagons, should withdraw from the pass, with Hunyadi and his troops covering the retreat. It may have been a last-ditch effort to trick the Ottomans out of their well-defended positions. If so, the plan almost worked, for -according to the Anonymous- it was once again the notorious Turahan upon whose advice Murad cancelled a potentially self-destructive assault on the newly-established Christian wagenburg outside the pass''
  18. Boyar, Ebru; Fleet, Kate. A Social History of Ottoman Istanbul. Cambridge University Press. 15 April 2010. səh. 25. ISBN 978-1-139-48444-2.
  19. The Cambridge Medieval History Series volumes 1-5. Plantagenet Publishing. səh. 1728. GGKEY:G636GD76LW7.
  20. 1 2 Pálosfalvi, Tamás (2018). p. 118 "The retreat was an inverse reflection of the outward march, with Hunyadi now providing the rearguard for the royal army marching in front. The Christian forces were closely followed by the Ottomans, commanded by Murad in person, and on 24 December a battle took place at a place called Melstica, presumably south of Sofia. The time apparently came for the wagenburg to assume its proper role: turning back after a rapid assault against the enemy lines, Hunyadi tried to lure the Ottomans into the death-trap constituted by the firearms installed on the wagons. Again, if the narrative of the best-informed Ottoman chronicler can be trusted, the sultan himself failed to realize the Christians' goal, but Turahan Bey revealed to him the "treachery and deceitfulness" of the enemy. Although the author likens the Ottoman soldiers attacking the wagenburg to "lions that have tasted blood," and tells how, before retreating into the wagenburg, Hunyadi's men "began to fell like autumn leaves, the encounter at Melstica was probably not a major one. Hunyadi himself, who, speaking about the battle around Niš before, and that of Kunovitsa later on, offers valuable details both about the opposing Ottoman forces and the circumstances of the encounter, keeps relative silence when it comes to Melstica. His laconic account is all the more interesting since, unlike in the other two battles, the Ottoman emperor was present in the fighting on 24 December. In the last week of December, the Christian army continued its westward march, and, passing through the Dragoman Pass, arrived in the region of Pirot at the very end of 1443. Sultan Murad had gone back to Sofia after the indecisive encounter of 24 December, entrusting the task of pursuing the enemy to Kasim Pasha and Turahan Bey, as well as Mahmud Chelebi, brother of Grand Vezir Halil Pasha, who led some Anatolian troops..."
  21. Jefferson, 2012: "With the Ottomans unwilling to assault the tabor the battle at Melshtitsa proved indecisive. The crusader army continued home, marching through the Dragoman pass into the plain of Pirot. Meanwhile Murad had dispatched a force of cavalry to pursue the crusaders; he himself went back to Sophia. The pursuit force was composed of Kasım Pasha and the men under his standard, Turahan Bey with the "Army of Thessaly," and Mahmud Chelebi with seven banners of recently arrived troops from Anatolia."
  22. Imber, Colin. Introduction // The Crusade of Varna, 1443-45. Ashgate Publishing. July 2006. 9–31. ISBN 0-7546-0144-7. İstifadə tarixi: 2007-04-19.
  23. Fine, John V. A. Jr. (1994). The Late Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Late Twelfth Century to the Ottoman Conquest, p. 549 "But along the route, at Zlatica, they met a strong and well-placed Ottoman defense force. After a period of facing each other, including it seems a couple of skirmishes (about which our few sources contradict one another on details and outcome), the crusaders retreated"
  24. Mustafa Serdar Palabiyik. The Changing Ottoman Perception of War: From the Foundation of the Empire to its Disintegration // Avery Plaw (redaktor). The Metamorphosis of War. New York, United States of America. 2012. səh. 129.
  25. T. C. F. Hopkins. Empires, Wars, and Battles. New York, United States of America. 2007. səh. 207. ISBN 9780765303264.
  26. Imber, Colin. The Crusade of Varna 1443-145 (ingilis). Ashgate Publishing. 2006. ISBN 9781472416940. In reality, it had been a disaster. In his account of the Hungarian army's retreat, Długosz describes 'the greater part of the King's army falling in heaps, overcome by hunger, and some soldiers marching with their bodies tottering hither and thither... most of them in truth so exhausted that you would think them to be ghosts devoid of flesh rather than men. His description echoes precisely the account of the army's return in The Holy Wars of Sultan Murad.
  27. Imber, Colin (2006). The Crusade of Varna 1443-145, ''On the return march, however, Hunyadi was able to secure another victory, when he ambushed a pursuing force in the Dragoman Pass, taking prisoner Mahmud Bey, the son-in-law of the Sultan and brother of the Grand Vizier. Constantine Mihailović names the place of the action as Kunovica. It was probably, above all, this success that created the illusion that the war of the Zlatitsa Pass had been a Christian triumph. In reality, it had been a disaster. In his account of the Hungarian army's retreat, Długosz describes 'the greater part of the King's army falling in heaps, overcome by hunger, and some soldiers marching with their bodies tottering hither and thither... most of them in truth so exhausted that you would think them to be ghosts devoid of flesh rather than men. His description echoes precisely the account of the army's return in The Holy Wars of Sultan Murad. However, the appearance of the captured standards in the Church of the Blessed Virgin in Buda reinforced the illusion of victory. It was an illusion that the King and, especially, Cesarini were anxious to maintain. Jehan de Wavrin reports that, after the battle, Cesarini was to go to the Pope, and in every place that he went through, he was to announce the great victories that he and the King had won against the Turks. However, he was to keep quiet about the losses that the Christians had suffered in the mountains, contradicting anyone who said anything about them''
  28. İnalcık, Halil. Yeni bulunuş bir Gazavat-ı Sultan Murad. ''Oruç: "Sultan Murad Hana haber oldu, Sultan Murad Han Edirne'den çıkup Rumeli çerisiyle ve azepleriyle ve yeniçerisiyle ve kapuhalkıyle kışın zemherirde İzladi Derbendi'nde kâfirle buluşup cenk edüp kâfirleri Derbend'den gerisine döndürüp..., Anonim: Hemen aynı... Hulâsa, Gazavat'ın İzladi ve Varna savaşları hakkında elimizdeki Osmanlı kaynakları arasında en tafsilâtlı bir kaynak olduğuna şimdilik hükmedebiliriz.''
  29. Blagojević, Božidar. Zbornik radova sa naučnih skupova u Negotinu i Kladovu povodom obeležavanja 170 godina od pogibije Hajduk-Veljka Petrovića i 150 godina oslobođenja od Turaka. Izd. Međuopštinska konferencija SSRN Zaječar, Balkanološki institut SANU. 1984. səh. 35.
  30. Jefferson, 2012: "Confused by the Polish date for Adalbert's translation, but unable to reconcile it with the early date of 20 October, Dąbrowski mistakenly maintains that the letter was written in December, after the battle of Zlatitsa. He bases this off of the date given in Bachmann, in which the date is given as "tercia die festo beati Luce ewangeliste nunc preteriti," which would seem to support the date of October 20th. Yet there is a simple explanation for this. As mentioned above, the feast day St. Adalbert's translation differed locally in both Poland (20 October) and Hungary (6 November). The copyist, almost certainly Polish, calculated the date in question based off the Polish date for Adalbert's translation, i.e. 20 October, and not the Hungarian one which would have been used by Wladislas' royal chancellery. In order to rid future readers of the same ambiguity he had encountered, he changed the date to one that would have been universally understood, that is, he used the feast of St. Luke (18 October) as the reference date, which was identical throughout Christendom. Dąbrowski seems to have overlooked this rather simple explanation and instead maintained that there was an error in Bachmann and the feast day should be "Lucie," not "Luce," which gives the letter the same date as Hunyadi's dispatch from January 6th. But January 6th makes no sense given the text. There is no mention in the letter of the battles of Zlatitsa or Kunovitsa, all of which had taken place by January 6th and which were described in Hunyadi's letter. The letter does, however, mention Balaban Pasha and Isa Bey, both of whom fought and were captured at Nish (see Hunyadi's letters and the Gazavât). Dąbrowski cites as a second point of evidence that Wladislas was headed off to Edirne, as he would have after Zlatitsa (more on this below). Therefore, in his reckoning, this letter must refer to that battle. This is a bit of circular reasoning, for the letter itself is his evidence that they pushed on after Zlatitsa, and the date of the letter is for him proven by the fact that they pushed on after Zlatitsa. What seems most problematic for Dąbrowski is that the king mentions in the letter a battle at Sophia, which by no account took place after Zlatitsa. Instead, the crusaders arrived at Sophia after the earlier battle of Nish. Yet in his letter Wladislas does not write that the battle took place "at" Sophia, but "near" Sophia, "conflictus idem prope civitatem Zofia." This makes sense if the letter was, as I believe, simply a piece of propaganda for his subjects in far-away Hungary and Poland regarding Hunyadi's victories at Nish and Aleksinac. Neither of these Bulgarian cities would have been immediately recognizable to Europeans by name. Instead it would make sense to mention the well-known city of Sophia. It is much easier to accept this, i.e. that the battle referred to is that of Nish/Aleksinac, than maintain that the battle referred to in the letter is Zlatitsa, and that the king continued on from that battle further into the Ottoman heartland (again, see below). Indeed, this letter is the basis for the biggest error Dąbrowski commits in his study of the Long March. Based on Wladislas' words in this letter "procedere disposuimus versus civitatem Andrinopolim," and believing that the battle described in the letter is the Battle of Zlatitsa, he assumes the Christians drove the Turks away at Zlatitsa and were able to proceed a bit farther on. This was not at all the case, as multiple sources both Ottoman and otherwise confirm. The Christian advance was decisively halted by the Ottomans at Zlatitsa and they were forced to turn back. The details that the letter mentions instead entirely reflect the Battle of Nish. Facts mentioned in the letter, for example that the battle began around noon and lasted for a long time, that Balaban Pasha was captured, and that the men were now ready to head on to Edirne all agree with Hunyadi and Cesarini's letters after the Battle of Nish/Aleksinac. Thus, there can be little doubt that the king is referring in this letter to the battles of Nish/Aleksinac, and that it's date is Nov. 6th."