Abstract
On the evening of 29 August 1526 Louis II, twenty-year-old King of Hungary and Bohemia, fell into a swollen stream while fleeing from the battlefield at Mohacz and drowned. The heavy armour which weighed him down symbolized the obsolescence of his army which had been overwhelmed by the superior fire-power and discipline of the Ottoman force under Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent.1 It being late in the campaigning season, the Turks soon turned for home. Nevertheless, their victory was to have serious consequences.
Henceforth these regions accustomed to the ringing of church bells will hear the cry of the muezzin.…
Proclamation of Suleiman the Magnificent, 1541.
On Christmas night according to the Lutheran calendar the Devil himself came to Church, and sat on a throne near the altar. He wore black silk clothes in the German fashion … and a black silk cap on each of his nine heads.
Confession of witchcraft in sixteenth-century Riga.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
See the eye-witness account by the Chancellor of Hungary and Bishop of Syrmia, Stephanus Brodericus [Istvan Broderics]: P. Kulcsar (ed.), De Conflictu Hungarorum cum Solymano Turcarum imperatore ad Mohach historia Verissima [Bibliotheca scriptorum medii recentisque aevorum, series nova vol. VI] (Budapest, 1985) especially pp. 52–6. For recent analyses in English by military specialists, see G. Perjes, The Fall of the Mediaeval Kingdom of Hungary (Boulder, 1989) and L. Alfoldi, ‘The Battle of Mohacs, 1526’ in J. Bak and B. Kiraly (eds.), From Hunyadi to Rakocsi: War and Society in Late Mediaeval and Early Modern Hungary [East European Monographs, No. CIV] (New York, 1982) pp. 189–203.
For the career of Petru Rares, ruler of Moldavia 1527–38 and 1541–6, at the inception of this period, and the difficulties he faced, both internally from his own boiars and internationally as head of a shuttlecock state poised between the Habsburgs, Poland and the Turks (to whom they were formally subject), see L. Simanschi (ed.), Petru Rares (Bucharest, 1978).
For the constitutional position in the lands of the Bohemian crown see K.J. Dillon, Kmg and Estates in the Bohemian Lands 1526–1564 [Studies presented to the International Commission for the History of Representative and Parliamentary Institutions, No. LVII] (Brussels, 1976) especially pp. 19–21.
For the western flank, Kriegsarchiv, Vienna, especially the Alte Feldakten records which date back to 1528 and are voluminous from 1540; also Steiermarkische Landesarchiv, Graz: Meiller akten, and K. Kaser, Freie Bauer und Soldat (Graz, 1986) especially pp. 18–60 on the settlement of Slav and other fugitives (uskoci, vlachs) from the 1550s, the origins of the Military Frontier in Croatia-Slavonia. The records in the Budapest State Archive [Magyar Orszagos Leveltar] dealing with the eastern, Hungarian, sector are predictably spottier, though some telling detail relating to the defences of Hungarian border towns, muster and pay lists is provided, for instance in E 210: Militaria (see also n. 23 infra). However, the destructive effects of war have sometimes been exaggerated — see V. Zimanyi, Economy and Society in Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Hungary (1526–1650) [Studia Historica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 188] (Budapest, 1987) pp. 9 and 14.
A. Veress (ed.), Matricula et Acta Hungarorum in Universitatibus Italiae studentium [Monumenta Hungariae Italica, Vol. III] (Budapest, 1941) pp. 182–96 for Padua 1536–60; also pp. 317–19 for Dudic’s association with Verona.
See A. Kadic, ‘Jan Kochanowski in Croatian Literature’, in S. Fiszman (ed.), The Polish Renaissance in its European Context (Bloomington, 1988) pp. 421–8; and other essays in the same volume.
On the Reformation in general, see A.G. Dickens, Reformation and Society in Sixteenth Century Europe (New York, 1966); for East-Central Europe, R. Betts in The New Cambridge Modern History, vol. II (Cambridge, 1961) pp. 186–209 and R.J.W. Evans, The Making of the Habsburg Monarchy (Oxford, 1979) especially pp. 3–40; for Bohemia, Dillon, op. cit., pp. 71ff.; for Poland J. Tazbir in S. Kieniewicz (chief ed.), History of Poland, 2nd ed. (Warsaw, 1979) pp. 158ff..
On constitutional developments in Poland see in particular A. Wyczanski in A. Maczak et al. (eds.), East-Central Europe in Transition (Cambridge, 1985) pp. 142ff.. Also Tazbir in Kieniewicz, op. cit., pp. 160–7, and H. Roos,’ standewesen und Parlamentarische Verfassung in Polen’, D. Gerhard (ed.), Standische Vertretung in Europa von 17. und 18. Jahrhundert (Gottingen, 1969) pp. 310–67.
Mustafa Selaniki, Tarih-i Selaniki: Die Chronik des Selaniki (Freiburg, 1970). Translation adapted from a forgotten source.
The account which follow draws on inter alia O. Barkan, ‘The Price Revolution of the Sixteenth Century’, International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 6, 1975, pp. 3–28; V.J. Parry, ‘The Successors of Suleyman, 1566–1617’ in M.A. Cook (ed.), A History of the Ottoman Empire to 1730 (Cambridge, 1976) pp. 103–32; S.J. Shaw, History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey, vol. I, pp. 107ff. and for the useful bibliography, pp. 317ff.. Also C. Kafadar, ‘When Coins Turned into Drops of Dew and Bankers became Robbers of Shadows’, McGill University doctoral thesis, 1986.
S. Pulaha, On the Demographic and Ethnical Situation of the Albanian Territory (15th-16th Centuries), (Tirana, 1988), pp. 31–3, suggests that the drying-up of migration from Albania to Italy contributed to the increase. On urban population growth, O. Barkan in N. Todorov (ed.), La Ville Baklanique xv–xix ss (Sofia, 1970) p. 181.
I.M. Kunt, The Sultan’s Servants 1550–1650: The Transformation of Ottoman Provincial Government (New York, 1983) especially Tables 4.1, 4.8, 4.9, 4.11, and 4.12.
The’ second serfdom’ is a Marxist notion unsupported by the evidence. In Ceaucescu’s time David Prodan once challenged his colleagues in the Academy by promising to accept the notion if they could demonstrate the existence of an earlier ‘first serfdom’. The response was to expel him. For further discussion, see Chapter 9.
See the useful discussion by M. Bogucka in V. Zimanyi (ed.), La Pologne et la Hongrie aux xvi-xvii siecles (Budapest, 1981) especially pp. 11–18.
L. Zytkowicz, ‘The Peasant’s Farm and the Landlord’s Farm in Poland from the Sixteenth to the Middle of the Eighteenth Century’, Journal of European Economic History, I, 1 1972, pp. 135–54; also A. Maczak, ‘Polish Society and Power System’ in S. Fiszman, op. cit., pp. 17–33. For a general introduction to the phenomenon of serfdom, see J. Blum, ‘The Rise of Serfdom in Eastern Europe’, The American Historical Review, 42 (4), 1957, pp. 807–36, who believes the chief cause of this divergence from the Western European experience was political. For Russia, J. Blum, Lord and Peasant in Russia from the Ninth to the Nineteenth Century (Princeton, 1961); and J. Mavor, An Economic History of Russia, I (New York, 1965) which draws on the considerable expertise of V.I. Semevskii.
Zimanyi, Economy and Society, op. cit. pp. 30–8.
A. Wolanis’s speech is quoted by A. Spekke, History of Latvia (Stockholm, 1951) p. 198.
Alderman Prutze of Stralsund 1614, quoted by H. Kamen, The Iron Century (London, 1971) pp. 219–20.
M. Bogucka, ‘The Towns of East-Central Europe from the Fourteenth to the Seventeenth Century’, A. Maczak et al., (eds.), East-Central Europe in Transition (Cambridge, 1985) pp. 97–108 (the quoted extract is on p. 101).
Zimanyi, op. cit., pp. 69–70. She rightly points out that the number of newcomers to the aristocracy was no greater than in England. However, the numbers of substantial merchants and yeomen were considerably less. A closer analogy lies, perhaps with the merchants of Venice who showed a marked change in their investment policies in the same period, buying estates in the hinterland rather than putting money into commercial ventures which had become both riskier and less profitable.
Dillon, op. cit., pp. 159ff.; Evans, op. cit., pp. 39ff.; also his Rudolf II and his World (Oxford, 1973) pp. 157–8; A.F. Pollard, The Jesuits in Poland (Oxford, 1892).
A useful summary of such Ottoman military categories is provided by O. Zirojevic, Tursko vojno urecenje u srbji 1459–1683 [Istorijski institut posebna izdana, kn. 18] (Beograd, 1974) esp. pp. 158ff.. Despite the title the categories described apply to Ottoman-governed Balkan areas other than Serbia. See also my ‘Conclusions’ in G. Rothenberg et al. (eds.), East-Central European Society and War (Boulder, 1982) pp. 507–12. More specifically on the origins of the Cossacks, see Chapter I of my The Cossacks (London, 1969).
The Ottoman register of Timisoara [Temesvar] for 1566–7 (Basbakanli Arsivi, Istanbul, TD no. 17) may throw more light on this. For registers of units with a high proportion of men called Racz, see Hungarian State Archive E 210, 123t., 51cs., especially Jus Bassa’s company (sixty-five out of 100), and Farkas Rats (twenty-one out of fifty). Also names such as U[z]beg (=runaway), Pribek (=refugee), Kozak, Rusnak, Torok, etc.. Many south Slavs also found their way into the Romanian lands (as witness names and references to refugees) e.g. ms.721 in Bucharest State Archive. See also L. Makkai, ‘Istvan Bockai’s Insurrectionary Army’ in Bak and Kiraly, op. cit., p. 277. For the origins of the Szekels, see Chapter 8. It is impossible to standardize the spelling and italicization of words such as usbog, heyduck/heyduk, mariolos, etc, as there is no standard form in English. See OED.
On the evidence of Cossacks’ names, see S. Luber, Die Herkunft von Zaporoger Kosaken des 17 Jahrhunderts nach Personennamen (Berlin [Freie Universitat, Osteuropa Institut: Slawische Veroffentlichungen, 56], 1983); also the report from Alba Julia, the capital of Transylvania, December 1597, in A. Veress (ed.), Epistolae et Acta Jesuitarum Transylvaniae temporibus... Bathory (1571–1613) [Fontes rerum Transylvanicarum] 1911.
I owe the reference to their killing Calvinist pastors whose faith they professed to Ferenc Szakkai (personal communication). For the data on heyduk depredations, G. Kemeny (ed.), Deutsche Fundgruben der Geschichte Siebenburgens, 2 vols (Klausenberg [Cluj], 1839–40) I, p. 189 and T. Tatter’s record in Quellen zur Geschichte der Stadt Brasso, vol. IV [=Chroniken und Tagebucher, I] (Brasso, 1918), pp. 160 and 165–6 (but one wonders what use heyduks might have found for the books). The print referred to is in Braun and Hohenberg, Theatre totius Mundi, no. 35 (Pappa, 1597). For an example of heyduks plundering villages in Wallachia in 1611, see Romanian State Archive, Bucharest, M-rea Tismara XCII, 152.
M. Fumee, Historie of the Troubles in Hungary (London, 1600), p. 323. The French edition was published in the same year. For a useful collation of documents of Michael ‘the Brave’, see I. Ardeleanu et al, Mihai Viteazul in Constiinta Europeana, pt. 4 (Bucharest, 1986).
For cases of Uskok activity around Trau [Trogir] at the turn of the century: Zadar: Historijski archiv, Archiv Trogira, k. 25, sv. xxvii, 11, ff. 2476r–7v. See my ‘The Senj Uskoks Reconsidered’, Slavonic & East European Review, 57 (3), 1979, pp. 348–68; B. Desnica, Istorija kotarskih uskoka, 2 vols (Beograd, 1950–4); also W. Bracewell in Rothenberg et al, op. cit., pp. 431–47.
The manipulation of Ivan’s image by both Stalinists and anti-Stalinists has stood in the way of any fair assessment of him. Ian Grey’s Ivan the Terrible, (London, 1964) is in parts outdated; R. Skrynnikov’s study is too brief. For a summary in English, see Fennel in The New Cambridge Modern History (hereafter NCMH), II, pp. 551–61. But a good new biography is sorely needed.
The recently discovered evidence of an eye-witness leaves no doubt that the report of the original investigation was correct and not a white-wash. Dmitrii’s death in a play-fight with another child was accidental. The part peasant rebels played in Russia’s ‘Time of Troubles’ is nowadays downplayed. See R. Skrynnikov, Rossiia v nachale xvii v:’ smuta’ (Moscow, 1988) and his Samozvantsy v Rossii v nachale xvii veka (Novosibirsk, 1990).
See O. Halecki, From Florence to Brest (1439–1596) (Rome, 1958) parts III and IV, esp. pp. 366–91, and see Chapter 8.
The Jesuit, Antonio Possevino, left an account of his experiences, Moscovia (1587).
R.J.W. Evans, Rudolph II and his World (Oxford, 1973) especially pp. 60 and 70; and his Making of the Habsburg Monarchy (Oxford, 1979) pp. 51ff.. A translation of the text of the Letter of Majesty is to be found in C.A. Macartney, The Habsburg and Hohenzollern Dynasties (New York, 1970) pp. 24–322.
The classic assertion of the rights of the Bohemian Estates is P. Stransky, Republica Bohemiae (Leyden, 1634); for an account of the defenestration, see Macartney, op. cit., pp. 33–7; and for some useful background and bibliography, Evans, Making, op. cit., pp. 66ff..
See the translation in Macartney, op. cit., pp. 37–45.
Evans, Making, op. cit., pp. 71–3 passim. At the same time time legitimations of Habsburg power were disseminated. For an example of Habsburg display on behalf of Ferdinand III which anticipates the age of the Baroque with its puns associating the House of Austria with a star, see P. Ostermann, Iustus Romaio-Basilikos Stephanos (1640).
As Father Dvornik points out, cultural damage was done too insofar as Czech literature was associated with Protestantism [The Slavs in European History and Civilization (New Brunswick, 1962) pp. 456ff.].
S. Runciman, The Great Church in Captivity (Cambridge, 1968) pp. 259ff.. The phrase characterising de Dominis is Richard Neile’s, see his M. Antonio de Dominis... His Shiftings in Religion (1624) which contains the text of a letter to Lucaris.
On Ligarides see V. Grumel in Dictionnaire de Theologie Catholique, IX (Paris, 1926) and R. Salomon in Zeitschrift fur Osteuropaische Geschichte, V, 1931 (both hostile), besides much else in Greek and Russian. For his letters from Romania 1647–8, Rome: Archivio della propaganda Fide, SOCG Nos. 64 and 177. For translation of passages from his ‘Book of Prophecies’ see H. Hionides, Paisios Ligarides (New York, 1972).
Zs.P. Pach, Die Ungarische Agrarentwicklung im 16–17 Jahrhundert (Budapest, 1964) pp. 91–2. This work is devoted to exploring the differences between Hungarian and West European agrarian development. See also Zimanyi, Economy, op. cit., pp. 75ff. and L. Zytkowicz (inter alia) in Maczak et al., op. cit., pp. 59–83, whose qualifications do not substantially alter the general force of the summations made here.
On the strange story of the rise and decline of business mentality among the nobles of East-Central Europe, see Zs. P. Pach, Etudes Historiques Hongroises, 3 vols (Budapest, 1985), vol. II, pp. 131ff.. At the same time the fact that St Isidore had been a farm manager was suppressed in Poland (see J. Tazbir in Poland at the 14th International Congress of Historical Sciences in San Francisco (Wroclaw, 1975) p. 107) and the word ‘peasant’ became a term of abuse in Hungary.
These points are argued by E. Fugedi in Maczak et al, op. cit., p. 54 and L. Makkai, ibid., p. 31.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1992 Philip Longworth
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Longworth, P. (1992). Metamorphoses (1526–1648). In: The Making of Eastern Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-22202-5_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-22202-5_8
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-22204-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-22202-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)