Romanian brilliant tactical victorys in pre ww2 history?

You are confusing battles here. The first battle of tapae ended in defeat, just like the second one. Fuscus was defeated on teh Olt Valley I believe.

Yes ,you ar confusing the battle,first battle of Tapae was in 88 dC.,in 87 was a battle to the Olt valley,most probably at Turnu Rosu.And even the first battle at Tapae was half lose military,tactic and politically was transformed in to a succes,becouse romans dont advance anymore,pay compensation for dacians,and help him with engineers and weapons.About our first brilliant tactical victory,i believe is the victory of Dromichete,ruler of south dacians against the Lisimach,king of Macedonia.

Posada was a battle between people and nature. The fact that Ungrovlahia was on the side of nature doesn't mean it should take all the glory. That victory was won by the rocks.

Rovine was a battle we know very little but it eventually ended with the dethroning of Mircea. So, I guess there are two options: either the ottomans were master diplomats, suceeding to impose their own man, even after such a defeat, or the battle itself is a beautiful legend, created after a skirmish of drunk Ungrowallachs on some turkish women. I vote for the second one.

Calugareni...hmm, considering that this was the moment the Ungrowallachs would have become for certain osmanli slaves, I consider Calugareni a shameful victory. Shame on you, Mihai Viteazule, for allowing westerners and foreigners to free your own country. Of course, you had no parliament back then, so you thought that the peasants could easily take the blame for your infamous ottoman backstabbing.

Now, how about that_other_romanian_land_that_I_am_not_allowed_to_talk_about ? Victories over victories, cultural achievements, great leaders, powerful women, countless legends, an universe like no other, trambled upon by the later romanian historiography. Stefan cel Mare, Vasile Lupu, Petru Rares, Ioan Voda cel Cumplit, Alexandru cel Bun, Dimitrie Cantemir, Grigore Ureche, Miron Costin, Nicolae Milescu, Ion Neculce, Dosoftei, Varlaam, Atanasie Crimca, Tetraevangheliarul de la Humor, Letopisetul Bistritei, Voronet, Sucevita....

Please ignore the last quote! It's not important!

This post has been edited by Alexandru H. on November 04, 2004 02:08 pm

... and do not forget to count another great man - Pavel Corut!!!

Iama

Alexandru, stop using the off-topic quotes at the end of your posts.

Dragos, excuse me, but you are off-topic!

You are triyng to post here just to count some more points?

Iama

Let's get back to the topic.

Rocks and trees don't fall by themselves and create in depth defensive positions at each end of the pass and then siege the army trapped between them. Using the same logic, one would also assign many other Romanian victories to "nature" like the one in 1398 in Moldavia against the Poles or the one in Cosmin Forest some 100 years later by the same Moldavians against the same Poles. During the entire Middle Ages, Romanian military leaders tried to use terrain to compensate for the fewer men and worse equipment.

Your choice should also be backed up by something. Mircea wasn't dethroned, as he still retained control of a part of the country and even signed a military alliance with Sigismund of Luxemburg on 7 March 1395 (the first one in recorded Romanian history) on equal terms. Something not possible for a prince without land and army.

I fail to see your point here. The anti-Ottoman campaign of 1594-95 was very well fought and ended up with the victory of the Transylvanian-Moldavian-Wallachian Alliance. Too bad the Christians lacked \unity afterwards. Btw, most of the armies at the time were made up of mercenaries.

Nobody forbids you to talk about Moldavia, just do it in a normal way, without your baseless affirmations like the last part of the phrase. Pick up any serious history book you will find that there is no discrimination made between Wallachian and Moldavian princes, because they are all part of the Romanian heritage. Even in this thread.

I'm living unther the impresion that some people here are confusing the tactical value with the strtegic value.

The moldavians were the only ones advanced enough to beat the enemies in both strategic and tactical play...

Care to back this opinion with any actual arguments or are you just spamming?

You know, no matter what I say, it will be considered spamming. And that is because you think that just because Moldavia and Wallachia are now united, they looked similar in all aspects until 1859. Romanian political corectness... we were all one from the dacians onwards...

I'll retreat from this thread...

Playing the victim won't help you prove a point. Arguments will, but it seems you lack them.

Alexandru H., please give me a info - Ioan Voda cel Cumplit is the same one with Ioan Voda cel Viteaz? If yes, tell me why this progressive military leader had this "Cumplit" on his tail? I know just "Viteaz"... And, i have more simpaty for them, for his vision in military thinking, then for ex. Vasile Lupul (why you don't say the name of Movileshti? )

And, you know whatt? I think, if Polish don't interfer with Moldavia's bussines, Moldavia had more chances to be more advanced. Turks, tatars, etc. If only polish had focused in other neighbors...


Iama

Yes, he is the same one... "Cumplit" is his name in the chronicles, because the ones that wrote about him (I think that Azaria, the monk) were working for his enemy, Petru Schiopul. Pure political propaganda. I, for one, like this name better than the communist "cel Viteaz", it's kind of cool for a boring history lesson...

Vasile Lupu is one of the greatest moldavian leaders that ever lived. And, in better times, he would have been more ilustrious than Petru Rares, the one hospodar that resembles him. Like him, he took power in order to end an unpopular regime, had wonderful dreams of empires (his only true goal was the crown of the Byzance), fell down after a coalition only to be reborn in Istanbul. His 20 year reign saw extraordinary developments (historiography, arts, theology, legislation), alas he only lacked a great military leader and a good ally (he did get one, Bogdan Hmnielitki, but it proved too late).

As I was saying to Indrid a few days ago while watching the newest "King Arthur" movie, the moldavians are the sole heirs of sarmatians, therefore they hold valid claims to the polish lands. Poland had to focus on us...A Greater "blablabla" was too dangerous to have, both as a friend and as a foe