Romanian brilliant tactical victorys in pre ww2 history?

This period - Vasile Lupul for Moldavia, and Matei Basarab for Valachia, was a good one for both countrys. Long time leadership, many "extraordinary developments". Too bad this two leaders not being true friends/ allies. I hope i dont have a defect memory, but from what i remember in this period was Ureche and Naturel. And Kiev Mitropolit - one of Movila family, who give both leaders complete "tipografii" who counter Coresi publishings about Lutheran/Calvin (?) writings who wants to convert romanians ortodox to this ... A, romanian language was begin introduced in church.

Now, i remember about what you are sayng against Mihai Viteazul - this one, Vasile Lupul, was an "arnaut", "albanez" . And come at power with the promise to trow out greeks... no? And after that momment, he not renounced to them.

"Bogdan Hmnielitki" + that cossak who married with his doughter... in some bad circumstances.
Too bad for Vasile Lupul, because in Valachia was another great leader at that time - Matei Basarab.

Iama

I thinked some more to Polish influence, and i found some good things - Cracovia and later Lemberg - cultural centers, where moldavians was learning like "a Paris" later in history.

So it's clear for me now why A. has all this Moldavian Epire dreams. The blood of the nomadic Kazakhs runs trough his veins

Don't forget Varlaam, the first written code of laws and the fact that the later cultural developments were the direct consequences of his school and his contemporaries. For Miron Costin, he was the greatest moldavian leader of the century. He was ambitious, but isn't every sarmatian like that?

Some info on Sarmatians:

http://www.livius.org/sao-sd/sarmatians/sarmatians.html

http://www.silk-road.com/artl/sarmatian.shtml



This post has been edited by Alexandru H. on November 16, 2004 10:28 am

Sarmatians were famous for their heavy cavalry (poorly simulated in RTW btw), while the Moldavian cavalry, was always light, medium at best.

Ion Voda cel Cumplit was indeed a very capable military commander and was very close of obtaining a significant success in his campaign against the Ottomans. Too bad he was betrayed by his cavalry commanders or else the battle of Cahul (20 June 1574) could have turned out into a brilliant tactical victory and would have shaken the Ottoman hold on the Lower Danube.

As for Vasile Lupu, there is no victory of his worth mentioning for this thread. He usually was on the defeated side, although he was the initiator of the conflict most of the time.

Selimbar may be considered a briliant tactical victory? I read yesterday about it, from Radu Theodoru's book "Stramosii - Gesta Valachorum". From my opinion it was a victory achieved with some good tactical maneuvres, but im not 100 % convinced to give a title of "briliant".
What is your opinion?

Battle of Cahul 1574 was a moment of great drama - on of the sad moments of romanian history.

Nothing to say about Vasile Lupul - albanian arnaut?

In that book - mentioned above - in battle of Selimbar, a grup of warriors - maybe Baba Novak serb haiduks (i don't remember well) saluted Mihai Viteazul with some like this "Sa ne traiesti makedoane". Some like... but i remember exactly this word: "makedoane".
Certainly, in history learned in schools - i don't konw wat is in present school books - we learned about romanian more like in a propaganda style.
In present days, we have the possybility to speak free (waw!!!), so, really - what was true in what sayed Alexandru H. in another post, form another topic, about Mihai Viteazul slavon provenience (*)? Or about this "makedoane"?

Iama

Definiton of victory: a successful ending of a struggle or contest

Types of military victory:

- tactical victory: a success in battle without substantive or long-lasting gain
- strategic victory: a success in a military campaign
- a la Pyrus victory: a victory at heavy cost to the victor

source: wikipedia

And your opinion about brilliant tactical victorys of romanian in pre ww2 ? What do you think?

Iama

I wrote about this?
I have this book: "Ioan Voda cel Cumplit" wroted by Bogdan Petriceicu - Hasdeu, Chisinau, Tipografia Eparhiala 'Cartea Romaneasca'. 1926. This is the 3'rd edition. Firsta was at 1864, wroted 30 years earlier.

Iama

It's a good book, but it is arguable how accurate it is. Hasdeu was a romantic after all and he tends to exagerrate a bit.

I still believe that victories over macedonians (at the peak of hellenistic power) was ones of most important. In the period when Alexander the Great conquered his empire, and shortlly after, when his diadochi rules the game, getians was able to defeat (quite destroy) 3 macedonian armies (one of Zopyrion, in Alexander times), and 2 of Lisimach, defeting the famous macedonian phalanx and combined army who rull the know world at that time and crushed the persian empire, with a mix of scorch earth tactics, deceptions of enemy, and carefull planned atacks. It was brilliant tactic victories who keep us free of greeks influence or even domination. As well, the Vlad Tepes fight against ottoman invasion was a masterpiece of psichological and guerilla warfare, who is remebered even today (even with gruesome parts too) as one huge victory (as well as the Stefan cel Mare battle at Podu Inalt) of a much smaller country against a big empire.

Probably the night atack of Vlad Tepes against turks it is the greatest strategical victory, giving the fact that after this atack Mohamed II decides to retreat across Danube.

The greatest tactical victory is probable the battle from Calugareni, fought by Mihai Viteazu, greatly outnumbered by the turks.

This post has been edited by 21 inf on May 25, 2007 10:54 am

They're many battles in witch Romanians demonstrates they're great warriors and great strategiests. About Calugareni, indeed, it was a great tactical victory, but the most important victory it was the battle of Saint Georgio (Italian Chronichles), for us, the battle of Sfantu Gheorghe. Because, at Calugareni, the Ottomans lost 3000 soldiers, but at Sfantu Gheorghe, they lost 30000 soldiers. After that battle, the Sultan recognised Michael the Brave as ruler of Tara Romaneasca. Ottomans loose the city of Targoviste and Bucarest (who were under siege by ottoman troops), and the control of Romanian land.
About these important battles, whe can talk many more, these is not a single forum to talk about these.

I think the battle of Ghidaoani (1395) it was a very important one, for us, the Romanians. Don't you think?

Yes, those are examples of great tactical victories, but afterward the terms were always negotiated with the great powers with advantages more or less for both sides, because in case of a full scale war against the Ottoman Empire, we wouldn't have stood a chance

Excuse me, but here we talk about Romanian battles and tactics, not about Great Powers. Everyone knows, in our history we gave our blood, our fight, but others decided for us at "green table of negociations". But we must recognize our eforts, our fights, not the arrangements that other Great powers made against us.