[A
TSD member, Michael Vorsino is completing his Masters degree in History (with
thesis on Vlad Dracula) at the University of Texas at Arlington. A single
father, he has two daughters – Samantha and Priscilla.]
Southeastern
Europe has long been one of the world’s hotbeds of instability and strife.
Owing in part to the rise of the Ottoman Empire in the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries with the simultaneous decline of the Byzantine Empire, this region
was used as a marching ground for numerous armies. In Bram Stoker’s novel Dracula
(1897), the Count refers to this instability when he tells Jonathan Harker: “In
the region through which you came last night, there can be but little doubt;
for it was the ground fought over for centuries by the Wallachian, the Saxon,
and the Turk. Why, there is hardly a foot of soil in all this region that has
not been enriched by the blood of men, patriots, or invaders” (27).
In the
early to mid-fifteenth century, as the Ottoman tide reached its apex, freedom
from the suzerainty of Ottoman dominion was a dream shared by many regional
leaders. Relationships and partnerships were forged between these leaders, most
of which were not entirely successful, but few are more dynamic than the
triangle that was formed between Vlad Dracul, his son Vlad Dracula (better
known by Romanian historians as Vlad Ţepeş) and John Hunyadi.
Since the
fall of the Byzantine Empire in 1453, the countries in this part of Europe have
been sandwiched between the dichotomous forces of the Christian west and the
Muslim east. The fifteenth and sixteenth centuries were particularly difficult,
as the expansion of the Ottoman tide swept across the continent. Striving to
preserve the independence of their states, this region has not surprisingly
produced some of the most incredible men of the time.
John Hunyadi was a celebrated war hero, made legendary by his
confrontations with the Ottoman Turks.
He was a man of immense power and wealth, often financing campaigns
largely out of his personal funds. His ultimate desire was to see the Ottomans
expelled from Europe forever. His political and military machinations reached
into surrounding countries, including Wallachia, where he set up and deposed
some of its leaders (based on their perceived loyalty to the Christian cause),
including Vlad Dracul, and his son Vlad Ţepeş (henceforth in this essay
referred to as Dracula). Dracula was driven by a passionate hatred of all that
would disrupt Wallachian independence, especially the Turks. This enmity was
fueled in part by a period of Turkish captivity during which he had endured
tortures of several kinds, including frequent use of the lash by his Turkish
tutors. When Vlad Dracula became voivode of Wallachia, he became widely known
for his liberal use of impalement as a form of punishment, hence his nickname
“the Impaler.” This torturous method of execution was used with great
effectiveness as a means of psychological warfare in his brutal battles with
the forces of Mehmed “the Conqueror,”
who was one of the most powerful sultans of the Ottoman Empire. Because of his
opposition to the Ottomans, Vlad Dracula is seen by many as the father of
Romanian sovereignty.
An
examination of the links between Vlad Dracula and John Hunyadi begins with the
relationship Hunyadi had with Dracula’s father, Vlad Dracul (“the Dragon”). In
1438, just two years after taking the Wallachian throne, Dracul aided Sultan
Murad II in a raid on Transylvania (Treptow 44). Hunyadi, having
recently been appointed as “defender” of Transylvania, was unable to stop the
Turks from plundering several cities. By 1440 the relations between Hungary and
Wallachia began to improve, as politically Dracul began to stray from the
Ottomans in favor of his Christian allies. Hunyadi, however, had not forgotten
Dracul’s aid to the Ottomans in 1438. Thus, when the Sultan had Dracul
imprisoned in 1442, Hunyadi removed Dracul’s oldest son, Mircea, and seated
Basarab II on the Wallachian throne. This appointment did not last long. In
March 1443, Sultan Murad II released Dracul after he agreed to send his two
youngest sons, Vlad and Radu, to become “guests” (hostages) at Murad’s court.
“The Dragon” invaded and reclaimed his rightful place as ruler of Wallachia a
few weeks later.
Meanwhile in
Hungary, Hunyadi had become engrossed in preparations for what would be known
as the Varna Campaign. Not wishing to weaken his border with Wallachia, Hunyadi
chose to accept Dracul once again. On the eve of the Varna offensive, the two
signed a treaty increasing trade between their respective nations. It is
entirely possible that Hunyadi used the agreement as a means to compel Dracul
to participate in the upcoming campaign. With much trepidation, Dracul agreed
to send 4,000 troops to serve in Hunyadi’s army under the command of his son, Mircea.
Dracul was taking a great risk, given the precarious condition of his two sons
being held hostage by the Sultan. Prior to the crusade, he wrote to the
citizens of Braşov, pointing this out: “Please understand that I have allowed
my little children to be butchered for the sake of Christian peace” (qtd
in Florescu & McNally, Dracula: Biography 106).
The Varna
Crusade ended in disaster. Fearing repercussions from the Ottomans, Dracul had
Hunyadi arrested upon the latter’s flight through Wallachia. Vlad blamed Hunyadi for the debacle. He must
have felt anguish over thoughts of his children being slaughtered because of
his decision to support the Transylvanian Voivode. News soon came that Murad
had not ordered Dracul’s progeny killed, but rather, preferred to use them as a
bargaining chip to control Wallachia.
From 1445-1447, the enmity between Vlad Dracul and Hunyadi began to
grow. Both men supported different candidates for the Moldavian throne, and
neither had forgotten the other’s transgression. Dracul was compelled to sign a
treaty with the sultanate in light of his decrepit relations with Hunyadi. In
July of 1447, Hunyadi appealed to the leaders of Braşov to support Vladislav II
for the Wallachian throne. In November, he invaded Wallachia. Dracul was killed
near Balteni in January of the following year, while his oldest son, Mircea,
was buried alive by boyars loyal to Hunyadi.
Necessity makes strange bedfellows, or so it would seem when
examining the association between “the Son of the Dragon” and the “White
Knight” of Hungary. Like his father Dracul, Vlad Dracula felt the Wallachian
throne was his by divine right. His opportunity came when he was released after
four years of captivity following his father’s murder in 1448. Hunyadi had
chosen yet again to confront the Turks. He enlisted the newly appointed
Vladislav II (Voivode of Wallachia) and along with other nobles, crossed the
Danube on their way to Kosovo in 1448. Dracula seized the opportunity and
invaded Wallachia, and, with the help of the Turks he briefly captured his
coveted prize. The victory was short lived as after suffering defeat at Kosovo,
Vladislav II reclaimed the throne and Dracula was compelled to flee to
Moldavia. For the next several years (1448-1455), Dracula was forced to travel
back and forth between Moldavia and Transylvania riding the tides of political
change. Hunyadi would not offer him any help, and the turbulence surrounding
the frequent change in Moldavian leadership required Dracula to maintain a low
profile. In 1455, the situation was right for Dracula to re-emerge as claimant
to his father’s throne. He appealed to Hunyadi for asylum, and this time it was
granted. The Transylvanian ruler went as far as introducing Dracula to King
Ladislas, lauding him as the best man for the Wallachian crown (see Florescu
& McNally, Dracula: Biography 40-44)
Hunyadi may have come to realize that Dracula was the man he had
sought all along. They both shared a
special hatred for the Turks and with Hunyadi’s coming preparations to defend
Belgrade, he needed his Wallachian flank secure from Ottoman loyalists. Both
men had witnessed first hand the cruelty of the Ottoman blade. Years of
captivity sharpened Dracula’s disdain and would lead him to commit legendary
acts of barbarity, earning him respect, fear and fame throughout Europe.
Shortly after his ascension to the Wallachian throne, in the early summer of
1456, Vlad Dracula took an oath of loyalty to King Ladislas. This let Hunyadi
concentrate on the defense of Belgrade and relieved his anxiety concerning his
Wallachian border (Stoicescu 82)
Only three months after Hunyadi’s death, which occurred after he led
the valiant defense of Belgrade, Ladislas V wanted Dracula removed. The events
that followed bring to light another aspect of the relationship between Hunyadi
and Dracula: their mutual kinship with Michael Szilagyi. Szilagyi was cut from
the same mold as Hunyadi and Dracula. A fierce warrior and ardent enemy of the
Turks, Szilagyi was also was Hunyadi’s brother-in-law and a trusted friend and
confidant to both men. (He may well have been the father of Vlad Dracula’s
second wife. See Florescu & McNally, Dracula: Prince 166.) In a bold
move, Szilagyi rallied the supporters of the Hunyadi family (following John’s
death) against the Hungarian nobility, which was led by two former friends of
Hunyadi, Palatine Garai and Nicholas Uljaki. This put Szilagyi in direct
confrontation with the Hungarian King, Ladislas V. Szilagyi drew first blood
when he had his own nephew, Ladislas of Hunedoara, killed. Ladislas had taken
the title of “Warlord of Transylvania” after John Hunyadi’s death, and opposed
his uncle’s attempts to consolidate Hunyadi’s power (Stoicescu 85). One of the
German pamphlets (Nürnberg 1488) claims that Dracula may have aided his friend
in this matter: “In the same year he was appointed lord in Wallachia. Immediately he had Prince Lasla killed, who
was lord of this country. Soon after this he had villages in Transylvania, also
a town by the name of Beckendorf in Wurtzland, burned.”
Some have interpreted this to indicate the slaying of the previous
Wallachian ruler, Vladislav II. However, it could also be in reference to
Szilagyi and Dracula’s open war against their mutual enemies, the Uljaki and
Garai families, as well as the merchants of Braşov, who were forced endure
Vlad’s wrath after agreeing to harbor a pretender to his throne, Dan III. The
burning of towns in Transylvania refers to the events of April and May 1457,
when Dracula invaded Transylvania and burned the villages of Casolt, Hosman,
Satulnoe, and Berkendorf (Stoicescu 84-85). By September of 1457, both sides
had agreed to an armistice. In December, Vlad Dracula spoke to the burghers of
Brasov: “May your highness learn that everything that my elder brother and
master Mihail Szilagyi ordered me I will observe” (qtd in Stoicescu
86).
There can be little doubt that Hunyadi, Dracul, and Dracula shared
the same goal: the end of Turkish oppression that was to blanket the area for
centuries. Both Dracul and Hunyadi spent considerable time in, and showed
loyalty to, the Court of King Sigismund I. Sigismund was patron to both men. He
trusted them, and he made it possible for Hunyadi and Dracul (and thus,
Dracula) to assume the vital role of leadership in a war-torn area. So why then
did their relationship end so poorly? To understand this, one must understand
the driving force behind each man.
Vlad Dracul sought to maintain Wallachian independence at any cost.
After the passing of Sigismund I, Dracul went the way of many of Sigismund’s
followers. That is, their loyalty was extended to the man, not the crown.
Realizing that he would never receive the support from the new King of Hungary
that he had from his patron, Vlad sought peace with his enemies in order to
save his people from the brutal wrath of the Turks. Subsequent peace treaties and the homage he
paid to the sultan put him at odds with the oath he swore to Sigismund as a
member of the Order of the Dragon: to fight the enemies of Christ, whether they
be Hussite or Turk.
John Hunyadi was, in many ways, an idealist. He never swayed from
his dream of ending Ottoman suzerainty. Hunyadi always held a feeling of
contempt for those who would placate the Turks rather than fight. Frustrated
time and time again by western powers, Hungarian division, and the cowardice of
the regional nobility, Hunyadi fought on against overwhelming odds in the vain
hope that Christendom would rise up and unite to smite the Turkish
“infidel.”
Both Hunyadi and Dracul influenced Vlad Dracula. As the son of
Dracul, he carried on and surpassed his father’s vow to fight the Turks. He
shared his father’s desire for Wallachian independence, and took inhumane
measures to make it a reality. Even when one considers that the tales of the
Impaler Prince are certainly exaggerated, the fact remains that they are based
to a great extent on actual events. From a military standpoint, Dracula was
surely inspired by the tales of triumph and sacrifice made by Hunyadi. He even
went as far as imitating Hunyadi in his famous “night attack” on Mehmed’s camp.
His own efforts to resist the Turkish menace have inspired a nation, and, for
better or worse, his name lives on because an Irish writer chose his sobriquet
“Dracula” for the title character of his classic horror novel.
Works Cited:
“Dracula.”
Nürnberg, 1488. Translated with an Essay by Beverley Eddy. Philadelphia:
Rosenbach Museum & Library, 1985.
Florescu,
Radu and Raymond McNally. Dracula: A Biography of Vlad the Impaler. New
York: Hawthorn Books, 1973
Florescu,
Radu and Raymond McNally. Dracula: Prince of Many Faces. Boston: Little,
Brown, 1989.
Stoicescu,
Nicolae. “Vlad Tepes’ Relations with Transylvania and Hungary.” In Kurt W
Treptow, ed, Dracula: Essays on the
Life and Times of Vlad Ţepeş. East European Monographs. New York: Columbia
UP, 1991. 81-101.
Stoker, Bram. Dracula. 1897. New York: Norton,
1997.
No comments:
Post a Comment