Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Speculative History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Speculative History Speculative History Forum - Alternate History, What If Questions, Pseudo History, and anything outside the boundaries of mainstream historical research


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 18th, 2011, 05:55 PM   #41

Frank81's Avatar
Guanarteme
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: Canary Islands-Spain
Posts: 2,523

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahadir View Post
Actually Suleiman was also challanging Charles V and Archduke Ferdinand by capturing Budapest and besieging Vienna but none of those confronted Suleiman on battlefield instead they opted to flee. During the reign of Suleiman; one of his ambition to meet Charles V on battlefield, he had always chased Charles V but unsuccesful to meet him, even he sent letters to challange Charles V. Should be really annoying I guess...

That's not correct. In 1532, Charles V headed toward Suleyman with an army of 150,000 men. Never again could Charles V concentrate in such scale in this theatre. They were from the part of Charles V, 12,000 German lanskenet, 10,000 Spanish, 10,000 Italians, 4,000 heavy cavalry, 2,000 light cavalry; from the part of Ferdinand, 42,000 infantry, 6,000 heavy cavalry, 2,000 light cavalry; from the part of the other German states 38,000 infantry, 6,000 heavy cavalry, 6,000 light cavalry; plus 10,000 light cavalry of Croatians and Hungarians.

In front of them, Suleyman had 82,000 infantry including 12,000 Jannissaries, 20,000 Spahis, and 30,000 light cavalry. They were very close to each other early on September, but Suleyman retreated very quickly in front of Charles, which didn't preclude the annihilation of part of the Turkish light cavalry in the rear.

If the Christedom could unite, only if the Habsburgs could have freed hands, the Ottoman Empire could be matched. The problem was the eternal struggle against other Christians.
Frank81 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 18th, 2011, 07:00 PM   #42

Bahadir's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2011
From: KSA
Posts: 1,149

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank81 View Post
That's not correct. In 1532, Charles V headed toward Suleyman with an army of 150,000 men. Never again could Charles V concentrate in such scale in this theatre. They were from the part of Charles V, 12,000 German lanskenet, 10,000 Spanish, 10,000 Italians, 4,000 heavy cavalry, 2,000 light cavalry; from the part of Ferdinand, 42,000 infantry, 6,000 heavy cavalry, 2,000 light cavalry; from the part of the other German states 38,000 infantry, 6,000 heavy cavalry, 6,000 light cavalry; plus 10,000 light cavalry of Croatians and Hungarians.

In front of them, Suleyman had 82,000 infantry including 12,000 Jannissaries, 20,000 Spahis, and 30,000 light cavalry. They were very close to each other early on September, but Suleyman retreated very quickly in front of Charles, which didn't preclude the annihilation of part of the Turkish light cavalry in the rear.

If the Christedom could unite, only if the Habsburgs could have freed hands, the Ottoman Empire could be matched. The problem was the eternal struggle against other Christians.
Wrong, even army figures are wrong. Ottoman army was around 120.000(became 150.000 when the tatar army joined them on the way) men and 400 artillery units whereas combined forces of Charles V and Ferdinand 300.000 men and 600 artillery units. Ottoman army began marching on June 1532 and they easily captured Hungarian castles like Nagykanizsa and Günz which were captured by Holy Germen Empire before. But Ottoman army did not encounter big Germen army, so they continued their way to Austria, still there were no trace of Germen army, the famous letters of Suleiman that humiliates Charles V coincides with this period, they captured Graz on the lands of Austria but because of Jelali rebellions in Anatolia army marching stopped and campaign finished. Actually Suleiman’s army stayed there for about one year waiting for Charles V but not able to meet on battlefield with any big Germen army which was Suleiman’s neverending ambition...
Bahadir is offline  
Old November 18th, 2011, 09:03 PM   #43

clement's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2011
From: California, USA
Posts: 2,103
Blog Entries: 2

Well again, Charles V had no reason to engage a battle, since the ottomans did not attack Vienna. PArt of the reason why they did not do so was that they were delayed by the resistance of several Hungarian fortresses.

I don't know where you saw the number of 300,000 christian soldiers. Charles V himself, who was much more powerful than his brother, had a maximum of 150,000 soldiers mobilized at one point, and it was in the late 1540s, 1547 I think. Most of them were in Germany to fight against the protestants.
clement is offline  
Old November 21st, 2011, 08:12 AM   #44

Frank81's Avatar
Guanarteme
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: Canary Islands-Spain
Posts: 2,523

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahadir View Post
Wrong, even army figures are wrong. Ottoman army was around 120.000(became 150.000 when the tatar army joined them on the way) men and 400 artillery units whereas combined forces of Charles V and Ferdinand 300.000 men and 600 artillery units.
First time I know that number.

Quote:
Ottoman army began marching on June 1532 and they easily captured Hungarian castles like Nagykanizsa and Günz which were captured by Holy Germen Empire before. But Ottoman army did not encounter big Germen army, so they continued their way to Austria, still there were no trace of Germen army, the famous letters of Suleiman that humiliates Charles V coincides with this period, they captured Graz on the lands of Austria but because of Jelali rebellions in Anatolia army marching stopped and campaign finished. Actually Suleiman’s army stayed there for about one year waiting for Charles V but not able to meet on battlefield with any big Germen army which was Suleiman’s neverending ambition...
Well it's hard to tell what happened exactly, Charles V advanced against Suleyman but without fast pace, also Suleyman retreated despite Charles V being very close. Seem that both didn't want very much the fight.

Emperor Charles V, impresario of war ... - James D. Tracy - Google Libros

Last edited by Frank81; November 21st, 2011 at 08:21 AM.
Frank81 is offline  
Old December 24th, 2011, 11:59 AM   #45

Qymaen's Avatar
King of the Seas!
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Border of GA and AL
Posts: 7,889
Blog Entries: 3

If the Turks managed to reach the Iberian Peninsula in force then I doubt Spain would live very long without outside help. Of course the Ottomans would have to get past the Spanish fleet first.
Qymaen is offline  
Old June 7th, 2012, 08:15 AM   #46
Citizen
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 11

Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWeaver View Post
IF Memory serves.....and it might not....I fail to recall any time that Spain (and I assume we are justs talking spain here) single handidly induced a major defeat at land or sea on the Ottomans. Lepanto, overrated, Malta was a nightmare. I just cant recall any. Numerosu Holy Leagues and other organisations failed to put a halt on the Ottomans (atleast not until the later 17th Century) .

Spain despite the wealth of the Americas was bankrupting itself for its part in the Hapsburg Valois conflicts.

I fail to see Spain overcoming the Ottomans. I cant se spain winning in such a struggle.

I think you say Lepanto is Overrated becase british didn't take part in it? am I right? because that was one of the biggest naval battles in history.

is the same as Spanish Armada. The weather sank the Armada, but you claim you did it. Anyway until the XVIII century the british navy was not supperior to spanish or french.


Is the same as the batlle of Cartagena de Indias, you don't usually talk about it, but we know that:

28.000 british vs 3.600 spaniards

=
10000 brits killed, thousands of wounded and the retreat of the brits.

The english king Jorge II banned any historical reference to it.


I'm not trying to offend, just putting things in place.

The Spanish defeated the Ottoman several times. How do you think the spanish crown or the corwn of Aragon achived Napoles, Sicilia etc???

strategically that was not good for spanish crowns, but they only fight due to christian fanatism, in order to help the Holy Roma and the christians of the area.
Danker is offline  
Old June 7th, 2012, 08:39 AM   #47
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 925

Definitely the Ottomans.
macro is offline  
Old June 8th, 2012, 02:53 PM   #48

Yekkelle's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: May 2012
From: The Old Dominion
Posts: 269

The French were allied to the Ottomans. It would come down to the allies. The Ottomans were allies of France, who in turn attacked Spain, so in various points the two powers did fight. Total war? That wasn't "invented" if you will until the civil war by the infamous Sherman.
Yekkelle is offline  
Old June 8th, 2012, 04:22 PM   #49

Sultan44's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Al-Ta'If, Makkah, Saudi arabia.
Posts: 521

The ottmans, no doubt
Sultan44 is offline  
Old June 10th, 2012, 09:28 PM   #50

Tercio's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: May 2011
From: Leon, Spain
Posts: 516

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danker View Post
I think you say Lepanto is Overrated becase british didn't take part in it? am I right? because that was one of the biggest naval battles in history.

is the same as Spanish Armada. The weather sank the Armada, but you claim you did it. Anyway until the XVIII century the british navy was not supperior to spanish or french.


Is the same as the batlle of Cartagena de Indias, you don't usually talk about it, but we know that:

28.000 british vs 3.600 spaniards

=
10000 brits killed, thousands of wounded and the retreat of the brits.

The english king Jorge II banned any historical reference to it.


I'm not trying to offend, just putting things in place.

The Spanish defeated the Ottoman several times. How do you think the spanish crown or the corwn of Aragon achived Napoles, Sicilia etc???

strategically that was not good for spanish crowns, but they only fight due to christian fanatism, in order to help the Holy Roma and the christians of the area.
Well said
Tercio is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Speculative History

Tags
empire, ottoman, spain


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Was the Ottoman Empire a European Empire? Zeno Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 54 January 19th, 2014 09:44 AM
The Ottoman Empire RoyalGovnaWatts Middle Eastern and African History 25 November 28th, 2013 05:50 AM
Ottoman Empire Kirialax History Book Reviews 13 January 31st, 2011 11:56 AM
The Ottoman Empire oshron Speculative History 35 May 17th, 2010 12:07 PM
how powerful was the ottoman empire old_abe Medieval and Byzantine History 5 August 26th, 2007 12:47 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.