| Conflict: | Battle of Zlatitsa |
| Partof: | Crusade of Varna |
| Date: | 12 December 1443 |
| Place: | Zlatitsa pass in the Balkan Mountains, Ottoman Empire (modern-day Bulgaria) |
| Result: | Ottoman victory |
| Combatant1: | Kingdom of Hungary Kingdom of Poland Serbian Despotate Papal States |
| Combatant2: | Ottoman Empire |
| Commander1: | Władysław III of Poland John Hunyadi Đurađ Branković Julian Cesarini |
| Commander2: | Murad II Kasim Pasha Turakhan Beg |
| Strength1: | Unknown |
| Strength2: | Unknown |
| Casualties1: | Heavy casualties during the battle and the subsequent retreat[1] |
| Casualties2: | Unknown |
The Battle of Zlatitsa was fought on 12 December 1443[2] between the Ottoman Empire and Serbian and Hungarian troops in the Balkans as part of the larger Crusade of Varna.[3] The battle was fought at Zlatitsa Pass (Bulgarian: Златишки проход) (Turkish: Izladi Derbendi) near the town of Zlatitsa in the Balkan Mountains, Ottoman Empire (modern-day Bulgaria). The impatience of the King of Poland and the severity of the winter then compelled John Hunyadi to return home in February 1444, but not before he had utterly broken the Sultan's power in Bosnia, Herzegovina, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Albania.
In 1440, John Hunyadi became the trusted adviser and most highly regarded soldier of King Władysław III of Poland. Hunyadi was rewarded with the captaincy of the fortress of Belgrade and was put in charge of military operations against the Ottomans. Władysław recognized Hunyadi's merits by granting him estates in Eastern Hungary. Hunyadi soon showed and displayed extraordinary capacity in marshaling its defenses with the limited resources at his disposal. He was victorious in Semendria over Isak-Beg in 1441, not far from Nagyszeben in Transylvania, where he annihilated an Ottoman force and recovered for Hungary suzerainty over Wallachia. In the year of 1442, John Hunyadi won four victories against the Ottomans, two of which were decisive. In March 1442, Hunyadi defeated Mezid Bey and the raiding Ottoman army at the Battle of Szeben in the south part of the Kingdom of Hungary in Transylvania. In September 1442, Hunyadi defeated a large Ottoman army of Beylerbey Şehabeddin, the Provincial Governor of Rumelia. This was the first time that a European army defeated such a large Ottoman force, composed not only of raiders, but of the provincial cavalry led by their own sanjak beys (governors) and accompanied by the formidable janissaries. These victories made Hunyadi a prominent enemy of the Ottomans and a renowned figure throughout Christendom and were prime motivators for him to undertake along with King Władysław the famous expedition known as the "Long Campaign" in 1443, with the Battle of Niš being the first major clash of this expedition. Hunyadi was accompanied by Giuliano Cesarini during the campaign. The battle took place in the plain between the Bolvan Fortress (near Aleksinac) and Niš on 3 November 1443. Ottoman forces were led by Kasim Pasha, the beglerbeg of Rumelia, Turakhan Beg and Isak-Beg. After the Ottoman defeat, the retreating forces of Kasim Pasha and Turakhan Beg burned all of the villages between Niš and Sofia to hinder the crusaders in finding provisions. The Ottoman sources explain the Ottoman defeat by a lack of cooperation between the Ottoman armies led by different commanders. The Ottoman Sultan Murad II, who had been occupied with a war against the Karamanids, rushed to his European possessions in order to establish defenses on the crusader path to prevent them from reaching his capital Edirne. Turakhan Bey convinced Murad to burn down Sofia and retreat to the Bulgarian mountains.[4] Towards the end of November, the crusaders entered Sofia. Following the capture of the city, Hunyadi reported to the Saxon towns of Transylvania the Sultan had ''fled towards the sea'' and that he would in the Edirne within six or eight days. As it appeared later, the sultan had opted to block the two mountain passes leading to Edirne, one being an ancient Roman road named Trajan's Gate and another route named Zlatitsa Pass.[5]
Hunyadi opted for the less popular and more difficult route to Edirne through Zlatitsa, hoping to overcome the Ottomans with an unexpected maneuver. However by the time the crusaders had left Sofia the pass had already been blocked by the Turks, the troops guarding it led by Murad in person. The pass had been obstructed with large boulders and cut trees to make any attack by the crusaders difficult. At Zlatitsa, the crusaders met a major and well-fortified Ottoman army for the first time, as they had only clashed against local garrisons and hastily mobilized irregular troops along their route towards Edirne so far.[6] [7] The severely cold weather favored the position of the Ottoman defenders,[8] led by Kasım Pasha and Turakhan Beg under the command of Murad.[9] After the earlier rumors of the sultan's flight, the situation likely came as a surprise to many in the Christian army. Nevertheless, on the twelfth of December Hunyadi tried to break through the pass, using artillery and trusting in the superior armor of his army. The crusaders intended to continue their advance toward Adrianople through the forests of Sredna Gora after forcing the pass.[9] The attempt proved futile, however, and the Ottoman forces made up of Janissaries, Azeps and Kapıkulus[10] were able to successfully stop the offensive of the crusaders.[11] Similarly, Turkish Historian Halil İnalcık argues that the anonymous Ottoman chronicle Gazavât-ı Sultan Murad bin Mehmet Han, which describes the battle as an Ottoman victory, gives the most reliable account amongst all the Ottoman chronicles about the events related to the Battle of Zlatitsa and Battle of Varna.[24] Polish historian Jan Dąbrowski, on the other hand, argues that the Christians were able to successfully drive the Turks away at Zlatitsa and proceeded farther on before retreating. His claim, however, is criticized by researcher John Jefferson in his book The Holy Wars of King Wladislas and Sultan Murad, who argues that Dąbrowski had confused the battles of Nish and Zlatitsa in his work, with Jefferson too agreeing on the Christian advance being halted at Zlatitsa.
"Confused by the Polish date for Adalbert's translation, but unable to reconcile it with the early date of 20 October, Dąbrowski mistakenly maintains that the letter was written in December, after the battle of Zlatitsa. He bases this off of the date given in Bachmann, in which the date is given as "tercia die festo beati Luce ewangeliste nunc preteriti," which would seem to support the date of October 20th. Yet there is a simple explanation for this. As mentioned above, the feast day St. Adalbert's translation differed locally in both Poland (20 October) and Hungary (6 November). The copyist, almost certainly Polish, calculated the date in question based on the Polish date for Adalbert's translation, i.e. 20 October, and not the Hungarian one which would have been used by Wladislas' royal chancellery. In order to rid future readers of the same ambiguity he had encountered, he changed the date to one that would have been universally understood, that is, he used the feast of St. Luke (18 October) as the reference date, which was identical throughout Christendom. Dąbrowski seems to have overlooked this rather simple explanation and instead maintained that there was an error in Bachmann and the feast day should be "Lucie," not "Luce," which gives the letter the same date as Hunyadi's dispatch from January 6. But January 6 makes no sense given the text. There is no mention in the letter of the battles of Zlatitsa or Kunovitsa, all of which had taken place by January 6 and which were described in Hunyadi's letter. The letter does, however, mention Balaban Pasha and Isa Bey, both of whom fought and were captured at Nish (see Hunyadi's letters and the Gazavât). Dąbrowski cites as a second point of evidence that Wladislas was headed off to Edirne, as he would have after Zlatitsa (more on this below). Therefore, in his reckoning, this letter must refer to that battle. This is a bit of circular reasoning, for the letter itself is his evidence that they pushed on after Zlatitsa, and the date of the letter is for him proven by the fact that they pushed on after Zlatitsa. What seems most problematic for Dąbrowski is that the king mentions in the letter a battle at Sophia, which by no account took place after Zlatitsa. Instead, the crusaders arrived at Sophia after the earlier battle of Nish. Yet in his letter Wladislas does not write that the battle took place "at" Sophia, but "near" Sophia, "conflictus idem prope civitatem Zofia." This makes sense if the letter was, as I believe, simply a piece of propaganda for his subjects in far-away Hungary and Poland regarding Hunyadi's victories at Nish and Aleksinac. Neither of these Bulgarian cities would have been immediately recognizable to Europeans by name. Instead it would make sense to mention the well-known city of Sophia. It is much easier to accept this, i.e. that the battle referred to is that of Nish/Aleksinac, than maintain that the battle referred to in the letter is Zlatitsa, and that the king continued on from that battle further into the Ottoman heartland (again, see below). Indeed, this letter is the basis for the biggest error Dąbrowski commits in his study of the Long March. Based on Wladislas' words in this letter "procedere disposuimus versus civitatem Andrinopolim," and believing that the battle described in the letter is the Battle of Zlatitsa, he assumes the Christians drove the Turks away at Zlatitsa and were able to proceed a bit farther on. This was not at all the case, as multiple sources both Ottoman and otherwise confirm. The Christian advance was decisively halted by the Ottomans at Zlatitsa and they were forced to turn back. The details that the letter mentions instead entirely reflect the Battle of Nish. Facts mentioned in the letter, for example that the battle began around noon and lasted for a long time, that Balaban Pasha was captured, and that the men were now ready to head on to Edirne all agree with Hunyadi and Cesarini's letters after the Battle of Nish/Aleksinac. Thus, there can be little doubt that the king is referring in this letter to the battles of Nish/Aleksinac, and that it's date is Nov. 6th."
"With the Ottomans unwilling to assault the tabor the battle at Melshtitsa proved indecisive. The crusader army continued home, marching through the Dragoman pass into the plain of Pirot. Meanwhile Murad had dispatched a force of cavalry to pursue the crusaders; he himself went back to Sophia. The pursuit force was composed of Kasım Pasha and the men under his standard, Turahan Bey with the "Army of Thessaly," and Mahmud Chelebi with seven banners of recently arrived troops from Anatolia."
After the Battle of Zlatica and the subsequent retreat of the crusaders, the battlefield and surrounding regions were completely destroyed. Serbia was devastated while Sofia was destroyed and burnt, turned into a "black field" with its surrounding villages being turned into "black charcoal".[13] Only Đurađ Branković gained from the 1443 campaign.[14]
As the Christians marched home, the Ottoman forces closely followed the retreating army.[15] After an indecisive clash on the 24th of December near Melstica, the Sultan entrusted the task of pursuing the enemy to Kasım Pasha and Turakhan Beg and went back to the recently recaptured Sofia.[16] Soon after this, the crusaders ambushed and defeated a pursuing Turkish force in the Battle of Kunovica, where Mahmud Bey, son-in-law of the Sultan and brother of the Grand Vizier Çandarlı Halil Pasha, was taken prisoner.[17]
There is some debate amongst historians as to the details and the outcome of the battle, as various sources give contradictory accounts.[18] [19] [20] Historian Colin Imber argues that the battle was disastrous for the Christian forces,[21] arguing the victory at the later battle of Kunovica created the illusion that the clash at Zlatitsa had been a Christian triumph. Further stating that ''the illusion of victory'' was one Władysław and especially Cesarini were ''anxious'' to maintain, pointing out the reports from Jehan de Wavrin stating that after the campaign, Cesarini was to go to the Pope, and in every place he went through, announce the great victories he and the King had won against the Turks, while keeping quiet about the losses suffered in the mountains, contradicting anyone who said anything about them.[22]