Луняшин С. Д. Трансильванский князь Дьёрдь II Ракоци в 1657–1660 гг.: участие в сражении как политическая необходимость. [Digital Resource] // Vox medii aevi. 2024. Vol. 2(11). P. 88–103. URL: https://voxmediiaevi.com/en/2024-2-lunyashin/
DOI: 10.24412/2587-6619-2024-11-88-103
Sergey Lunyashin
Post-Graduate Student, Assistant Lecturer at the Department of Medieval History, Faculty of History, Lomonosov Moscow State University
crvlunyashin@gmail.com
Transylvanian Prince George II Rakoczi in 1657–1660: participation in the battle as a political necessity
The article examines the influence of political factors on the ruler’s decision to participate (or not) in a battle and on his behavior during the battle. As a way of example, two battles of the Transylvanian prince George II Rakoczi (1657 and 1660) are taken as a case study. A broad review of the political milieu is undertaken to better understand the conditions in which the Transylvanian principality existed, as well as the context of the political decisions made by the princes of the Rakoczi dynasty. This analysis allows us to define the political concept of George II, within which he waged the wars in which the battles in question occurred.
Although the primary goal of the 1657 campaign was to be elected as the king of Poland, the final idea of strengthening the Transylvanian principality was apparently lingering in his mind, which thus determined his fierce struggle for power between 1657–1660. During the campaigns of 1657 and 1660, George II demonstrated the subordination of his actions and his overall strategy to political calculations. He abandoned the army before the battle with the Tatars in 1657, but personally commanded in a major battle with the Ottomans near Gyalú in 1660. At the decisive moment of the latter, when the outcome of the battle was under threat, he took a great risk by leading a cavalry charge of his guard and reserve forces.
Rakoczi’s death in battle did not mark the end of the anti-Ottoman struggle, which was continued until 1662 by his field marshal and comrade-in-arms, János Kemény, who also fell on the battlefield. The study adds to our understanding of the ruler’s role in the early modern state formation. In addition, the results allow not only to distinguish with sufficient justification the features of George II’s political thinking and his attitude toward war but also open the space for future scholarship on the military ideal in the culture of the Transylvanian nobility.
Keywords: Military History; Ottoman-Habsburg Wars; Ruler; Combat; Rakoczi; Transylvania; Political Anthropology