Francis I’s letter

Force of an impact of Ottomans was defined not only the fact that it got indirect support from Protestant principalities, but in a bigger degree the fact that Turks found the ally in the powerful Catholic state — France. In 1525 Charles V’s troops inflicted in fight at Pavia a crushing defeat over the French army headed by the king Francis I. The head of the French kingdom was taken away by the captive to Madrid. It managed to be released only at the price of humiliating promises which he, nprochy, having crashed out, hurried to withdraw. While Francis remained in captivity, the queen-mother Louise Savoyskaya who became at the head of the French government tried to start communications with the sultan. Her first messengers were intercepted and killed by agents Gabsburgov. One of the French representatives — to a certain Ioann Frandzhipani — in December, 1525 managed to reach Constantinople. It gave a request on behalf of the queen to attack possession of the emperor who differently will become mister of all Europe. This message of the queen-mother, according to one of her latest biographers, allows to consider that she the first put forward the concept of “balance of forces”. (In practice as we will be convinced, this concept and even the beginning of its practical application belong to earlier time.) On the going rumors, Frandzhipani delivered also personal letter of Francis which that secretly sent to Paris from the Madrid prison and which the courier took hidden in a boot sole. The sultan planning a campaign for Hungary grabbed at the presented chance to find the ally. He even sent the response message to Francis, advising not to lose courage in misfortune, and orally through Frandzhipani promised the help against Charles V. From the emperor this did not take cover, on his expression, “the sacrilegious union of a lily (Valois’s coat of arms) and a half moon”. Contemporaries remembered that when the emperor Charles V reproached Francis for the union with “an incorrect dog” — the sultan, the king answered: “I used the help of a dog, but in order that my herd did not get into teeth to a wolf”. The French diplomacy sought to prevent Charles V’s union with Protestant princes on the anti-Turkish basis. The part of historians believes that Francis I directly called the sultan in 1525 for attack on Hungary. (The same charges are distributed to Venice and the father. Said even that they sent auxiliary groups for strengthening of the Turkish army.) In 1533 Francis I’s meeting with the father Kliment VIII took place. Contemporaries accused the father that he agreed to the union of the French king with the sultan, and also with the German Protestants. It cannot be documented. But the fact is that Kliment retold the content of these confidential negotiations to Charles V. According to the father, the king directly declared: “I not only am not going to resist the Turkish invasion on the Christian countries, but, on the contrary, as far as I will be able, I will promote it to facilitate to myself return of what belongs to me and my children and that was usurped by the emperor”. The French-Turkish union was dictated also by alignment of forces, but both parties could not conclude it openly. It was difficult also to “its Christian majesty the” of the king Francis I carrying a title of “the defender of belief” and for “the master devout” — the sultan Suleiman. Even the informal and originally remaining in secret agreement between Paris and Constantinople was met in Europe indignantly. However in the 30th years of the 16th century of communication between Paris and Porta became a fact of common knowledge. The French merchants received from the sultan trade privileges in Turkey (so-called capitulations of 1535) . Under the pretext of preservation of France on the party of Catholicism in the main century conflict of Gabsburgi wanted to return it on the party and in other century conflict — Christianity and Islam. Under the secret Zhuanvilsky contract which in December, 1584 was signed by Spain with the French Catholic league (group of extreme Catholics) the last undertook to suspend allied relations which already half a century connected France and the Ottoman empire. The French Huguenots tried to go also more than once “the Turkish card”. The admiral Kolinyi established the connection with Suleyman Velikolepny interrupted with death of the sultan in 1566. After murder of the admiral during the Massacre of St. Bartholomew contacts with the sultan Murad III were started by Heinrich Navarrsky (future Henry IV), repeatedly receiving promises of the help against Philip II. The risen Netherlands also went on this way. In 1569 the secret messenger of William of Orange arrived to Constantinople. Attempts of establishment of direct contacts with Porta were made also in the next years. The symbolical sense was made by one episode in long fight of Netherlanders against Philip II’s army: when Leiden besieged by Spaniards was saved by arrival of reinforcements, soldiers carried on the hats the image of a half moon with the inscription “Better Turks, than Papist”. Interests of one more important participant of the conflict — Venice, connected with absence at it sufficient forces (especially overland) for repulse of an impact of the Ottoman empire, attracted the island republic to attempts of creation of perhaps wider and powerful union against Turks, transformations of war against the sultan I am the conflict of Christianity and Islam. At the same time extreme dependence of Venice on the trade ways on the East which were under the Turkish control on grain supply ич Asia Minor, from the Balkan Peninsula and of the Southern Russia which transportation was impossible without the sultan’s consent vulnerability of the Venetian possession in East Mediterranean did Saint Mark’s Republic especially pliable on the Turkish threats and ready for extreme concessions for the sake of the end of war. In 1540 Venice a pyshla from the anti-Turkish coalition into which the emperor and the father entered besides it and requested to Port the world. Obvious discrepancy of the poyenny purposes of Venice and Charles V (it was limited to fight against Algeria) and care of preservation of the remained possession in East Mediterranean were the cause. Venice played a special role in secret war which accompanied the century conflict. Information which both parties which faced in the conflict had about each other was as it was told above, very incomplete and, the main thing, usually extremely outdated. Therefore data which could be received in any way from Constantinople were highly appreciated very much. Venice with its well adjusted investigation, and also some circles in the port of Ragusa (present Dubrovnik) which, in particular, regularly supplied with news Vatican were a source of such data for a number of the Christian states. Turks, in turn, decided to use awareness of the Venetian diplomacy and a secret service. At the time of the world with Turkey Saint Mark’s Republic was very interested in to exciting displeasure of the sultan. Considering it, the Venetian ambassador in Constantinople Port all details of preparation by the emperor Charles V of military fleet politely asked to report. From the Turkish side it was kindly added that performance of this request will not burden the Venetian government as his representatives know even, “that is done by fish in sea depths”. However, there were failures and at the Venetian investigation. In 1540 instructions to the Venetian ambassador who conducted peace talks with Turks were sold to French, and those transferred the received data to the Turkish allies. It had the most serious consequences and sharply worsened for Venice the term of the contract signed with the Turkish sultan. England at Elizabeth lriderzhivatsya the principle to steer clear of fight against Islam. It quite corresponded to interests of the British trade. Later the English diplomacy began to use more and more actively communications with Porta in the diplomatic combinations. Throughout the 16th century projects of the termination of one century conflict by merging of both camps for participation in another repeatedly moved forward. The Calvinist to La N flung in prison by Philip II in 1584 made the plan of a new crusade. The same ideas were developed by the Capuchin father Joseph who later became the head of a secret service Richelieu. All these plans remained on paper. Tried to obtain the most serious progress of Gabsburgi when there came the temporary pause in development of one of the conflicts. The striking example to that is a victory of the integrated squadrons exposed by Spain, Venice and the father, over the Turkish fleet at Lepanto on October 7, 1571 T. Eto was just when it seemed that the duke Alba managed to subordinate completely the Netherlands, and England — other possible opponent — was paralyzed recent (1569) Catholic revolt in northern counties, and Elizabeth I was afraid of new plots (the well-known “plot of Ridolfi” which could be partly and government provocation became one of them). The policy of temporary muting of one of the conflicts for concentration of all forces on another becomes quite conscious purpose of the Spanish diplomacy Since the end of the 70th years. In the 80th years she tries to obtain repeatedly iozobnovlyaemy agreements on a truce with Turks to concentrate forces against England and the Netherlands, have with that accusing them of aspiration to get support of “enemies of Christianity”. Since the beginning of the 17th century former unanimity in an assessment of gravity of the Turkish threat disappears. Doubts are in what Port still constitutes danger to the western Christianity, began to express even more often. In 1607 the English ambassador Henry Lello, having returned home, nirazit opinion that Turkey endures decline and that it will be easy to Western European countries to win a resolute victory over it. His successor in Constantinople Thomas Ro, watching a chaotic state of affairs but times of the next interregnum and mutiny the Janissar, and wrote 1622 that the Ottoman empire “is incurably sick”. Ro anticipated for 230 years the famous phrase of the Russian tsar Nicholas I about Turkey as about “the sick person of Europe”. In process of easing Ports Gabsburgi sought to utilize discontent of the Christian people of the Balkans enslaved by Turks more than once, tried to interfere with the fight for a throne arising after death honor each of sultans. In 1609 and in the next years the Spanish authorities discussed plans of use of the certain Yakhiya claiming that he is Mekhmed III’s son who gave birth-i to D in October, 1585 and transported to Greece by the mother who was afraid that her child will be killed to an irela of death of the sultan and accession to the throne of his successor. (Mekhmed at occupation of a throne exterminated 18, according to other data — 21 brothers.) For the next two decades the governments of a number of the European countries thought more than once of an opportunity to take highway to sweat from claims of this Turkish “Grishki Otrepyev”. Special attention was paid on itself by lag of the Turkish military fleet which was still consisting of galleys whereas in Europe began to build much larger and high-speed sailing ships. Much supporters of a new crusade who were not translated even after the beginning of Thirty years’ war (1618 — 1648) told about easing Ports made obviously impossible implementation of such project. Ascertaining of decline of power Ports obviously advanced events, and plans of the military solution of the conflict with all Islam — and even with only one Ottoman empire — still were so chimerical, as well as in a century before, during rule of Suleyman Velikolepny. Finally decline Ports became obvious after the last Turkish campaign to Western Europe in 1683 which ended with defeat near Vienna. The Polish king Jan Sobesky entered Vienna freed from a siege. Soon the emperor Leopold who was publicly questioning also returned to the capital whether he has to, the hereditary monarch gives an audience to the king by the right of election what the winner of Turks was. The discussion of this question which brightly showed truly Habsburg idea of gratitude borrowed the whole five days, and Turks could recede quietly out of borders of Austria. After 1683 for Ports the period of almost continuous failures and retreats begins. Wars Gabsburgov against the Ottoman empire at the very end of XVII and the beginning of the 18th century are already in many respects deprived of signs of the century conflict. The religion ceases to play a former role; it was shown also that officers in imperial troops were recruited, without paying attention to that, Catholics they or Protestants that prince Evgeny Savoysky — if not liberal, by criteria of that time was the commander-in-chief, then the person, obviously indifferent to religion (even rumors went that Jesuits when he was at war against Louis XIV’s armies tried to poison him). But also at this stage the century conflict did not receive the military decision. It gradually stopped being by itself, turning into notorious “east question” — a question of destinies of mainly European territories which still were under the power Ports and the Dardanelless and Bosphorus Straits.

Chernyak E. B. Century conflicts

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.