564 years ago – Hungarian myths debunked: siege of Nándorfehérvár, 1456

Change language:
Every year on the 22nd of July, a special feeling overwhelms Hungarians while they hear the noon bell toll. On the 22nd of July, in 1456, 564 years ago, the siege of Nándorfehérvár took place. Thanks to the triumph of the Hungarians and the help of some other European forces, the armies of the Sultan Mehmed the II. had to withdraw. The popular Hungarian belief is that the victory of János Hunyadi was a “world-renowned” triumph, which commemorates Hungarian courage forever. Hunyadi was the archetype of the Hungarian hero in every era, and his actions belonged to the most glorious pages of Hungarian history.
The historiography of the 20th century has washed a little colour away from his myth in many ways, yet it has not taken deep root in public thinking. Although it turned out that János Hunyadi was responsible for launching the tragic campaign of 1444, he lost his two most significant battles and took an active part in the civil war, but all of this did not detract from his appraisal as a national hero, as his successes were attributed to his personal qualities.
There are two things: real deeds and their judgement, and these two are very separate things. The latter, of course, plays a more important role in creating a tradition.

Such was the case with István I., Mátyás Hunyadi and Lajos Kossuth, who were seen by their contemporaries and immediate descendants with much less empathy. Yet, newer generations their stories in a way that evokes devotion and heroism. This is not a bad thing, however, because it can inspire future generations, but it is important not to alter past events entirely.
For us Hungarians, in the last five hundred years, Nándorfehérvár has become a symbol of self-sacrificing heroism, Hungary as the bastion of Christianity and the feeling of ‘we must fight alone’.
However, this developed gradually over the centuries. For those who fought the battle, this was certainly not as clear as it has become a symbol to us. But in today’s highly relative world, where centuries-old beliefs and values are being questioned in a matter of moments, we need to see how successful the Christian triumph really was.
The young Sultan Mehmed II. who inherited the Ottoman throne in 1453 successfully invaded Constantinople, a city that symbolised the last light of the Roman Empire. This was unthinkable for the people, and it caused panic in Europe. This was the context in which the Hungarians fended off the invaders at Nándorfehérvár. An attack launched by a young and ambitious Sultan against a divided force that lacked confidence.

It is also important to note that the fall of the Kingdom of Hungary would have dragged the remaining states of the Balkan Peninsula with it, so the eyes of the West were gazing upon Mihály Szilágyi and János Hunyadi whose defences were tested to the very limit.
Luckily, almost everything fell into place perfectly for the defenders: Serbian forces broke through the Ottoman ships on the Christian side, and the untrained Christian forces led by János Kapisztrán (John of Capistrano) intervened just at the right time. But there was more luck to it than you would first guess.
All things considered, the Christian victory, was unexpected and seemed miraculous in the eyes of contemporary people, so it was obvious to incorporate self-sacrificing heroes and miraculous elements into the narration of the story to give it some extra flair. This is how the myth of the noon bell toll and the heroic Titusz Dugovics came to life and became an integral part of Hungarian belief and tradition. Now it can be scientifically proven, that they cannot be associated with the triumph of Nándorfehérvár.
However, all this should not bother us, let us also rejoice in the bell ringing at noon and tell our children about the heroism of Titusz Dugovics, because these beliefs are the ones that bind us Hungarians together, these beliefs help us through hard times and these figures of heroism inspire us.

The noon bell toll
To this day, many stubbornly believe, that the noon bell is in memory of the triumph of Nándorfehérvár, even though this theorem has been refuted several times over the past decades. Callixtus III., when found out about the Ottoman campaign, issued a so-called ‘imabulla’ (papal prayer bull) in Rome on the 29th of June announcing a spiritual crusade to defeat the “unbelieving”. According to the bull, between three o’clock in the afternoon and the evening prayer, they would ring the bells three times at half-hour intervals, and that every Christian would pray fervently when they heard it. Also, a bad omen appeared on the sky around this time on the 3rd of June; Halley’s comet, which suggested destruction and danger further making it seem unlikely to be able to stop the Ottoman Empire. The news of the triumph of Nándorfehérvár only arrived in Rome on the 6th of August, and to his delight, the Pope set the Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord on this day, so in fact, this moment is the one which is most strongly associated with the Hungarian victory, not the noon bell toll.
It is important to mention that the bull and the victory in Nándorfehérvár were forgotten in the second half of the century. Due to the growing Ottoman threat, however, Pope Alexander VI. renewed the bull of his predecessor in 1500 and issued a new decree. He changed two things in the papal decree: he ordered the noon bell toll to encourage prayer, and this decree is the reason why they toll the bell at noon in the Christian world. So, we can only talk about the noon bell toll in the Christian world from this point onwards.








Shall we call it Belgrade/ Beograd ?
We shall not call it Belgrade/Beograd.
That would be confusing and anachronistic. It would be different than how other historical place names are treated (Constantinople, Leningrad, Bombay, etc…). Since this is a Hungarian historical event on a Hungarian page and your suggestion is inconsistent with other historical references, shall we call your suggestion trolling?
I disagree with Arpad. If you write in English, especially, but not only, if readers are mostly foreigners and the News portal is in English, city names should be written in English. Non English names are acceptable in exceptional cases, which is not the case of Belgrade, for nobody but Hungarians know what Nandorfehervar is. This particular event is known, internationally, as the Siege of Belgrade.
I am sure that Hungarians would not like it if an article referred to Szeged as “ Seghedin “ . Just an example…
Mario, if it was written in Hungarian history, and this being a Hungarian web page written in English, the historical names should read as such. The commonly used new name can be stated in brackets. Pozsony(Bratislava), Becs(Vienna), Orosz(Russian) Lengyelorszag(Poland) for example. What is correct to Hungarians and historical should not be be changed or bastardized because of foreign readers.