Constantin Brancoveanu | AHistoryWebsite

260455169_317593900366714_7820118589774339716_n_edited.jpg

Father

Mother

Matei „Papa” Brâncoveanu

Stanca Cantacuzino

Father

Mother

467313677_27549354874711293_860123584758

Neagoe of Popești, son of the former ruler Antonie of Popești.

dsc_2482_2014_04_15_08_48_46_utc_edited_

Necsuta

Coat of arms granted on May 19, 1688 by Emperor Leopold I of Habsburg

Reign Period: Oct / Nov 1688 — Aug 1714 (total: ~26 years)

Successors:

Copie dupa portretul realizat in 1696, pastrat la Man Sf Ecaterina din Sinai, Sec XIX, aut

Constantin Brâncoveanu, Prince of Wallachia, portrait by an anonymous author, kept at Saint Catherine's Monastery on Mount Sinai (Egypt)

Wife: Marica (Maria) Brâncoveanu

Sons: Constantin II (married to Anița, daughter of the great Moldavian boyar Ion Balș), Ștefan (married to Bălașa, daughter of the Moldavian boyar Ilie Cantacuzino), Radu (engaged to Maria, daughter of Antioh Cantemir), Matei (unmarried)

Daughters: Stanca (married to Radu, son of Iliaș Vodă), Maria (married to Constantin Duca, voivode), Ilinca (married to Scarlatache, son of Alexandru Mavrocordat), Safta (married to Iordache Crețulescu), Ancuța (married to Nicolae Ruset), Bălașa (married to Manolache Lambrino), Smaragda (married to Constantin Băleanu)

Coat of Arms of Wallachia (proposed colours) according to a seal from a document dated 1695 AD

1718

1694

1706

1700

1712

1697

1715

1703

1709

1670

1682

1676

1688

1673

1679

1685

1691

The Habsburg Empire invades Wallachia -

Influences the removal of A. Cantemir from the throne and secures the reappointment of C. Duca as Prince of Moldavia -

Mutual support agreement concluded with Russia, in case of war against the Ottomans -

He establishes a public College for locals and foreigners -

The ottomans

declare war on Poland

Diplomatic relations with the Tsar of Russia, Peter the Great -

Collaboration pact with A. Cantemir -

The Ottomans invade Hungary, and Brâncoveanu is tasked with defending the Danube at Cerneți -

He is granted the role of

Great Postelnic (Chamberlain) -

He becomes Prince of Wallachia -

He influences the election of Constantin Duca

(his son-in-law) to the throne of Moldavia -

The Treaty of Karlowitz -

He is summoned to Constantinople to be deposed,

but manages to secure his throne again through intrigue and gifts -

The Russo-Turkish War -

The Ottomans arrest and execute

him and his sons in Constantinople -

Religion: Orthodox
Ethnicity: Wallachian
Title: By the mercy of God, we, Io Constantin Basarab Voivode, ruler and governor of all Wallachia
Noble House: Brâncoveanu
Place and Year of Birth: Wallachia, circa 1654
Age at the Beginning of Reign: ~34 years
Age at the End of Reign: ~60 years
Year and Age at the Time of Death: 1714, ~60 years
Place of Burial: Bucharest, "Sfântul Gheorghe Nou" Church
Estimated Wealth: Over 2 million guruş (Ottoman silver currency equivalent to the silver thaler), according to the report of the Venetian bailo Andrea Memmo. It was also believed that Brâncoveanu had approximately 300 pouches deposited in Venice, equivalent to 150,000 reals, a fact that drew attention and investigations from Ottoman officials. He owned more than 200 inherited and purchased villages, both in Wallachia and Transylvania, including estates at Sâmbăta de Sus and houses in Brașov, as well as investments in luxury goods such as jewelry, expensive fabrics, and valuable furs. The estimated wealth of Constantin Brâncoveanu, converted into gold and euros, would amount to approximately: 3.4 tons of gold / 193.8 million euros (at a 2025 price of approximately 57 EUR/gram of gold).

Biographical Information

Regalia

Bucuresti,_Romania._ATHENEUL_ROMAN_edited.png

kuenker_brancoveanu_5_ducati - Copy_edited.png

Seal with the country's coat of arms on a 1695 document through which Constantin Brâncoveanu, Prince of Wallachia, grants several properties to Horezu Monastery.

328091234_989349739119420_83255421737839

costume varianta finala corectata 08_edited_edited_edited_edited.png

Swords that belonged to Constantin Brâncoveanu, held in the collections of the National Military Museum "King Ferdinand I" and the Bucharest Municipal Museum (Romania).

57ce764ae906d8f7a53738b14e4ce27e_edited (1).png

Doamna Maria Brâncoveanu,_edited_edited.png

201303201141-1 copy_edited_edited_edited.png

Coin issued in 1713 by C. Brâncoveanu to commemorate the 25th year of his reign.

The royal crowns of Brâncoveanu and his wife, as depicted in the mural painting in the Hurezi Monastery.

Name of the State: commonly referred to as ''Țara Românească'' (ad litteram translation is ''The Romanian Country'', the exonym term used was ''Wallachia''). In some chancellery documents, it was also called ''Ungrovlahia'' (the Wallachia near Hungary), a term used to distinguish it from other regions with similar names, such as Wallachia in Greece.
Constituent Territories: Muntenia and Oltenia
Capital city: Bucharest.
State religion: the main state religion was Orthodox Christianity, which was practiced by the majority of the population and strongly supported by the ruler himself. Constantin Brâncoveanu is well-known for his contributions to the Orthodox Church, including the construction of religious establishments and the printing of religious texts. The second most significant religion during this period was Roman Catholicism, which was practiced by a smaller segment of the population, including some Saxons, Hungarians, and other minorities in the region
Coins in Usage:

- The piaster / Kuruş (a Turkish silver coin that circulated in the Romanian Principalities) – smaller denominations were called "Parale" and "Aspers."

- Grosetto, was a small-value silver issue from the city of Ragusa (modern-day Dubrovnik), which held an autonomous status within the Ottoman Empire.

- In 1713, Constantin Brâncoveanu issued a series of gold and silver coins to commemorate the 25th year of his reign.

Population: roughly 600,000 people by around 1700 AD, mainly Romanians, Turkic, Tatars, Saxons, Székelys and others (including Greeks, Armenians, and Jews, who were involved in commerce and urban life)
Armed Forces: Small Army (Standing Troops) - roughly 5,000 or so soldiers (several thousand cavalry and foot). Big Army (General Levies) - maximum of 15000 / 30,000 men under arms.
Commerce:

- Key Commodities: grains, livestock, salt, honey, wax, wine, spirits, timber, and luxury goods were the backbone of Wallachia’s trade.

- Trade Routes: Wallachia maintained trade relations with the Ottoman Empire, Transylvania, Poland, and Russia. The Danube River, Carpathian Mountain passes, and land routes to the north and east were vital for trade. Market centers and fairs in towns like Bucharest, Târgoviște, Ploiești, Pitești, Craiova, and Buzău facilitated trade, aided by commercial facilities like inns and customs posts.

- Taxation and Economic Policies: Wallachia was subject to heavy fiscal demands from the Ottoman Empire, including monetary tribute and in-kind obligations. Customs duties on imports and exports were a major source of income. State monopolies on commodities like salt and fishing provided significant revenue. Internal taxation focused on trade goods and cattle.

- Merchant Groups: Commerce was carried out by local Romanian, Greek, Armenian merchants, and other foreign traders. These merchants engaged in activities beyond simple buying and selling, including money-changing, lending, and maintaining caravan networks.

Annual Tribute: Constantin Brâncoveanu’s reign was marked by immense wealth and heavy obligations to the Ottoman Empire . A ''haraci'' (tribute) was often reckoned in gold coin, so its historical value can be expressed in gold weight. A single Ottoman/Venetian gold ducat of that era weighed about 3.4 grams of fine gold, thus, an annual payment of 200,000 ducats (as Brâncoveanu paid circa 1700), contained roughly 680–700 kilograms of gold in total. This is an enormous sum – for perspective, 680 kg of gold in the early 18th century could fund armies or major building projects. Converting that to modern value, we use today’s gold prices, at approx. €50–60 per gram of gold (current market rate in 2023–2025), 700 kg of gold is worth on the order of €35–42 million. In other words, Wallachia’s yearly tribute under Brâncoveanu can be valued around €40 million in today’s money (per annum). If we take a higher recent gold price (~€80 per gram), the value exceeds €50+ million for one year’s tribute. Keep in mind this was annual; over 26 years Brâncoveanu might have sent the equivalent of €1–1.5 billion in tribute by modern standards (not even counting interest or economic impact). In addition to money, Wallachia had to furnish the Ottoman Empire with substantial goods in kind every year as part of its vassal obligations. The major items included: Grain (cereals), Livestock (Cattle and Sheep), Timber (Wood), Bee Products (Wax and Honey), salt, fish, wine, furs, and other foodstuffs as demanded by the Sultan’s representatives.
Records / Battles and Wars:

- The Great Turkish War (1683–1699) – Opponents: The Ottoman Empire vs. the Holy League (an alliance of the Habsburg Monarchy, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Tsardom of Russia, and Republic of Venice). Wallachia, as an Ottoman vassal state, was drawn into the latter part of this war after Brâncoveanu became prince in 1688. Brâncoveanu initially secretly negotiated with the Christian powers for an anti-Ottoman alliance but ultimately remained loyal to the Ottomans. In 1689–1690, Habsburg imperial forces invaded Wallachia (reaching as far as Târgoviște), prompting Brâncoveanu to consider siding with the Austrians. He convened a council of boyars to debate joining the Austrians against the Turks, but many advisers (notably the Cantacuzino boyars) warned that an open switch would invite devastating Tatar reprisals. Consequently, Brâncoveanu opposed the Austrian invasion and remained with the Ottomans, even offering supplies to the advancing Habsburg troops as a stalling tactic Wallachian forces, under his command, eventually fought alongside Ottoman–Tatar armies to expel the Austrian incursion. Outcome: By the war’s end, the Holy League had defeated the Ottomans in Central Europe, forcing the Ottomans to sign the Treaty of Karlowitz (1699) and surrender significant territories (especially in Hungary). However, Wallachia emerged largely intact under Ottoman suzerainty – Brâncoveanu’s careful balancing ensured that Wallachia was not occupied by foreign powers and could enjoy relative stability once the war concluded (in Wallachia, this earned Brâncoveanu both criticism for “Turkophilia” – not joining the Christian alliance – and credit for sparing his country from prolonged devastation).

- Battle of Zărnești (11 August 1690) – Opponents: Habsburg imperial and Transylvanian forces vs. an Ottoman-allied army of Turks, Tatars, Wallachians, and Hungarian Kuruc rebels. This battle was a major engagement during the Great Turkish War. Brâncoveanu personally led a few thousand Wallachian troops to join the Ottoman/Kuruc army under Imre Thököly. He was the mastermind of the campaign, guiding the Ottoman forces through mountain passes to outflank the Habsburg army’s defenses. In the ensuing battle near Zărnești, the combined Ottoman–Wallachian–Tatar force decisively defeated the Habsburg and Transylvanian troops, killing the Transylvanian commander (Count Mihály Teleki) and capturing the Imperial general Donat Heissler. Outcome: Wallachia (Ottoman side) achieved a victory. The defeat forced the Habsburgs to retreat from southern Transylvania, and Sultan-backed Imre Thököly was briefly installed as Prince of Transylvania. While short-lived, this victory secured Wallachia’s frontiers at that time and reaffirmed Brâncoveanu’s value to the Ottoman cause during the war.

- Russo-Turkish War (1710–1711) (The Pruth Campaign) – Opponents: The Tsardom of Russia (allied with Moldavia) vs. the Ottoman Empire (with support from Crimean Tatars and its vassals, including Wallachia). This conflict erupted when Russia’s Peter the Great, after defeating Sweden, marched into the Ottoman vassal Moldavia, prompting the Ottoman Sultan to declare war. In 1710–1711, Wallachia was caught between the two powers: Tsar Peter sought Brâncoveanu’s cooperation, while the Ottomans demanded loyalty. Wallachia’s role was ambivalent – Brâncoveanu secretly corresponded with Peter the Great and even accepted Russian gifts, hoping to possibly support the Christian side. However, he was also wary, due to rivalry with Moldavia’s Prince Dimitrie Cantemir (who openly joined the Russians) and fear of Ottoman retribution. Brâncoveanu gathered the Wallachian army at Urlați near the Moldavian border, prepared to assist the Russians if they prevailed or, alternatively, to aid the Ottomans if fortunes reversed. When a faction of his boyars led by Spatar Toma Cantacuzino defected to the Russians, Brâncoveanu was forced to show loyalty to the Ottomans – he withdrew his secret support for Russia and sent back the Tsar’s gifts to avoid being branded a traitor. Throughout the short campaign, Wallachia’s involvement was cautious: Brâncoveanu delayed committing his troops and provided only token support to the Ottoman war effort, trying to keep Wallachia’s options open. Outcome: The war culminated in July 1711 with an Ottoman victory. The main confrontation, the Battle of Stănilești (Pruth River), saw the Ottomans surround Peter the Great’s forces and compel the Russians to negotiate after heavy fighting. The resulting Treaty of the Pruth (1711) forced Russia to abandon its gains (Azov was returned to the Ottomans, and Peter agreed to stay out of Polish and Cossack affairs). For Wallachia, the aftermath was dire: although Brâncoveanu had nominally remained an Ottoman vassal during the campaign, his behind-the-scenes contacts with Russia aroused Ottoman suspicions. In 1714 Sultan Ahmed III, now aware of Brâncoveanu’s duplicity, deposed and arrested him, ultimately executing Brâncoveanu and his sons on charges of treason and collusion with the enemy. The Ottomans then ended Wallachia’s traditional autonomy by installing Greek Phanariote rulers (1716 onward), tightening control to prevent such double-dealing in the future.

- Siege of Brăila (July 1711) – Opponents: A Russian detachment + Wallachian defectors vs. the Ottoman garrison. This siege was a pivotal episode during the Russo-Turkish War. As the Russo-Moldavian army advanced, General Carl E. von Rönne’s Russian column moved into Wallachia towards Brăila, an important Danubian port-town that was under direct Ottoman administration. They were joined by Wallachian troops under Spatharios Toma Cantacuzino, who betrayed Prince Brâncoveanu’s orders and sided with the Russians. The combined Russian and Wallachian rebel force assaulted and captured Brăila after a two-day siege on 13–14 July 1711. Outcome: Wallachian-Russian victory (local) – the fall of Brăila marked a brief success for the anti-Ottoman side. However, this triumph was short-lived; within weeks the broader war’s outcome (the Treaty of the Pruth) forced Russia to withdraw. The Ottomans likely reoccupied Brăila soon after, and Brâncoveanu’s authority in Wallachia was fatally undermined by the defection. This event highlighted Wallachia’s internal split: part of its army actively aided Russia, while Brâncoveanu ultimately stayed with the Ottomans – a rift that contributed to his downfall.

- Battle of Stănilești (18–22 July 1711) – Opponents: Russia (Peter the Great’s army, allied with Moldavians under Prince Dimitrie Cantemir) vs. the Ottoman Empire (commanded by Grand Vizier Baltacı Mehmed Pasha, with Crimean Tatar cavalry; Wallachia’s prince did not personally fight but remained on the Ottoman side). This was the decisive battle of the 1711 Russo-Turkish War. Peter’s Russo-Moldavian forces, having crossed into Moldavia, were confronted by a significantly larger Ottoman army on the Pruth River. Over four days near Stănilești, the Ottomans encircled the Russian camp. Repeated Ottoman assaults were repelled with heavy casualties, but the Russians became trapped, lacking supplies and water. Peter the Great, outmaneuvered and isolated, was forced to seek terms. On 22 July 1711, he agreed to an Ottoman-imposed peace, ending the battle and the war. Outcome: Ottoman victory. The surrounded Russian army avoided annihilation only by signing the Treaty of the Pruth, surrendering Azov and other fortifications to the Ottomans in exchange for a safe retreat. For Wallachia, this Ottoman success ensured it remained under Ottoman dominance – there would be no Russian liberation at this time. Nonetheless, Brâncoveanu’s equivocation during the campaign had already sealed his fate; despite Wallachia technically being on the “winning” Ottoman side at Stănilești, Brâncoveanu himself fell victim to Ottoman reprisals for his suspected disloyalty.

Demographic Information from the Period of Reign

Diplomacy

Ottoman

Empire

Sultan Ahmed II (1691–1695): Brâncoveanu maintained Wallachia's vassal status under the Ottomans, navigating the complexities of tribute payments.

Wallachia was an Ottoman vassal state throughout Brâncoveanu’s reign (1688–1714), continuing a status established in the 15th century. Brâncoveanu owed allegiance to the Sultan and was officially confirmed as prince by Ottoman authorities. He maintained outward loyalty and paid the yearly tribute (haraci) reliably, even increasing the tribute in times of suspicion to prove his fidelity. There were no open wars between Wallachia and the Ottomans during this time, as Brâncoveanu avoided rebelling. In fact, he aided Ottoman military efforts during the Great Turkish War – most notably joining Ottoman and Tatar forces at the Battle of Zărnești (12 August 1690) to crush a Habsburg incursion in Transylvania. This victory installed the Ottoman-backed Imre Thököli as Transylvania’s ruler and solidified Brâncoveanu’s standing with the Porte. Nonetheless, Brâncoveanu also secretly explored anti-Ottoman alliances (e.g. covert talks with the Habsburgs in the 1690s), which he kept hidden from Constantinople . During the Russo-Turkish War of 1710–1711, he found himself torn between supporting the Ottoman Sultan or Tsar Peter’s invading army. Initially, he sent encouraging messages to the Russians, but when the tide turned he reaffirmed loyalty to his Ottoman suzerain, returning the gifts the Tsar had sent him. The Ottomans, at that point, were aware of Brâncoveanu’s duplicitous diplomacy but had tolerated it while they were on the defensive. After the Ottoman victory over Russia at Stănilești (1711), Sultan Ahmed III grew less forgiving. Brâncoveanu’s long balancing act collapsed: he was accused of treason and deposed in 1714. That year, he was taken to Istanbul and executed (along with his sons) on Ottoman orders, marking the end of his rule and the beginning of tighter Ottoman control (the Phanariote era) in Wallachia. Throughout his reign, Wallachia remained a vassal paying tribute (and lavish “gifts”) to the Porte, and Brâncoveanu repeatedly professed allegiance to the Sultan – until his covert dealings led to his tragic downfall.

Sultan Mustafa II (1695–1703): A key figure during Brâncoveanu's reign, as the Ottomans sought to consolidate control in the region.

Sultan Ahmed III (1703–1730): Ahmed III was the ruling sultan during the later years of Brâncoveanu's reign and eventual execution in 1714.

Alexander-Column-Palace-Square-St-Petersburg-Hermitage.webp

Russian Empire

Peter the Great (1682–1725): Brâncoveanu corresponded and negotiated with Peter the Great during the Russo-Turkish conflicts. Wallachia's position between empires made such interactions inevitable.

Constantin Brâncoveanu maintained cautious but active diplomatic relations with Imperial Russia, often in secret. As early as the 1690s, he sought an understanding with Tsar Peter the Great, who was then co-ruler of Russia. Brâncoveanu used intermediaries like monks and merchants to correspond with the Russians; one envoy, the monk Isaia, was sent to contact Peter (during Peter’s joint rule with Ivan V) but was discovered and arrested, indicating the clandestine nature of these early exchanges. After 1700, Brâncoveanu’s ties with Russia grew stronger. Tsar Peter I rewarded him for friendly conduct: on 21 August 1700 Brâncoveanu received the Order of St. Andrew (a high honor), and in 1701 the Tsar even granted him a “jalovannaia gramota” (charter of protection) assuring Brâncoveanu and his family refuge in Russian territory (Ukraine) if they had to flee the Ottomans. According to chronicler Ion Neculce, a secret treaty was concluded between Brâncoveanu and Peter the Great, containing political, military, and economic clauses – essentially a covert alliance – though the exact details remain unknown.

During the Russo-Turkish War (1710–1711), these Russian-Wallachian contacts came to a head. Tsar Peter’s army marched into neighboring Moldavia in 1710, aiming to draw in Wallachia as well. Brâncoveanu promised support to both sides – a duplicitous strategy to see which way the conflict unfolded. He accepted Russian envoys and money, ready to assist Peter’s campaign to free the Balkans from Ottoman rule, but simultaneously assured the Ottoman Sultan of his loyalty. In early 1711, he gathered Wallachian troops at Urlați near the Moldavian border, prepared to join the Russians if they prevailed or to aid the Ottomans if the Russian offensive faltered. This hedging meant Wallachia never openly joined the fighting. When several Wallachian boyars defected to the Russian camp mid-campaign, Brâncoveanu panicked that he would be labeled a rebel; he quickly returned the Tsar’s gifts and reasserted his allegiance to the Sultan to avoid Ottoman retribution. Consequently, Wallachia did not engage in battle against the Ottomans or the Russians during the 1711 campaign – Brâncoveanu remained officially neutral, contributing no troops to either side. However, one notable incident blurred this neutrality: Brâncoveanu’s relative and general, Spătar Toma Cantacuzino, defected with a contingent of Wallachian soldiers to Peter’s army. Toma’s forces joined the Russians and helped them capture the fortress of Brăila from the Ottomans in 1711. This isolated act showed the undercurrent of pro-Russian sentiment in Brâncoveanu’s circle, even as the prince himself held back. After the war ended disastrously for Russia (Peter was forced to retreat by the Treaty of the Pruth, July 1711), both sides viewed Brâncoveanu with suspicion. The Russians felt betrayed – Tsar Peter blamed Brâncoveanu’s hesitation for the failure of the Moldavian campaign, and no longer trusted the Wallachian prince. On the Ottoman side, his flirtation with Russia had been noted (reports of his correspondence and the defection of his men made it to Istanbul), planting the seeds for his later arrest. In sum, Brâncoveanu forged a secret alliance with Russia and maintained cordial relations with Tsar Peter (even receiving Russian decorations and safe-passage guarantees), but he ultimately avoided committing Wallachia to open war on Russia’s side. His indecisive stance in 1711 left him isolated: Russia had counted on him but got little help, and the Ottomans grew convinced of his treachery. This delicate Russian-Wallachian diplomacy provided opportunities (such as a potential Orthodox coalition against the Turks) but also directly contributed to Brâncoveanu’s demise once the Ottomans took revenge for his double dealings.

Jan_Thomas_-_Leopold_I_as_Acis_in_the_play__La_Galatea_.jpg

Habsburg Monarchy

Leopold I (1658–1705): The Holy Roman Emperor, whose reign coincided with significant Habsburg-Ottoman conflicts that influenced Wallachian politics.

Brâncoveanu’s relationship with the Habsburg Monarchy (Austria) was characterized by careful diplomacy and shifting allegiances. In the late 1680s, the Habsburgs were pressing southward against the Ottomans, which put Wallachia in a delicate position. Initially, Brâncoveanu sided with the Ottomans militarily to resist Habsburg incursions. During the Great Turkish War, Wallachia itself became a target of imperial advance around 1690, and Brâncoveanu took action. He cooperated with Ottoman commands to expel an Austrian force that had entered Wallachia’s territory – persuading an Imperial detachment to withdraw from Oltenia in early 1690 – and then aided the Ottoman counterattack into Transylvania. On 12 August 1690, his troops, alongside Ottoman and Tatar allies, confronted General Heissler’s Habsburg army at Zărnești. The result was a major Habsburg defeat: the imperial army was routed, General Heissler was captured, and Brâncoveanu emerged as the unexpected victor of the battle. This triumph, achieved ostensibly in the Sultan’s service, eliminated Brâncoveanu’s pro-Habsburg rivals (such as Cantacuzino allies who had sided with Austria) and demonstrated Wallachia’s value to the Ottomans. Yet significantly, Brâncoveanu managed to avoid irreparably antagonizing Vienna despite fighting Habsburg troops. Contemporary accounts note that he “only watched the battle” rather than personally leading the charge, which later allowed him to claim he was not a direct enemy of the Emperor. Indeed, after 1690 Brâncoveanu quickly sought to mend fences with the Austrian Empire.

Starting in the 1690s, he opened a clandestine dialogue with the Habsburgs. Brâncoveanu resumed correspondence with the Imperial court and influential Austrian generals even while officially Ottoman-allied. He maintained agents in Vienna and used trusted boyars to exchange letters, all in secret. He even provided assistance to Habsburg envoys passing through or operating in the Balkans: he hosted Imperial emissaries in Wallachia, fed them intelligence on Ottoman movements, and at times covertly subsidized their missions. Simultaneously, Brâncoveanu took practical steps to secure favor (and a potential refuge) under Habsburg rule. He invested money in Habsburg lands – depositing Wallachian funds in Viennese and Brașov banks – and purchased estates in Transylvania (then under Habsburg sovereignty. He even built a residence at Sâmbăta de Jos (in southern Transylvania), signaling his intention to have a safe haven on Habsburg soil. These moves paid off dramatically. In January 1695, Emperor Leopold I conferred on Constantin Brâncoveanu the title of Prince of the Holy Roman Empire, elevating him and his family into the Imperial nobility. Along with this prestigious title came the Emperor’s guarantee of political asylum in Habsburg territory for Brâncoveanu and his kin, should they need to flee the Ottomans. This was an extraordinary diplomatic coup – contemporaries were astonished that the same Wallachian ruler who had fought Austrian troops at Zărnești in 1690 was, by 1695, welcomed into the Holy Roman Empire’s aristocratic ranks.

Through the remainder of his reign, Brâncoveanu maintained a balancing act vis-à-vis Austria. He stayed in contact with Vienna (often through secret letters and couriers) and kept informed about Habsburg affairs, but he never openly broke from the Ottoman fold to join an Austrian alliance. Wallachia did not directly align with Austria in any battle under Brâncoveanu – for example, during Prince Eugene of Savoy’s campaigns against the Turks in the early 1700s, Brâncoveanu stayed officially neutral. Nevertheless, his sympathies often lay with the Habsburgs’ cause. He supplied Austria with valuable intelligence about Ottoman plans and attempted to influence regional politics in Austria’s favor when possible. Notably, Brâncoveanu ensured that Wallachian territory saw no further combat between Ottomans and Austrians after 1690 – he skillfully kept his land from becoming a battleground or being claimed in any Austro-Ottoman peace settlement. (Even the 1699 Treaty of Karlowitz, which ended the Great Turkish War, left Wallachia’s status quo intact, thanks in part to Brâncoveanu’s behind-the-scenes lobbying to exclude his principality from those negotiations. In summary, Brâncoveanu’s Wallachia and the Habsburg Monarchy enjoyed a discreet partnership: he secretly courted Habsburg protection and honors (culminating in his 1695 elevation), and in return he provided Austria a friendly buffer state and source of information inside the Ottoman sphere. This delicate diplomacy with Vienna helped Brâncoveanu sustain Wallachia’s autonomy and gain a powerful backer abroad, even as he outwardly remained an Ottoman vassal.

Joseph I (1705–1711): Continued Leopold's policies, and Brâncoveanu cautiously engaged with the Habsburgs while managing Ottoman relations.

Charles VI (1711–1740): Although Brâncoveanu did not live through most of Charles VI's reign, his policies impacted Wallachia indirectly.

Transylvania

Imre Thököli, (1705–1711): Emeric was Prince of Upper Hungary, an Ottoman vassal state, from 1682 to 1685, and briefly Prince of Transylvania during the year 1690.

Brâncoveanu’s interactions with Hungary and Transylvania (often intertwined with Habsburg or Ottoman politics) were driven by the upheavals of the late 17th and early 18th centuries. One major episode was his involvement in the Hungarian Kuruc revolts against Habsburg rule. In 1690, the Ottomans enlisted Brâncoveanu’s aid to support Imre Thököli, a Hungarian noble leading an anti-Habsburg uprising. When the Prince of Transylvania, Mihály Apafi, died in April 1690, the Ottomans saw an opportunity to install Thököli as a client ruler in Transylvania. Brâncoveanu agreed to assist. He organized a joint Wallachian-Ottoman-Tatar expedition into Transylvania in the summer of 1690, guiding their armies through mountain passes. This campaign culminated in the Battle of Zărnești (also known as the Battle of Vulcan Pass) on 12 August 1690, where Brâncoveanu’s forces (alongside Ottoman pashas, Crimean Tatars, and Thököli’s Kuruc rebels) defeated the Habsburg army under General Heissler. The Austrian commander was killed or captured, and the victory allowed Thököli to briefly take power as Prince of Transylvania. Brâncoveanu’s role was pivotal – by delivering this military success for the Ottomans, he eliminated a pro-Habsburg threat on his doorstep and earned the gratitude of the Sultan. It also meant that for a short time Wallachia and Ottoman-allied Hungary (Thököli’s regime) were in close cooperation. However, Thököli’s rule in Transylvania was short-lived; by 1691 the Habsburgs counter-attacked and removed him, bringing Transylvania firmly under Imperial control. Brâncoveanu then adjusted to the new reality, as described above, by reconciling with Vienna.

In the early 18th century, Brâncoveanu carefully watched the Hungarian independence movement led by Prince Francis II Rákóczi. Rákóczi’s War of Independence (1703–1711) against Habsburg rule convulsed the region. Although Wallachia did not directly participate in this conflict, Brâncoveanu maintained diplomatic contacts with the Hungarian rebels. He corresponded with figures in Rákóczi’s camp, likely to keep informed and to hedge his bets in case the political landscape shifted. (Contemporary records indicate Brâncoveanu exchanged letters not only with emperors and tsars, but even with “leaders of Kuruts’ revolution (1703–1711)” – i.e. Rákóczi and his generals. His involvement was discreet; he provided no troops to Rákóczi, as openly aiding a rebellion against the Habsburgs could have backfired given Brâncoveanu’s own arrangements with Emperor Leopold. Instead, he likely shared intelligence and tried to balance relations with all sides. For example, when Rákóczi’s envoys or Polish allies passed near Wallachia, Brâncoveanu would treat them cautiously but courteously, signaling sympathy without committing to their cause. Meanwhile, Brâncoveanu’s domestic rivals tried to use the Hungarian uprising against him. The influential Cantacuzino family (formerly Brâncoveanu’s allies, later enemies) spread denunciations portraying Brâncoveanu as untrustworthy. In one report sent to Prince Rákóczi, they painted Brâncoveanu as “a man of the Austrians” who deceived both Turks and Russians and had amassed a secret fortune abroad. This intrigue was intended to turn Rákóczi (and by extension the Ottomans or others) against Brâncoveanu. There is no evidence that Rákóczi took direct action based on those letters; however, it shows that Wallachia’s stance was a factor in the minds of Rákóczi’s supporters and detractors.

Brâncoveanu also engaged with the semi-autonomous authorities in Transylvania when it was under Habsburg rule. Transylvania neighbored Wallachia to the northwest, so developments there were crucial to Wallachia’s security. Brâncoveanu maintained cordial relations with Transylvanian governors and nobles. He leveraged his rights (granted by Leopold I) to own estates in Transylvania, effectively becoming a Transylvanian landowner and integrating into that society’s elite. This gave him a stake in Transylvania’s stability. He often acted as a mediator – for instance, after Rákóczi’s rebellion, he may have helped negotiate or at least facilitate the flight of some rebel leaders (Rákóczi himself eventually took refuge in Ottoman lands). Overall, with regard to Hungary and Transylvania, Brâncoveanu’s policy was one of cautious engagement: he intervened militarily on Ottoman request when it served Wallachia’s interests (1690), but in later Hungarian conflicts he limited himself to diplomatic observation and quiet support. By doing so, he ensured Wallachia avoided hostility with whichever side prevailed. In all cases, his primary goal was to safeguard Wallachia’s autonomy and his own position amid the shifting power struggles between Habsburg rulers and Hungarian nobility.

Michael I Apafi (1661–1690): Prince of Transylvania early in Brâncoveanu's reign. Transylvania's proximity to Wallachia made it a key player in regional politics.

Francis II Rákóczi (1704–1711): Prince of Transylvania who led the Rákóczi's War of Independence against the Habsburgs. Brâncoveanu likely observed this closely, as it impacted Wallachia’s relations with the Habsburgs.

Poland

John III Sobieski (1674–1696): Renowned for his victory at the Battle of Vienna (1683) against the Ottomans. Brâncoveanu was aware of Poland's influence in the anti-Ottoman sphere.

Throughout Constantin Brâncoveanu’s reign, Wallachia maintained amicable relations with the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. Although not immediate neighbors (Moldavia lay between Wallachia and Poland), the two states had long-standing ties of diplomacy and trade. Brâncoveanu actively corresponded with the Polish crown, considering Poland-Lithuania a potential ally in the Christian world against Ottoman domination. In the late 17th century, the Commonwealth was part of the Holy League fighting the Ottomans – King Jan Sobieski’s victory at Vienna in 1683 and subsequent campaigns against the Turks resonated in Wallachia. Brâncoveanu, as an Ottoman vassal, could not openly join Sobieski’s war, but he quietly welcomed any Polish successes that pressured their mutual Ottoman overlord. He kept up an exchange of envoys with the Poles. Envoys from Wallachia visited the Commonwealth and vice versa, discussing matters of trade and sometimes security coordination (for example, containing Tatar raids that threatened both Moldavia and Poland’s borders). Contemporary evidence shows Brâncoveanu’s extensive correspondence network included the King of Poland; he wrote to or received letters from Polish rulers such as Sobieski (reigned until 1696) and King Augustus II (who regained the Polish throne in 1709). He also interacted with Polish nobles and diplomats in Istanbul. In one instance, Brâncoveanu’s agents provided intelligence to the Russians about secret dealings between Poland’s King (Stanisław Leszczyński, a Polish contender allied with Sweden) and the Ottoman Porte, implying that Wallachia was well-informed on Polish-Ottoman affairs and possibly acted as an intermediary.

Augustus II the Strong (1697–1706, 1709–1733): As a ruler of Poland and elector of Saxony, his reign affected Wallachia indirectly through Polish-Ottoman diplomacy

Moldavia

Constantin Cantemir (1685 - 1693): Brâncoveanu maintained a relatively stable relationship with him, as both Wallachia and Moldavia were under Ottoman suzerainty. They shared information and sometimes presented united fronts to the Ottoman Porte.

A crucial regional relationship was with Wallachia’s sister principality, Moldavia. The two Romanian principalities often coordinated their policies under Ottoman suzerainty, but during Brâncoveanu’s tenure their relations were complicated by rivalries. Early in Brâncoveanu’s reign, he worked amicably with Moldavian princes like Constantin Duca and Mihai Racoviță, who were connected to Wallachia’s boyar families. They shared information and sometimes presented united fronts to the Ottoman Porte (for instance, jointly petitioning for tax relief or against abuses by Ottoman officials). However, from 1710 onward Brâncoveanu’s dealings with Moldavia were dominated by his uneasy interaction with Prince Dimitrie Cantemir. Cantemir, a learned ruler and one-time ally of Brâncoveanu’s in-laws, became Prince of Moldavia in 1710 and immediately forged a formal alliance with Russia (the secret Treaty of Lutsk). This put Brâncoveanu in a bind. The two princes had a personal rivalry – Cantemir and Brâncoveanu were competing for influence and each distrusted the other. When Tsar Peter approached them for support against the Ottomans, Cantemir eagerly agreed, but Brâncoveanu hesitated. During the 1711 campaign, Cantemir’s Moldavia rose in open revolt (providing troops and supplies to the Russian army) while Wallachia under Brâncoveanu stayed officially loyal to the Ottomans. This divergence soured their relations. Brâncoveanu even informed the Ottomans of Cantemir’s actions at one point, trying to deflect suspicion from himself. After the Russo-Turkish war failed, Cantemir fled into Russian exile, leaving Moldavia to another ruler. Ottoman investigators then uncovered correspondence suggesting Brâncoveanu had also entertained Russian proposals, which made him appear two-faced like Cantemir. In short, Moldavia’s fate was intertwined with Wallachia’s: Brâncoveanu’s diplomatic tightrope was made trickier by Moldavia’s choices. Despite tensions, he remained in contact with post-1711 Moldavian authorities (now Phanariote governors) and even sheltered some Moldavian refugees in Wallachia. The pattern was cooperation when interests aligned and cautious distance when Moldavia took a different geopolitical path. Notably, both Wallachia and Moldavia were punished in the end – Cantemir lost his throne in 1711 and Brâncoveanu his in 1714 – for their respective dealings with Russia, after which the Ottomans imposed Greek Phanariote princes over both countries

Dimitrie Cantemir (1693; 1710 - 1711): he had a personal rivalry with Cantemir and distrusted him. During the Russo-Turkish War of 1710–1711, Cantemir's Moldavia rose in open revolt, providing troops and supplies to the Russian army, while Brâncoveanu stayed officially loyal to the Ottomans.

Mihai Racoviță (1658–1705): Loyal to the Ottomans, he provided support to the Ottoman army against the Russians and Dimitrie Cantemir. A quiet political rivalry, in which each maintained their influence within the Ottoman Empire

Antioh Cantemir (1695 - 1700; 1705 - 1707): Often ideologically opposed to Brâncoveanu, but they coexisted without military conflict. Brâncoveanu occasionally supported rivals of the Cantemir family, influencing the selection of rulers in Moldavia.

Constituent Territories

Map of Wallachia from the year 1707, dedicated to Emperor Joseph I, authored by Schierl von Schierendorf and Christian Julius - title of te map: ''Augustissimo Invictissimoque Romanorum Imperatori Iosepho I. Mappam hanc geographicam Principatus Valachiae in XVII themata divisae ab exemplari graeco, quod, juxta accuratissimam descriptionem Sapientiss: Viri Constantini Cantacuzeni ...''

Princely Palace

Mogoșoaia Palace, built between 1698 and 1702 by Prince Constantin Brâncoveanu, located near Bucharest, Romania. It served as a summer residence for the prince and his family.

Endowments

Podul Mogoșoaiei (Mogoșoaia Wood-Paved Road) – A major thoroughfare built in 1692 at Brâncoveanu’s order to connect his Mogoșoaia Palace to central Bucharest. The road was planked with thick oak beams (hence called a “pod”, or bridge) and became the city’s first paved street. It was known for two centuries as Podul Mogoșoaiei until 1878, when it was renamed Calea Victoriei. This initiative improved trade and travel between the capital and the palace.
Royal Academy of Bucharest (Academia Domnească) – Founded by Brâncoveanu in 1694 as an advanced learning institute in Bucharest. He transformed the old Saint Sava monastic school into an academy offering courses in Greek and Latin, open to all social classes. This institution (forebear of the University of Bucharest) marked a significant investment in education and culture during his reign.
Schools and Printing Presses – As part of his cultural policy, Brâncoveanu supported the establishment of schools (like the Princely Academy mentioned) and printing houses. In 1706 he built a printing workshop at the Snagov Monastery (near Bucharest) and at Buzău, where liturgical and scholarly books were printed in Romanian and Greek. While not buildings in the traditional sense, these were housed in monastery outbuildings that he refurbished for the purpose. They underscore his role in advancing education and literature.
Hospital and Inn Foundations – Brâncoveanu’s uncle Mihai Cantacuzino founded the Colțea Hospital in Bucharest (1704), and Brâncoveanu as prince supported such charitable constructions. He endowed monasteries to run infirmaries and is sometimes credited with aiding in establishing caravanserai-style inns whose revenue supported churches (e.g. an inn for New St. George church). One such inn was attached to Sf. Gheorghe Nou to fund its maintenance, dedicated to the Holy Sepulchre.

Public Infrastructure

Mogoșoaia Palace (built 1698–1702) – Brâncoveanu’s grand estate about 10 km from Bucharest. Erected in the Wallachian Renaissance or Brâncovenesc style, it features arcaded loggias, sculpted stone columns, and a blend of local and Italianate motifs. The palace is well-preserved (restored post-World War II) and today houses the Muzeul de Artă Brâncovenească serving as a popular tourist destination.
Potlogi Palace (constructed 1698) – A country palace in Potlogi (Dâmbovița County), built as a residence for Brâncoveanu’s eldest son. An inscription above the entrance attests that “these houses from their foundation were raised by the enlightened ruler… finishing them in the year 7206 (1698)”. Designed in early Brâncovenesc style with a central loggia and ornate façade, the Potlogi palace fell into disrepair but was fully restored (2011–2015) and opened as a museum site.
Old Princely Court, Bucharest (Curtea Veche) – Originally a 15th-century princely residence, it was extensively rebuilt by Brâncoveanu around 1700. According to contemporary accounts, he reconstructed the palace in stone, adding a monumental marble staircase and spacious halls with carved columns and painted ceilings. He also improved the complex with new guardhouses and heightened defensive walls, completed shortly before his downfall in 1714.
Brâncoveanu’s Palace at Târgoviște – Brâncoveanu also maintained the old princely residence in Târgoviște, the former capital. While no entirely new palace was built there, he is recorded to have commissioned repairs and enhancements during his reign (e.g. refurbishing chambers and fortifications), though much of that complex was later ruined.

Palaces and Residences

Potlogi Church (St. Demetrius) – 1683, Potlogi, Dâmbovița
Mogoșoaia Palace Church (St. George) – 1688, Mogoșoaia (Ilfov).
St. John the Great (“Grecesc”) Church – 1700 (rebuilt), Bucharest
St. Sava Monastery Church – 1700 (rebuilt), Bucharest
New St. George Church – 1705–1707, Bucharest
Râmnicu Sărat Monastery Church (Dormition of the Virgin) – 1691–1697, Râmnicu Sărat (Buzău County).
Hurezi Monastery (Hurezu) – 1690–1697, Horezu, Vâlcea County
Mamu Monastery (St. Nicholas) – 1695–1696 (rebuilt), Stănești-Lunca, Vâlcea County
Brâncoveni Monastery (Dormition of the Virgin) – 1699–1704 (rebuilt), Brâncoveni, Olt County.
Surpatele Monastery (Holy Trinity) – 1703–1706, Frâncești, Vâlcea County
Polovragi Monastery (Assumption of the Virgin) – rebuilt 1713, Polovragi, Gorj County
Turnu Monastery of Târgșor (Prahova County) – early 1700s (restoration).
Doicești Church (Nativity of the Virgin) – 1706, Doicești, Dâmbovița
St. Nicholas Church of Făgăraș – built 1697–1698 in Făgăraș town
Brâncoveanu Church of Ocna Sibiului (St. Archangels Michael and Gabriel) – built c.1695–1700 (completed by 1710)
Poiana Mărului Church – built 1700s, Poiana Mărului (Brașov County)
Sâmbăta de Sus Monastery (Brâncoveanu Monastery) – 1696–1707, Sâmbăta de Sus, Brașov County
Church of St. Nicholas in Istanbul (Galata) – 1707, Constantinople (Ottoman Empire).
Contributions on Mount Athos – 1700s, Athos (Greece). Brâncoveanu sponsored buildings at St. Paul’s Monastery on Mount Athos
St. George Church in Ismail – c.1700, Ismail (then Ottoman Danube town).

churches and monasteries he built or significantly restored

The Court Council

Vintilă Corbeanu (ante 1688 – c.1691) – boyar from Oltenia who held the title of Ban of Craiova even before Brâncoveanu's ascent to the throne.

Ban

Role: The Ban was the governor of Oltenia (western Wallachia), holding judicial, administrative, and military authority. He was the second most powerful man in Wallachia after the prince.

Western analogy: Like a viceroy or duke-governor (e.g., the Duke of Milan ruling a region under a monarch).

Radu (Toma) Năsturel (c.1691 – 1695) – a boyar from the old Năsturel family, who briefly held the office of Great Ban after Vintilă's departure. Năsturel is mentioned in an earlier charter as “Radu (Toma) Năsturel, Great Ban of Craiova.”

Cornea Brăiloiu (1695 – 1705) – a close collaborator of Brâncoveanu, originally from Gorj. He held several offices (treasurer, chief of police, cupbearer). In March 1695, he was elevated to the rank of Great Ban of Craiova. Contemporary chronicles describe him as “a stern man, with good judgment, prompt and skilled in his replies,” wise and loyal to the prince.

Ștefan Cantacuzino (1705 – 1714) – son of the stolnic Constantin Cantacuzino and maternal nephew of Șerban Cantacuzino. He entered the princely council as Great Postelnic, and toward the end of Brâncoveanu’s reign, he rose to hold the office of Great Ban, making him the second most powerful man in the state.

Vornic

• Role: Chief of the judicial system, especially civil cases; sometimes oversaw the administration of noble courts and regional governance.
• Western analogy: Comparable to a Lord Chancellor or Chief Justice.

Vălcu Grădișteanu (c.1689 – ~1695) – a boyar from the Grădișteanu family, he held the office of Great Vornic during the 1690s. He is recorded in a document as “Vălcu (Grădișteanu), Great Vornic.”

Șerban II Cantacuzino (son of stolnic Constantin) (cca. 1705 – 1714) – Nephew of Prince Șerban Cantacuzino, he became Great Vornic during the final decade of Brâncoveanu's reign. In 1706, the chronicle notes that Șerban Cantacuzino held the office of Great Vornic, while his cousins Toma and Ștefan held the positions of Great Sword-Bearer (Spătar) and Great Chamberlain (Postelnic).

Primirea de către principele Transilvaniei, Gabriel Bethlen, a ambasadorului otoman, Yusuf

Radu Greceanu (between 1688–1714) – served during the reign of Constantin Brâncoveanu. He was a prominent historian and held the position of logothete (and Secondary Logothete) at the Wallachian court. He was the official chronicler of Brâncoveanu's rule.

Logofat

Role: Head of the chancellery; responsible for all official documents, laws, and foreign correspondence.
Western analogy: Like a Chancellor of the Realm or Secretary of State.

Diicu (Radu) Rudeanu (1688 – ~1700) – A member of an old boyar family (son-in-law of Udrea Băleanu), he assumed the office of Great Logothete after Brâncoveanu became prince. A charter from 1696 attests him as “Diicu Rudeanu, Great Logothete,” serving as a witness at the head of the Divan.

Gheorghe (Iordache) Crețulescu (c.1700 – c.1705) (Uncertain) – After Radu Rudeanu stepped down, the position of Great Logothete may have been taken over by a boyar from the new generation, possibly Iordache Crețulescu, who was Brâncoveanu’s son-in-law.

Toma Cantacuzino (Secondary Logothete 1690–1706) – Toma Cantacuzino, nephew of Mihai the Sword-Bearer, also deserves mention. Although he never reached the rank of Great Logothete (serving instead as the second logothete in the chancery), Toma played an important role in Brâncoveanu’s diplomatic machinery.

Mihai Cantacuzino (1688 – 1706) – Brother of stolnic Constantin Cantacuzino and uncle of the prince, he was the Great Sword-Bearer who directly supported Brâncoveanu's rise to the throne. He led the Wallachian armies for nearly two decades and was a key figure in the government, initially a pillar of Brâncoveanu's regime due to their family ties.

Role: Commander of the army; bearer of the ruler’s sword; supervised military affairs.
Western analogy: Similar to a Marshal or Lord High Constable.

Toma Cantacuzino (1706 – 1711) – He assumed the rank of Great Sword-Bearer after his uncle was removed from office by the Prince. Toma’s appointment, as a young and ambitious figure, was intended to temporarily ease tensions within the Cantacuzino family. As Great Spătar, he commanded the Wallachian army during the Russo-Turkish War of 1711.

Ștefan Papazoglu (1711 – 1714) – (Uncertain) After Toma Cantacuzino fled, command of the army was entrusted to another trusted boyar. Contemporary records suggest that the Sword-Bearer during Brâncoveanu’s final years was Ștefan Papazoglu, who was later also mentioned as Spătar under the Phanariot rulers.

Spatar

Constantin Cantacuzino „Măgureanu” (1688 – ~1690) – A distant cousin of stolnic Constantin Cantacuzino, he initially held the office of Great Cupbearer under Șerban Cantacuzino and continued in this role during the early years of Brâncoveanu’s reign. A period document from 1683 refers to him as “Constantin Cantacuzino (Măgureanu), Great Cupbearer” in the council.

Role: In charge of the ruler’s wine cellar and ceremonial pouring; sometimes managed vineyards and wine taxes.
Western analogy: Comparable to a Cup-bearer or Master of the Wine in royal households.

Cornea Brăiloiu (1691 – 1695) – Before becoming Ban, Cornea served as the Great Cupbearer of the country. On March 28, 1691, he is mentioned with this title. As Cupbearer, Brăiloiu gained diplomatic experience, being sent by Brâncoveanu in 1693 on a mission to the Ottoman Porte.

Ștefan (Verigu) Greceanu (1695 – ~1700) – After Cornea's promotion, the position of Great Cupbearer was taken by the boyar Ștefan Greceanu, from the Greceanu family (possibly identified in documents as “Vergo, Great Cupbearer”). Greceanu came from a traditional family of officials – Șerban Greceanu being the treasurer of the time.

Iordache Crețulescu (c.1705 – 1714) – (Uncertain) Son-in-law of Brâncoveanu, Iordache Crețulescu is believed to have held the office of Great Cupbearer during the final years of the reign. Although he is better known as Great Logothete during the later Phanariot period, Crețulescu appears in some lists of boyars as a Cupbearer as well.

Paharnic

Vistiernic

Role: The treasurer of the country, managing state finances, taxes, and treasury.
Western analogy: Equivalent to a Minister of Finance or Lord High Treasurer.

Șerban Greceanu (1688 – ~1702) – Brother-in-law of the Cantacuzino family (married to Săruca Cantacuzino), he served as Great Treasurer during the early part of the reign. A charter from April 1696 refers to him as “Șerban Greceanu, Great Treasurer,” heading the country’s treasury. Greceanu managed the state's finances, collecting taxes and overseeing court expenditures.

Ianache Văcărescu (1702 – 1714) – The most trusted advisor of Brâncoveanu in his final years, Ianache (Enache) Văcărescu took over the treasury during a critical time. He was a cultured boyar and the prince’s brother-in-law (related to Brâncoveanu’s wife), and was likely appointed Great Treasurer around 1702. He was executed in 1714 alongside Brâncoveanu and his sons.

Comis

Role: Supervised the stables and military horses (cavalry); responsible for equine logistics.
Western analogy: Similar to a Master of the Horse.

Șerban II Cantacuzino (fiul stolnicului) (1690 – 1705) – Before becoming Great Vornic, Șerban (also known as Șerbănică) held the rank of Great Comis. A document from 1696 refers to him as “Șerban Cantacuzino, Great Comis” in the Divan. As Great Comis, he was responsible for the princely stud farms and commanded the detachments of boyar cavalry.

Vlad Velescu (1705 – 1714) – (Uncertain) After Șerban’s promotion, a boyar outside the Cantacuzino family took over the role of Great Comis. Some boyar lists suggest the name Vlad Velescu (or Cocorăscu), a close associate of Brâncoveanu. Velescu is believed to have managed the princely stables and the cavalry in the later years of the reign, remaining loyal to the prince during his conflict with the Cantacuzinos.

Postelnic

Role: Managed access to the prince's private chambers and organized court ceremonies and audiences.
Western analogy: Like a Chamberlain or Master of Ceremonies.

Dumitrașco Caramalău (1688 – cca. 1705) – A Moldavian boyar of Greek origin (Caramalău), he served as Great Postelnic for much of Brâncoveanu’s reign. In 1696, he is recorded as “Dumitrașco Caramanlău, Great Postelnic.” He was responsible for organizing the princely household, managing audiences with the ruler, and overseeing the supply of luxury foods to the Court.

Ștefan Cantacuzino (1705 – 1714) – Son of stolnic Constantin, he was appointed Great Postelnic by Brâncoveanu after the removal of Caramalău. In 1706, the chronicle records that Ștefan Cantacuzino held the position of Great Postelnic in the Council of the Country. As Postelnic, he was constantly in the prince’s presence, managing the audience schedule—a role that allowed him to secretly maintain contact with foreign envoys and conspirators.

Stolnic

Role: Oversaw the royal kitchen, feasts, and food supply for the court.
Western analogy: Comparable to a Steward or Master of the Household.

Constantin Cantacuzino „Stolnicul” (before 1688 – 1714) – The erudite uncle of Brâncoveanu and brother of Prince Șerban, he held the office of Great Stolnic even before his nephew’s reign. Under his direct guidance, the prince’s secret chancery and external intelligence network were established. He advocated for a cautious anti-Ottoman orientation and effectively led the Cantacuzino boyar faction until 1714.

Radu Izvoranu (1693 – ~1708) – A mid-ranking boyar, he held the position of Great Stolnic, at least formally, during the period when Stolnic Cantacuzino was more focused on politics than on managing the Court. A document from 1696 lists “Radu Izvoranu, Great Stolnic” as a witness in the council.

Ivașco Băleanu (before 1688 – ~1690) – A boyar from the Băleanu faction, he served as Great Clucer during the reign of Șerban Cantacuzino and at the beginning of Brâncoveanu’s rule. A charter from the 1670s refers to him as “Ivașco (Băleanu), Great Clucer” of the Divan. As Great Clucer, Ivașco managed the grain storehouses and provisions of the princely court.

Role: Managed granaries, storerooms, and the provisioning of the court with grain and dry goods.
Western analogy: Similar to a Quartermaster or Pantry Master.

Constantin Ciorogârleanu (Glogoveanu) (1695 – cca. 1709) – A boyar close to the Cantacuzino circle, Constantin of Ciorogârla (possibly the same as Constantin Glogoveanu mentioned in chronicles) was appointed Great Clucer after the purge of the old Băleanu faction. In 1696, he appears as “Costandin Ciorogârlean, Great Clucer,” signing the country’s charters.

Enache Văcărescu (1710 – 1714) – (Uncertain) Toward the end of the reign, it appears that the prince’s son-in-law, Enache (Ianache) Văcărescu, temporarily assumed the responsibilities of Great Clucer in addition to those of treasurer. Being very close to Brâncoveanu, he was likely entrusted with the management of the Court’s material goods, especially in the context of preparations for possible retreats.

Clucer

Sluger

Role: Responsible for procuring and distributing meat for the court and military.
Western analogy: Equivalent to a Master of the Butchery or Provisioner.

Vasilache Văcărescu (ante 1688 – ~1690) – A mid-ranking boyar from the Văcărescu family, Vasilache is mentioned in an older charter as “Vasilache, Great Sluger,” indicating that he held the position of Great Sluger during the transitional period leading up to Brâncoveanu’s reign. After the consolidation of the new reign, he disappears from records (possibly deceased around 1690).

Iorga (Gheorghe) Costescu (1693 – cca. 1708) – He served as Great Sluger of Wallachia during the middle period of Brâncoveanu’s reign. In a 1696 charter, he appears as “Iorga (Costescu), Great Sluger” among the dignitaries of the council.

Dumitrașco Băbeanu (ante 1688 – ~1690) – (Uncertain) At the beginning of the reign, the office of Great Pitar was held by the boyar Dumitrașco (possibly from the Băbeanu family), who appears in a 1665 document as Great Pitar during the time of Antonie Vodă. He likely still held the position when Brâncoveanu ascended to the throne.

Role: Managed granaries, storerooms, and the provisioning of the court with grain and dry goods.
Western analogy: Similar to a Quartermaster or Pantry Master.

Constantin Corbeanul (1692 – cca. 1708) – A member of the Corbeanu family (the same lineage as Ban Vintilă), he is recorded as Great Pitar in Divan lists at the end of the 17th century. In 1696, he appears as “Costandin Corbeanul, Great Pitar,” indicating that he held this position at that time.

Scarlat Văcărescu (1710 – 1714) – (Uncertain) In the final years of the reign, the office of Great Pitar is believed to have been entrusted to Scarlat Văcărescu, a young boyar from the Văcărescu family (related to treasurer Ianache). He likely took on the responsibility of managing grain supplies amid increasing financial obligations to the Ottomans and the defensive preparations of 1711–1712.

Pitar

464081506_1078025607658876_6550988638184216529_n_edited_edited_edited.jpg

Role: The highest-ranking bishop, head of the Orthodox Church in the principality; advisor to the prince and spiritual leader.
Western analogy: Like an Archbishop (e.g., the Archbishop of Canterbury) or Patriarch.

Teodosie Veștemeanul (1668–1672; 1679–1708) – Elected as Metropolitan in 1668, he served almost continuously for about 40 years. He was the spiritual advisor and close counselor of both Șerban Cantacuzino and later Constantin Brâncoveanu. He was also actively involved in supporting Orthodoxy in Transylvania, ordaining five Metropolitans of the region.

Antim Ivireanul (1708–1714) – The successor of Teodosie, he was elected with the direct support of Constantin Brâncoveanu. A Georgian-born bishop of Râmnic, Antim was proposed by Teodosie himself and backed by the prince to occupy the metropolitan seat. On January 28, 1708, Antim Ivireanul was elected Metropolitan of Ungro-Wallachia. During his brief time as metropolitan, he distinguished himself as a great scholar and printer.

Co-evals

Mitropolit

One of the most influential scientists in history, known for his laws of motion and universal gravitation. He published Principia Mathematica (1687), revolutionizing physics.

Isaac Newton (1643–1727)