Maid of Norway, Queen of Scotland: A Plantagenet Britain Timeline

I was not even defending Richard III. In fact, I dislike him simply because of the fact he overthrew the rightly king, who was his nephew. I was simply referring to how people in that time period would feel about him when it comes to Edward V and Richard.
Well, then you gave me a great opportunity to inform everyone.
 
FYI: You're not allowed to defend Richard III in my threads. House rules, sorry :/
I say what Richard III did was not big of a deal, in the times the event happened that is (in modern times, it is disgusting)
Though I am from Turkey, and our medieval history largely consist of empires who were weakened by infighting between numerous relatives (whether in Anatolia or Central Asia) followed by being finished off by some foreign power and the Ottoman Empire, whose Sultans regularly killed their brothers, nephews, uncles, cousins and in one case, fathers (Yavuz Sultan Selim, the youngest son, overthrew his father Bayezid II and I think he died few weeks after overthrowal)
 
Well, then you gave me a great opportunity to inform everyone.
True. And to be fair, in hindsight, I probably should use Richard II and Henry IV as the example. After all, Henry IV did have to deal with the revolts during his reign even after Richard II died from the starvation while in the prison. Ah, well, learn and live.🤷‍♀️
 
Last edited:
I say what Richard III did was not big of a deal, in the times the event happened that is (in modern times, it is disgusting)
Though I am from Turkey, and our medieval history largely consist of empires who were weakened by infighting between numerous relatives (whether in Anatolia or Central Asia) followed by being finished off by some foreign power and the Ottoman Empire, whose Sultans regularly killed their brothers, nephews, uncles, cousins and in one case, fathers (Yavuz Sultan Selim, the youngest son, overthrew his father Bayezid II and I think he died few weeks after overthrowal)
No, because in the wars of the roses, they didn't kill royal heirs who were still children. Turkey is another matter.
 
Meh, just wanted to say what I think.
That's true. Thank God that Ottomans eventfully stopped that tradition. Of course, it was after one Sultan had his 20 brothers killed, which was simply too much even for general public of Ottoman Empire at the time, and the fact the tradition leaded House of Osman to just two males, both underage, at one point. Yeah, I am happy that the tradition is gone. Yes, I understand that they wanted to avoid the civil wars but it is little overkill, no pun intended, in my opinion.

In any case, let's get on the topic on the thread. House of Osman, at this point of history of the thread, isn't yet powerful enough for Europeans to worry about to my knowledge(with the possible exception of East Roman Empire, but that is besides the point).
 
Last edited:
That's true. Thank God that Ottomans eventfully stopped that tradition. Of course, it was after one Sultan had his 20 brothers killed, which was simply too much even for general public of Ottoman Empire at the time, and the fact the tradition leaded House of Osman to just two males, both underage, at one point. Yeah, I am happy that the tradition is gone. Yes, I understand that they wanted to avoid the civil wars but it is little overkill, no pun intended, in my opinion.
That is true (and you forget to add the fact that one or two of the deaths were literal babies, whose caskets caused a riot among the public) though the replacement was not that great (better than dead bodies of your brothers filling your throne room, but again, frequent and heavy migraine is better than that) as the cage system lead many shehzades to lose their minds (though brother killing was effective in many of their madness)
 
That is true (and you forget to add the fact that one or two of the deaths were literal babies, whose caskets caused a riot among the public) though the replacement was not that great (better than dead bodies of your brothers filling your throne room, but again, frequent and heavy migraine is better than that) as the cage system lead many shehzades to lose their minds (though brother killing was effective in many of their madness)
True.
 
I've been having great fun writing ahead.
piers gaveston.jpg

No context needed, really.
 
I say what Richard III did was not big of a deal, in the times the event happened that is (in modern times, it is disgusting)
Though I am from Turkey, and our medieval history largely consist of empires who were weakened by infighting between numerous relatives (whether in Anatolia or Central Asia) followed by being finished off by some foreign power and the Ottoman Empire, whose Sultans regularly killed their brothers, nephews, uncles, cousins and in one case, fathers (Yavuz Sultan Selim, the youngest son, overthrew his father Bayezid II and I think he died few weeks after overthrowal)
It very much was a big deal in Christian Europe. It’s not the stuff you would boast about.Different rules for Ottomans and Christian Europe.While stuff like that still happen, it’s not something taken for natural like in the Ottoman Empire.As soon as news broke that King John had murdered his nephew for example, his vassals who helped him capture said nephew all ended up defecting to the King of France. The church probably won’t be thrilled too.
 
Last edited:
Top