Rule Britannia! - An English AAR

[Lord Valentine]

The Reign of Engelbrecht I. I.(1165-1178)
War, Victory and Death(1172-1178)

To show the german nobility that he had only the best of intentions for Germany and them he gave a total of 10 new Duke titles to german nobles. These actions largely pacificied Germany, after all the former King had not given away such high titles.

In September 1173 Engelbrecht declared war upon the Beydom of Adrianopolis, a small muslim state that had been established after the turkish invasion of the Balkans.
By April 1174 the whole Beydom (Adrianopolis and half the Peleponnes) where conquered and given away to loyal servants of the crown.
In August 1175 the King went to war once again, this time against the Beydom of Sryma, in Asia Minor.
Again the enemy was easily overwhelmed and the land given away.
These actions impressed several nobles so much that they decided to join the realm of the sucessfull Crusader King. These included the Counts of Verona, Thüringen, Besacon and Godrey de Normandy, Duke of Hamsphire, whose familiy had controlled the german baltic coast independantly for over 50 years.
At the begining of 1177 Engelbrecht started out for his final conquest. Engelbrecht claimed the title "Emporer of the Roman Empire" (OOC: Originaly Emporer of Byzantium, I edited the title).
The "Empire had by then allready been reduced to a hand full of provinces in Asia Minor and the Emporer, a boy out of a russian dynastie, controlled one province on the Peleponnes.
Logically Victory was quickly won and Engelbrech proclaimed Emporer. Now after years of war abroad Engelbrecht returned to London.

His first act was to organize a big feast to celebrate his returne. Furthermore there was a big hunting party.
But this was when tragedy struck. During the hunt the King got seperated from the party. In a dark area of the forest he was suddenly faced with a bear running towards. The King did not run but drew his sword and prepeared for the onslaught. Once the bear was in striking range the King delt him a blow but managed only to make it more angry. Now Engelbrecht got hit by the bears powerfull arms, its claws cutting down deep into his flesh.
The bear then stood up onto his two feet to deal the King a deadly blow. It was then that the King mustered all his stength and pushed his sword into the stomach of the bear. Filled with deadly pain the bear stumbled away but died hours later.
The King was soon found and brought to his estate.
For four days he strugled against death until finaly on the 2nd of May he died.
The greatest warrior since William I. had died not in battle but during a hunt aged only 38.
But what was far worse was that he left the realm, having changed the succesion laws to salic consanguity, to his youngest 4 year old son Anselm.
This would be a serious for the stability of the Kingdom.

Here end the chronicles on the reign of Engelbrecht I.

~Lord Valentine~

 

[stnylan]

A twelve year regency! Things could get very interesting...

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

A big empire and a regency, that most of the time leads to a lot of demands from vassals, for more rights, like installing Elective law

Hopefully young Anselm has some good councillors

 

[unmerged(3435)]

A big empire and a regency, that most of the time leads to a lot of demands from vassals, for more rights, like installing Elective law

Hopefully young Anselm has some good councillors

I love Elective Law. It's great. 'From now on, O vassals, the most powerful among you will be heir to the throne! On an entirely unrelated note, I'm granting my son several more Duchies... my intelligent son, that is.'

 

[Lord Valentine]

Well people my AAR has finaly more or less catched up with my actual game. I am still in Anselms reign and hope to finish it tomorrow so that I can give you a first update.
Stay tuned for it everything that has happened up till now is absolutly worth writing.

~Lord Valentine~

 

[unmerged(58610)]

Engelbrecht I came to an unfortunate end. I was looking forward to many more years of his exploits.

Oh no, a regency. I do so hope Anselm is worthy of it. He sounds more at home in a monastery!

 

[Lord Valentine]

Engelbrecht I came to an unfortunate end. I was looking forward to many more years of his exploits.

Yes it's sad that my best King since William had to go this way. After all the chance of the King getting killed in the event is 1%. Lucky me.

Oh no, a regency. I do so hope Anselm is worthy of it. He sounds more at home in a monastery!

Just because he has got the same name like a medieval Pope? :rofl:
No I can allready tell you that he is going to be a great guy once he has growen up...

 

[unmerged(60087)]

Great AAR to read. Keep it up!

 

[unmerged(18239)]

A twelve year regency! Things could get very interesting...

Interesting. 12 year of Stewards and Chancellors

 

[unmerged(51164)]

I am very interested to see how this regency turns out.

 

[Lord Valentine]

I am very interested to see how this regency turns out.

Well I fear you will have to wait a while. I have allready played pretty long but obviously this is going to be my longest reign so far. With a bit of luck I will be through by tomorow and post the first update.

~Lord Valentine~

 

[unmerged(58610)]

I hope Anselm has a nice bearskin rug made out of the bear that died killing his father.

Was there one regent or several at the same time or were there a number of different regencies?

Denmark has a lot to thank that bear for; well, 12 years anyway.

 

[Lord Valentine]

I hope Anselm has a nice bearskin rug made out of the bear that died killing his father.

Was there one regent or several at the same time or were there a number of different regencies?

Denmark has a lot to thank that bear for; well, 12 years anyway.

Regencies in England were handled quite diffrently. Usually the coronation of the monarch signalled that he now had the power to rule. In many cases however (Henry VI. or Edward V. in the 15th century for example) they were still children however and although they held supreme power on the paper they were controlled by their councillers, often close family members.

The over less frequent option was to appoint a "Lord Protector" who saw to it
that rule and order in the realm was kept until the minority was over. Richard, Duke of Gloucester later the infamous Richard III., would be an example for this. Though in this case one can doubt wether he really had a legitimate claim on the protectorate and wether he really used it to the benefit of his King or to speed up his own usurpation attempt.

In my game I think I will chose a mixture of both. Anselm will be formaly crowned but the buisnesses of the day will be taken by a Lord Protector.

And considering the bear and Denmark: Let me put it this way a lot of countries would have been very glad if good ol' Engelbrecht had lived a bit longer rather than face Anselm.

~Lord Valentine~

 

[unmerged(58610)]

Richard, Duke of Gloucester was appointed Lord Protector by Edward IV's will. Richard III was no usurper nor was he infamous except vilified so in Tudor propaganda. Edward IV's son was not crowned.

The position of Lord Protector could become contested. It sounds as though Anselm's was strong enough to deter "competition".

 

[Lord Valentine]

Richard, Duke of Gloucester was appointed Lord Protector by Edward IV's will. Richard III was no usurper nor was he infamous except vilified so in Tudor propaganda. Edward IV's son was not crowned.

The position of Lord Protector could become contested. It sounds as though Anselm's was strong enough to deter "competition".

I was just waiting for a "Ricardian" to start a debatte on this subject!

I have just read the very good biograpgy "Richard III." by Michael Hicks and it gives a very interesting and diverse picture.
For example basically all sources that tell us about Richard beeing mentioned as Lord Protector in Edward IV's will draw heavily on publicationes of Richard himeself or accounts from persons of his inner circle. Furthermore it does not seem logical that Edward IV should appoint him Lord Protector if he also wished his son to be crowned directly after his death. As mentioned in my previous post the coronation marked the point were a monarch no longer needed a "Protector".

A further indicator that speeks against it is that Edward did not mention the post of a Lord Protector in his last will of 1475 when he was about to go to war with France and had to take into account that he could be killed. If he did not wish his then not even 5 year old son to have a Lord Protector why should he have wanted one for his 10 year old son in 1483?

Furthermore I think there is no way around calling Richard ascension to the throne a usurpation.
First of all he seized posetion of the heir to the throne Edward, Prince of Wales, who allthough not fomally crowned yet had allready been declared Edward V. the day after his fathers death. At the same time he had the Kings entourage arrested without any real claim against them.

By doing this and by sucessfull manipulation of the public picture of his person and the picture of the allready hated Wydevill family he managed to reach a recognization of his title as Lord Protector.
His second coup de' état was struck only a month later when he seized Lord Hastings, who he knew as close adviser and friend of Edward IV, would support Edward V., and had him executed without trial. Just a week later he manages to get possesion of Edward IV. second son and sent him together with Edward V. to the Tower of London.

By than the Bishop of Baht and Wells Robert Stillington had started the roumour that Edward V. had allready entered a marriage vow with another woman before the marriage to Elizabeth Wydevill. This would have made the Kings marriage invalid and its offsprings bastards. Again this was very cunning because there had always been roumours of Elizabeth using witchcraft to make the King marry her.
Buckingham manages to get support among the populace and nobility for an accension of Richard III.. Just a day before Richard is formaly crowned he had the Queens brother Lord Rivers, her second son Richard Grey and an old counciller to Edward IV, Thomas Vaughan executed on the same treason charges as Hastings. Again without trial.

What happend to "Princes in the Tower" is open to speculation. They were never seen again so it is likely that they were murderd. The confession of the suspectid murderer Tryel can not be taken to serious because it was extracted on the day before his execution in the Reign of Henry VII.. However he stated that he had been orderd to kill the princes by Richard III..
One can not prove that Richard had the princes murderd. But it would have been a logical continuation of his policies. The princes could have been the legitimate cause for anyone who wished to rebel against Richard. Exspecially as the princes had been disinherited on a very strange ground this danger was very reall in deed and as long as they lived Richard could not feel save on his throne.

I do agree that the Tudor propaganda, exspecially William Shakespeare, made Richard a far more evil creatur than he was. He was often described as caring and loyal towards his friends by his contemporaries. And especially if you look at the vita of Henry VII. you will find that this Tudor was also far from beein an angel. Furthermore it is probably absolute ficton that Richard was hunchbacked. Richard on nearly all acounts appears as a great warrior. He could not have been if he had been as heavily disabled as the tudor historians claim.
Nevertheles Richard was a scrupelos politican. Allready when he established his postion as "Patron\Master of the Northerners" he did use propaganda intimidation and sometimes violence without hesitation.
And after the death of his brother Edward IV. he again took rapid action. It has often been claimed that Richard had to because, as he himeself claimed, the Wydvilles and Hastings were plotting to destroy him. However this must have been a very weak plot in deed, after all they were all taken suprisingly unprepared by Richard. In the end I think Richard was not the monster that Shakespeare shows us in his famous play, but a powerhungry Landlord who knew to how to create a favourable public picture of himeself and discredit his enmies. He did not hesitate to kill those whom he knew would stand against his accension to the throne which at least hints that he might also be able to kill his nephews.
Therefore I think one has to admitt that although the tudorian picture of Richard is probably exagerated his reputation is still rightfully tarnished.

And before I forget it I have reached the final part of Anselms reign and will hopefully soon post the next update.

~Lord Valentine~

 

[unmerged(58610)]

I wondered before my previous post whether you were itching to have a "discussion" about Richard III. Your post confirms that you did. These discussions do not stay civilised. You leave plenty of lines for response. I shall not be drawn. This forum is not the time or place.

Anselm seems to have been a worthy successor to Engelbrecht. I am looking forward to reading about his reign.

 

[Lord Valentine]

I wondered before my previous post whether you were itching to have a "discussion" about Richard III. Your post confirms that you did. These discussions do not stay civilised. You leave plenty of lines for response. I shall not be drawn. This forum is not the time or place.

Anselm seems to have been a worthy successor to Engelbrecht. I am looking forward to reading about his reign.

It's not that I really wanted to be provocativ by mentioning Richard III. it's only that he was the only example I could think of at the time. But you are right I am not going to highjack this thread for a discussion that would belong in the off Topic area.

So just hope that Anselm stays free of evil councillers or other false friends as he begins the longest reign in this AAR so far...

~Lord Valentine~

PS: The main reason for my Post 75 was to demonstrate that I was not mearly quoting tudor propaganda without any scientific approach when I gave the example of Richard III. I ment in now way to insult the work of "Richard III. Society" or those who share their views. In fact sciences ows a lot to them thanks to the massive amount of sources they have presented to the public. Now that I have made my "scientific position" about Richard clear I will refrain from warming up the subject in this thread. If anyone whises a deeper discussion of the matter he can write me a PM or open a thread in the off Topic area.

 

[unmerged(58610)]

Your House of Normandy has remained remarkably free of incompetent kings, false friends and evil counsellors.

King Anselm seems to be the type of monarch who will be a loyal and true friend and awesome on the battlefield. Cross him and your last meal is likely to be your own guts.

 

[Lord Valentine]

Your House of Normandy has remained remarkably free of incompetent kings, false friends and evil counsellors.

King Anselm seems to be the type of monarch who will be a loyal and true friend and awesome on the battlefield. Cross him and your last meal is likely to be your own guts.

Wow I must have got you people really hot on this King! :rofl:
I have never seen so much (positive) speculation about a King before the first post. I will probably download Victoria Revolutions tonight and play it for a while. Nevertheless I am optimistic that I will be finished with Anselm tomorow and post the first update.

~Lord Valentine~

 

[EvilSanta]

Really impressive english empire you have carved out. Engelbrecht dealt good with Germans.

Have you considered changing to gavelkind at some point to make your empire fall apart?

It would really allow great storyline, the war of brothers that is.