Should be fixed now.
BirdNES 3: When Worlds Collide
- Thread starter Birdjaguar
- Start date
Abaddon
Deity
Eugh, my stats are jank. As ever I seem to lurch from one problem to another.. I can't string two successful turns together!
Shadowbound
Incorrugible
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2007
- Messages
- 4,079
Oh, sweet, Kalmar is open. Let's go a viking.
Thanks, Kalmar is yours.
The Strategos
Thanatos
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2002
- Messages
- 1,175
To: Philip of Austria
From: Charles, Emperor of France
Seeing your puzzlement at our recent suit we have raised against you, we have designed to answer you with our own hands so that your mind may be at peace. We have brought our suits against you at this time, for this was the first suitable time to do so. For when an Emperor rules, it is not the place of another Prince or King to question how he reigns in his lands, for he answers to God alone and is judged by him. So when the Holy Roman Emperor made a treaty, even if it went against the laws of his land, we would not interfere, nor say a word against it unless the oppressed nobles of Germany petitioned us. But the situation with Philip is different, for it is not his laws which he is following, but the laws of another country, over which he is not the king. For he is now the Archduke of Austria and subject in this matter to the laws of the Holy Roman Empire. Thus we lodged a suit in the court of the Empire, that those entrusted in the interregnum might, while they hold the power, uphold the laws of their land. But this suit was not lodged for our benefit, for we are willing to swear on our most holy relics, even on the relic of the head of the lance which pierced Christs side, that we have not, nor will we, contact the Electors, asking them to vote for us or for any man from France. But rather we were asked by one who felt that the smallness of their voice would cause their words to be ignored but knew if the words came from France they would be heard, for all men know we wish to rule in wisdom and justice.
To: Electors of Holy Roman Empire
From: Guillaume Budé, Maître des Requêtes to His Most Illustrious Emperor Charles of France
You have heard the defense by the party who wishes to justify their lawless deeds. Their arguments lack coherence that we are certain that men of reason such as yourselves will easily dismiss them. Nonetheless, lest they dare say they have won because of our silence, we will speak but a word, though we will keep it short lest we tire you by too often stating the obvious. For even though they proclaim it is against the honor of my lord to bring such a suit against a foremost king of Christendom, forgetting that even David, a man after Gods own heart, was righteously accused by Nathan of violating the law. If then even David could break a law and be rebuked, how much more can any of us who break laws be rebuked by another.
Now those who defend Philip do not argue against the law, for it is clear. Rather they argue that Bohemia is unique and thus does not fall under the law. And so they argue that because Bohemia has several special privileges given to it by law it is not governed by the law of regency. But this argument is nonsense. For no man would argue that men from France and Spain are different, that they speak a different language, have different customs, and exist under different laws. But it does not follow that there cannot be any similarities between the two, that one must have three arms and another three legs. Or that because murder is illegal in one state it must be legal in the other. In the same way just because Bohemia holds some special privileges does not mean that they do not have any of the same laws as the rest of the Empire.
Indeed, the uniqueness of Bohemia in other respects makes it certain that they fall under the law in this respect. For when the law was laid down, all of Bohemias special privileges were enumerated. Yet among those number a different law of regency was not named. Thus it is evident that Bohemia exists under the same law as otherwise it would have been mentioned along with its other special privileges.
If it is possible their defense of the usurper Maximilian is even more incoherent. For they claim that the rightful Duke Francesco cannot be legitimate as he abandoned Milan. Yet they do not mention that the reason he abandoned Milan was because the usurper backed by the Austrians forced him to do so by violence. Would he have been legitimate in Austrias eyes if he allowed himself to be imprisoned, or killed as his father both his father and grandfather by an assassins hand? Indeed is it any wonder to see why he fled from Austria and the usurper when one considers how his family has suffered? For his grandfather died by assassination, leaving his father Gian still a youth. And so a regent was appointed until his maturity. But the regent refused to step down, in his hubris declaring himself the rightful duke. This unlawful usurpation Austria supported. Indeed, if this shows Austrias views towards regency, I fear for the King of Bohemia, lest the Austrian prince attempt to do for himself in Bohemia what he supported in Milan. The rightful duke Gian then came to France for redress, seeing as his liege the Holy Roman Emperor ignored his just pleas. So France gave him money to hire mercenaries, though France herself did not send armies, so that no man could claim she invaded Milan out of greed, to add that territory to her own. But before Gian could be restored to his rightful place he was assassinated, just as his father. So, as is lawful, the ducal throne of Milan went to Gians eldest son, Francesco. But the army of Austria prevented Francesco from being crowned as he ought, instead supporting one who has no legal claim to the ducal throne.
These then are the facts of the case, which make it clear that only Francesco has a rightful claim to the ducal throne of Milan. But Austria would have us believe these facts are so complicated that it would delay the Imperial election to an intolerable degree! But even a child can understand that Francesco is the rightful duke and all others without a claim save for the claim which the might of unlawful tyranny gives.
But France raised this suit before all of you, not as some supposed, because we are ignorant of who is the Imperial Vicar, but rather to bring before you the unlawful practice within the borders of the Empire which some support. For if a man before he is made Emperor ignores the laws of the Empire, why should we suppose once he is made Emperor he will follow all its laws? The partisans of Maximilian would have you believe that the Emperor will decide its legality when it is clear to all that the legality has already been decided by the laws of the land! In the days of Noah evil did not become good simply because all believed their actions to be good, for there was a law above them which judged them. So too does the Imperial law sit above all who would judge it, making the usurpation of the rightful Duke illegal no matter how many acclaim it. It is then the duty of the electors to recognize for themselves the law of the land, and choose for themselves one to rule over them who will fulfill all the requirements of the law, rather than one who ignores all its laws, preferring to rule by their tyrannical pleasure.
From: Charles, Emperor of France
Seeing your puzzlement at our recent suit we have raised against you, we have designed to answer you with our own hands so that your mind may be at peace. We have brought our suits against you at this time, for this was the first suitable time to do so. For when an Emperor rules, it is not the place of another Prince or King to question how he reigns in his lands, for he answers to God alone and is judged by him. So when the Holy Roman Emperor made a treaty, even if it went against the laws of his land, we would not interfere, nor say a word against it unless the oppressed nobles of Germany petitioned us. But the situation with Philip is different, for it is not his laws which he is following, but the laws of another country, over which he is not the king. For he is now the Archduke of Austria and subject in this matter to the laws of the Holy Roman Empire. Thus we lodged a suit in the court of the Empire, that those entrusted in the interregnum might, while they hold the power, uphold the laws of their land. But this suit was not lodged for our benefit, for we are willing to swear on our most holy relics, even on the relic of the head of the lance which pierced Christs side, that we have not, nor will we, contact the Electors, asking them to vote for us or for any man from France. But rather we were asked by one who felt that the smallness of their voice would cause their words to be ignored but knew if the words came from France they would be heard, for all men know we wish to rule in wisdom and justice.
To: Electors of Holy Roman Empire
From: Guillaume Budé, Maître des Requêtes to His Most Illustrious Emperor Charles of France
You have heard the defense by the party who wishes to justify their lawless deeds. Their arguments lack coherence that we are certain that men of reason such as yourselves will easily dismiss them. Nonetheless, lest they dare say they have won because of our silence, we will speak but a word, though we will keep it short lest we tire you by too often stating the obvious. For even though they proclaim it is against the honor of my lord to bring such a suit against a foremost king of Christendom, forgetting that even David, a man after Gods own heart, was righteously accused by Nathan of violating the law. If then even David could break a law and be rebuked, how much more can any of us who break laws be rebuked by another.
Now those who defend Philip do not argue against the law, for it is clear. Rather they argue that Bohemia is unique and thus does not fall under the law. And so they argue that because Bohemia has several special privileges given to it by law it is not governed by the law of regency. But this argument is nonsense. For no man would argue that men from France and Spain are different, that they speak a different language, have different customs, and exist under different laws. But it does not follow that there cannot be any similarities between the two, that one must have three arms and another three legs. Or that because murder is illegal in one state it must be legal in the other. In the same way just because Bohemia holds some special privileges does not mean that they do not have any of the same laws as the rest of the Empire.
Indeed, the uniqueness of Bohemia in other respects makes it certain that they fall under the law in this respect. For when the law was laid down, all of Bohemias special privileges were enumerated. Yet among those number a different law of regency was not named. Thus it is evident that Bohemia exists under the same law as otherwise it would have been mentioned along with its other special privileges.
If it is possible their defense of the usurper Maximilian is even more incoherent. For they claim that the rightful Duke Francesco cannot be legitimate as he abandoned Milan. Yet they do not mention that the reason he abandoned Milan was because the usurper backed by the Austrians forced him to do so by violence. Would he have been legitimate in Austrias eyes if he allowed himself to be imprisoned, or killed as his father both his father and grandfather by an assassins hand? Indeed is it any wonder to see why he fled from Austria and the usurper when one considers how his family has suffered? For his grandfather died by assassination, leaving his father Gian still a youth. And so a regent was appointed until his maturity. But the regent refused to step down, in his hubris declaring himself the rightful duke. This unlawful usurpation Austria supported. Indeed, if this shows Austrias views towards regency, I fear for the King of Bohemia, lest the Austrian prince attempt to do for himself in Bohemia what he supported in Milan. The rightful duke Gian then came to France for redress, seeing as his liege the Holy Roman Emperor ignored his just pleas. So France gave him money to hire mercenaries, though France herself did not send armies, so that no man could claim she invaded Milan out of greed, to add that territory to her own. But before Gian could be restored to his rightful place he was assassinated, just as his father. So, as is lawful, the ducal throne of Milan went to Gians eldest son, Francesco. But the army of Austria prevented Francesco from being crowned as he ought, instead supporting one who has no legal claim to the ducal throne.
These then are the facts of the case, which make it clear that only Francesco has a rightful claim to the ducal throne of Milan. But Austria would have us believe these facts are so complicated that it would delay the Imperial election to an intolerable degree! But even a child can understand that Francesco is the rightful duke and all others without a claim save for the claim which the might of unlawful tyranny gives.
But France raised this suit before all of you, not as some supposed, because we are ignorant of who is the Imperial Vicar, but rather to bring before you the unlawful practice within the borders of the Empire which some support. For if a man before he is made Emperor ignores the laws of the Empire, why should we suppose once he is made Emperor he will follow all its laws? The partisans of Maximilian would have you believe that the Emperor will decide its legality when it is clear to all that the legality has already been decided by the laws of the land! In the days of Noah evil did not become good simply because all believed their actions to be good, for there was a law above them which judged them. So too does the Imperial law sit above all who would judge it, making the usurpation of the rightful Duke illegal no matter how many acclaim it. It is then the duty of the electors to recognize for themselves the law of the land, and choose for themselves one to rule over them who will fulfill all the requirements of the law, rather than one who ignores all its laws, preferring to rule by their tyrannical pleasure.
Agent 89
King
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 978
To: France and the Electors
From: Philip I, Archduke of Austria, Prince of Luxembourg, Duke of Burgundy, Princely Count of Hapsburg, Margrave of Moravia, Regent of Bohemia
Surely, no Christian lord would think to challenge the divorce of the Duke of Orleans, even though Pope Innocent VIII has longer since ascended to heaven. Therefore, we wonder why you would challenge the word of Emperor Maximilian. For by signing the Treaty of Prague, he decreed that he, and subsequently myself, would act as Regent of Bohemia until Louis Jagiellon reaches the age of sixteen. And even though my father has passed away, his word is still law. Once again, should France, or the nation that they claim to speak on behalf of, have wished to challenge the decision of Maximilian, they should have done so in the year of the signing of the Treaty of Prague, not now. This makes me wonder whether the King of France, of whoever makes these accusations, was indeed to cowardly to stand up to my father, and believe that I will be easily scared into accepting their demands. I assure you, this is not the case.
I also assure you that the claims of France towards the validity of my regency in Bohemia are unfounded. Bohemia is an independent kingdom, which lays outside the confines of the Holy Roman Empire. They participate in the election of the Holy Roman Emperor, but other than that, they have no place in the Holy Roman Empire. As an independent kingdom, they are not subject to the laws and customs of the Holy Roman Empire, including the law regarding regencies which the King of France has put forth as his argument. It is perfectly legal for myself, and my father before me to have acted as regents while Louis is but a boy. To say otherwise is pure nonsense. However, I do admit that when it comes to the election of the new Emperor, Bohemia is subject to the customs of the Empire. Since Louis Jagiellon is not yet old enough to rule in his own right, the laws of the Empire state that his tutor must travel to Frankfort in his place and cast the vote of Bohemia. Be assured, I have no intention of interfering with this custom.
I also feel that I cannot fail to point out that even if Charles was correct in his accusations, which he is not, Louis Jagiellon has no uncle of close family member who could act as regent under the laws applying to the Holy Roman Empire, which makes the arguments of France even more unfounded.
To: France, Naples, Genoa
From: Philip, Archduke of Austria, etc.
Austria has no wish to war with her fellow Christians. Now is a time when the once mighty Turk sits on the precipice of defeat and all faithful Christian kings should direct their full energies towards ending the rule of the infidel in Europe, as Austria has endeavored to do for over a decade. To distract the armies of God from victory in the Balkans by causing further war in Italy would be a sin beyond imagining, and I have no wish to anger the heavens. Instead, I wish to strive for peace in Italy. However, it seems that I am continuously faced by opposition by your nations. In the hopes of avoiding continued bloodshed in the Italian Peninsula, and allowing Austria, and those who are pious enough to aid her, to finally end Turkish rule in Europe, I propose a truce to all hostilities in Italy until a later date, when the borders of Christianity have been secured and the rulers of all nations involved in this conflict can sit at the negotiating table and secure peace.
Should my cries for a truce be ignored, I am of course open to compromises suggested by any party that might end conflict in Italy.
To: My Fellow Electors
From: Margrave of Brandenburg: Joachim I Nestor
Dear Friends, please bear the informality of this missive, but I feel it appropriate given our difficult times and weighty task. We have a grave and solemn duty to perform as the new year of our Lord comes upon us: the election of our Emperor. These other troubles regarding the Duke of Milan are not of our jurisdiction and should be left to the kings of France and Austria to resolve in conversation with His Holiness the Pope. The burden of our task is heavy enough without the addition of squabbling Italian Dukes. Once we have a new Emperor, he will be able to join France and Austria in coming to a resolution of this Italian matter if he deems it worthwhile.
Note: All nominations for the HRE (and encouraging gifts for the electors) must be pmed to me by Tuesday Jan 11, so the election can take place and the results announced before Friday when my son, daughter, nieces and nephew arrive for the weekend.
From: Margrave of Brandenburg: Joachim I Nestor
Dear Friends, please bear the informality of this missive, but I feel it appropriate given our difficult times and weighty task. We have a grave and solemn duty to perform as the new year of our Lord comes upon us: the election of our Emperor. These other troubles regarding the Duke of Milan are not of our jurisdiction and should be left to the kings of France and Austria to resolve in conversation with His Holiness the Pope. The burden of our task is heavy enough without the addition of squabbling Italian Dukes. Once we have a new Emperor, he will be able to join France and Austria in coming to a resolution of this Italian matter if he deems it worthwhile.
Note: All nominations for the HRE (and encouraging gifts for the electors) must be pmed to me by Tuesday Jan 11, so the election can take place and the results announced before Friday when my son, daughter, nieces and nephew arrive for the weekend.
Milarqui
Deity
When is the deadline for the orders?
Once the election is finalized you can send orders. I'd like them by the 17th, but as usual, early ones will get something and the remainders will trickle in as I work with the early ones.
Welcome!
LittleBoots
The Bloody Banner
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2006
- Messages
- 1,979
Pope diplo tomorrow. Sorry for absence.
These notes may offer some guidance in soliciting electors to your cause.
Archbishop of Mainz: Cardinal Albert of Hohenzollern
A liberal thinking, but practical man who is deep in debt and relying on indulgences to pay them off. He considers many of Luther’s 95 theses to be heresy. Brother of Joachim I Nestor.
Archbishop of Trier: Richard Greiffenklau zu Vollraths
A mildly reformist Archbishop with a desire for power and prestige. He favors Germans as HRE and is good friends with the King of Bavaria.
Archbishop of Cologne: Hermann of Wied
Reformist minded. Does not support Philip's regency. Wants an emperor who will lead the HRE to its former glory.
King of Bohemia: Louis Jagiellon (child)
Has no opinions and currently will cast the vote of Philip of Austria
Margrave of Brandenburg: Joachim I Nestor
Staunch conservative Catholic with heavy debts; was instrumental in getting Albert Hohenzollern, his brother, installed as Archbishop of Mainz. Likes the idea of himself as HRE. Would rather not be bothered by the affairs of Italy.
Count Palatine of the Rhine: Louis V
Church conservative; easily swayed by money and power.
Duke of Saxony: Magnus I
Religiously liberal and always looking for ways to enhance his position within Germany. Would take the Imperial crown if elected or money to vote another way. Is a meddler in princely politics and supports France’s claims about the Duke of Milan. Is unhappy with the rise in Austrian prestige.
Archbishop of Mainz: Cardinal Albert of Hohenzollern
A liberal thinking, but practical man who is deep in debt and relying on indulgences to pay them off. He considers many of Luther’s 95 theses to be heresy. Brother of Joachim I Nestor.
Archbishop of Trier: Richard Greiffenklau zu Vollraths
A mildly reformist Archbishop with a desire for power and prestige. He favors Germans as HRE and is good friends with the King of Bavaria.
Archbishop of Cologne: Hermann of Wied
Reformist minded. Does not support Philip's regency. Wants an emperor who will lead the HRE to its former glory.
King of Bohemia: Louis Jagiellon (child)
Has no opinions and currently will cast the vote of Philip of Austria
Margrave of Brandenburg: Joachim I Nestor
Staunch conservative Catholic with heavy debts; was instrumental in getting Albert Hohenzollern, his brother, installed as Archbishop of Mainz. Likes the idea of himself as HRE. Would rather not be bothered by the affairs of Italy.
Count Palatine of the Rhine: Louis V
Church conservative; easily swayed by money and power.
Duke of Saxony: Magnus I
Religiously liberal and always looking for ways to enhance his position within Germany. Would take the Imperial crown if elected or money to vote another way. Is a meddler in princely politics and supports France’s claims about the Duke of Milan. Is unhappy with the rise in Austrian prestige.
The Strategos
Thanatos
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2002
- Messages
- 1,175
To: Henry VIII of England; James V of Scotland
From: The Most Christian Emperor, Charles VIII
We claim no authority in judging over other kings. And so we write to you not out of authority but as a Christian brother. On the basis of our mutual submission to our Mother the Church, and to her head, Christ’s Vicar, the Pope, we most strongly urge you to withdraw from the lands you illegally occupy in the New World. For the Pope has given these lands to Spain and Portugal. Now while the Pope has, in his abounding wisdom, suggested the possibility of future revision of that treaty, until such a day it and all its conditions remain in effect. Thus the current colonies are in violation of the Papal degree and as such are an affront to his wishes and authority. But for what reason should the Pope revise the treaty for your benefit when you have already shown yourself to stop your ears towards his words? We see no reason, though perhaps the Pope in his abundant mercy will still consider your words.
From: The Most Christian Emperor, Charles VIII
We claim no authority in judging over other kings. And so we write to you not out of authority but as a Christian brother. On the basis of our mutual submission to our Mother the Church, and to her head, Christ’s Vicar, the Pope, we most strongly urge you to withdraw from the lands you illegally occupy in the New World. For the Pope has given these lands to Spain and Portugal. Now while the Pope has, in his abounding wisdom, suggested the possibility of future revision of that treaty, until such a day it and all its conditions remain in effect. Thus the current colonies are in violation of the Papal degree and as such are an affront to his wishes and authority. But for what reason should the Pope revise the treaty for your benefit when you have already shown yourself to stop your ears towards his words? We see no reason, though perhaps the Pope in his abundant mercy will still consider your words.
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
TO: All Christian Realms
FROM: Juan II, King of Spain and Navarre, Prince of Algiers
CC: Charles VIII, King of France
I am most pleased to announce a royal engagement between the two most pious of kingdoms. Phillipe Orland, crown prince of France and all lands by right of God granted to it, shall be married to Infanta Eleanor, eldest daughter of myself the king of Spain. Further more the future marriage of the Prince of Asturias, Juan, my own son and heir, and young Princess Marie of Charles own blood. As a dowry for the royal engagements, both ways shall the princess neglect their rights to the throne of their motherland and the border province of Roussillon shall be received by Charles VIII. Long may our two kingdoms under our Lord have peace and wealth.
Map:
FROM: Juan II, King of Spain and Navarre, Prince of Algiers
CC: Charles VIII, King of France
I am most pleased to announce a royal engagement between the two most pious of kingdoms. Phillipe Orland, crown prince of France and all lands by right of God granted to it, shall be married to Infanta Eleanor, eldest daughter of myself the king of Spain. Further more the future marriage of the Prince of Asturias, Juan, my own son and heir, and young Princess Marie of Charles own blood. As a dowry for the royal engagements, both ways shall the princess neglect their rights to the throne of their motherland and the border province of Roussillon shall be received by Charles VIII. Long may our two kingdoms under our Lord have peace and wealth.
Map:
Immaculate
unerring
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 7,623
TO: All Christian Realms
FROM: Juan II, King of Spain and Navarre, Prince of Algiers
CC: Charles VIII, King of France
I am most pleased to announce a royal engagement between the two most pious of kingdoms. Phillipe Orland, crown prince of France and all lands by right of God granted to it, shall be married to Infanta Eleanor, eldest daughter of myself the king of Spain. Further more the future marriage of the Prince of Asturias, Juan, my own son and heir, and young Princess Marie of Charles own blood. As a dowry for the royal engagements, both ways shall the princess neglect their rights to the throne of their motherland and the border province of Roussillon shall be received by Charles VIII. Long may our two kingdoms under our Lord have peace and wealth.
Map:
To the Holy See, His Holiness, Pope Gregorious XIII,
From King Henry VIII of England,
This is the way of Spanish piety, unapologetic bribes of land and military alliances, support for political positions. You see no greater evidence of the moral bankruptcy of the Iberians then this. The King of Spain buys French opinion with land and alliances.
When the Kings of Spain and Portugal claim they are most pious, that they do your will in the new world, i see no evidence thereof. I see commercial trading posts, gold and silver, timber and tobacco enriching the coffers of the Iberians.
Indeed, i have heard of not a single great work of Christianity in the New World.
I do not argue that the Spanish or Portuguese did not sign an agreement with your predecessor, merely that they have not lived up to their expectations, namely,
It is time to review the judgement.
Does a general send two hundred soldiers to fight the enemy when seven hundred are ready to fight and die for his cause? And if he does, why? Is it because these two hundred are richest? Are best able to spin a political web to entrap the other five-hundred?
Send the soldiers of Christ to the New World. ALL OF THEM.
Similar threads
