We mustn’t allow them to continue breaking our laws without retribution.
They don’t recognize the authority of this Sejm, or the authority of our King and Queen. They have proclaimed themselves representatives of their culture and land, attempting to steal our peace and usurp our titles. “My lords, our country has long been afflicted by our traitorous brothers and sisters in Lithuania. Parts of the speech have survived to this day, and they are as follow:
The speech was also the first time where King Henry communicated with his subjects exclusively in Polish, without the use of translators. At the time, most of the royal army was preoccupied with the Livonian war, also against Russia, but many believed it to be more important to defeat the Lithuanian first, before continuing the conflict with the Tsardom. On March 4, 1581, King Henry III delivered a speech to the Sejm, requesting the use of the complete royal army in the rebellion. King Henryk III in front of the Polish diet. Russian-heir Tsarevich Ivan Ivanovich wasn’t allowed by his father to command the army, which modern historians believe was a sign that Ivan the Terrible didn’t believe in the possible victory of John Sigismund’s forces. The two thousand men met with John Sigismund’s army of ten thousand, who had been in a stalemate in the surrounding area of the city of Zvyahel, their only major conquest in the war. It’s unlikely that John Sigismund knew about Ivan’s power-hungry nature, for he agreed to those demands. Although his terms were very generous, most modern historians agree that Ivan IV had no intentions of holding his end of the deal, that is, recognizing the Lithuanian independence and not pressing his own claims on the land. An old enemy of Poland, Ivan had written to John Sigismund in 1579, promising his support for the rebellion in exchange for trading deals and substantial payment at the end of the war. In early 1581, two thousand men sent by Tsar Ivan IV of Russia, also known as Ivan the Terrible, entered Lithuania. Keep in I mind who a different surname do not mean automatically different blood. The two grandson of Louis XIV married sisters who were also close relations as they were twice second cousins (one of their grandfathers was Louis XIV’s brother (who had married another first cousin, by the way) while the other was the brother of their maternal grandmother). I wonder why you hate them so much).Īlso Louis XV rejected a girl who was still years away from being able to marry and have children (and paid for that) and that rejection (who was rewarded by sending back the two French girls sent in Spain, one widowed, the other unmarried) was owed to the Duke of Bourbon who wanted Louis XV to start to generate children soon (as he do not wanted the risk of an a Orléans‘ succession).Īnd Bourbons do NOT ,arrived better at all: Louis XIV married a double first cousin, his son married a second cousin (she was Bavarian not Italian and her Italian mother was a first cousin of Louis XIV wh9 appear etis and his wife). You can stop that chain but NOT humiliating Isabella Clara Eugenia in this way (like you are doing with any Habsburg girl you can (see Anne of Austria insulted by her husband who apparently hated and mistrusted her so much to broke the centenary costumes of France, depriving her of the custody of their son and her rightful regency in favour of his over-scheming mother or their aunt Catherine who was declared public enemy by her husband and not allowed be near to her own only child. Also Philip III/IV are a totally different matter than Ernest and Isabella Clara Eugenia. Because Rudolf remained unmarried for years, keeping Philip II and Isabella Clara Eugenia waiting, not rejected her for marrying soon to another bride.
0 kommentar(er)
