I believe it would be the Siege of Candia, where Ottoman forces laid siege to forces of the Kingdom of Candia from 1648 to 1669. Ultimately, the Ottomans won what is generally accepted to be the second-longest siege in recorded history.
I was just thinking the other day that having a surviving Plantagenet line on the continent would be very fun.
Any timeline without Richard II is a good timeline.
Depends on who he named as his heir. The will that he wrote up before sailing to Ireland implies that Edmund of Langley is next in line, but any corresponding instrument that may have made this explicit has been lost to history.
The Mortimers were really never seriously in line. It was only ever going to be Lancaster or York and it's just a quirk of history that the Mortimer and York lines merged, and that the 3rd duke of York chose to press his claim through his Mortimer descent.
True enough, though I felt remiss not to mention them. Members of the political elite unaware of Edward III's entail considered the Mortimers to have a reasonable claim (Thomas Walsingham for one). And Ian Mortimer makes a decent argument that Richard II named Roger Mortimer his heir in 1386. Though in typical Richard II fashion, this was likely intended to undermine Henry of Lancaster rather than a sincere expression of Richard II's wishes regarding the crown after his passing.
I don't think it's disputed that Richard II named Roger Mortimer his heir in the 1386 parliament, but also I don't think anyone took him seriously at the time. IIRC, Ian Mortimer's interpretation of events was that the announcement received no attention because everyone already thought of Mortimer of heir, but I just don't think that's the case. The announcement came at a moment of political crisis -- parliament was threatening to depose Richard -- and so Richard's move was more of a threat than anything else. He was basically saying "depose me, and you'll be stuck with a boy, and wouldn't that be worse?" But parliament never backs down -- they still force the reform of his government while making the threat to remove him if he doesn't -- and Richard never seals letters patent to confirm the boy as heir once the crisis has passed. His naming of Mortimer is so insignificant that it's not even recorded in the parliamentary rolls and only a single chronicler mentions it. Richard recognizes Gaunt as heir just a year later.
It's not particularly relevant, but I wonder if York emphasized his mother's line over his father's line because of his father's treason in the Southampton plot? York could have argued his father's attainder was invalid because an illegal king had issued it, but it might not have been a convincing argument (especially since Henry V was a popular king, and Cambridge's scheme so hair-brained).
Maybe, but i think who getting his uncle‘s inheritance would likely restore his rights on the Crown, bypassing the issue of his father. Still the Mortimer claim was likely the stronger of the two and the only one who could be used against the Lancaster
Bourguigne is fertile and had kids with later marriages so Toulouse will not unite with France in this scenario.
There would probably be a separate bureau (Bureau of Moro Affairs) under the auspices of the Department of Interior whose headquarters would be located in either Cotabato or Zamboanga.
