This is how Latino dads confront disrespect great show by the way
@LBF522
Жыл бұрын
Regardless his reasons, I would imagine his sons would hate him and never forgive him.
@عليياسر-ذ5ب
Жыл бұрын
His second son Vlad loved him, a mad man, and the King of Hungary killed him
@uzibhai5246
9 ай бұрын
@@عليياسر-ذ5بbro learn history from tiktok the guy assasinated by some group of ottomans
@omerfaruk6082
3 ай бұрын
Sultan Murad II has nothing in common with this actor. The Sultan had delicate facial features, with average height, pinkish white complexion, dark green eyes, auburn hair (so, not bald at all), and had a smiling, generous, kind personality. His personality was praised by even the contemporary Byzantine historians. His miniatures show him to be handsome. He was 40 years old when the Voivode of Wallachia came with his sons to his court. The voivode Vlad II was 7 years older than the Sultan.
@omerfaruk6082
3 ай бұрын
@@zaidkapadia6824 Sultan Murad II was a peace loving, charming Sultan with a very different appearance, not to disrespect the actor.
@brav0wing
Жыл бұрын
Vlad Dracul gave all 3 sons to Murad: Mircea, Vlad and Radu. Mircea stayed prisoner for a short time because Murad released him. Yet Mircea's hate towards the Ottomas was as fierce as Vlad's. You have to understand that this was done not only to protect the life of himself and family (the Hungarians and saxons wanted to kill Vlad Dracul) but to protect Wallachia (from an Ottoman attack). Vlad Dracul was between a rock and a hard place. Nevertheless, Mircea did indeed fought against the Ottomans after his release. At the battle of Varna he was the only one to destroy and sack the Ottoman's right flank and he later attacked the fortress of Giurgiu. There he saw his former jailor and it is said that Mircea went mad and massacred the entire garrison. When the Ottomans sent a force of 300 soldiers to see what was happening, Mircea ambushed them, killed them, stripped the bodies naked and hanged them upside down. You can see from where Vlad got his panache. Vlad Dracul tried to reign him in fearing that the Sultan would kill Vlad and Radu and many believe that at the battle of Varna he didn't help the Hungarians to capture the body of the Polish king and attack further the Ottoman troop because of this fear. All in all, a badass family. They are and will forever remain our heroes.
@mr.tobacco1708
Жыл бұрын
Mircea was never taken by the Ottomans the only true thing in this comment is him taking the fortress. Other things are just pure nationalistic fairy tales about him.
@justjoe942
Жыл бұрын
Thanks for taking the time to explain that; the history of these events (as best as can be determined) out shine any silly fantasy story 'hollowwood' could ever create. People are woefully ignorant to Historiography and the idea that the past cannot be judge by present standards. Anyway, liked the comment; thanks for making it.
@selcuk32adana
11 ай бұрын
hollywood
@captanjames6765
11 ай бұрын
Romanian Fairytales 😂
@andreeailie9053
6 ай бұрын
Amen 🙏🏻 Well said it ❤😊
@zahirhussain5913
Жыл бұрын
Orthodox under Murad-II: ( Around 1443 AD under Ottoman Sultan Murad-II period ) " On all sides ( Pope's allies at Northen Balkan, sharing Ottoman border) there were uprisings against the Ottoman overlords and soon the Turkish garrisons were driven from a number of important castles and fortresses. But it should not be supposed that the Balkan peoples joined in common revolt against Ottoman rule. By prompt payment of the ' harac', the tribute always imposed on them, the Christians of the conquered countries purchase the right to live unmolested in their faith and to maintain their customs and many of their institutions.......Those who paid their taxes fully and punctually enjoyed a life scarcely different from that of pre-Ottoman ( Roman or Byzantine) times. Such, at least, was the case in the fifteenth century. It was only much later that bribery, extortion, blackmail, and usury made their appearance in the Ottoman provinces, that the officials, often spurred by insatiable greed, began to suck the blood of the population, and that all life was poisoned by deception and distrust. But this was in the decadence of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries; conditions were very different under Murad II, who, as we have noted, was respected even among his adversaries for his sense of justice. Thus it was not so much the people who rebelled against the new masters ( muslims) as the would-be rulers, who feared for their lands as well as for those privileges and liberties which they still retained." Book: Mehmed the Conqueror and his time Author: Franz Babinger Edited: William C Hickman Translator: Ralph Manheim Edition: 1959 Page: 26,27
@самозванец-й8д
Жыл бұрын
The romanian Vaivode is a gypsy lmaooo
@warscreamon
Жыл бұрын
That's how people consider Romanians :D
@brav0wing
Жыл бұрын
Some Romanians have a darker tone skin. That doesn't mean that they are gypsies. Some Ottomans (Turks) had darker tone skin and settled in Dobrogea. They mingled with many locals and hence the darker tone skin.
@warscreamon
Жыл бұрын
@@brav0wing People comes in every size, shape and color I guess, not a choice after all.
@aspieanarchist5439
Жыл бұрын
There are Romani in Romania but Romani come from the lower classes of the Achamaenid,Bactrian and Persian Empires(They were Hindus who were sold to Persian Zoroastrians and Coptic Egyptians as slaves and many of them converted to Christianity to be accepted in North Africa and Europe after the Anglicised and feudalistic government of their native India rejected them as 'untouchables')whereas Romanians are descended from the Thracians,Dacians,Moldavians and Wallachians, Hellenized and Romanized Bulgarians,Ukrainians,Austro-Hungarians,Serbians,Croatians,Bosnian-Herzegovinans,Bohemians and Belarusians.
@islammehmeov2334
Жыл бұрын
@@aspieanarchist5439 and in reality romanias are GYPSY and NOTING more)
@zahirhussain5913
Жыл бұрын
Pl read this history ; ( i ). " The main reason for Ottaman success , however , was the development of stable and permanent institutions of government that transformed a tribal polity into a workable state ". ( ii ) " The Ottamans utilized all human resources in their emirate and quickly learned skills in bureaucracy and diplomacy ........ They also did not slaughter every Christian in their path ; rather , they encouraged the Christian inhabitants of the countryside and the towns to join them . Islamic law and tradition declared that enemies who surrendered on demand should be treated with tolerance . ( iii ). " The Christians of Bithynia were obliged to pay the ' harac ' , or capitation tax , for the privilege of being tolerated , but this was no more burdensome than the taxes they had paid to the Byzantine government , which had neglected their interests . Once they had made the decision to surrender or defect , the Byzantine population resigned to their fate ". " Some Christians converted to Islam upon joining the Ottamans ; however, this was not demanded . Many local Christians even participated in Ottaman raids against Byzantium ". BOOK : Encyclopaedia of the Ottoman Empire . AUTHOR : Gabor Agoston and Bruce Masters . Edition : 2009 page -109 . "Existing sources , such as the 25th century Ottoman census records , suggest that the earliest converts to Islam in the Balkans came from the ranks of the Balkan nobility and military elite that could supply the Ottomans with the manpower ............. BOOK : Encyclopaedia of the Ottoman Empire . AUTHOR : Gabor Agoston and Bruce Masters . Edition : 2009 page -146 .
@Pionullegionar
Жыл бұрын
Captured*
@alexandrupreda1994
9 ай бұрын
In this visualisation of that moment, i can'timaginate what a hard decision wash for the father to make/accept this proposal and for the sons to just take it. Afthat seen this moment i despice Radu the Handsome even more. He whas the one who accepted to keep paying the tribute and keep friendly relationship whit the boiards. He simply accepted to be send to Constantinopole, rule Wallachia in Ottoman favor along whit the nobility who kill his own father and didn't want to learn from his older brother Vlad actions in Wallachia. That why his brother later Vlad, will kill him and come the 3 time in power.
@adrianamihalache8160
Жыл бұрын
♥️💛💙🇷🇴🇷🇴🇷🇴
@islammehmeov2334
Жыл бұрын
🇹🇷☪️💪☝️
@zahirhussain5913
Жыл бұрын
The Ottamans set such a good example as pacific conquerors that they won the confidence of many former Byzantine subjects . For example , when Nicaea fell , Orhan allowed all who wanted to leave the city to depart freely , taking with them their holy relics , but few availed themselves of the chance . No reprisals were taken against those who had resisted , and the city was left to manage its internal affairs under its own municipal government . BOOK : Encyclopaedia of the Ottoman Empire . AUTHOR : Gabor Agoston and Bruce Masters . Edition : 2009 page -109 . And Go through sultan salahuddin ayyubi history . He showed mercy while retake Jerusalem in 1187 AD . AND Recently , Taliban showed mercy towards western Christian club occupied force . Anyone can show a such example from Pope world? " The inhabitants ( of nicaea ) surrendered not from starvation or defeat but from a calculation of their own best interests. They were quickly and willingly incorporated into the growing Osmanli nation. Only eight years after the fall of Nicaea, the Patriarch of Constantinople was shocked to learn that many of the citizens of this once great Christian city had already abjured their Orthodox faith and embraced Islam. In 1339 and 1340 he addressed encyclicals to them for the salvation of their souls, but it was too late. " BOOK : The Last Centuries of Byzantium 1261-1453. page - 171 AUTHOR : Donald M. Nicol So , conversion by Ottomans not forced but the Greek Christian embraced Islam. "The Osmanlis did not therefore slaughter every Christian 'miscreant' in their path. Rather they encouraged the Christian inhabitants of the countryside and the towns to join them. Islamic law and tradition declared that enemies who surrendered on demand should be treated with tolerance. The Christians of Bithynia were obliged to pay the haradj or capitation tax for the privilege of being tolerated, but this was no more burdensome than the taxes they had paid to the Byzantine government which had neglected their interests. Once they had made the decision to surrender or defect the Byzantine population did not find the change of masters too distressing. The inducements were often strong for the Osmanlis wanted to increase their numbers. A band of Catalans even went over to them in 1304. Some Christians went all the way with the conquerors and were converted to Islam. But this was not demanded of them, for all who entered the service of Osman, Turks or Greeks, became part of· the same nation and were collectively known as Osmanlis. It was because they began to look to the future instead of living from day to day that the Osmanlis prospered when the other emirates declined. BOOK : The Last Centuries of Byzantium 1261-1453. page - 146 AUTHOR : Donald M. Nicol EDITION : Second edition ( 1999 )
@zahirhussain5913
Жыл бұрын
Peace lover, Ottoman Sultan Murad - II. We have already noted that not only the Ottoman but also the Byzantine chroniclers accord the highest praise to the justice and mildness, honesty and forthrightness of Murad II, to mention only the principal traits of his character. Occasionally this emphasis on the bright side of the sultan's nature has been explained as an effort to paint as dark a picture as possible of his successor, destroyer of the remnant of the Byzantine Empire. But when we examine these historians' words more closely, we see that they were meant in all sincerity. "Sultan Murad," observes Chalcocondylas ( Contemporary historian ), for example, "was a man who loved law and justice and had fortune on his side. He waged war only in self-defense. He attacked no one unjustly. But when he was attacked by others he took up arms. If no one provoked him, he took no pleasure in campaigns, but the reason for this is not to be sought in laziness. For when it was necessary to defend his empire, he did not fear to set out even in winter, nor did he measure the dangers and difficulties attending his undertakings." Ducas( contemporary historian ), probably the most reliable of the Byzantine annalists, said to be a man enamored of the truth, gives special emphasis, in his judgment of Murad II, to the loyalty with which the sultan observed his treaties with the Christian powers, and stigmatizes the failure of the Christians always to exhibit the same virtue, as exemplified by their breach of the peace of Szeged. "Murad kept his given word,'' writes Ducas, "and not only to those of his own people and faith, for he never violated the treaties he had concluded with the Christians; when the Christians transgressed against the treaties and broke their given word, this did not escape the eye of God, which sees the truth. His just punishment befell them. But His wrath was not long lived, for the barbarian did not follow up his victories. He did not desire the total destruction of any people. And when the defeated sent envoys to sue for peace, he gave them a friendly reception, granted their plea, laid down the sword, and went the ways of peace. For this reason also the Father of Peace granted him to die in peace and not by the violence of the sword." Book: Mehmet the Conqueror and his time Edited: William C Hickman Translator: Ralph Manheim Edition: 1959 Page: 61,62
Пікірлер: 32