Is it possible for kingdoms to maintain peace between each other throughout 5 centuries?
$begingroup$
So here's the thing.
During the Age of Kings, all the kingdoms in each region of Itheria are at peace for 500 years. They maintain a close relationship with each other and even held councils every 5 years. They trade with each other's resources per month. All the kingdoms have an armed force enough fight against the armies of darkness, but there were no threat against them for almost 500 years. The only treat they face are localized like bandits and wild beasts.
So is it possible for them to maintain peace with each other and remain their power for 500 years?
government peace kingdom
asked 4 hours ago
JustMikaJustMika
524
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
So here's the thing.
During the Age of Kings, all the kingdoms in each region of Itheria are at peace for 500 years. They maintain a close relationship with each other and even held councils every 5 years. They trade with each other's resources per month. All the kingdoms have an armed force enough fight against the armies of darkness, but there were no threat against them for almost 500 years. The only treat they face are localized like bandits and wild beasts.
So is it possible for them to maintain peace with each other and remain their power for 500 years?
government peace kingdom
asked 4 hours ago
JustMikaJustMika
524
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Possible, yes. Likely, no. Five centuries is quite a long time for a kingdom to endure without major modifications, transformations, civil wars and upheavals, and five centuries of peace between multiple independent adjacent kingdoms is unheard of in the entire human history.
$endgroup$
– AlexP
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
It all depends on what you call "peace". I.e. US have not been in a formal war since end of WWII. But they have busy with "peacekeeping", "consulting", "fighting terrorism" almost every year.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Sometimes kingdoms (and other forms of government) are run by folks unfit to rule, who lash out, who feel entitled. Both kingdoms must have either strong institutions to prevent the monarch from misrule, or strong family traditions that prevents a miscreant from taking the throne. Even then, 500 years is a long time - think about the ups and downs of European and Asian royals in a similar window.
$endgroup$
– user535733
48 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
So here's the thing.
During the Age of Kings, all the kingdoms in each region of Itheria are at peace for 500 years. They maintain a close relationship with each other and even held councils every 5 years. They trade with each other's resources per month. All the kingdoms have an armed force enough fight against the armies of darkness, but there were no threat against them for almost 500 years. The only treat they face are localized like bandits and wild beasts.
So is it possible for them to maintain peace with each other and remain their power for 500 years?
government peace kingdom
asked 4 hours ago
JustMikaJustMika
524
$endgroup$
So here's the thing.
During the Age of Kings, all the kingdoms in each region of Itheria are at peace for 500 years. They maintain a close relationship with each other and even held councils every 5 years. They trade with each other's resources per month. All the kingdoms have an armed force enough fight against the armies of darkness, but there were no threat against them for almost 500 years. The only treat they face are localized like bandits and wild beasts.
So is it possible for them to maintain peace with each other and remain their power for 500 years?
government peace kingdom
government peace kingdom
asked 4 hours ago
JustMikaJustMika
524
asked 4 hours ago
JustMikaJustMika
524
asked 4 hours ago
JustMikaJustMika
524
asked 4 hours ago
JustMikaJustMika
524
asked 4 hours ago
JustMikaJustMika
524
524
$begingroup$
Possible, yes. Likely, no. Five centuries is quite a long time for a kingdom to endure without major modifications, transformations, civil wars and upheavals, and five centuries of peace between multiple independent adjacent kingdoms is unheard of in the entire human history.
$endgroup$
– AlexP
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
It all depends on what you call "peace". I.e. US have not been in a formal war since end of WWII. But they have busy with "peacekeeping", "consulting", "fighting terrorism" almost every year.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Sometimes kingdoms (and other forms of government) are run by folks unfit to rule, who lash out, who feel entitled. Both kingdoms must have either strong institutions to prevent the monarch from misrule, or strong family traditions that prevents a miscreant from taking the throne. Even then, 500 years is a long time - think about the ups and downs of European and Asian royals in a similar window.
$endgroup$
– user535733
48 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Possible, yes. Likely, no. Five centuries is quite a long time for a kingdom to endure without major modifications, transformations, civil wars and upheavals, and five centuries of peace between multiple independent adjacent kingdoms is unheard of in the entire human history.
$endgroup$
– AlexP
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
It all depends on what you call "peace". I.e. US have not been in a formal war since end of WWII. But they have busy with "peacekeeping", "consulting", "fighting terrorism" almost every year.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Sometimes kingdoms (and other forms of government) are run by folks unfit to rule, who lash out, who feel entitled. Both kingdoms must have either strong institutions to prevent the monarch from misrule, or strong family traditions that prevents a miscreant from taking the throne. Even then, 500 years is a long time - think about the ups and downs of European and Asian royals in a similar window.
$endgroup$
– user535733
48 mins ago
$begingroup$
Possible, yes. Likely, no. Five centuries is quite a long time for a kingdom to endure without major modifications, transformations, civil wars and upheavals, and five centuries of peace between multiple independent adjacent kingdoms is unheard of in the entire human history.
$endgroup$
– AlexP
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Possible, yes. Likely, no. Five centuries is quite a long time for a kingdom to endure without major modifications, transformations, civil wars and upheavals, and five centuries of peace between multiple independent adjacent kingdoms is unheard of in the entire human history.
$endgroup$
– AlexP
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
It all depends on what you call "peace". I.e. US have not been in a formal war since end of WWII. But they have busy with "peacekeeping", "consulting", "fighting terrorism" almost every year.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
It all depends on what you call "peace". I.e. US have not been in a formal war since end of WWII. But they have busy with "peacekeeping", "consulting", "fighting terrorism" almost every year.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Sometimes kingdoms (and other forms of government) are run by folks unfit to rule, who lash out, who feel entitled. Both kingdoms must have either strong institutions to prevent the monarch from misrule, or strong family traditions that prevents a miscreant from taking the throne. Even then, 500 years is a long time - think about the ups and downs of European and Asian royals in a similar window.
$endgroup$
– user535733
48 mins ago
$begingroup$
Sometimes kingdoms (and other forms of government) are run by folks unfit to rule, who lash out, who feel entitled. Both kingdoms must have either strong institutions to prevent the monarch from misrule, or strong family traditions that prevents a miscreant from taking the throne. Even then, 500 years is a long time - think about the ups and downs of European and Asian royals in a similar window.
$endgroup$
– user535733
48 mins ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The current longest standing treaty is the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance which dates from 1386, so history says yes, it is possible for countries to remain at peace for over 500 years.
Of course Britain and Portugal aren't rubbing shoulders day to day along a common border, but for much of that period were rubbing shoulders on imperial expansion. Something that led to major conflicts between European powers for the most part, but that treaty held.
answered 3 hours ago
SeparatrixSeparatrix
81k31190316
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
+1 Simple answer yet complete, I think. Who knew us Brits actually knew how to be peaceful sometimes?
$endgroup$
– Kallum Tanton
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KallumTanton, remember an alliance is usually the result of mutual war against a third party. In this case the Spanish, French, and Dutch. Nothing really changes.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
32 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A union or federation of countries
You might want to go with a federation of some kind. In this example each kingdom/barony is its own self managed kingdom, but they collectively meet to decide on the legislation that will affect all countries/states. In this way you could have an entity like the EU, or United States. A super country formed from many smaller countries.
The idea of a federation is somewhat flexible, so you could increase or decrease centralized power as needed. For example, no centralized military.
The solidarity of these different countries working together over 500 years comes from the fact that they treat themselves as a single larger entity, and then derive benefits from it. For example economic benefit (free trade with each other, bail outs), military benefit (attack any country and you are attacking the collective), and so on. In your case there is an inbuilt benefit of "us vs them", namely us vs the army of darkness.
A super entity like this would be about as stable as a country. So its possible that it could last 500 years. Although like in all scenarios political and technological change can cause a lot of upheaval.
answered 59 mins ago
Tyler S. LoeperTyler S. Loeper
3,7001726
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It depends. Many kings weren't conquerors, because conquest is an extremly costly act. A reason for war was either:
- Ressource shortage, e.g. hunger, need for ore
- Control, e.g. having control over trade routes, or maybe have access to the ocean for trade
- Religion
- "Race"
- Rivalry
- Ambitious plans for expansions, but as said, not many kings had those ambitions
Now if none of these factors are present in your kingdoms, enduring peace is very likely, as people need a motivation for war.
So yes, it would be possible, given that nothing like natural disasters, plagues, treachery, or any cause of ressource shortage happened over that duration.
answered 4 hours ago
miepmiep
15210
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f138040%2fis-it-possible-for-kingdoms-to-maintain-peace-between-each-other-throughout-5-ce%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The current longest standing treaty is the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance which dates from 1386, so history says yes, it is possible for countries to remain at peace for over 500 years.
Of course Britain and Portugal aren't rubbing shoulders day to day along a common border, but for much of that period were rubbing shoulders on imperial expansion. Something that led to major conflicts between European powers for the most part, but that treaty held.
answered 3 hours ago
SeparatrixSeparatrix
81k31190316
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
+1 Simple answer yet complete, I think. Who knew us Brits actually knew how to be peaceful sometimes?
$endgroup$
– Kallum Tanton
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KallumTanton, remember an alliance is usually the result of mutual war against a third party. In this case the Spanish, French, and Dutch. Nothing really changes.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
32 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The current longest standing treaty is the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance which dates from 1386, so history says yes, it is possible for countries to remain at peace for over 500 years.
Of course Britain and Portugal aren't rubbing shoulders day to day along a common border, but for much of that period were rubbing shoulders on imperial expansion. Something that led to major conflicts between European powers for the most part, but that treaty held.
answered 3 hours ago
SeparatrixSeparatrix
81k31190316
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
+1 Simple answer yet complete, I think. Who knew us Brits actually knew how to be peaceful sometimes?
$endgroup$
– Kallum Tanton
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KallumTanton, remember an alliance is usually the result of mutual war against a third party. In this case the Spanish, French, and Dutch. Nothing really changes.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
32 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The current longest standing treaty is the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance which dates from 1386, so history says yes, it is possible for countries to remain at peace for over 500 years.
Of course Britain and Portugal aren't rubbing shoulders day to day along a common border, but for much of that period were rubbing shoulders on imperial expansion. Something that led to major conflicts between European powers for the most part, but that treaty held.
answered 3 hours ago
SeparatrixSeparatrix
81k31190316
$endgroup$
The current longest standing treaty is the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance which dates from 1386, so history says yes, it is possible for countries to remain at peace for over 500 years.
Of course Britain and Portugal aren't rubbing shoulders day to day along a common border, but for much of that period were rubbing shoulders on imperial expansion. Something that led to major conflicts between European powers for the most part, but that treaty held.
answered 3 hours ago
SeparatrixSeparatrix
81k31190316
answered 3 hours ago
SeparatrixSeparatrix
81k31190316
answered 3 hours ago
SeparatrixSeparatrix
81k31190316
answered 3 hours ago
SeparatrixSeparatrix
81k31190316
81k31190316
$begingroup$
+1 Simple answer yet complete, I think. Who knew us Brits actually knew how to be peaceful sometimes?
$endgroup$
– Kallum Tanton
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KallumTanton, remember an alliance is usually the result of mutual war against a third party. In this case the Spanish, French, and Dutch. Nothing really changes.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
32 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
+1 Simple answer yet complete, I think. Who knew us Brits actually knew how to be peaceful sometimes?
$endgroup$
– Kallum Tanton
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KallumTanton, remember an alliance is usually the result of mutual war against a third party. In this case the Spanish, French, and Dutch. Nothing really changes.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
32 mins ago
$begingroup$
+1 Simple answer yet complete, I think. Who knew us Brits actually knew how to be peaceful sometimes?
$endgroup$
– Kallum Tanton
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
+1 Simple answer yet complete, I think. Who knew us Brits actually knew how to be peaceful sometimes?
$endgroup$
– Kallum Tanton
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KallumTanton, remember an alliance is usually the result of mutual war against a third party. In this case the Spanish, French, and Dutch. Nothing really changes.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
32 mins ago
$begingroup$
@KallumTanton, remember an alliance is usually the result of mutual war against a third party. In this case the Spanish, French, and Dutch. Nothing really changes.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
32 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A union or federation of countries
You might want to go with a federation of some kind. In this example each kingdom/barony is its own self managed kingdom, but they collectively meet to decide on the legislation that will affect all countries/states. In this way you could have an entity like the EU, or United States. A super country formed from many smaller countries.
The idea of a federation is somewhat flexible, so you could increase or decrease centralized power as needed. For example, no centralized military.
The solidarity of these different countries working together over 500 years comes from the fact that they treat themselves as a single larger entity, and then derive benefits from it. For example economic benefit (free trade with each other, bail outs), military benefit (attack any country and you are attacking the collective), and so on. In your case there is an inbuilt benefit of "us vs them", namely us vs the army of darkness.
A super entity like this would be about as stable as a country. So its possible that it could last 500 years. Although like in all scenarios political and technological change can cause a lot of upheaval.
answered 59 mins ago
Tyler S. LoeperTyler S. Loeper
3,7001726
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A union or federation of countries
You might want to go with a federation of some kind. In this example each kingdom/barony is its own self managed kingdom, but they collectively meet to decide on the legislation that will affect all countries/states. In this way you could have an entity like the EU, or United States. A super country formed from many smaller countries.
The idea of a federation is somewhat flexible, so you could increase or decrease centralized power as needed. For example, no centralized military.
The solidarity of these different countries working together over 500 years comes from the fact that they treat themselves as a single larger entity, and then derive benefits from it. For example economic benefit (free trade with each other, bail outs), military benefit (attack any country and you are attacking the collective), and so on. In your case there is an inbuilt benefit of "us vs them", namely us vs the army of darkness.
A super entity like this would be about as stable as a country. So its possible that it could last 500 years. Although like in all scenarios political and technological change can cause a lot of upheaval.
answered 59 mins ago
Tyler S. LoeperTyler S. Loeper
3,7001726
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A union or federation of countries
You might want to go with a federation of some kind. In this example each kingdom/barony is its own self managed kingdom, but they collectively meet to decide on the legislation that will affect all countries/states. In this way you could have an entity like the EU, or United States. A super country formed from many smaller countries.
The idea of a federation is somewhat flexible, so you could increase or decrease centralized power as needed. For example, no centralized military.
The solidarity of these different countries working together over 500 years comes from the fact that they treat themselves as a single larger entity, and then derive benefits from it. For example economic benefit (free trade with each other, bail outs), military benefit (attack any country and you are attacking the collective), and so on. In your case there is an inbuilt benefit of "us vs them", namely us vs the army of darkness.
A super entity like this would be about as stable as a country. So its possible that it could last 500 years. Although like in all scenarios political and technological change can cause a lot of upheaval.
answered 59 mins ago
Tyler S. LoeperTyler S. Loeper
3,7001726
$endgroup$
A union or federation of countries
You might want to go with a federation of some kind. In this example each kingdom/barony is its own self managed kingdom, but they collectively meet to decide on the legislation that will affect all countries/states. In this way you could have an entity like the EU, or United States. A super country formed from many smaller countries.
The idea of a federation is somewhat flexible, so you could increase or decrease centralized power as needed. For example, no centralized military.
The solidarity of these different countries working together over 500 years comes from the fact that they treat themselves as a single larger entity, and then derive benefits from it. For example economic benefit (free trade with each other, bail outs), military benefit (attack any country and you are attacking the collective), and so on. In your case there is an inbuilt benefit of "us vs them", namely us vs the army of darkness.
A super entity like this would be about as stable as a country. So its possible that it could last 500 years. Although like in all scenarios political and technological change can cause a lot of upheaval.
answered 59 mins ago
Tyler S. LoeperTyler S. Loeper
3,7001726
edited 47 mins ago
answered 59 mins ago
Tyler S. LoeperTyler S. Loeper
3,7001726
answered 59 mins ago
Tyler S. LoeperTyler S. Loeper
3,7001726
answered 59 mins ago
Tyler S. LoeperTyler S. Loeper
3,7001726
3,7001726
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It depends. Many kings weren't conquerors, because conquest is an extremly costly act. A reason for war was either:
- Ressource shortage, e.g. hunger, need for ore
- Control, e.g. having control over trade routes, or maybe have access to the ocean for trade
- Religion
- "Race"
- Rivalry
- Ambitious plans for expansions, but as said, not many kings had those ambitions
Now if none of these factors are present in your kingdoms, enduring peace is very likely, as people need a motivation for war.
So yes, it would be possible, given that nothing like natural disasters, plagues, treachery, or any cause of ressource shortage happened over that duration.
answered 4 hours ago
miepmiep
15210
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It depends. Many kings weren't conquerors, because conquest is an extremly costly act. A reason for war was either:
- Ressource shortage, e.g. hunger, need for ore
- Control, e.g. having control over trade routes, or maybe have access to the ocean for trade
- Religion
- "Race"
- Rivalry
- Ambitious plans for expansions, but as said, not many kings had those ambitions
Now if none of these factors are present in your kingdoms, enduring peace is very likely, as people need a motivation for war.
So yes, it would be possible, given that nothing like natural disasters, plagues, treachery, or any cause of ressource shortage happened over that duration.
answered 4 hours ago
miepmiep
15210
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It depends. Many kings weren't conquerors, because conquest is an extremly costly act. A reason for war was either:
- Ressource shortage, e.g. hunger, need for ore
- Control, e.g. having control over trade routes, or maybe have access to the ocean for trade
- Religion
- "Race"
- Rivalry
- Ambitious plans for expansions, but as said, not many kings had those ambitions
Now if none of these factors are present in your kingdoms, enduring peace is very likely, as people need a motivation for war.
So yes, it would be possible, given that nothing like natural disasters, plagues, treachery, or any cause of ressource shortage happened over that duration.
answered 4 hours ago
miepmiep
15210
$endgroup$
It depends. Many kings weren't conquerors, because conquest is an extremly costly act. A reason for war was either:
- Ressource shortage, e.g. hunger, need for ore
- Control, e.g. having control over trade routes, or maybe have access to the ocean for trade
- Religion
- "Race"
- Rivalry
- Ambitious plans for expansions, but as said, not many kings had those ambitions
Now if none of these factors are present in your kingdoms, enduring peace is very likely, as people need a motivation for war.
So yes, it would be possible, given that nothing like natural disasters, plagues, treachery, or any cause of ressource shortage happened over that duration.
answered 4 hours ago
miepmiep
15210
answered 4 hours ago
miepmiep
15210
answered 4 hours ago
miepmiep
15210
answered 4 hours ago
miepmiep
15210
15210
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f138040%2fis-it-possible-for-kingdoms-to-maintain-peace-between-each-other-throughout-5-ce%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Possible, yes. Likely, no. Five centuries is quite a long time for a kingdom to endure without major modifications, transformations, civil wars and upheavals, and five centuries of peace between multiple independent adjacent kingdoms is unheard of in the entire human history.
$endgroup$
– AlexP
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
It all depends on what you call "peace". I.e. US have not been in a formal war since end of WWII. But they have busy with "peacekeeping", "consulting", "fighting terrorism" almost every year.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Sometimes kingdoms (and other forms of government) are run by folks unfit to rule, who lash out, who feel entitled. Both kingdoms must have either strong institutions to prevent the monarch from misrule, or strong family traditions that prevents a miscreant from taking the throne. Even then, 500 years is a long time - think about the ups and downs of European and Asian royals in a similar window.
$endgroup$
– user535733
48 mins ago