I won't say anything about the ever-lasting "Barcan corruption" issue, as I rather to read what the protagonists involved have to say about it. But if Mendicant protected some rebelled nobles from a realm with which he wanted some kind of peace, that's not a very honourable way of doing politics. Even worse if they really acted in the way Vellos describes. If that's accurate, he protected traitors that acted very strangely towards the realm they joined in first instance. That's not what I would expect from a king that insists so pompously on proving how superior is.
By "!@#$ing Prussians" you mean the Freikorps, it's true that army was crated in the 18th Century. That reminds me of a post I read some time ago about the "generous" use a player did of the swastikas, which are symbols present in ancient cultures from Asia, and even used by the Roman Empire and other Italic peoples before them. I think you won't deny this symbol can't be any more taken out of its recent context, so maybe you are playing down too much about an army that supported the nazism in its more recent history.
This topic is kind of becoming the playground where non-Aurvandilian players seek for an explanation for how things turned out at some point. I've done it myself, and truth is Mendicant's player can use whatever IC argument likes to prove them they're "wrong", but Mendicant did what he liked as he liked (OOC they wanted to keep the regions). If every participant likes that kind of conversation, and likes Medicant to have OOC notoriety, keep on. If I say this is because sometimes it seems there's actually tension in this topic. I guess you knew that, but maybe somebody saves some time with this
