Cem's Journey through Europe

So I've finally been reading John Freely's 'Jem Sultan', which goes in to a lot of detail about his travels, and we now have sufficient information to decide how we're going to tweak the timeline to work with what we're writing.

So, historically, Cem and his companions left Anatolia in 1481, and headed to the Mamluk sultans of Egypt for help against his brother. He returned to Anatolia briefly before boarding a ship to Rhodes; and he never saw his homeland again.

He arrived in Rhodes in 1482, and spent only about a month there, before being moved onto Europe. His ship eventually landed in Nice, France, and from there he travelled north. He came to Italy in 1489, to be received by Pope Innocent, Borgia's predecessor.

Since we have just written the Ottomans entering Italy on their way to Rome now, in 1494, I propose that we adjust all other dates by five years; so Cem and his companions fled their capital at Bursa in 1486, arrived in Egypt 1487, Rhodes 1488, and then onwards to Europe.

That leaves six years. I wrote in my first post that they spent two years at Rhodes, but that could be tweaked...does anyone have an opinion on how long we should be at Rhodes as opposed to France?

The current timeline leaves us with the following ages for our characters:

1486 - Sultan Mehmet the Conqueror dies.

Cem: 26
Korkut: 22
Ezel: 12
Evren: 11

1488 - Arrival at Rhodes

Cem: 28
Korkut: 24
Ezel: 14
Evren: 13

1489 - (Korkut and Ezel would have married)

1490 - To France

Cem: 30
Korkut: 26
Ezel: 16
Evren: 15

1494 - To Rome

Cem: 34
Korkut: 30
Ezel: 20
Evren: 19

This tosses up another problem, as I mentioned that both Ezel's children had been born in Rhodes - but there is the possibility that one of them was born on the journey between Rhodes and Nice.

Alternately, we could shorten the stay in Rhodes and have them all born in France.

Any opinions?

I'm thinking also that we could make the princes younger by five years each to keep the change consistent...any objections?