How to reunite Poland?

[Jan Olbracht]

OTL reunification which resulted in Władysław Łokietek on the throne (he had insane amount of luck, but was was good for him wasn't necessarily good for the Kingdom) was far from optimal and ended with significant territorial loses.

Challenge is to restore Poland in better shape after period of fragmentation with PoD no earlier than battle of Legnica (1241).


My take:

1) Reduce number of Silesian Piast. There were too many of them. Lets say, that Konrad, son of Henry the Pious, joined clergy like it was intended and became bishop of Passau.

2) Bolesław V is not the Chaste. Lesser Poland, unlike Greater Poland, Mazovia or Silesia failed to develop its own Piast line as rulers of Kraków either were deposed, died childless or left underaged sons. If Bolesław V left issue, succession in Kraków should be less chaotic.

So lets say Bolesław has kids with Kinga of Hungary, born around 1250

-son (Leszek) married to daughter of Przemysł I of Poznań.

-daughter (Salomea) married to Henryk Brzuchaty/Henry the Fat of Silesia

Przemysł II dies without sons around 1300 (from natural cases or accident, not from assassination) so Leszek II of Kraków, as his sister's husband, succeedes him, Leszek rules Lesser and Greater Poland + Pomerelia and is backed by archbishop of Gniezno Jakub Świnka, big supporter of reunification. Leszek's sons happen to predecease him and thus he is in turn succeeded by nephew, son of Salomea and Henry the Fat (*Bolesław VI*) who should control most of Silesia at the time (to strenghten his claim to Greater Poland Bolesław VI could marry Przemysł II's daughter).

It leaves Mazovia and Cuiavia, but with richest and most populous provinces under his direct control Bolesław VI should easily subjugate poor Mazovian cousins.

@Zygmunt Stary

 

[Zygmunt Stary]

1) Reduce number of Silesian Piast. There were too many of them. Lets say, that Konrad, son of Henry the Pious, joined clergy like it was intended and became bishop of Passau.

I agree with that, Silesia was richest and one of the most populous provinces and it's loss hurted a lot and reducing number of Silesian Piasts would likely help to keep in Poland.

2) Bolesław V is not the Chaste. Lesser Poland, unlike Greater Poland, Mazovia or Silesia failed to develop its own Piast line as rulers of Kraków either were deposed, died childless or left underaged sons. If Bolesław V left issue, succession in Kraków should be less chaotic

Not so much with that, Casimir the Just (direct ancestor of Bolesław V) benefitted from breach of Bolesław the Wrymouth's succesion law which was one of the reasons cancerous system of elective monarchy spread it's roots in Poland, IMHO if other Piast line reunified the country, preferably defeating Cracovian forces and ending up negotiating with nobles from the position of force, which would reduce their influence on reunified state and thus would drift it into solidifying hereditary monarchy. Simply electing rulers from the same family doesn't really mean anything (also hereditary claim Elbow-High and his descendants had is likely influence of Greater Polish custom), Jagiellons were elected and at the same time their subjects did anything in their power to solidify election as law. IMHO it's the best if Leszek the White and his line suffered some crushing military defeat, taking away Cracow from them - that would be step towards less chaotic succesion. Maybe if as you said Konrad, son of Henry the Pious joined clergy and Boleslaus the Horned (Rogatka) died before his father, leaving capable Henry the White as heir of Silesia that'd be possible? Bonus points if Przemysł I and Boleslaus the Pious somehow die also, than Silesia-Greater Poland block should be capable of dealing with Lesser Poland and Bohemian alliance would counter Hungarian connections of Kraków nobles. Sons of Henry the Pious used "Polish" titles so good chances they maintained claim to entire Poland based on hereditary succesion laws (I'll send you article which I am basing my claims on in priv, as I don't have enough time to translate it into English and I'd need to do so if I posted it there, also it's unlikely that someone else besides us would be interested).

 

[Elfwine]

I'm interested (not familiar enough with Poland of the period to add very much, but interested).

No need to worry about translating it on my behalf though if time is an issue.

Does this alternate reunification have much to worry about as far as conflict with the Teutonic Knights?

 

[Jan Olbracht]

I agree with that, Silesia was richest and one of the most populous provinces and it's loss hurted a lot and reducing number of Silesian Piasts would likely help to keep in Poland.



Not so much with that, Casimir the Just (direct ancestor of Bolesław V) benefitted from breach of Bolesław the Wrymouth's succesion law which was one of the reasons cancerous system of elective monarchy spread it's roots in Poland, IMHO if other Piast line reunified the country, preferably defeating Cracovian forces and ending up negotiating with nobles from the position of force, which would reduce their influence on reunified state and thus would drift it into solidifying hereditary monarchy. Simply electing rulers from the same family doesn't really mean anything (also hereditary claim Elbow-High and his descendants had is likely influence of Greater Polish custom), Jagiellons were elected and at the same time their subjects did anything in their power to solidify election as law. IMHO it's the best if Leszek the White and his line suffered some crushing military defeat, taking away Cracow from them - that would be step towards less chaotic succesion. Maybe if as you said Konrad, son of Henry the Pious joined clergy and Boleslaus the Horned (Rogatka) died before his father, leaving capable Henry the White as heir of Silesia that'd be possible? Bonus points if Przemysł I and Boleslaus the Pious somehow die also, than Silesia-Greater Poland block should be capable of dealing with Lesser Poland and Bohemian alliance would counter Hungarian connections of Kraków nobles. Sons of Henry the Pious used "Polish" titles so good chances they maintained claim to entire Poland based on hereditary succesion laws (I'll send you article which I am basing my claims on in priv, as I don't have enough time to translate it into English and I'd need to do so if I posted it there, also it's unlikely that someone else besides us would be interested).

Bolesław V was quite popular, so his son would likely succede him anyway.

But Silesian conquest by Henryk Probus on steroids is option as well. Assuming, that Konrad is a bishop of Passau and Bolesław Rogatka has no sons, then Probus rules whole Lower Silesia and (as Henryk Brzuchaty does not exist) may be married to daughter of Bolesław Pobożny of Kalisz and it would give him claim to Greater Poland. Thus he could take Kraków by force and then inherit Greater Poland + Pomerelia after death of Przemysł II.

 

[Jan Olbracht]

Such Poland would be Silesian centered. Silesia was richer and more populous than Lesser Poland, so power of Lesser Poland magnates would be diminished.

And as Lower Silesian Piasts were oldest Piast branch they may develop something like Salic Law to justify their domination over younger lines of Upper Silesian, Cuiavian and Mazovian lines.

 

[Arkenfolm]

I had this idea when I was reading through this material earlier. Could Wenceslaus III of Bohemia not be assassinated on the eve of his invasion of Poland, succeed at his invasion, subdue Poland (and maybe Wladyslaw the Elbow High gets killed in the process or dies in a dungeon), and then die a few years later anyway without a male heir given he was an alcoholic? Then Boleslaw III of Legnica, who was Wenceslaus III's brother-in-law, can ally with the Luxembourgs (or maybe the Habsburgs if Albert I doesn't get assassinated like OTL) and try and grab Poland for himself. Since Wenceslaus would have crippled many contenders and Boleslaw has the benefit of being an heir to the prior king AND the HRE's support, then he has plenty of legitimacy and an easy path to pick up the pieces of Poland.

 

[Zygmunt Stary]

Bolesław V was quite popular, so his son would likely succede him anyway.

But Silesian conquest by Henryk Probus on steroids is option as well. Assuming, that Konrad is a bishop of Passau and Bolesław Rogatka has no sons, then Probus rules whole Lower Silesia and (as Henryk Brzuchaty does not exist) may be married to daughter of Bolesław Pobożny of Kalisz and it would give him claim to Greater Poland. Thus he could take Kraków by force and then inherit Greater Poland + Pomerelia after death of Przemysł II.

Doesn't give anything as far as stable succesion is concerned, Jagiellons were already popular and succeeding each other and it caused the abomination in form of viritim election.
I think Henry the White, Probus's father being only heir of Henry the Pious + Greater Polish dukes (Premysl I, Boleslaus the Pious) meeting an unfortunate accident would be better POD than Henryk Probus, tho Henryk Probus is better than line of Leszek the White being the one to succeed.

Such Poland would be Silesian centered. Silesia was richer and more populous than Lesser Poland, so power of Lesser Poland magnates would be diminished.

And as Lower Silesian Piasts were oldest Piast branch they may develop something like Salic Law to justify their domination over younger lines of Upper Silesian, Cuiavian and Mazovian lines.

According to article I've sent you on priv they tried to do so IOTL (very likely) and that was Bolesław the Wrymouth's will (that I am torn on, on the other hand the arguments look sensible, on the other one, culturally similar Bohemia and Rus' all practiced agnatic seniority).

I had this idea when I was reading through this material earlier. Could Wenceslaus III of Bohemia not be assassinated on the eve of his invasion of Poland, succeed at his invasion, subdue Poland (and maybe Wladyslaw the Elbow High gets killed in the process or dies in a dungeon), and then die a few years later anyway without a male heir given he was an alcoholic? Then Boleslaw III of Legnica, who was Wenceslaus III's brother-in-law, can ally with the Luxembourgs (or maybe the Habsburgs if Albert I doesn't get assassinated like OTL) and try and grab Poland for himself. Since Wenceslaus would have crippled many contenders and Boleslaw has the benefit of being an heir to the prior king AND the HRE's support, then he has plenty of legitimacy and an easy path to pick up the pieces of Poland

Well, if he subdued Poland and lived few years younger without male heir he could make Boleslaus III of Legnica his heir in Bohemia as well, due to him being Wenceslaus's brother in law, at that point (earlier unification with more stable state is different case) sticking with Bohemia is preferable, because it's strong enough to help Poland, while difference between Bohemians and Poles wasn't striking, probably comparable to that between Germans from Bavaria and Germans from Saxony.

 

[Jan Olbracht]

while difference between Bohemians and Poles wasn't striking, probably comparable to that between Germans from Bavaria and Germans from Saxony.

And certainly smaller than between Provence and Normandy. If French nation is possible, then Polish-Bohemian nation is possible too.

 

[marcinL]

And certainly smaller than between Provence and Normandy. If French nation is possible, then Polish-Bohemian nation is possible too.

Parisians subjugated the rest of the country and forced their culture on it, didnt they?

 

[Zygmunt Stary]

And certainly smaller than between Provence and Normandy. If French nation is possible, then Polish-Bohemian nation is possible too.

Actually, Provencal is langue d'oc so more distantly related to Parisian than langues d'oil, difference between Provencal and standard French is more comparable to difference between medieval Polish and at least western part of Eastern Slavic language (Old Belarussian/Old Ukrainian).