Zbigniew Oleśnicki, bishop of Cracow and first Polish cardinal, was prominent figure in Poland's politics during late Władysław II's reign and reign of his young son Władysław III. Oleśnicki was ambitious and capable man, but his actions caused lots of problems for rulers of Poland, starting with controversy over rights of Jogaila's sons to the Polish throne-Oleśnicki denied them hereditary laws to the throne of Poland-they were born from non-dynastic marriage, when their older half-sister with Piast blood was still alive. Despite this there was still significant support for hereditary monarchy in Poland, although camp supporting elective monarchy, with powerful Oleśnicki on their side, prevailed. So if Oleśnicki is regalist instead and support Jogaila in his struggle to confirm rights of his sons to the Crown, Jogaila may be successful. In such situation Jogaila would not support Vytautas' coronation plans (IOTL King decided, that it is good idea to strenghten his negotiation position with Polish Royal Council, if Jogaila has bishop Oleśnicki on his side and managed to officially make his son heir of the Kingdom, there would be no need for this. Thus all that mess with Vytautas' coronation would be butterflyied away). That is first change. That is first change. Other changes in Oleśncki's behaviour would be:
-his approach towards religion (including his attitude towards Hussites) is more pragmatic than IOTL. His ITTL actions are motivated more by Poland's interest.
-Oleśnicki is against Władysław III's Hungarian adventure, seeing it as something, that would distract Poland's attention from Baltic. Thus Władysław III would not accept Hungarian offert and would not became King of Hungary. His main counter-candidate in Hungary was Lazar Branković. So would we see civil war between Lazar and Elizabeth of Luxembourg instead of OTL war between Elizabeth and Władysław? @Fehérvári Without need to fight war in Hungary Władysław would not ruin Poland's treasure and Royal domain would not be reduced like IOTL, when King needed cash in hurry, thus he has given lots of his lands to nobles as lien and never get these lands back).
-Oleśnicki convince Władysław to respect conditions of Union of Horodło and to recognize his younger brother Kazimierz as Grand Duke of Litghuania (while Władysław would keep title of Supreme Duke of Lithuania).
-When rebellion against Teutonic Order starts in Prussian towns Oleśnicki fully supports Poland's entry to the war against TO. And without royal treasure being emptied King would have money to hire mercenaries, thus Teutonic Order would be finished quickly and disaster of Chojnice would be avoided.
@krieger
 

krieger

Banned
Zbigniew Oleśnicki, bishop of Cracow and first Polish cardinal, was prominent figure in Poland's politics during late Władysław II's reign and reign of his young son Władysław III. Oleśnicki was ambitious and capable man, but his actions caused lots of problems for rulers of Poland, starting with controversy over rights of Jogaila's sons to the Polish throne-Oleśnicki denied them hereditary laws to the throne of Poland-they were born from non-dynastic marriage, when their older half-sister with Piast blood was still alive. Despite this there was still significant support for hereditary monarchy in Poland, although camp supporting elective monarchy, with powerful Oleśnicki on their side, prevailed. So if Oleśnicki is regalist instead and support Jogaila in his struggle to confirm rights of his sons to the Crown, Jogaila may be successful. In such situation Jogaila would not support Vytautas' coronation plans (IOTL King decided, that it is good idea to strenghten his negotiation position with Polish Royal Council, if Jogaila has bishop Oleśnicki on his side and managed to officially make his son heir of the Kingdom, there would be no need for this. Thus all that mess with Vytautas' coronation would be butterflyied away). That is first change. That is first change. Other changes in Oleśncki's behaviour would be:
-his approach towards religion (including his attitude towards Hussites) is more pragmatic than IOTL. His ITTL actions are motivated more by Poland's interest.
-Oleśnicki is against Władysław III's Hungarian adventure, seeing it as something, that would distract Poland's attention from Baltic. Thus Władysław III would not accept Hungarian offert and would not became King of Hungary. His main counter-candidate in Hungary was Lazar Branković. So would we see civil war between Lazar and Elizabeth of Luxembourg instead of OTL war between Elizabeth and Władysław? @Fehérvári Without need to fight war in Hungary Władysław would not ruin Poland's treasure and Royal domain would not be reduced like IOTL, when King needed cash in hurry, thus he has given lots of his lands to nobles as lien and never get these lands back).
-Oleśnicki convince Władysław to respect conditions of Union of Horodło and to recognize his younger brother Kazimierz as Grand Duke of Litghuania (while Władysław would keep title of Supreme Duke of Lithuania).
-When rebellion against Teutonic Order starts in Prussian towns Oleśnicki fully supports Poland's entry to the war against TO. And without royal treasure being emptied King would have money to hire mercenaries, thus Teutonic Order would be finished quickly and disaster of Chojnice would be avoided.
@krieger

If Oleśnicki supports Jogaila and hereditary rights of his dynasty and young Władysław stays in Cracow, Lithuanians wouldn't proclaim Casimir separate Grand Duke, because they would fear Polish backlash. IOTL, Władysław was going to Buda and Lithuanian magnates thought that he is going to neglect Poland and it's interests in favor of Hungary (they turned out to be completely right about this), ITTL Lithuanians have no hope for such a situation, so they would be afraid of Polish anger and not proclaim Casimir. Casimir will stay his brother's governor as Władysław intended. Regarding Vytautas's coronation, the matter is more complicated than it seems to be. But to fully acknowledge this, we need to come back to a very beginning of Jogaila's rule. To Krewo. In Krewo, Jogaila promised Polish estates to subjugate his Ruthenian and Lithuanian lands to Polish crown (he kinda gambled, because it was not guaranteed that Gediminids will stay on throne after him). And, at first these promises were fulfilled. Lithuanian princes (brothers of Jogaila and Keystutovichi) were not only pledging allegiance to Jogaila and Hedwig, but also to the Polish state (Corona Regni Poloniae) itself. Vytautas only gained a promise of full incorporation being enacted after his death (and as a Grand Duke of Lithuania, he was a subject of Polish king). Vytautas tried to obtain crown, because it would mean that Regnum Lithuaniae is no longer subordinate to Regnum Poloniae. He'd most likely still try to be crowned King, but he wouldn't have Jogailas support. Regarding Hungary, Lazar doesn't have such a military force as Vladislaus III had. Vladislaus III used Polish troops, which proved their qualities fighting with TO twice and crushing it twice - one time near Grunwald (Tanneberg) and other time (during Vlad's lifetime) near river Święta. Poland itself, while not a wealthiest country in Europe was far from shithole after Casimir's III and Jogaila's rule. Serbia was constantly ruined by Ottomans and internal struggles, and I doubt that Lazar will have enought troops to fight for Hungarian throne. In addtion, Vladislaus had capable advisors like Mikołaj Lasocki, who was extremely succesful in convincing Hungarian nobility to vote for Vladislaus. Lazar doesn't have them, so I assume that Hungarian diet would after some time accept Elizabeth's coronation of Ladislaus the Posthumous and let him (or rather his mother rule).
 
Still, Ladislaus the Posthumous was not yet born when Hungarians offered throne to Vladislaus and they could not be sure that Queen Elizabeth would give birth to a son, thus even if Lazar eventually lost his struggle he would still be claimant to the throne for a while.
 

krieger

Banned
Still, Ladislaus the Posthumous was not yet born when Hungarians offered throne to Vladislaus and they could not be sure that Queen Elizabeth would give birth to a son, thus even if Lazar eventually lost his struggle he would still be claimant to the throne for a while.

I'd say that he would be elected but after the birth of a son, Elizabeth would force Lazar to abdicate.
 
I'd say that he would be elected but after the birth of a son, Elizabeth would force Lazar to abdicate.
At least with child King there would be less crusading and no Varna. If Ladislas the Posthumous still dies like IOTL (and marriage of his sister with Polish King still happens-that would be seen as good way to secure peace at Poland's southern border before expected war with TO) situation in Bohemia and Hungary would be interesting-Vladislaus III, having more cash than Casimir IOTL, defeated TO quickly in 1454. In 1457 he has free hand in the south and could claim the thrones of his brother-in-law.
 

krieger

Banned
At least with child King there would be less crusading and no Varna. If Ladislas the Posthumous still dies like IOTL (and marriage of his sister with Polish King still happens-that would be seen as good way to secure peace at Poland's southern border before expected war with TO) situation in Bohemia and Hungary would be interesting-Vladislaus III, having more cash than Casimir IOTL, defeated TO quickly in 1454. In 1457 he has free hand in the south and could claim the thrones of his brother-in-law.

Given Vladislaus IOTL leanings, he would not hesitate to claim what is rightfully his. If he married a daughter of Albert II (elder Anna or younger Elizabeth) and defeated TO quickly in 1454, he would be elected to Hungarian throne in 1458.
 
Top