How to ensure the survival of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth?

A quick Google search pointed out a couple old threads on this subject (and some PLC-wanks), but I'm interested to hear some ideas. With whatever PoD you see fitting post-1600, prevent the collapse and cannibalization of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

On the external scenario, I imagine the handicapping of Muscovy/Russia comes as a necessity (or at least as very convenient). Sweden's expansion into the Baltic also created some serious tensions that facilitated the ruin of the PLC, especially during the Deluge. Not sure about Austria, Brandenburg and the Ottomans. Despite their continued hostilities, I don't recall these powers being existential threats to the PLC.

On the internal scenario, I've read that perhaps the adoption of a hereditary monarchy might have helped, or perhaps a simple curbing of the aristocratic power. Even if their regime was atypical for the time, in the long run it has been claimed that the privileges of the szchlata created internal instability and facilitated external aggression. Is this statement true, in first place?
 
On the external scenario, I imagine the handicapping of Russia comes as a necessity (or at least as very convenient). Sweden's expansion into the Baltic also created some serious tensions that facilitated the ruin of the PLC, especially during the Deluge. Not sure about Austria, Brandenburg and the Ottomans. Despite their continued hostilities, I don't recall these powers being existential threats to the PLC.

On the internal scenario, I've read that perhaps the adoption of a hereditary monarchy might have helped, or perhaps a simple curbing of the aristocratic power. Even if their regime was atypical for the time, in the long run it has been claimed that the privileges of the szchlata created internal instability and facilitated external aggression. Is this statement true, in first place?

Muscovy didn't exist Russia had been unified for a while, the problem with trying to handicap Russia is the PLC tried that during the Time of Troubles, and it didn't work out. I suppose the pro-Polish first false Dimitry could succeed, yet what do to keep the PLC and Russia friendly with each other I don't know.
 
Well, you could handicap Moscow if you move all the way back to the 15th c. but then Poland and Lithuania might look quite different.
 
Maybe better luck with Wladyslaw IV. He was tsar of Russia from 1610 until 1613, if I recall correctly. The only thing is that his father, Sigismund, was not too keen on having his teen son as the Russian tsar, despite the Seven Boyars voting him in. Also, there was a popular uprising which resulted in Michael Romanov getting the throne.

I am not sure of the details behind Sigismund's reasoning but maybe he changes his mind ITTL and John Casimir is next in line to the throne of the PLC. A pro-Polish ruler in Russia might help the PLC at least for a short while.

Another thing that I had noticed was that the PLC had a decentralized financial system for quite a while and that had left insufficient funds in the treasury. Also, the liberum veto had a tendency to hold up decisions in the Sejm.
 
The first False Dmitry was actually quite popular in Russia at first, especially among the lower classes. His insistence on surrounding himself with Poles and Germans wore that out, however. Unfortunately, surrounding him with more Russians will make him less friendly to the PLC.

The Deluge and the Chmielnicki Uprising cannot be underestimated in their effect--the sheer human and capital loss of the war crippled the PLC in the long run. After 1655, it's hard to imagine any scenario that ends with Poland restored as a Great Power.

Hmmm...could getting involved in the 30 Years War be beneficial at all for the PLC? A string of Kircholm-scale victories could cripple Sweden's power in Germany and lead to them withdrawing from continental European affairs.
 
The first False Dmitry was actually quite popular in Russia at first, especially among the lower classes. His insistence on surrounding himself with Poles and Germans wore that out, however. Unfortunately, surrounding him with more Russians will make him less friendly to the PLC.

The Deluge and the Chmielnicki Uprising cannot be underestimated in their effect--the sheer human and capital loss of the war crippled the PLC in the long run. After 1655, it's hard to imagine any scenario that ends with Poland restored as a Great Power.

Hmmm...could getting involved in the 30 Years War be beneficial at all for the PLC? A string of Kircholm-scale victories could cripple Sweden's power in Germany and lead to them withdrawing from continental European affairs.
The battle of Kircholm was a different Swedish army. Under Gustav II Adolf there were quite a few changes enacted which made the Swedish military better as a whole and introduced the concept of combined arms on a larger scale. Another thing to consider is that the PLC virtually had no navy to speak of and the battle of Oliwa, the only battle that I am aware of involving any resemblance of a Commonwealth navy, was a fluke, in my opinion.

There are a some things that would need to happen in order to make the future of the PLC a little less dreary. Diestormlie mentioned in his post that the veto needs to be hanged and I agree with that statement. If the PLC is to have a good showing in an ATL Thirty Years War, they need to get a handle on their finances. I don't expect the Holy Roman Empire to dish out money to the Poles on a scale like the French did with Sweden OTL. Retrieving more troops would be helpful in this scenario but in order to properly train them as well as supply them the financial situation needs to be better.

Something else that should be considered is more involvement from the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans and the Poles shared a border around this time period, if I remember correctly. More involvement from the Ottomans would not only be detrimental to the Poles but to the HRE as well. A war on two fronts is not exactly a desirable situation to be in.
 
Last edited:
Actually, a successful PLC under the Vasas will mean that PLC will have Upper Silesia, this will be a win win scenario for the Poles in General..
 
From the posts that I could find on AH.com, I have noticed a trend in posts made by some past and current members. One member mentioned having a longer surviving Jagiellonian dynasty. It wasn't until after the death of Sigismund II Augustus that liberum veto was brought back.
 
From the posts that I could find on AH.com, I have noticed a trend in posts made by some past and current members. One member mentioned having a longer surviving Jagiellonian dynasty. It wasn't until after the death of Sigismund II Augustus that liberum veto was brought back.

A surviving Jagiellonian dynasty is the best hope. With the dynasty's legitimacy a strong ruler could have developed some centralized institutions.
 
I don't think you can have PLC survive with a POD post 1600. Once liberum veto and nihil novi sub sole (1505) have been declared, the szlachta will not let the king overthrow either of them. They didn't in the face of almost total extinction under Jan Olbracht or during the Swedish deluge.
 
It may be enough to delay the reforms of the 1790s which led to the Russian attack - no, sorry, I meant to say: the Russian humanitarian intervention to protect the old order and the freedoms of the nobility from the evil revolutionaries. This might avert the second and third partitions until France starts fighting almost everyone else in Europe. And even if France still loses its wars, the butterflies may still allow the Commonwealth to survive past them.
 
Top