Why Not? - Sigismund the Old for Holy Roman Emperor

John Fredrick Parker

Donor
In 1519, in electing the Holy Roman Emperor, candidates aside from Charles of Spain included Frederick of Saxony, Francis of France, and even Henry of England as a dark horse; but AFAICT, there was no consideration for the Grand Duke of Lithuania and King of Poland, Sigismund I (aka the Old).

Does anyone know why this is? And what could have been different to allow the eastern monarch to be a candidate for HRE, and possibly even be selected?

@Kellan Sullivan
 
Superninja76

Superninja76

He wouldn't be able to remotely focus on the HRE, without pissing off half of his subjects. That's a wonderful recipe for a shit sandwich right there!
 
Superninja76

Superninja76

John Fredrick Parker said:
Weren't Francis and Henry in the same boat?
Click to expand...
If you are referring to henry III of france, then yes. Well, not really. He was only king of france and king of the PLC for a couple months, and he ruled neither during that time as he was heading back to france from poland after accepting the french crown. What a squandered oppurtunity, honestly.
 

John Fredrick Parker

Donor
@Superninja76 What I mean is, why is being King of Poland specifically (as opposed to being King of France of England) a deal-breaker? If it's because said king's Polish subjects would take issue with him giving attention to the Germanies, why is that more of a problem than a King of France's French subjects or a King of England's English subjects?
 
Superninja76

Superninja76

Christ, I just realised. Sorry, I'm rather tired and I didn't read the opening post that well. To be honest, I genuinely have no idea why. Perhaps sigismund didn't go for it?
 

Jan Olbracht

Sigismund tried to avoid direct conflict with Habsburgs, in 1515 in Vienna he even renounced any claims to Bohemia and Hungary ruled by his brother, so why would he decide to enrage Habsburgs totally by trying to get Imperial title?
 
Last edited:

Kellan Sullivan

John Fredrick Parker said:
In 1519, in electing the Holy Roman Emperor, candidates aside from Charles of Spain included Frederick of Saxony, Francis of France, and even Henry of England as a dark horse; but AFAICT, there was no consideration for the Grand Duke of Lithuania and King of Poland, Sigismund I (aka the Old).

Does anyone know why this is? And what could have been different to allow the eastern monarch to be a candidate for HRE, and possibly even be selected?

@Kellan Sullivan
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why he didn't stand. It couldn't have been a lack of a male heir (since Henry and Friedrich of Saxony would be out (unless Fritz decided that if he was emperor he'd normalize his relationship with der Wantzlerinne if an archduchess of Austria was still unwilling)), or lack of land held in the empire itself (cause then Henry and François (I think) would be out - not sure if this was in place then though, but I know François Étienne was regarded as a "poor" match for Maria Theresia before he was given Tuscany, since his only imperial territories were the duchy of Teschen and the county of Falkenstein). So, if those two reasons are out, in theory we can ask why did Christian II/Manuel I/insert European sovereign's name here, not enter this.

Which brings us to @Svetonius' point: The Congress of Vienna. It was (AFAIK) a mutual succession pact - the Jagiellons in Hungary-Bohemia default on heirs, the Habsburgs get it; the Habsburgs do the same, cooeey Herr Jagiellon, ve need ein kaiser. Plus, Siggie's getting Habsburg backing against Muscovy, which makes me think he's not going to rock the boat unnecessarily. Now, if Wlad HAD no son (and Lajos was a slender chance at best), Vienna might have been different: Habsburgs get Hungary-Bohemia when Wlad dies, marriage between Karl/Ferdinand-Anna. If the Habsburgs default, maybe the Polish branch gets nominated (doubtful though, since Siggie has no son (yet) to marry an archduchess to smooth such a transition).
 

Mikestone8

Kellan Sullivan said:
Which brings us to @Svetonius' point: The Congress of Vienna. It was (AFAIK) a mutual succession pact - the Jagiellons in Hungary-Bohemia default on heirs, the Habsburgs get it; the Habsburgs do the same, cooeey Herr Jagiellon, ve need ein kaiser. Plus, Siggie's getting Habsburg backing against Muscovy, which makes me think he's not going to rock the boat unnecessarily. Now, if Wlad HAD no son (and Lajos was a slender chance at best), Vienna might have been different: Habsburgs get Hungary-Bohemia when Wlad dies, marriage between Karl/Ferdinand-Anna. If the Habsburgs default, maybe the Polish branch gets nominated (doubtful though, since Siggie has no son (yet) to marry an archduchess to smooth such a transition).
Click to expand...

Does that men that if the Habsburg male line expires - ie Philip dies before Charles V is born or conceived - then Louis II of Hungary inherits Austria, and if he still gets killed at Mohacs, then the Polish branch inherit the lot?

In that case they might be well-placed to get the Imperial Crown.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top