WI: Jan Ziska as Hussite King of Bohemia?

Zioneer

Zioneer

Banned
So I just found out about a certain general named Jan Ziska today, and while I don't know much about the Hussite wars, I'm starting to get interested, mainly because of the tactics used by Ziska.

However, I see on his Wikipedia page that he was one of those long-suffering "Oh, I only wanted one thing, but hey if you really want me to rule, I could be a great leader" types.

So, what if instead of the provisional government that popped up (and was entirely useless during the civil wars among the Hussites, it seems), the Hussite nobles of Bohemia elect Jan Ziska as king? (despite their love for democracy, they toyed with electing a Lithuanian Grand Duke, so it seems they were willing to tolerate nobility.

Could the Hussites survive longer with a powerful and fairly just/merciful general as their figurehead and commander?

Would the tactics used by Ziska be effective against the armies of the Catholics?

And finally, could the ideals of the Hussites spread far beyond Bohemia, in a 100 year early Reformation?
 

Jester

I believe, as I said in another thread, that a Hussite victory wouldn't just mean an earlier reformation- a Hussite victory could mean earlier nationalism. I imagine you would see a spread of autocephalous, national churches springing up in the aftermath, rather than an ideological shift.
 

Shawn Endresen

Absolutely the Hussites could have lasted longer. Although my impression is that even if he didn't have the title, he was in absolute command, so I'm not sure how much this changes (until it's time for a new King of Bohemia, anyway).

Lots still depends on individuals in this time period. If you really want Jan to do well, have him capture Sigismund in battle and decline to either kill or ransom him. There's several opportunities between, say, 1420 and 1423. Without having to worry about Hungary, he has a while to set the Bohemian house in order before the Imperial forces show up (which is what he needs).
 
Zioneer

Zioneer

Banned
AngleAngel said:
I believe, as I said in another thread, that a Hussite victory wouldn't just mean an earlier reformation- a Hussite victory could mean earlier nationalism. I imagine you would see a spread of autocephalous, national churches springing up in the aftermath, rather than an ideological shift.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the impression I got from reading the wiki pages; Huss and Ziska are early Czech nationalist symbols.

But now I'm interested in specifically how a Hussite victory would provoke national churches and nationalism in non-Czech countries. Would a stronger Basel Compacts force the Pope to recognize the primacy of "national" Archbishops or something similar?

Shawn Endresen said:
Absolutely the Hussites could have lasted longer. Although my impression is that even if he didn't have the title, he was in absolute command, so I'm not sure how much this changes (until it's time for a new King of Bohemia, anyway).

Lots still depends on individuals in this time period. If you really want Jan to do well, have him capture Sigismund in battle and decline to either kill or ransom him. There's several opportunities between, say, 1420 and 1423. Without having to worry about Hungary, he has a while to set the Bohemian house in order before the Imperial forces show up (which is what he needs).
Click to expand...

Well, one change is that the Czech nobility likely see Ziska's power as more legitimate; a King is more prestigious than a mere general after all.

As for capturing Sigismund, I might have him do so; he seemed to be more forward-thinking then the bloodthirsty Taborite branch of the Hussites. Killing the Emperor isn't likely in my opinion, unless it was an accident.

AngleAngel said:
The Hussites became known for NOT ransoming or releasing "important" individuals.
Click to expand...

Another good point, but again, Ziska was a lot more merciful than his soldiers. In fact, a good PoD would be Ziska capturing Sigismund, and while he debates what to do with the Emperor, a rabid Hussite fanatic murders the Emperor.

Any Czech members (or those interested in Czech history) willing to chime in on this idea?
 

Jester

Once the mass armies of the Hussites have proven they can defeat armies of cavalry, the standard equations of period warfare will be forever altered. This will bring with it larger armies and, by necessity, a larger state apparatus. With the victory of the terror of Europe, seizure of church properties will be a possibility for cash-strapped realms- many looked on the wealth of the church with disdain. Much of the Protestant Reformation was, like it or not, proving that one could get away with such things.

As for nationalism, that is a little more complex. It will spread as it did IOTL- as a reaction.
 
Last edited:
Zioneer

Zioneer

Banned
AngleAngel said:
Once the mass armies of the Hussites have proven they can defeat armies of cavalry, the standard equations of period warfare will be forever altered. This will bring with it larger armies and, by necessity, a larger state apparatus. With the victory of the terror of Europe, seizure of church properties will be a possibility for cash-strapped realms- many looked on the wealth of the church with disdain. Much of the Protestant Reformation was, like it or not, proving that one could get away with such things.

As for nationalism, that is a little more complex. It will spread as it did IOTL- as a reaction.
Click to expand...

Hmm.. so a possible King Jan Ziska could likely fund his burgeoning Thirty Years War-esque armies with the seizure of church properties?

Ah, how about this possibility: Ziska is NOT crowned King instead of the provisional government, but when he captures the Emperor and forces Sigismund to give up all claims on Czech lands, is proclaimed King of Bohemia anyway?
 
Zioneer

Zioneer

Banned
Sorry to double post, but I had another thought: Ziskas cannon wagons were essentially early tanks. What if he uses the newfound wealth of Bohemia (from seizing the rest of the Catholic Churchs properties) to increase the efficiency of his wagons?

Or would it be unfeasible for various reasons?
 

Jester

They weren't like tanks- whoever came up with that meme either doesn't know the function of tanks or didn't understand the function of Hussite war-wagons.

They were used as mobile fortifications, which is decidedly different from a tank.
 
Zioneer

Zioneer

Banned
AngleAngel said:
They weren't like tanks- whoever came up with that meme either doesn't know the function of tanks or didn't understand the function of Hussite war-wagons.

They were used as mobile fortifications, which is decidedly different from a tank.
Click to expand...

Ah. But they were still armored, yes? So more like an armored military Humvee or something similar?

In any case, I think I *may* have enough to write a TL on. I might need some good sources (Wikipedia doesn't count, as it's a Central/Eastern European article), though. Any sources that are good for the Hussite Wars?
 
Zioneer

Zioneer

Banned
AngleAngel said:
Well, it isn't really an issue specific to you. A lot of people seem to compare them to tanks.
Click to expand...

It's fine then, I watched a clip from the Communist-Era film Jan Ziska and it's usage of the tabors seems to correlate with the other info I've read about them.

But anyway, is Ziska becoming King a plausible event? Or would a more likely idea be a Czech-style Oliver Cromwell "Lord Protector" sort of title?
 

Jester

King is likely I think- likely to be more acceptable to the moderate Utraquists even, who found the Taborites Captaincies to be shocking.
 

RGB

Actually, "War Wagons" were used all over Eastern Europe. They are not used in the West as much because, in part, of the damn hedges. They make the landscape poor for cavalry maneouvres (primary reason for wagenburg is to defeat cavalry, something the infantry of the time was very poor at) and also for large wagenburg deployments.

So the warfare does change but not as profoundly and universally as one might think.
 

Jester

Which is why I pointed out the infantry tactics that were the real defining moment of the Hussar Wars.
 

Iñaki

If the hussites remain united and not at the end like in OTL divided between taborites (middle and low class) and utraquits (noble class), the hussites could easily consolidate a bohemian kingdom under Jan Ziska, this is not 1618 neither 1521, there was not a giant power like Habsburgs Charles V Empire or the Spanish Empire of Philip II that could bring help to Sigismund, also with the turks in the balkans I think that Sigismund and his succesor Albert II could not fight a war in two fronts (with the turks invading Hungary during the kingship of Albert and the poles intervening in Bohemia).

Also apart of Jan Ziska as a king, having as military commander to Procopius the gret means that they have one of the best tacticians of the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top