WIF Teutonic Order wins at Grunwald

Status
Not open for further replies.

Toraach

Banned
I'm talking about the Great War era.
Ok, I'm mostly talking about the thirteen years war.

But even for the great war, if they would have sezeid Malbork, and Gdańsk, at least anexation of the western bank of Vistula would be possible. There was even a peace proposition from the Order for that, if I'm correct.
 
Hello.
For the Novgorod-Muscovite wars. There is an interesting issue, you pointed that Poland wasn't able to totally devasted the TO, because papal and imperial support for this, later you pointed that Moscow could do anything to Novgorod, and lithuanian support was irrevalent. I don't understand what is the difference, that there support of distant leaders mattered, and here a support from a neighbour country didn't.

Because one of the "distant leaders" had been exercising some moral authority (you can't just shrug off importance of a Pope in the Poland of XV century) and, an Emperor could apply some political pressure as well even if he had other problems to attend to.

As for the "neighbour country", aka Lithuania, it was not strong enough to deal with the Muscovite State of that specific time.



By subjugating Moscow, I mean not only conquering this thing, but also humilating, defending, succesfully helping Novgorod. More interesting thing here, I think that you by writing that hitted people who dream about timelines about estabilishing the Lithuanian Empire, because you pointed that Lithuania big and under strong leader was too weak to help Novgorod against her eastern archenemy.

Putting aside that "hitting" and "dreaming" nonsense (in case you did not notice, I was among those proposing "Greater Lithuania" scenarios), we are talking about a very specific time. Muscovite state is ruled by Ivan III, "the Great" and is at the peak of its pre-imperial strength. Talk about Novgorod and its "archenemy" is just empty words: there was a strong pro-Moscow party in the city which took over and ended the 1st war. Taking into an account that Novgorodian army had been easily defeated by a small detachment of Ivan's army, Lithuanian help would not save them because Lithuania on its own could not fight successfully even against the self-destructive maniac like Ivan IV who managed to execute most of his military leaders so what chance would it have against more competent opponent?

Also I want to point that a generation later Ivan III got like a third of Grand Duchy areas after the war with Alexander Jagielończyk, so really that was better to help Novgorod when there was the time for it.

Isn't that a clear indication of what a war against Ivan III would mean for Lithuania? With Novgorod not being a serious military factor, Lithuania would be ravaged by Ivan's troops. Alexander at least could use his wife (Ivan's daughter) as intermediary.
 

Toraach

Banned
Because one of the "distant leaders" had been exercising some moral authority (you can't just shrug off importance of a Pope in the Poland of XV century) and, an Emperor could apply some political pressure as well even if he had other problems to attend to.

As for the "neighbour country", aka Lithuania, it was not strong enough to deal with the Muscovite State of that specific time.





Putting aside that "hitting" and "dreaming" nonsense (in case you did not notice, I was among those proposing "Greater Lithuania" scenarios), we are talking about a very specific time. Muscovite state is ruled by Ivan III, "the Great" and is at the peak of its pre-imperial strength. Talk about Novgorod and its "archenemy" is just empty words: there was a strong pro-Moscow party in the city which took over and ended the 1st war. Taking into an account that Novgorodian army had been easily defeated by a small detachment of Ivan's army, Lithuanian help would not save them because Lithuania on its own could not fight successfully even against the self-destructive maniac like Ivan IV who managed to execute most of his military leaders so what chance would it have against more competent opponent?



Isn't that a clear indication of what a war against Ivan III would mean for Lithuania? With Novgorod not being a serious military factor, Lithuania would be ravaged by Ivan's troops. Alexander at least could use his wife (Ivan's daughter) as intermediary.
Could you explain me please, how the Great Lithuanian Empire was possible, if they were so weak? This is not a hostile question.

For Moscow and Lithuania in 1470. Maybe Lithuania was stronger than 35 years later, and Moscow was weaker (one of the reason that they didn't not have Novgorod). I mean that Moscow was lithuanian archenemy.

Those distant leaders didn't have any influece and impact there in OTL, so I pressume that even in ATL they won't have.
 
@Toraach you said, that Poland needed absolutism to survive, and at the same time you described all monarchs of Poland after Casimir III as idiots, so you think giving absolute power to an idiot would suddenly make him smart??? Also it is worth to note, that nobility of Poland wanted incorporation of Prussia, kings didn't want to hurt their Hohenzollern cousins, so yeah, give more power to them so they would be able to give any part of Poland to anyone if they wished, what about Władysław Opolczyk and fiefs given him by Louis d'Anjou, which he later handed to Teutonic Order (because 'he could', so why not?).
And seemingly it is not Jagiellon blood but very fact of sitting on Polish throne that makes Kings of Poland idiots, because Stephen Bathory, man with no drop of Jagiellon blood also confirmed Brandenburgian Hohenzollern rights to Prussia. Teutonic State in Prussia OTOH provided job for second sons long after raids on Lithuania were over, until Reformation. They made careers in administration of TO state.
And who was main opponent of war against TO? Not nobility but powerful magnate, bishop Oleśnicki. Casimir IV allied with lesser nobility against great magnates, the same thing was done by his sons-Jan Olbracht and Aleksander, and by Matthias Corvinus in Hungary (also idiot???). Priviledge of Mielnik changed king into powerless tool in hands of big magnates, King with support of lesser nobility repelled it and increased his power again.
 

Toraach

Banned
@Toraach you said, that Poland needed absolutism to survive, and at the same time you described all monarchs of Poland after Casimir III as idiots, so you think giving absolute power to an idiot would suddenly make him smart??? Also it is worth to note, that nobility of Poland wanted incorporation of Prussia, kings didn't want to hurt their Hohenzollern cousins, so yeah, give more power to them so they would be able to give any part of Poland to anyone if they wished, what about Władysław Opolczyk and fiefs given him by Louis d'Anjou, which he later handed to Teutonic Order (because 'he could', so why not?).
And seemingly it is not Jagiellon blood but very fact of sitting on Polish throne that makes Kings of Poland idiots, because Stephen Bathory, man with no drop of Jagiellon blood also confirmed Brandenburgian Hohenzollern rights to Prussia. Teutonic State in Prussia OTOH provided job for second sons long after raids on Lithuania were over, until Reformation. They made careers in administration of TO state.
And who was main opponent of war against TO? Not nobility but powerful magnate, bishop Oleśnicki. Casimir IV allied with lesser nobility against great magnates, the same thing was done by his sons-Jan Olbracht and Aleksander, and by Matthias Corvinus in Hungary (also idiot???). Priviledge of Mielnik changed king into powerless tool in hands of big magnates, King with support of lesser nobility repelled it and increased his power again.
It is pretty obvious why I prefer absolutism instead of powerlessness. Although I don't have anything against reasonable noble's demoracy, which had some working institutions, taxations, standing army (I mean for real, not this what was in OTL), and no liberum veto. Back for absolutism, I mean not particular rulers, but that this political system during that age could mobilised/used a country's potential much better than nobles' democracy. It is a very simple, but it shows well what I mean, in old polish history books for school kids, back in times when in those books were some text, not only pictures, were used this example. Numbers I might write wrong, but a sense is the same. That in early 18th century Poland had oficialy 24k of soldiers, and they were worthless, and even lower number in reality, when her neighbours Prussia, Austria and Russia had more than hundred thousands soldiers. It shows how worthless in the darwinian political landscape was polish political system, I know that it was a time of total degeneracy, but roots of that were in the past, and even in this past, this country always troubled with fielding armies. Maybe in diffrent circumstances those idiots could have done better? They didn't have to look at whimpering nobles and aristocrats, or so patheticaly looking for money, to allow prussian inheritance for Brandenburg. Maybe with absolutism, we would have better kings, because it is hard to have worse ones. Russia have had their own number of bad rulers, yet survives, and Poland not. I know that Moscowy of that period was quite barbaric and their despotism was bad, yet Moscow/Russia could field enough army to survive and expand, when Poland got pathetic nobles, even worse aristocrats, and stupid kings, who couldn't do even little to estrenghing country. And at the end we got Kluchosław.
 
For the Novgorod-Muscovite wars. There is an interesting issue, you pointed that Poland wasn't able to totally devasted the TO, because papal and imperial support for this, later you pointed that Moscow could do anything to Novgorod, and lithuanian support was irrevalent. I don't understand what is the difference, that there support of distant leaders mattered, and here a support from a neighbour country didn't. By subjugating Moscow, I mean not only conquering this thing, but also humilating, defending, succesfully helping Novgorod. More interesting thing here, I think that you by writing that hitted people who dream about timelines about estabilishing the Lithuanian Empire, because you pointed that Lithuania big and under strong leader was too weak to help Novgorod against her eastern archenemy. Also I want to point that a generation later Ivan III got like a third of Grand Duchy areas after the war with Alexander Jagielończyk, so really that was better to help Novgorod when there was the time for it.
Lithuania could not help Novgorod in 1480 not necessarily because they saw themselves as too weak (they certainly didn't, given that they believed they could fight Moscow alone as far as the Livonian War) to help Novgorod, but because of the circumstances at the time, more specifically, Menli Giray's takeover of Crimea in 1478 and subsequent beginning of Crimean raids against Lithuania, which sapped its resources.

The effect of Crimean raids on Lithuania and its capabilities to combat Moscow in this period are often very understated - in the end of the 15th century and the beginning of the 16th, they went as far as the city of Vilnius, even during times of war against Moscow.

Besides, the "greater Lithuania" timeline dreaming people usually put the POD necessarily to create it one or two centuries before this time, anyway, so I don't see how it discredits them.
 
Could you explain me please, how the Great Lithuanian Empire was possible, if they were so weak? This is not a hostile question.

In OTL "the Great Lithuanian Empire" did not happen: it was just a Grand Duchy of Lithuania. As for the military strength, let's start with Grunwald. Poland had a much smaller territory than a Grand Duchy but Polish contingent was much bigger than Lithuanian and it had a big "quality advantage" over Lithuania in the terms of a heavy cavalry. While there are various theories regarding what really happened (from Lithuanians just fleeing and all the way to this being a part of a well-thought maneuver), it is absolutely clear that the light Lithuanian cavalry could not stand in a head-to-head confrontation with the armored opponent. It seems that the only part of Witold's army which did not break were so-called "Smolensk regiments" (IIRC, only one of which was from Smolensk) from the Russian territories of Lithuania: while not being as "heavy" as Order's troops, they still had an armor.

Duchy's territory was big but a great part of it was sparsely populated so the total population was not too big and military class was, seemingly, small. It's great size (prior to the PLC) was to a great degree thanks to a power vacuum created by the Mongolian invasion: the traditional structures of the pre-Mongolian Rus had been broken and the Lithuanian raiders became a power which was able to force submission of the princes in a "grey area" outside the Mongolian reach. For the local princes it was not such a big thing: they just had to acknowledge supremacy of a Grand Duke, which would leave them free from the raiding.

Of course, the raiding should not be underestimated: it could cause serious economic damage to the area and was a popular method of the warfare not only in the region but all the way to England and France: it was main English modus operandi during the 100YW. But, with the raise of the Muscovite state, situation became more balanced because armies of Moscow had been routinely using the same methods, had (at least starting from the reign of Ivan III) the growing numbers of the Tatar troops AND had both heavier cavalry and at least some infantry. And it had an advantage (questionable in many other areas) of a centralized state capable of a quite effective mobilization of its resources for war.

It took few decades of isolationism for Muscovite state to start lagging behind the "West" (including Poland but not necessarily the Duchy) in the military matters.
 

Toraach

Banned
Lithuania could not help Novgorod in 1480 not necessarily because they saw themselves as too weak (they certainly didn't, given that they believed they could fight Moscow alone as far as the Livonian War) to help Novgorod, but because of the circumstances at the time, more specifically, Menli Giray's takeover of Crimea in 1478 and subsequent beginning of Crimean raids against Lithuania, which sapped its resources.

The effect of Crimean raids on Lithuania and its capabilities to combat Moscow in this period are often very understated - in the end of the 15th century and the beginning of the 16th, they went as far as the city of Vilnius, even during times of war against Moscow.

Besides, the "greater Lithuania" timeline dreaming people usually put the POD necessarily to create it one or two centuries before this time, anyway, so I don't see how it discredits them.
I would like to read more about those raids, it is an interesting and not well known thing (except its existence, but not how important they were).
 
Lithuania could not help Novgorod in 1480 not necessarily because they saw themselves as too weak (they certainly didn't, given that they believed they could fight Moscow alone as far as the Livonian War) to help Novgorod, but because of the circumstances at the time, more specifically, Menli Giray's takeover of Crimea in 1478 and subsequent beginning of Crimean raids against Lithuania, which sapped its resources.

The effect of Crimean raids on Lithuania and its capabilities to combat Moscow in this period are often very understated - in the end of the 15th century and the beginning of the 16th, they went as far as the city of Vilnius, even during times of war against Moscow.

As far as I can tell, effect of their raids is understated in general.

You can start with their contribution to the fall of the Great Horde (leftover of the Golden Horde). Raid of the Crimean & Musovite (Ivan III and Mengli Girey had been allies) force into Horde's territory while Khan Akhmat and Ivan III had been facing each other on Ugra River led to Akhmat's retreat and, eventually, assassination. In 1502 Mengli Girey defeated army of the Great Horde thus ending its existence and, basically, paving the way to the Eastward expansion of the Muscovite state.

Of course, as the opponent, the Crimean Khanate was equally dangerous to Moscow: until the late XVII huge effort had been spent on building series of the defensive lines along Russian southern borders (still, during the reign of Ivan IV Tatars burned Moscow) and keeping mobilized nobility of the southern regions.

Khan's position clearly had a decisive impact on initial success of Khmelnitsky's Uprising (and after Khan changed the sides, so did the fortune of the war) and seriously impacted the following Cossack-Polish-Moscow (in various combinations :cool:) conflicts. At least to a noticeable degree it contributed to the allied victory at Vienna.

AFAIK, their last big raid happened in 1769 when Crimean Khan Qırım Giray invaded the Russian held territories in modern-day Ukraine. Crimean Tatars and Nogais ravaged New Serbia and took a significant number of prisoners. The issue was "settled" only in 1770 when the Crimean peninsula had been penetrated by the troops of Prince Dolgorukov, Khan's army destroyed and the Khanate agreed to became a Russian vassal.
 

krieger

Banned
Stopping Lithuanian raiding was more important for magnates of Lesser Poland than regaining Gdańsk, Lithuanian raids made Polish lands east of Vistula almost useless, fertile Lublin Uppland was almost uninhabitated and magnate eastates located there were of little valu

But why do you forget about one certain Czech-Hungarian-German fellow, who would be the most likely succesor of Jogaila if he was to die in the battle of Grunwald? Yes, stopping Lithuanian raids would be important. But it is 1410, Lithuania is already Catholic and IMHO would get into a civil war if Jagiełło and Witold were to lose Grunwald. And on the paper, Grand Duchy of Lithuania is already a part of Polish crown (as a result of Krewo treaty). So if Sigismund of Luxembourg promised not to give Red Ruthenia to Hungary, he'd have a decent chance to take Polish throne after death of Jagiełło in the battle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top