Zebrzydowski's Rokosz and the Struggle of Estates Against Rulers in East-Central Europe

The aim of these considerations is to compare the Zebrzydowski Rokosz and the Confederatio Bohemica. The comparative method used was to show the essence of these institutions more fully by demonstrating their differences and similarities, and also to show the specific quality of the struggle of estates against rulers in this part of Europe. This consisted in the fact that both in the Czech Lands and in the Commonwealth the estates held a relatively high position, based on rights and freedoms (including religious freedoms), in the system of power. Being convinced that the rulers wanted to deprive the estates of their political significance and introduce an absolutist system, they decided to defend themselves, even by taking up arms. The tactics of the nobility in both countries were basically similar and consisted of convincing the rest of society, as well as their neighbours (in the case of the Czech Lands), that their actions were not directed against the rulers but served to defend rights and freedoms. In total, the Czechs managed to consolidate the estates around themselves in the lands of the entire Czech Crown, as was also the case in Austria and Hungary. In Poland, the rebels failed to convince the majority of the nobility, who remained loyal to Sigismund III or remained neutral in the conflict, to join their actions. In Bohemia, the Confederatio Bohemica became, on the one hand, a tool for the consolidation of the estates, and on the other hand, an interesting constitutional proposal. In Poland, on the other hand, the rebels intended the Rokosz to be an extraordinary constitutional institution enabling actions against the king. However, the constitutional proposals of the Rokosz were of a more cosmetic nature. Both of the estates’ undertakings ended in military defeat in armed confrontation with the rulers (the White Mountain and GuzĂłw).