Royal elections in Poland

Based on traditions dating to the very beginning of the Polish statehood, strengthened during the Piast and Jagiellon dynasties, they reached their final form in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth period between 1572 and 1791.

[2][3] The election privilege, exercised during the gatherings known as wiec, was usually limited to the most powerful nobles (magnates) or officials, and was heavily influenced by local traditions and strength of the ruler.

[5] The electors chose Władysław II Jagiełło as king, and he married a daughter of Louis I, Jadwiga of Poland, but had no promise that his dynasty would continue on the throne.

[5][8] The principle of election continued in effect throughout the nearly two centuries of the Jagiellon Dynasty, but just as in Piast times, it actually amounted to mere confirmation of the incoming heir.

"[8] A major reason was the desire on the part of Polish nobility to retain the Polish–Lithuanian union, and the Jagiellon dynasty were the hereditary rulers of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.

[9] During the ensuing interregnum, anxiety for the safety of the Commonwealth eventually led to agreements among the political classes that pending election of a new king, the Roman Catholic Primate of Poland would exercise supreme authority, acting as interrex (from the Latin); and that special "hooded" confederations (Polish: konfederacje kapturowe, named after the hoods traditionally worn by their members) of nobility would assume power in each the country's regions.

[9] Any Catholic nobleman could stand for election, but in practice, only rich and powerful members of foreign dynasties or Commonwealth magnates had a serious chance for consideration.

[10] Most tellingly, one of the provisions of the pacta conventa included the right of revolution (rokosz) for the nobility if it considered the king not to be adhering to the laws of the state.

[9][10] By the last years of the Commonwealth, royal elections grew to be seen as a source of conflicts and instability; Lerski describes them as having "become a symbol of anarchy".