The working definition of a “succession crisis” is based on the presumption that stability is a critical factor in a political system. The system becomes vulnerable if something deprives it of its steadiness and pushes it out of balance. A monarch in the medieval political system played the role of the stability factor which was supposed to harmonize contrary interests of different groups and circles in a kingdom. A “succession crisis” erupts when there is no political agreement regarding who should step into the role of a deceased monarch, i.e., who shows the most promise in achieving the goals of stability, harmony and a balance of power. The thrones in Central Europe were emptied nearly simultaneously at the turn of the fourteenth century. Since politics cannot bear a vacuum, these unexpected vacancies opened the field for new candidates to the throne(s). The paper reflects on three subjects. First, it raises the question of a “succession crisis” as a methodological tool for studying politics in the Middle Ages. Secondly, it outlines the stances of the modern Polish historiography on Łokietek’s coming back to power between 1305 and 1314 and his puzzling popularity among the nobility of Little Poland. It also reveals recent opinions of Polish historians about the Bohemian rule in Poland in the turn of the fourteenth century. Finally, the paper applies the concept of “succession crisis” and switch the focus of Łokietek’s attempts for the throne from a political microhistory to a picture of greater regional range. and Wojciech Kozłowski.