In OTL Russia only really got going as a trade route from the baltic to the black and Caspain seas, and because of it's many intersecting rivers, it made trade useful, this allowed for greater cultural influence to the native slavic peoples by Byzantine, Viking, and (to a lesser extant) Muslim peoples. What if this happens much earlier? Preroman conquest the greeks somehow get it in there heads to explore and trade along the russian rivers. What happens?
WI: Ancient Greeks Settle Russia.
- Thread starter ArKhan
- Start date
Thande
Donor
I don't want to sound stereotypical, but why would the Greeks want to colonise a region which would be so inhospitable to Mediterraneans? IIRC, their half-legendary descriptions of Britain always depicted the island as being a frozen wasteland, so how do you think they would view Russia?
Though I suppose Ukraine's more temperate climate and farming prospects might make it more attractive.
Though I suppose Ukraine's more temperate climate and farming prospects might make it more attractive.
Hendryk
Banned
Well, one could imagine them moving upriver on the Don from Crimea, and over the course of decades getting used to the harsher weather.
Susano
Banned
But if its over the course of decades, by teh colonies own development, without settlement waves from the homeland - then they just wont have the manpower to actually settle the land (as opposed to exist in some ethnically isolated cities)...
Thande
Donor
A civilisation consisting of Greek overlords and er...Scythian(?) peasants might be interesting, though, even if loses contact with the homeland, or more so even. Basically like the Variags and Kievan Rus, only much earlier.
Hendryk
Banned
The issue of manpower shortages may be alleviated to some extent by acculturating locals. Between acculturation and intermarriage, after a few generations, one may start seeing people who self-identify as Greeks but are ethnically Slavic-looking.
As we are talking about Ancient Greeks, can we assume that it will take at least few generations before intermarriage becomes accepted/legal?
Or am I just seeing Hellenistic policies were there shouldn't be any to see?
Hendryk
Banned
Indeed, looking at how plastic ethnic self-identification has historically been in that part of the world, I don't think Hellenistic Scythians or whatever is much of a stretch.Insert acerbic comment by AHP here
Hendryk
Banned
Usually, when you transplant single male settlers in their prime, barring freak developments, it doesn't take long for relationships to develop with the local womenfolk.
In OTL, British and Dutch colonists were an exception, but that's because they sent entire families rather than single men like the Spanish, Portuguese, French, etc.
Hendryk
Banned
I'm not sure about Sicily, but I think intermarriage with local tribes was fairly common in Massilia and Nicaea. IIRC there were anecdotes of Greek men being surprised at the forwardness of Gaulish women.
Of course. I was just thinking about attempts of Hellenistic rulers to stop such a thing from happening.
True, but Sicily seems to have been something different, with Greeks and Sicilians exisiting in separate communities. Segesta and Leontini, the cities whose war provided Athens an excuse to intervene in Sicily and thus to invade and attack Syracuse, offer such an example, since IIRC one was a Sikiliote settlement, the other Greek. One might suppose that the Sicilian colonies proximity to mainland Greece provided them with more manpower and womanpower than that available in Massilia.
If, say, Athens' empire had lasted longer I've often wondered if it might not invest a bit more in exploring and settling Ukraine and the Danube watershed. It's all accesible by ship and thus easily accessible / dominatable by a navy. And it provides Athens' more grain / food stuffs, which it seems to have gotten mainly from this region to begin with.
However, I'd expect it would take a lot to overcome the native populations, particularly with the problem (for Athens) of Persia right next door. You'd need to convince the Athenians that rather than attacking (and thus pillaging) the richest empire they knew, they'd be better off settling surplus population in farms.
And at some point they'd have to contend with the invasions of the eastern Celts -- the first of many wanderers from the great Steppes.
The Crimea was one of the breadbaskets of the Mediterranean world, it's where Athens and other cities imported their grain from (principally. Also from Sicily and Egypt)
Don't know about Sicily. But Hellenistic Kingdoms often tried to both Hellenize the local aristocracy and city dwellers and yet not to acknowledge them as equals, so that the Greeks and Macedonians could remain as a ruling class.
Hence the top positions were closed from the locals and there were laws against intermarriage.
Bright day
Why is everybody treating this as a computer game. Little offense meant, but a)those lands are already settled, b) economics of area later looked quite different. The proto-states of Scandinavia which made the trade feasible are not there yet. There is nobody in the Baltics capable of securing the routes.
Why is everybody treating this as a computer game. Little offense meant, but a)those lands are already settled, b) economics of area later looked quite different. The proto-states of Scandinavia which made the trade feasible are not there yet. There is nobody in the Baltics capable of securing the routes.