Make Russia considered part of the West

[Dude_guy]

IOTL, Russia was always considered too Asiatic or Eastern since atleast the medieval ages for a number of factors.

But how can a timeline where Russia is considered part of the West effect the world ?

Maybe Russia becomes part of the European enlightenment and renaissance and later the industrial revolution?

 

[General althist]

IOTL, Russia was always considered too Asiatic or Eastern since atleast the medieval ages for a number of factors.

Isn't that strange, when Russia was always Christianity-dominated until the Russian Revolution in 1917.

 

[cmakk1012]

Isn't that strange, when Russia was always Christianity-dominated until the Russian Revolution in 1917.

It’s because they were the “wrong type of Christianity.”

So I almost want to argue that you need to get rid of the Great Schism to keep this from happening but that seems way too early. Maybe a PoD that averts the Mongol invasions? Those really set Russia back and established its “Eastern character.”

 

[Jiraiyathegallant]

Make them Catholic instead of Orthodox. Then have them never separate from the rest of the West with something like Communism.

 

[stevej713]

It’s because they were the “wrong type of Christianity.”

It's more complex than that. Certainly by the 18th and 19th centuries, few people cared what kind of Christians the Russians were.

So I almost want to argue that you need to get rid of the Great Schism to keep this from happening but that seems way too early. Maybe a PoD that averts the Mongol invasions? Those really set Russia back and established its “Eastern character.”

The problem is that Russia is very remote and hard to reach from western Europe, while its geography gives it easy access to the Black Sea and the Caucasus. Russia was always bound to be influenced culturally by regions other than Western Europe.

 

[Escape Zeppelin]

It's more complex than that. Certainly by the 18th and 19th centuries, few people cared what kind of Christians the Russians were.

Yes, but by then they were already considered Eastern. If they're Roman Catholic from the start then that division never exists.

 

[cmakk1012]

It's more complex than that. Certainly by the 18th and 19th centuries, few people cared what kind of Christians the Russians were.

Sure, but by then the “Russia is Eastern” idea had become entrenched in Europe. Even in Russia—why else would Peter the Great feel the need to “Westernize”?

The problem is that Russia is very remote and hard to reach from western Europe, while its geography gives it easy access to the Black Sea and the Caucasus. Russia was always bound to be influenced culturally by regions other than Western Europe.

That’s true. The only easy route to the West is through the Baltic—which makes me wonder if Scandinavia could have helped it be percieved as Western. For instance, what if Novgorod got invaded by the Swedes or some other Scandinavian group after the Varangian era?

 

[Indicus]

Make it more apparently powerful, specifically in Europe (maybe get part of Prussia earlier and hold onto the Lordship of Jever), while reducing its influence in Asia (likely resulting in British Ferghana, Bukhara, etc.). Some of Siberia breaking off would be optimal for this.

 

[stevej713]

Sure, but by then the “Russia is Eastern” idea had become entrenched in Europe. Even in Russia—why else would Peter the Great feel the need to “Westernize”?

I definitely agree with you there. But I think it's worth noting that Poland was Catholic but was also regarded as backward and oriental in the 18th century.

 

[cmakk1012]

Make it more apparently powerful, specifically in Europe (maybe get part of Prussia earlier and hold onto the Lordship of Jever), while reducing its influence in Asia (likely resulting in British Ferghana, Bukhara, etc.). Some of Siberia breaking off would be optimal for this.

Actually, with an earlier PoD you could have a local empire block the Russians from the east instead. Something like a stable Timurids, maybe?

I definitely agree with you there. But I think it's worth noting that Poland was Catholic but was also regarded as backward and oriental in the 18th century.

I actually hadn’t realized that, but it makes sense. Was that partially due to the low urbanization of that region (same as Russia)?

 

[Grey Wolf]

I would argue that in 1914 they WERE considered part of "the West" as to how that phrase was visualised by then. US Newspapers trumpeted the Tsar's declaration of war on Germany, in a fashion that made it clear that they considered Russia a friendly part of their international political zone.

 

[Dude_guy]

Make them Catholic instead of Orthodox. Then have them never separate from the rest of the West with something like Communism.

Greece is orthodox Christian yet considered part of the West.

 

[Diego]

Well, some people will include in "The West" every country that is (or was) Christian, including Latin America, East Europe and parts of Africa, but other people more economically focused will exclude every poor and not so rich nation from that list, some will even exclude Poland and other Slavic countries. So what is west for you? Because it is just a matter of opinion and so it could be said that Russia being part of the west is OTL already.

 

[cmakk1012]

Greece is orthodox Christian yet considered part of the West.

That’s because of the Philhellenes and Romantic nationalism. Compare its modern treatment to how medieval Catholic Europe treated the Byzantines.

 

[Arkenfolm]

Isn't that strange, when Russia was always Christianity-dominated until the Russian Revolution in 1917.

Many Russians themselves didn't consider themselves the same civilisation as Western Europe but instead an "Orthodox Russian" civilisation. Hence the Slavophiles and the philosophy expounded by Konstantin Pobedonostsev. And the OTL historic development of Russia, with Russia on the fringe of Christian Europe, always being raided by steppe nomads, etc. seems to prove this.

 

[IamtheEmps]

Greece is orthodox Christian yet considered part of the West.

Thats largely because Philohellenes like all Romanticists ignored reality, I mean Katharevousa exists because Korais didn't like the Greek orthodox Church.

A simpler way is if the Byzantines don't fall, which would likely necessitate no Massacre of the Latins and no 4th Crusade. But if they are able to survive the current conceptions of the West would likely be quite different, and more explicitly just linked to being Christian, rather than more abstract things like Democracy and Liberalism, this would be due to the idea of Autocracy being more popular, and a greater focus on the latter parts of the Roman Empire. This is not to say that things like Philhellenism wouldn't exist, with its focus on the past, merely that the concept of the West would be less distinctly tied to Freedom, Democracy, and the Enlightenment, and more to the more vague and general concept of Christianity.

 

[Jan Olbracht]

Communism and Iron Curtain certainly greatly influenced East/West divide, so Finland and Greece are Western, while Estonia and Bulgaria are Eastern.

 

[Lalli]

Easiest way would be no Genghis Khan such no Mongol invasion and so Russian culture not become too "Asian".

 

[alexmilman]

IOTL, Russia was always considered too Asiatic or Eastern since atleast the medieval ages for a number of factors.

I'm not sure that Catherine II or her successors would agree with that notion and, anyway, status of the Great Power (at least in the XVIII - XIX) more or less implied being "Western".

But how can a timeline where Russia is considered part of the West effect the world ?

Why and how would anybody care and why would it matter at all?

Maybe Russia becomes part of the European enlightenment and renaissance and later the industrial revolution?

Depending upon the historian, the age of enlightenment starts anywhere between 1620 and 1715 with the end of it (according to the French) being 1789 (quite fitting ). While the 1st date is definitely too early, the 2nd fits quite well, especially according to Voltaire and other French philosophers "stimulated" by Catherine II). Renaissance is a little bit more difficult because it is rather vaguely defined outside the area of arts and even in that area it is varying from country to country in its form and scope. Anyway, it was introduced in Russia by Ivan III in the late XV (pretty much Italian time line) who imported a number of Italian architects to build the Cathedral of the Dormitionin the Moscow Kremlin, the fortifications of the Moscow Kremlin and a number of churches and palaces like the Palace of Facets (below).

By the XVII century, Renaissance influenced drastic changes in the traditional icon paintings, making them more realistic, and even in development of secular portrait painting. Printing was 1st time introduced in the XVI century and became wide-spread by the XVII, modern canon casting adopted in the 15th century. Allegedly, the 1st sample of aqua vitae had been brought to Russia in 1386 by the Genovese with the 1st documented Russian vodka being produced in 1430 (not sure what other sign of the technological progress one would need ). As for the non-critical technological developments (like railroads, process mechanization, etc.) for quite a while they did not make too much sense economically because manual work force was widely available and cheaper. As an ultimate extension of this solid principle of getting the same results with the minimal expenditures, allegedly some Soviet general, when explained that computer can do a lot of calculations, remarked that the same result could be achieved much cheaper by giving few thousand soldiers (free labor) manual calculators.

 

[alexmilman]

Sure, but by then the “Russia is Eastern” idea had become entrenched in Europe. Even in Russia—why else would Peter the Great feel the need to “Westernize”?

Because he was confused about meaning of the word. For him it mostly mean smoking, wearing clothes unsuitable for the Russian climate and adding randomly picked Dutch words to the Russian language. Well, also built the ships of the Dutch design for sailing in the northern seas (something they were ill-suited for, unlike the traditional ships of the Northern Russia), establishing an "Academy of Sciences" which he forgot to finance, renaming old "prokazes" into the "collegiums", "Boyar Duma" into "Senate", etc.

The main practical area in which the reforms had visible impact was military but these reforms had been started by his grandfather and steadily continued by Peter's predecessors in a way better suited for the Russian climate and cultural specifics. Anyway, out of all possible options Peter invariably was selecting the worst one. For example, his contemporary and adversary, Charles XII, trained his infantry for the bayonet attack and cavalry for attack on in the wedge formations on full gallop sword in hand. Peter explicitly forbade his cavalry to attack faster than a slow trot (even when pursuing), stressed linear cavalry and infantry formations and for infantry emphasized "regular" firing in salvos. Rather paradoxically, with all that Peter's cult, Potemkin in his military reforms completely rejected Petrian uniforms and the most prominent Russian generals of the XVIII century, Rumiantsev and Suvorov, stressed the bayonet attacks vs. firing (the trend continued in the XIX century all the way to the CW).

That’s true. The only easy route to the West is through the Baltic—which makes me wonder if Scandinavia could have helped it be percieved as Western. For instance, what if Novgorod got invaded by the Swedes or some other Scandinavian group after the Varangian era?

Novgorod was under the Swedish occupation for quite a while during the Time of Troubles without any visible "Westernization" effect. Not that there were problems for the Westerners to go to Russia before Livonia was conquered: there were plenty of them in the Russian service even before the 1st Romanovs and young Peter spent a quality time drinking and whoring in the German Settlement near Moscow.