A better reign for Ivan the Terrible?

[Vinization]

The last Grand Prince of Moscow and first Tsar of Russia, Ivan IV's reign started on a promising note, with the conquest of the khanates of Kazan and Astrakhan, before taking a turn for the worst with the outbreak of the Livonian War and ending with self-harming actions like the Massacre of Novgorod and the killing of his son and heir, Ivan Ivanovich.

A good part of this decline can be owed to Ivan's growing paranoia and descent into madness, so what if he, among other things, didn't lose both of his parents at such a young age (Vasili III died when he was three years old, and Elena Glinskaya died when he was eight [and was just 27 years old at the time of her death])? How could having a saner and more reasonable Ivan IV affect Russia in the mid to late 16th century?

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

@alexmilman and @Lalli can correct me, but didn't things only start going downhill after Anastasia Romanova die though?

 

[Vinization]

@alexmilman and @Lalli can correct me, but didn't things only start going downhill after Anastasia Romanova die though?

Not having a child king and a regent dying before he became of age could definitely help, though.

 

[Aphrodite]

@alexmilman and @Lalli can correct me, but didn't things only start going downhill after Anastasia Romanova die though?

There are several incidents. Anastasia had a calming influence on Ivan. Maria, his second wife, encouraged his vengeance.

Ivan had a severe fever and was believed to have been close to death. Many of the nobles refused to swear allegiance to Ivan's son probably because they feared another long regency.

High fevers are associated with madness, especially in the era of no medical care

 

[Vinization]

Could Russia have won the Livonian War (say, by taking and keeping Reval, Dorpat and Narva at the very least)? I read a thread discussing the topic recently, and IIRC one of the posts said that the Russians "reverted" to a type of warfare not suited for that place and time.

Also, could the oprichnina be avoided?

@alexmilman

 

[Vinization]

Alternatively, could Ivan become king of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania if Sigismund II dies without issue as OTL?

 

[alexmilman]

Could Russia have won the Livonian War (say, by taking and keeping Reval, Dorpat and Narva at the very least)? I read a thread discussing the topic recently, and IIRC one of the posts said that the Russians "reverted" to a type of warfare not suited for that place and time.

Yes, it seems Ivan turned to the Tatar-heavy military style which, in combination with the excessive and unnecessary cruelty in the Livonian territories, was rather counterproductive. By that time Tsardom already had a regular infantry with the firearms, strong artillery and few thousands foreign mercenaries so the whole thing hardly was absolutely necessary and the system definitely was backward by that time.

Also, could the oprichnina be avoided?

@alexmilman

There are numerous theories on the subject from it being just Ivan’s paranoia and all the way to it being rationalized as a tool necessary for dealing with the restrictions upon Tsar’s power. So probably it was avoidable.

 

[Jürgen]

It seem to me the easiest way to improve his reign is that he fall downs some stairs and dies in… let’s say 1572.

 

[ordinarylittleme]

It seem to me the easiest way to improve his reign is that he fall downs some stairs and dies in… let’s say 1572.

But then he won't have a reign to improve if he's dead

 

[Jürgen]

But then he won't have a reign to improve if he's dead

SometIme’s the best leadership a leader can do… is not being a leader at all. Ivan need to die between his son turning 18 and Ivan killing him.

 

[ordinarylittleme]

SometIme’s the best leadership a leader can do… is not being a leader at all. Ivan need to die between his son turning 18 and Ivan killing him.

True.

 

[Vinization]

What could be some consequences of Vasili III living, say, 10 years longer than OTL? Could Kazan be conquered earlier? @alexmilman

 

[Vinization]

Yes, it seems Ivan turned to the Tatar-heavy military style which, in combination with the excessive and unnecessary cruelty in the Livonian territories, was rather counterproductive. By that time Tsardom already had a regular infantry with the firearms, strong artillery and few thousands foreign mercenaries so the whole thing hardly was absolutely necessary and the system definitely was backward by that time.


There are numerous theories on the subject from it being just Ivan’s paranoia and all the way to it being rationalized as a tool necessary for dealing with the restrictions upon Tsar’s power. So probably it was avoidable.

According to Wikipedia (I know) Lithuania was apparently willing to split Livonia with Russia during the 1560s, but the latter rejected it. Could a slightly different Ivan, plus something else (a big war with the Crimeans and Ottomans, perhaps?), convince Moscow to take the deal and perhaps gain control of Narva, Dorpat and Reval?

 

[alexmilman]

According to Wikipedia (I know) Lithuania was apparently willing to split Livonia with Russia during the 1560s, but the latter rejected it. Could a slightly different Ivan, plus something else (a big war with the Crimeans and Ottomans, perhaps?), convince Moscow to take the deal and perhaps gain control of Narva, Dorpat and Reval?

Quite possible, with a more sane ruler and without the e the war (which was strengthening the Lithuanian position).