Balkoruzia?

What are your ideas on a state in the Balkans formed in the mid 1200s by fleeing Kievan Rus. They were driven out by Mongols. They now control the Balkans, Romania, Greece, the Black Sea coast, the North Caucasus and Crimea. They have Cuman vassals who control East Ukraine and what I call the Volga Strip (a moderately thin strip stretching from the North Caucasus to Kazakhstan.
 
If it happened (which isn't really doable, IMO. While historically, some did obtained refuge in Hungary, I doubt a ragtag army of refugees could have conquered the region), Mongols would go for them as they did for every significant part of population they conquered that attempted to fleer their rule.

Namely, the IOTL campaigns in Hungary would probably be legitimized not only trough the Hungarian protection over Cuman refugees, but as well on protection over Rus' refugees.

It would probably more decisive into having a swift Mongol invasion of Central Europe, maybe this time dominating Pannonian Plain for a longer time, and utter political destruction of these Russian refugees that would eventually mix with locals.
 
The best possibility for a Rus on the Balkans is actually with Svyatoslav Igorevich. But interestingly, during a tax revolt against Izyaslav Yaroslavich, the citizens of Kiev did threaten to abandon his lands and move to Bulgaria, so there may have been some close links into the early 12th c.
 
It's much possible that you had the permanance of kinship links between Volga, Dniepr and Danubian peoples (slavic or not) even after the last migrating waves : Constantinople didn't have the monopole either on trade or cultural roads in the region.

That said, Svyatoslav's position was more of an hegemon in the region, position gained from military lead rather than dominance. Once Byzantines managed to play parts of the assembled peoples (that didn't took very well Rus' dominance in their military gathering), it was relatively easy (a bit like it happened with Avars, centuries before).

I'd rather think Roman Mstislavich's success and survival may lead to something interesting. A strong Russian/Rusian state with influence in northern Balkans, maybe strong enough to counterbalance Hungary in lower Danube with support from Constantinople?
 
I'd rather think Roman Mstislavich's success and survival may lead to something interesting. A strong Russian/Rusian state with influence in northern Balkans, maybe strong enough to counterbalance Hungary in lower Danube with support from Constantinople?

Hm. The Byzantines tried to conduct diplomacy with the Galich dynasty on a few occasions as a counterbalance to Hungary, so maybe they knew something we are missing, but Volhynia was remarkably unstable as a realm, even for a Rus principality. Still, interesting idea.

Of course I sort of have to point out that neither Russia nor Bulgaria nor Hungary (nor yet the Golden Horde nor Lithuania nor Poland) ever managed to create firm and direct control over modern Romania in the time period, and that it was very vulnerable to steppe invasions, so Rus refugee kingdoms in say, Belgorod (on the Dniestr) or Kilia or Birlad would probably prove ephemeral. But that could be just me.
 
Of course I sort of have to point out that neither Russia nor Bulgaria nor Hungary (nor yet the Golden Horde nor Lithuania nor Poland) ever managed to create firm and direct control over modern Romania in the time period
Indeed : I should have been less vague.

I was more thinking about a Galician realm being able to have a comparable influence on Cumanic peoples or valachiesin the Lower Danubian as Hungarian did.
Maybe this kind of influence (rather than direct control) could be more structurated up to evolve up to some form of vassalage as for Transylvania? Granted, Galicia looks (as other late Rus' principalities) quite instable, but with Byzantine support and a lesser focus on Kiev (a rival principality kicks Romanovich out of the Dniepr?)...
Maybe it could counterbalance (rather than replace, tough) Hungarian presence?

so Rus refugee kingdoms in say, Belgorod (on the Dniestr) or Kilia or Birlad would probably prove ephemeral. But that could be just me.
I'd tend to agree, if we're talking about refugees kingdoms, without much deep political structuration to work with.
A more slow process, tough, could proove interesting : at least as Slavic ensembles getting integrated into regional geopolitics (Neo-Sklavinias under Byzantine/Hungarian/Bulgarian/etc. dominance?) may have a bigger survival rate, in your opinion.
 
Well, the Birlad princes are the closest we have to a success story, and maybe something would have developed along those lines if it wasn't for the Mongol invasions. As it was we eventually got Moldavia and Bessarabia instead after the westernmost Golden Horde collapsed.

Another interesting complication is the (largely post-Mongol, and of course post-Fourth-crusade) presence of Venice and specifically Genoa who were the main forces about rebuilding the infrastructure in the Krimea and Dnestr/Danube/Dniepr/Don estuaries, largely in the same spots where former Rus' outposts stood. If nothing else it indicates that some of the core areas have inherent strategic value.
 
Top