Ivan V is born healthy and hale.

Though idiot domestic in-laws are likely the reason Alexis II would want a European bride for his heir - "my son wouldn't have to put up with some idiots who want abundant favors from me just cause I'm married to their sister".
 
Though idiot domestic in-laws are likely the reason Alexis II would want a European bride for his heir - "my son wouldn't have to put up with some idiots who want abundant favors from me just cause I'm married to their sister".

Very true. Hmm, when might such a son be born? Around the 1670s?
 
I think 1672 is the wedding year (18th birthday of Alexis Jr.), and 1673 is the earliest birthday date for son possible.
 
I think 1672 is the wedding year (18th birthday of Alexis Jr.), and 1673 is the earliest birthday date for son possible.

Okay makes sense, so in 1673, Mikhail heir to Russia would be born. I imagine a Protestant Princess would be looked for? Perhaps from England, or from Denmark, Sweden or one of the German states.
 
German states are more likely, with our dear Duchess of Courland (Sophia) playing a matchmaker, though Denmark is ideal. Sweden is out of cards until "small Ingrian problem" is resolved and Russia regains access to Baltic, but Denmark or Brandenburg would be seriously considered - for alliance against said Sweden, if anything.
 
The second one is more likely, considering troubles Sophie Hedwig has converting into Catholicism (the reason she did not became the Holy Roman Empress) - though attitude of Lutherans towards "Papism" and Orthodox Christianity differed. Or it can be a princess from some minor house related to Denmark or Brandenburg dynastically, not necessary the main branch.
 
The second one is more likely, considering troubles Sophie Hedwig has converting into Catholicism (the reason she did not became the Holy Roman Empress) - though attitude of Lutherans towards "Papism" and Orthodox Christianity differed. Or it can be a princess from some minor house related to Denmark or Brandenburg dynastically, not necessary the main branch.

Alright this is true, thinking about it and considering Prussia's rise, Elisabeth might be the smartest option
 
And given the Hohenzollerns and Kettlers are related, this match is the easiest for the Duchess of Courland to arrange out of the important ones.
 
As for his policy towards the Commonwealth, the policy would be... mixed. On the one hand, the court reforms (clothes, etiquette, court entertainment etc) would be polonophilic. On the other hand, Alexis II is likely to be very distrustful of the Poles considering himself being "cheated" out of their crown, and this will play a part in his South-western policy, especially regarding TTL version of Eternal Peace.
 
As for his policy towards the Commonwealth, the policy would be... mixed. On the one hand, the court reforms (clothes, etiquette, court entertainment etc) would be polonophilic. On the other hand, Alexis II is likely to be very distrustful of the Poles considering himself being "cheated" out of their crown, and this will play a part in his South-western policy, especially regarding TTL version of Eternal Peace.
Very true. Could this possibly lead to war later on?
 
At first there is common enemy - the Turks. But he'll be much more paranoid towards the Poles than his brothers were OTL, and this will dictate his policy in TTL Holy League. As well as marriage alliance with Prussia later on - it's very important tool against both Commonwealth AND Sweden due to Prussian location.
I think that by 1690ies (when the War of Holy League is over, and the question of heir to Jan III is very unclear) there may be concluded a pact between Prussian and Russian court complete with dynastic marriage - directed both against Sweden and (secretly) against PLC with the master plan being to divide PLC (Kingdom of Poland goes to Hohenzollerns, Grand Duchy of Lithuania goes into personal union with Russia). Thus the plan looks like:
1. Turks
2. Swedes
3. Poles
Items 2 and 3 are subject to interchange depending on smartness/stupidity of foreign policy of Sweden and PLC regarding Russia in this timeline.
 
The war with Turks (as part of big coalition) is just what is needed to modernize & train the army, thus avoiding fails like Narva later on when facing modern armies in wars with (2) or (3). So it will definitely be the big part of first half of Alexis II reign.
The "Amur crisis" (Chinese war of 1681-1689) is also a topic of the day, as with 1682 being just another year of calendar there is quite enough of free Streltsy and quite a few of them have ambitions worthy of small vacation to Siberia. This crisis also depends on Alexis II ability to push the reform of Siberian dioceses, as there was only one Metropolitan for entire Siberia, who sat in Tobolsk. The separate Metropolitan seat for Eastern Siberia (in Irkutsk) was created in OTL only when Peter I abolished the Patriarchy and thus it was the Tsar who appointed Archbishops/Bishops. If Alexis II is successful in creating Metropolitan seat in Irkutsk, that will allow better management of Eastern Siberia, thus somewhat better odds in this conflict.
 
The war with Turks (as part of big coalition) is just what is needed to modernize & train the army, thus avoiding fails like Narva later on when facing modern armies in wars with (2) or (3). So it will definitely be the big part of first half of Alexis II reign.
The "Amur crisis" (Chinese war of 1681-1689) is also a topic of the day, as with 1682 being just another year of calendar there is quite enough of free Streltsy and quite a few of them have ambitions worthy of small vacation to Siberia. This crisis also depends on Alexis II ability to push the reform of Siberian dioceses, as there was only one Metropolitan for entire Siberia, who sat in Tobolsk. The separate Metropolitan seat for Eastern Siberia (in Irkutsk) was created in OTL only when Peter I abolished the Patriarchy and thus it was the Tsar who appointed Archbishops/Bishops. If Alexis II is successful in creating Metropolitan seat in Irkutsk, that will allow better management of Eastern Siberia, thus somewhat better odds in this conflict.

Alright, and potentially avoiding the abolishment all together
 
It's much more productive to find a candidate for Patriarchy that goes along with the reformist plans (somebody like (arch)bishop Athanasy of Kholmogory -a modern-minded cleric, born in Siberia and thus understanding the issues of managing Church in huge country and not protesting the increase in number of bishopricks under the pretext that "it would make existing bishops feel less special"), than abolishing the Patriarchy institution altogether.
 
It's much more productive to find a candidate for Patriarchy that goes along with the reformist plans (somebody like (arch)bishop Athanasy of Kholmogory -a modern-minded cleric, born in Siberia and thus understanding the issues of managing Church in huge country and not protesting the increase in number of bishopricks under the pretext that "it would make existing bishops feel less special"), than abolishing the Patriarchy institution altogether.

Very true very true. This could very well make the situation within Russia itself a bit more manageable and less chaotic than otl
 
By the way, Polonophilic reform of court customs is much healthier that what Peter did OTL. It both makes Russia seem less "Asian" yet still exotic for Europeans and removes the stupid OTL situation where Russian nobility might as well be of different ethnicity from their subjects (though the caricature "Russian aristocracy speaks Russian as second language if at all" situation was created more during later reigns, it started under Peter) - a Western Slavic example is what is needed for gradual transition.
And like with Elisabeth Petrovna and the French, being raised in particular culture/adoring the culture does not mean the automatic adoration of politics of country this culture belonged to. Realistically "Polonophilic in looks and customs, distrustful of Poles in deeds" would be a description of what Alexis II reign would look like.
 
Top