Larger Russian America

What would be the effects of the Russian Empire controlling territory further south than Alaska into present day British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, or even California? Could the Russians have held onto this large Pacific coastal territory? How would this impact developments into the 20th century such as WW1 or the Russian Civil War, if they even still happened in a recognizable way?
 
File under "supremely unlikely" considering HOW and WHY Russian America was administered. But if something fundamentally changes Russian colonialism in the early 19th c. (an alliance with Britain seems like a must), doing much "better" than OTL is quite possible.
 
What would be the effects of the Russian Empire controlling territory further south than Alaska into present day British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, or even California? Could the Russians have held onto this large Pacific coastal territory? How would this impact developments into the 20th century such as WW1 or the Russian Civil War, if they even still happened in a recognizable way?

In OTL Russia did control a piece of the coastal area in CA (fort Ross). The answer to your 1st question is "no". Naval communications with the European Russia were too limited and Russian Pacific Coast did not have a noticeable population until the 2nd half of the XIX: until 1860 the main Russian base on the Pacific coast was Okhotsk, which is too far to the North to be self-sustainable (From 1870 Okhotsk was supplied form Nikolayevsk-on-Amur). So who would be populating all these territories you mentioned?
220px-Ct002999.jpg


You would need (a) much earlier massive migration to the Siberia all the way to the Pacific coast (which in OTL became possible only after construction of the Trans Siberian Railroad; prior to this travel to the Pacific coast was taking well over the year) and (b) a considerable number of people willing to migrate even further, across the Pacific and (c) earlier development of the considerable merchant fleet on the Pacific coast combined with a serious naval presence to guard the communications. Plus you would need government's sponsorship of the resettlement, military presence, earlier territorial acquisitions at China expense, etc.

For this, you need (a) a very serious earlier (as in late XVIII - early XIX) re-orientation of the Russian foreign policies from Europe to Asia with the borders of 1860 being achieved in the 1st decade of the XIX , (b) dedicated effort to built more or less decent roads all the way to the Pacific (something of the kind had been happening on a smaller scale in the late XIX), (c) enough "cadres" ready to resettle, which means a much earlier Serfdom reform made in a way stimulating move to Siberia, (d) fleet capable to carry the settlers to the other side of the Pacific. On the top of all of it, you would need readiness to support settlements with a force of arms: Anglo-American Convention of 1818 established the 49th Parallel as the international border on the North and Spain, in 1819, ceded their rights north of the 42nd Parallel to the United States, although these rights did not include possession. So even if the real settlement did not happen on a big scale for approximately 3 following decades and there was an additional treaty in 1846, the claims were there and so was a possibility of a military conflict over possession. Was Russian empire ready/capable to maintain a military effort in the area in the 1840's? Or was it capable of establishing a meaningful presence prior to the 1818 so that an agreement would include the 3rd party, Russia? I doubt it.
 
File under "supremely unlikely" considering HOW and WHY Russian America was administered. But if something fundamentally changes Russian colonialism in the early 19th c. (an alliance with Britain seems like a must), doing much "better" than OTL is quite possible.

Alliance with Britain most probably would be a must but there would also be a need of a completely different situation on the Russan Pacific Coast: "adjusted" border with China, settlers, infrastructure, navy, merchant fleet, etc. and all that by the very early XIX. Which means that Russia, as a minimum, is not involved in the idiocy called "Napoleonic Wars" and this makes its alliance with Britain quite questionable. :winkytongue:
 
Alliance with Britain most probably would be a must but there would also be a need of a completely different situation on the Russan Pacific Coast: "adjusted" border with China, settlers, infrastructure, navy, merchant fleet, etc. and all that by the very early XIX. Which means that Russia, as a minimum, is not involved in the idiocy called "Napoleonic Wars" and this makes its alliance with Britain quite questionable. :winkytongue:

Yeah, no question that it's difficult. Lots of things would have to change and require an almost strategy-player level of focus over generations. But I don't like completely discouraging hypotheticals on principle, because even within the bigger laws of material history there's room for unpredictable events with long-lasting consequences.
 
Yeah, no question that it's difficult. Lots of things would have to change and require an almost strategy-player level of focus over generations. But I don't like completely discouraging hypotheticals on principle, because even within the bigger laws of material history there's room for unpredictable events with long-lasting consequences.

Well, as I said before, if Russia stays out of the European mess, preferably starting from non-participation in the 7YW (this also includes no wars with the Ottomans) and makes a dedicated effort to expand on the Far East, building in a process a supporting infrastructure and providing a steady resettlement to the newly accessible Eastern regions starting from the Western Siberia and then further to the East, kicking the Chinese out of the territories which in OTL Russia got only in 1860 to provide a self-sustainable economy of the Russian Far East and after this is done proceeds with the naval development on the Pacific and starts noticeable settlement of the American Pacific coast then they are well-entrenched before the Brits or the rebellious colonists manage to get there in the noticeable numbers.

Is this completely unrealistic? No, because none of these requirements was physically impossible. However, the probability is quite low and a number of the butterflies is staggering both for Russia and for the whole Europe.

Just as an idle thought (and don't take it too seriously), when these pesky colonists got upset with a request to pay the taxes (something like 3%, IIRC; now I'm paying more just as the town's taxes and fees :teary:), the British government asked Catherine II for help offering Majorca as payment for the troops. Catherine refused to interfere into the "quarrel between King George and his subjects" but what if she agrees and requests pieces of the American Pacific coast as the payment? At that time the Brits (AFAIK) did not care too much about most of the area so they are agreeing. The open question is how on Earth the Russians would manage to get any noticeable number of the settlers there with their 1st circumnavigation being a matter of the future, the Russian-Chinese border still being one established by the Treaty of Nerchinsk, Siberia having very little of the Russian population, main Russian interests being on the Black Sea coast, etc.? However, this is a legal opportunity to make a stake recognized by the Brits, Can you fantasize some plausible details? :winkytongue:

Edit: Actually, an idea of Catherine's involvement is "borrowed" from the "Трехглавый орел" by Свержин https://www.e-reading.club/book.php?book=50900
quite entertaining schema because, among other personages, it involves "Tsar Peter Feodorovich" also known as Емелька Пугачев, certain French artillery lieutenant, and .... Баба Яга. :)
 
Last edited:
Russia pushing further south faster would likely mean Spain decides to explore and conquer California even earlier (which means less time for California natives to recover from diseases brought in the 16th century) and likely means a higher Hispanic population of California by the time Mexico gets its independence.

Gold being discovered earlier is a possibility, which might increase competition for conquering California.
 
One way might be larger Russian involvement in the sea otter trade; discovery of gold in Alaska which leads to further exploration south looking for more; larger settlement as Alaska is used for more permanent exile than Siberia.
 
One way might be larger Russian involvement in the sea otter trade; discovery of gold in Alaska which leads to further exploration south looking for more; larger settlement as Alaska is used for more permanent exile than Siberia.

Russia was involved in the sea otter trade as much as it was making practical sense all the way to almost complete extermination of the otters and othe sea mammal with the valuable skins. Discovery of gold in Alaska happened after the gold was found in Ural Mountains and various places of Siberia which were more easily reachable and suppliable.
As a place of exile Alaska did not make too much sense because Siberia with a later addition of Sakhalin were quite adequate for the task.

The main problem with Alaska is that by the time of its selling it had severe supply problems. Russian settlers had to rely upon agreement between RAC and Hudson Bay Company because Russian Far East was not yet developed enough to produce a surplus of food.

Not that there were too many volunteers ready to move to Alaska or Fort Ross in CA.
 
Russia was involved in the sea otter trade as much as it was making practical sense all the way to almost complete extermination of the otters and othe sea mammal with the valuable skins. Discovery of gold in Alaska happened after the gold was found in Ural Mountains and various places of Siberia which were more easily reachable and suppliable.
As a place of exile Alaska did not make too much sense because Siberia with a later addition of Sakhalin were quite adequate for the task.

The main problem with Alaska is that by the time of its selling it had severe supply problems. Russian settlers had to rely upon agreement between RAC and Hudson Bay Company because Russian Far East was not yet developed enough to produce a surplus of food.

Not that there were too many volunteers ready to move to Alaska or Fort Ross in CA.


Part of the reason for the failure of the Fort Ross colony was the RAC coming to a deal HBC for food. Once they secured food via the HBC, there was no need for Fort Ross.

John Sutter (who was a swiss immigrant) OTL threatened to pledge loyalty to the French when having issues with Mexican California. I don't see why he couldn't pledge loyalty to Russia instead. Russia proceeds to mark a claim to California north of the San Francisco Bay.

If Russia has a shortage of settlers, why not use coolies? The brief protectorate over Kauai provides for a decent way-station from China to California.
Alternatively they could invite Germans to settle there.
 
Part of the reason for the failure of the Fort Ross colony was the RAC coming to a deal HBC for food. Once they secured food via the HBC, there was no need for Fort Ross.

John Sutter (who was a swiss immigrant) OTL threatened to pledge loyalty to the French when having issues with Mexican California. I don't see why he couldn't pledge loyalty to Russia instead. Russia proceeds to mark a claim to California north of the San Francisco Bay.

If Russia has a shortage of settlers, why not use coolies? The brief protectorate over Kauai provides for a decent way-station from China to California.
Alternatively they could invite Germans to settle there.

In OTL the claims had to be backed up by a military and naval force and Russian abilities to project any serious force in CA area had been quite limited. It would be helpful to look at what Russian-China border looked like before 1860, just few years prior to the Alaska Purchase: even Russian Pacific coast was not self-sustainable and its population was minuscule.

Agreement with the HBC was concluded because settlement around Fort Ross did not attract enough farmers to produce the needed amounts of food. Sutter started development in the area but would they be adequate for the task? Would the Russians be able to protect them from the squatters?

And the basic question remains: why bother if there were other more important areas to apply Russian resources? RAC was not profitable and kept existing on the government subsidies. It’s main and practically the only goal, fur trade, went down the tubes and what was there down the coast? Nothing Russia was seriously interested in.

Coolies ended up being widely used to create infrastructure of the Russian Far East and to do a lot of work even in the European Russia and the Germans proved to be quite useful in the Russia proper. After all, it was not like Russia suffered from a shortage of land: it started developing the west agricultural areas of Siberia only after the RJW.
 
Top