Mongol advance halted

Let's say that the Volga Bulgars inflict a devastating defeat to the Mongols at Samara Bend afterwards the Mongols are successful again until they again suffer a devastating defeat to the Cummans and Genghis Khan is killed. A mounth later the Mongol advance is halted in the east when they besiege Trebizond but are defeated outside the city
 
Depends on how much they have when Genghis is killed. I don't know much about this area of history so I can't help you.
 
Let's say that the Volga Bulgars inflict a devastating defeat to the Mongols at Samara Bend afterwards the Mongols are successful again until they again suffer a devastating defeat to the Cummans and Genghis Khan is killed. A mounth later the Mongol advance is halted in the east when they besiege Trebizond but are defeated outside the city

Genghis was already dead when Rus campaign carried out by Batu and Subedei.

I don't no how Bulgarians and Cummans will stop them. It is almost impossible IMO.
Maybe later Mongols might try to invade Europe through Middle East and Anatolia. If this is also failed.
Back to OP. If there was no European conquest then, that means Europe won't suffer under Mongols. Mongols won't bring gunpowder to Europe means, gunpowder introduction delayed. So will be cannon and musket invention and development. Which means delayed armada. Which means delayed Exploration of India and New World by Portuguese and Spain.
Good news might be there is no Bubonic Plague.
 
Well, stronger and more stable states in Eastern-Central Europe, particalarly Poland and Hungary. Hungary has been absolutely devastated by the invasion which prompted the king to settle all sorts of people to keep the land cultivated. With no Mongols, we could see a more ethnically homogenous Hungary that can be a major player in the Mediterranean against Venice as well as having a more firm grip on the Balkans, maybe even countering the Ottomans more successfully.

I would say the lack of Mongols will have some butterflies in the Baltic as well, but I know precious little of the impact they had on the Northern Crusades.

In short: We could see an even stronger Poland and Hungary in the 1300's that can not only rival the HRE and Italian states as they did IOTL, but could very well surpass them by asserting control over trade in the Baltic and the Mediterranean.

Also, an earlier unified Russia?
 
I doubt.
But center of Rus culture will be around Kiev. Muscovite won't rise to power.

More like Kiev will remain the spiritual capital without a strong native dynasty. Vladimir on the Volyn or Vladimir in Zalesye are the big powers of the time, Smolensk is another contender. Chernigov's lands are already splintered into pretty small domains.

Moscow not arising is almost guaranteed though.
 
More like Kiev will remain the spiritual capital without a strong native dynasty. Vladimir on the Volyn or Vladimir in Zalesye are the big powers of the time, Smolensk is another contender. Chernigov's lands are already splintered into pretty small domains.

Moscow not arising is almost guaranteed though.

So we would have rival Russian states as there is no common enemy to unite against? Would that mean Russians not expanding into Siberia?
 
Russia would still unite if one of principalities got strong enough to conquer others. Which what happened OTL anyway - and not because of common enemy.

Also, there's no reason why principalities of divided Rus would not expand into Siberia - although it'd be a longer process than OTL.
 
So we would have rival Russian states as there is no common enemy to unite against? Would that mean Russians not expanding into Siberia?

Possibly. It depends on what happens to Volga Bulgaria. It controls the best trans-Ural route via the Kama.
 
Top