No GNW (or “Peter goes South”)

Campaign of 1708
32. Campaign of 1708 and not only….

Things domestic

1. In 1706 Russia expanded nomenclature of its exports by adding grain. Not to be completely dependent upon its Dutch partners, a small caravan of 10 merchant ships with the mixed crews and wearing the Swedish colors sailed through the the Sound to Amsterdam. This was a small potato but with a great potential. Russian direct participation in a maritime trade, especially outside the “Russia-Sweden” route, also was something brand new: in general, the Russian merchants were rather reluctant to operate outside the home territory and, among other things, were lacking the credit institutions. Amsterdam had been chosen by two reasons: 1st, it was handling most of the Baltic grain trade and 2nd, it was a main Russian trade partner so there were some useful connections.[1]

2. Moscow water supply was mostly from the rivers flowing through it (not very clean, to put it mildly), the ponds (800 of them with a water quality even worse because population had been dumping into it garbage and excrements). Which left only the wells as a source of a clean drinking water. Moscow had over 5,000 of them but they were mostly on the private properties and only 3 of them available for the public use. The poor people had to pay the water carriers and quality of their water was not always high with the resulting regular epidemics of various infectious diseases.
1641495524659.jpeg

To deal with the issue, Peter ordered construction of a water supply system based upon the high quality spring water available in Mytishchi famous for its high quality water and conveniently located above Moscow city level. 43 water accumulation reservoirs had to be created, from them water would flow into reservoir at «Громовый ключ»
1641496196361.jpeg

and from it for 20km down the hill all the way to Moscow into the public fountains. The most spectacular part of the system was an aqueduct 292 meters long. The rest of the way water had been flowing by the underground pipes.
1641496724197.jpeg

The project was going to be expensive and time/labor-consuming. The labor-related part Peter addressed in his usual way by ordering military governor of Moscow to send 400 soldiers daily to work on the construction.[2]

3. Ukaz had been issued allowing everybody to look for the metals’ deposits (including silver and gold, which were so far state monopoly) a right to start extraction with the defined arrangements regarding compensation to the land owner and taxation (the precious metals had to be eventually sold to the state but this was a big difference from the existing state monopoly on the extraction).

4. It was officially announced that Tsarevna Ulrika Eleonora (Елена Карловна) is pregnant.

5. The newly founded wharf in Kherson completed construction of 2 first ships of the line, 84 and 74 guns. The usual caveat applied: they had been built fast which means that the wood was not dried properly and there are going to be problems with a speed and a length of service. But Peter needed the ships right here and now.

[To avoid misunderstandings, Apraksin is general-admiral, which is strictly speaking an administrative position, a minister of the navy with the corresponding functions but not a fighting admiral Of course, in OTL during Peter’s reign quite a few things had been confused because he kept borrowing the foreign titles without bothering to define their meaning. As a result, Apraksin was all over the place, constructing fleets, building fortresses and havens in Southern Russia, being chief of the admiralty and commanding the naval operations. Small wonder that he did not really excel in any of these activities and in 1715 fell into temporary disgrace with the tsar, who had been informed about disorders and bribery in the Admiralty. After brief investigation, he was fined and dispatched to govern Estonia.
In this TL he is predominantly concentrating on the Admiralty/ministerial duties, with the better results in the terms of a naval construction, supplies and preparing the personnel. The naval battles are going to be conducted by the professionals.
]


Back to war

On the Russian side.
By the start of 1708 campaign the Russian armies are positioned behind their “front line” on the Pruth and Danube. Their size is approximately the same as at the start of the previous year campaign: the battle losses are patched and those of the “natural causes” kept to minimum due to the adequate supplies during the winter. Their strategic plan is pretty much the same as in the previous year, only slightly more aggressive: instead of letting the Ottoman armies to just fell apart, engage and destroy them in the battles putting a psychological pressure upon the Sultan.

The navy has pretty much the same task: not to allow landings of the Ottoman troops in the Crimea or in a rear of the Russian armies. The Black Sea fleet, with the newly-built ships, may start acting more aggressively.

On the Ottoman side. A brand new Vizier [3] is raising one more army of 150,000 with a stated goal of kicking the Russians out of Moldavia. The ideas regarding conquest of Kiev (,Moscow and Kamchatka) are temporarily put on hold. A second “prong” of the Ottoman advance is to organize landings everywhere from Ochakov to the Kuban. A newly-appointed Kapudan Pasha ( لِسانِ عُثمانى, lisân-ı Osmânî) got his position swearing to clear the Black Sea from the Russian presence [4]. Part of the Ottoman navy had been moved from the Aegean to the Black Sea and positioned at Varna. The leftovers of the Mehmed Giray’s Tatars are still around on the Lower Danube.






______________
[1] In a long run Peter and Charles may try to turn market of the Baltic exports into a quasi-monopoly allowing to keep the high prices. For this they’ll need cooperation of (at least) two other players.
[2] Of course, this construction is not perfect and in a few decades will need the improvements and reconstruction but its completion (within few years) is going to supply Moscow with a clean drinking water.
[3] Surprise? Anybody? 😜
[4] Well, and the fact that he is married to the Sultan's sister also did not hurt.
 
A brand new Vizier [3] is raising one more army of 150,000 with a stated goal of kicking the Russians out of Moldavia. The ideas regarding conquest of Kiev (,Moscow and Kamchatka) are temporarily put on hold
I see the Ottomans are very humble and constrained in their war goals :p
 
I can see what you mean, though I used Great Power as a shorthand for a general idea. I really was thinking specifically about their military capability to resist other “Great Powers.” Historically as you know Sweden’s ability to defend itself really fell off over time, much like Spain or the Netherlands. Against Russia or a United Germany, Sweden of our 20th century would be toast. Even a stronger Sweden would be unlikely to be able to beat either of those nations (if Germany unites) but the power balance could be a lot closer. Great power has a bunch of other connotations a lot of which have to do with perception rather than reality, so maybe I should have used a different term.
Well, we are still in the early XVIII century, Sweden strengthened its position both by a modest but strategically important expansion and by a mutually-profitable strategic alliance and for now is quite secure from the 3rd parties at least for the next century.
 
Well, we are still in the early XVIII century, Sweden strengthened its position both by a modest but strategically important expansion and by a mutually-profitable strategic alliance and for now is quite secure from the 3rd parties at least for the next century.

Yes as ling as the Russian-Swedish alliance exist, Sweden is secure.
 
4. It was officially announced that Tsarevna Ulrika Eleonora (Елена Карловна) is pregnant.
This is interesting - OTL she never had any children, and her marriage is described as "unhappy and childless" - it is possible that she was infertile or at least had trouble conceiving, as her husband had several illegitimate children and the royal couple should at least have been trying for an heir, if nothing else for state matters. Her mother suffered many miscarriages.

It would also be interesting what she will take up - she was a woman of ambition and energy and quite some self control - during a dinner at the British embassy in 1719, when a Russian squadron of galleys raided the outskirts of the Archipelago outside Stockholm she stoically remained at dinner instead of fleeing to the countryside like many of the noblemen, probably preventing a general panic. She liked reading and was interested in currency and numismatics - she might collect Russian coins and create a coin museum (as she did OTL in Sweden). She also enjoyed music and dancing, so arranging "western" style balls might be a way for her to entertain herself and earn some appreciation from Peter, who will probably love anyone who brings something western to Moscow (although I suspect Ulrika Eleonora and Peter's ideas on how much drinking should be done on a ball would differ). :p

She was also quite pious, but not as far as I know fanatical protestant. I could see her spending some time with orthodox bishops and metropolitans to explore the faith of her new home country and perhaps visit cathedrals, churches and places of worship and perhaps also write and inspire writing on some similarities in protestantism and orthodoxy (as opposed to catholicism). Being respectful of the religion was usually a good way to endear yourself as a foreign princess in Russia, and she is probably smart enough to realise that.
 
I can see what you mean, though I used Great Power as a shorthand for a general idea. I really was thinking specifically about their military capability to resist other “Great Powers.” Historically as you know Sweden’s ability to defend itself really fell off over time, much like Spain or the Netherlands. Against Russia or a United Germany, Sweden of our 20th century would be toast. Even a stronger Sweden would be unlikely to be able to beat either of those nations (if Germany unites) but the power balance could be a lot closer. Great power has a bunch of other connotations a lot of which have to do with perception rather than reality, so maybe I should have used a different term.

Well, we are still in the early XVIII century, Sweden strengthened its position both by a modest but strategically important expansion and by a mutually-profitable strategic alliance and for now is quite secure from the 3rd parties at least for the next century.

Yes as ling as the Russian-Swedish alliance exist, Sweden is secure.

I agree here. As long as the alliance holds - and I really see not reason why it should not - Sweden is secure. How the Swedo-Russian alliance acts and reacts to the War of Austrian Succession and Seven Years' War will probably decide its future, but in general, Sweden's ambition during the 18th century was to restore some of its lost territory and end the meddling in its internal politics (by bribery of the estates parliament representatives by the foreign embassies) - neither will probably be a problem here, and a much less corrupt Sweden will like the OTL 17th century Sweden probably be way head of all other countries in using its resources, until Prussia rises to match it.

More importantly, I think both the Swedish and the Russian attitude to each other will have some long-term change. This is before Russia gained the "boogeyman" status of Sweden and became the "arch-enemy". Here Sweden and Russia have fought limited wars, with Sweden generally coming out on top, Sweden tried to support Russia against Poland-Lithuania in the Smolensk War and then Russia changed its attitude in the 1680s, renouncing its claim to Kexholm and Ingria, and then the countries became allies and the Russians proved to be vaulable and honourable allies. Denmark might remain Sweden's arch-enemy, and eventually be replaced by Prussia and then Germany. The OTL omni-present Russoophobia might be butterflied away completely.

The Russian attitude towards Sweden might also change quite a bit - while Sweden was always too small to be a Russian arch-enemy, Sweden's OTL attempts to regain territory lost as soon as Russia went to war against the Ottomans annoyed Russia. Here Sweden will appear to Russia as a country that while they did take Ingria and Kexholm during the times of trouble, once dealt with fairly was willing to return the important parts of it (and help Russia regain other parts lost to Poland-Lithuania). It would seem to Russia that being nice to Sweden has an automatic respone of getting a nice treatment back.

When it comes to Sweden's grand power status, it will probably remain for quite some time. ITTL, the Danes are the only ones capable of actually bringing a war to Sweden proper - Russia could get into Estonia, Livonia, Ingria, Kexholm and Finland. But Denmark alone is too weak to challenge Sweden, especially when Sweden's eastern border is secure (not that the Danes will actually know this - their experience is that Sweden alone could be taken on, as in the Scanian War).

Prussia/Germany will not have a navy able to challenge the Swedish one until the 1880s.

However, it is possible that a Danish-Hannovrian-Prussian Alliance would arise, especially after the Hannovers assume the throne in Britain, to go against Sweden. While George cannot use the Royal Navy against Sweden, he can make sure Britain does not support Sweden against this alliance.
 
I agree here. As long as the alliance holds - and I really see not reason why it should not - Sweden is secure. How the Swedo-Russian alliance acts and reacts to the War of Austrian Succession and Seven Years' War will probably decide its future, but in general, Sweden's ambition during the 18th century was to restore some of its lost territory and end the meddling in its internal politics (by bribery of the estates parliament representatives by the foreign embassies) - neither will probably be a problem here, and a much less corrupt Sweden will like the OTL 17th century Sweden probably be way head of all other countries in using its resources, until Prussia rises to match it.

Denmark might remain Sweden's arch-enemy, and eventually be replaced by Prussia and then Germany. The OTL omni-present Russoophobia might be butterflied away completely.

I am not so sure that Prussia will manage to rise and become the major regional rival. I think there is a great possibility for Charles to live until the late 1740s or even early 1750s. So far there are no butterflies that will change much in western Europe. If Fritz is not butterflied, then he will be the same ambitious, grasping monarch. The unlawful grap of Silesia will be horrifying for a monarch with Charles' sensibilities. And monarchs tend to grow more subborn by age, especially if they haven't faced severe setbacks during their reign. Moreover, Prussia did grab part of Swedish Pomerania in the past. So both personal traits and state interests make Carolean Sweden a natural ally for Maria Theresia.

TTL's Sweden will have significantly more resources and will lack the OTL internal weakness. At 1740, Sweden on its own can beat Prussia. Therefore, I think Prussia will be ebat long before it can gain a Great Power status. At the same time, Hannover cannot hope to become a regional power in the Empire, since it is being saddled to Britain. Having the same ruler as Britain is very useful when it comes to defence but it is very constrictive if the Electorate wants to become a Great Power. Overall, I don't see a northern german state becoming a regional rival of Sweden, not during the 18th century at the very least. Denmark will continue to have the dubious honor of being Sweden's arch-enemy.
 
Last edited:
This is interesting - OTL she never had any children, and her marriage is described as "unhappy and childless" - it is possible that she was infertile or at least had trouble conceiving, as her husband had several illegitimate children and the royal couple should at least have been trying for an heir, if nothing else for state matters. Her mother suffered many miscarriages.

She had two miscarriages, in 1715 and 1718. In this TL she may get lucky (preferably, more than once) to simplify the all-important line of the Swedish-Russian alliance. Otherwise, will have to start inventing alternative marriages, succession by the daughters of Ivan V and other messy things all the way to Peter’s second marriage (Catherine is not in the cards) …. eeek. 😉
It would also be interesting what she will take up - she was a woman of ambition and energy and quite some self control - during a dinner at the British embassy in 1719, when a Russian squadron of galleys raided the outskirts of the Archipelago outside Stockholm she stoically remained at dinner instead of fleeing to the countryside like many of the noblemen, probably preventing a general panic. She liked reading and was interested in currency and numismatics - she might collect Russian coins and create a coin museum (as she did OTL in Sweden).

Peter already founded his Kuntskamera so this would fit just fine.
She also enjoyed music and dancing, so arranging "western" style balls might be a way for her to entertain herself and earn some appreciation from Peter, who will probably love anyone who brings something western to Moscow (although I suspect Ulrika Eleonora and Peter's ideas on how much drinking should be done on a ball would differ). :p

AFAIK, Peter had firmly set ideas on certain subjects. 😜

She was also quite pious, but not as far as I know fanatical protestant. I could see her spending some time with orthodox bishops and metropolitans to explore the faith of her new home country and perhaps visit cathedrals, churches and places of worship and perhaps also write and inspire writing on some similarities in protestantism and orthodoxy (as opposed to catholicism). Being respectful of the religion was usually a good way to endear yourself as a foreign princess in Russia, and she is probably smart enough to realise that.
And here goes the main issue. To become something beyond just being a wife of Tsarevich/Tsar she must convert. Then she can be crowned and taken seriously by the Russians. Of course, she may have some personal influence even without it but it is not the same.
 
I agree here. As long as the alliance holds - and I really see not reason why it should not - Sweden is secure. How the Swedo-Russian alliance acts and reacts to the War of Austrian Succession and Seven Years' War will probably decide its future, but in general, Sweden's ambition during the 18th century was to restore some of its lost territory and end the meddling in its internal politics (by bribery of the estates parliament representatives by the foreign embassies) - neither will probably be a problem here, and a much less corrupt Sweden will like the OTL 17th century Sweden probably be way head of all other countries in using its resources, until Prussia rises to match it.

More importantly, I think both the Swedish and the Russian attitude to each other will have some long-term change. This is before Russia gained the "boogeyman" status of Sweden and became the "arch-enemy". Here Sweden and Russia have fought limited wars, with Sweden generally coming out on top, Sweden tried to support Russia against Poland-Lithuania in the Smolensk War and then Russia changed its attitude in the 1680s, renouncing its claim to Kexholm and Ingria, and then the countries became allies and the Russians proved to be vaulable and honourable allies. Denmark might remain Sweden's arch-enemy, and eventually be replaced by Prussia and then Germany. The OTL omni-present Russoophobia might be butterflied away completely.

The Russian attitude towards Sweden might also change quite a bit - while Sweden was always too small to be a Russian arch-enemy, Sweden's OTL attempts to regain territory lost as soon as Russia went to war against the Ottomans annoyed Russia. Here Sweden will appear to Russia as a country that while they did take Ingria and Kexholm during the times of trouble, once dealt with fairly was willing to return the important parts of it (and help Russia regain other parts lost to Poland-Lithuania). It would seem to Russia that being nice to Sweden has an automatic respone of getting a nice treatment back.

When it comes to Sweden's grand power status, it will probably remain for quite some time. ITTL, the Danes are the only ones capable of actually bringing a war to Sweden proper - Russia could get into Estonia, Livonia, Ingria, Kexholm and Finland. But Denmark alone is too weak to challenge Sweden, especially when Sweden's eastern border is secure (not that the Danes will actually know this - their experience is that Sweden alone could be taken on, as in the Scanian War).

Prussia/Germany will not have a navy able to challenge the Swedish one until the 1880s.

However, it is possible that a Danish-Hannovrian-Prussian Alliance would arise, especially after the Hannovers assume the throne in Britain, to go against Sweden. While George cannot use the Royal Navy against Sweden, he can make sure Britain does not support Sweden against this alliance.
The 1st obvious question, which I already asked, is the Danish-Swedish animosity irreconcilable? In OTL in the same XVIII century both of them ended up in (both) Neutrality leagues. While a quarrel around few tiny pieces if a territory is, of course, all important, look at the “big picture”. They, plus Russia, are the major suppliers of the strategic naval materials (IIRC, Norway was a big in timber) and by having an “economic alliance” they may pretty much dictate the prices to the maritime powers. Add to this almost complete control of the grain market [1] and the alliance can squeeze the balls really hard. The Baltic market is big enough to be practically self-sufficient (at least for quite a while) but what are the maritime powers without a timber, hemp, etc.?

So what makes more sense: to go to a risky war (Sweden + Russia is a serious combination and Prussia of the Old Fritz is a matter of future and nay not even happen) or to join the Mafia family and enjoy the profits? 😉


___________________
[1] The only other big player on the Baltic markets is Danzig but (a) its merchants are not going to lose from hiking the prices and (b) taking into an account all other “factors” of this TL, non-cooperation may be quite painful.
 
I am not so sure that Prussia will manage to rise and become the major regional rival. I think there is a great possibility for Charles to live until the late 1740s or even early 1750s. So far there are no butterflies that will change much in western Europe. If Fritz is not butterflied, then he will be the same ambitious, grasping monarch. The unlawful grap of Silesia will be horrifying for a monarch with Charles' sensibilities. And monarchs tend to grow more subborn by age, especially if they haven't faced severe setbacks during their reign. Moreover, Prussia did grab part of Swedish Pomerania in the past. So both personal traits and state interests make Carolean Sweden a natural ally for Maria Theresia.

TTL's Sweden will have significantly more resources and will lack the OTL internal weakness. At 1740, Sweden on its own can beat Prussia. Therefore, I think Prussia will be ebat long before it can gain a Great Power status. At the same time, Hannover cannot hope to become a regional power in the Empire, since it is being saddled to Britain. Having the same ruler as Britain is very useful when it comes to defence but it is very constrictive if the Electorate wants to become a Great Power. Overall, I don't see a northern german state becoming a regional rival of Sweden, not during the 18th century at the very least. Denmark will continue to have the dubious honor of being Sweden's arch-enemy.
And keep in mind that in this TL Sweden has a Russian backing. Which makes exercises at her expense quite risky and costly. Prussia still may rise as long as it happens at Austrian expense but an attempt to get into Russian-Swedish-Polish area means a big war and in this TL Russia is a much bigger scare than it was before the 7YW.
 
And here goes the main issue. To become something beyond just being a wife of Tsarevich/Tsar she must convert. Then she can be crowned and taken seriously by the Russians. Of course, she may have some personal influence even without it but it is not the same.

I don't hold it impossible that she might convert after some time exploring the orthodox faith. "Moscow is worth a mass" after all. :)

The 1st obvious question, which I already asked, is the Danish-Swedish animosity irreconcilable? In OTL in the same XVIII century both of them ended up in (both) Neutrality leagues. While a quarrel around few tiny pieces if a territory is, of course, all important, look at the “big picture”. They, plus Russia, are the major suppliers of the strategic naval materials (IIRC, Norway was a big in timber) and by having an “economic alliance” they may pretty much dictate the prices to the maritime powers. Add to this almost complete control of the grain market [1] and the alliance can squeeze the balls really hard. The Baltic market is big enough to be practically self-sufficient (at least for quite a while) but what are the maritime powers without a timber, hemp, etc.?

So what makes more sense: to go to a risky war (Sweden + Russia is a serious combination and Prussia of the Old Fritz is a matter of future and nay not even happen) or to join the Mafia family and enjoy the profits? 😉


___________________
[1] The only other big player on the Baltic markets is Danzig but (a) its merchants are not going to lose from hiking the prices and (b) taking into an account all other “factors” of this TL, non-cooperation may be quite painful.

OTL Denmark pretty much gave up on regaining Scania after the devastating defeat at Helsingborg 1710, which showed them that even when Sweden had lost its entire army and was at war with everyone with no support from anyone, it could still crush the Danish army in the field. Before that, Denmark had the idea that they could take on Sweden if Sweden did not have grand power support. After that, Denmark was content in removing Holstein-Gottorp as a Swedish ally and retained an alliance with Russia mostly to make sure Sweden did not enact any designs on Norway.

Without the defeat of 1710, Denmark will probably still want their lost territory back and think they could get it, especially if they could get some serious support - from Hannover (with the British economic might behind them) and Prussia, for example.

It was not until Denmark acquired Holstein completely in 1721 that Denmark's focus turned south, to preserve it and after the loss of Norway (and the navy to the British, meaning they had no way to retake it) that conflict with Sweden became impossible.

Sweden and Denmark are arch-enemies in this era - in 1658 and 1660, Sweden threatened to completely wipe out Denmark as a sovereign nation. 1677 Denmark was close to ending the Swedish Empire.

It would take some serious changes for this enmity to end without one party suffering a defeat to the extent that they realise they are unable to reverse it.

One possible way could be that a Hannovrian-Mecklemburgian-Prussian-Danish coalition attacks Sweden, perhaps immediately after the death of Peter, thinking Russia will be in turmoil and unable to respond. The Danes land an army in Scania and are utterly, utterly crushed. The Russians advance into East Prussia and occupy Königsberg. The Mecklemburgians are stuck outside Wismar and the Prussian army are not making headway on Stettin and the Hannovrians are stuck laying siege to forts in Swedish Bremen.

The Germans make peace as the Russians prepare to advance into German proper, and Denmark, angry at this betrayal and realising they are unable to fight Sweden on lan, and that the threat of the joint Swedo-Russian navy may actually be an existential threat to them also make peace. If Karl XII did not marry and have an heir, but rather adopted his nephew Karl Fredrik of Holstein-Gottorp, some kind of trade could be made. The Danes get Holstein-Gottorp (Karl Fredrik does not really need it if he's to become King of Sweden) and Sweden gets Tröndelag and northern Norway and now Denmark has its focus to the south and against the perfidious Germans rather than Sweden (and Russia).
 
The Germans make peace as the Russians prepare to advance into German proper, and Denmark, angry at this betrayal and realising they are unable to fight Sweden on lan, and that the threat of the joint Swedo-Russian navy may actually be an existential threat to them also make peace. If Karl XII did not marry and have an heir, but rather adopted his nephew Karl Fredrik of Holstein-Gottorp, some kind of trade could be made. The Danes get Holstein-Gottorp (Karl Fredrik does not really need it if he's to become King of Sweden) and Sweden gets Tröndelag and northern Norway and now Denmark has its focus to the south and against the perfidious Germans rather than Sweden (and Russia).
OK, how about the exchange happening without a war? IIRC, in OTL some kind of a swap happened (don’t remember if this was during EI or CII reign) with something going to Oldenburg and Denmark getting the Holstein/Schleswig and all this did not require a major war or any war at all. I understand that you guys are extremely blood thirsty but is a war really prerequisite for coming to a consensus? 😂



So the basic question is: are the Danish and Swedish rulers so bent on a quarrel over small pieces of land (and, as I understand, even one which none of them possesses, quarrel over Holstein) that they are going to ignore a possibility of the extremely profitable (as in 💰💵💶💷💴🤑 for pretty much nothing) arrangement?
 
But Alex, how will my Russians get the Baltic States with a continued Swedish / Russian Alliance? By trading them for Norway and Denmark? 😉
 
And keep in mind that in this TL Sweden has a Russian backing. Which makes exercises at her expense quite risky and costly. Prussia still may rise as long as it happens at Austrian expense but an attempt to get into Russian-Swedish-Polish area means a big war and in this TL Russia is a much bigger scare than it was before the 7YW.

I think that in TTL Russia wont be a century-long ally of the Emperor. However, even in TTL it makes sense that Russia would be a natural ally of Maria Theresia. Even in 1740, Russia will be the newest kid in the classroom of European Powers. I think that instinctively the rulling elite will gravitate towards legalism in international relations and act as a "proper" power, not like power-hungry upstarts (Frederick).

When it comes to actual state interests, by that point I expect Russia to control all the area between the Dniester and the Taman Peninsula. With ports and cities (even minor ones) at the mouths of the Dnieper and Southern Bug and fortresses/ magazines on Dniester east bank, the Russians can operate in the Danubian Principalities with the same ease as in OTL 1828. It would still be challenging, but incredibly less compared to the OTL 18th century. However, Vienna would throw a fit if the Danubian Principalities became russian vassals. The only time Vienna would not mind russian influence along the Danube would be during the War of Austrian Succession. Considering the OTL, the Austrians would be grateful for russian support and they would happily sign off the Principalities. When you lose the Imperial Crown and your Patrimony is close to dissolution, you don't care about an ottoman province.

Frankly, further russian expansion would have to be either towards the PLC or turning the Danubian Principalities into buffer states or protectorates. Encroaching the PLC would disrupt the lovely (for russian interests) state of affairs there and it would be against the interests of Sweden, their principal ally. On the other hand, there is always Circassia and the Caucasus, but they will always be secondary targets compared to european affairs.
 
Campaign of 1708 (cont)
But Alex, how will my Russians get the Baltic States with a continued Swedish / Russian Alliance? By trading them for Norway and Denmark? 😉
Why should they get the Swedish Baltic Provinces at all? They got Ingria and are constructing port(s) there so why do they need adding areas with the non-Russian population and their own laws? In OTL until XIX century the Baltic provinces preserved their own laws and privileges and Russian administrative rights had been quite limited. In Riga the old guild rights were still in place in 1812 (may be later) so, for example, the Russians (and even the Latvians who did not have the full “cotizenship” status) could not establish their business in the city. BTW, one of the first things Peter did in OTL was an attempt to kill all existing ports (the Baltic ones and Archangelsk) to promote trade through St. Petersburg. It did not work but the damage was done and the important thing is that Peter seemingly did not consider a commercial value of these ports as a critical factor in his decisions. He got these areas during the war and to return them would be silly, that’s it.


A consideration of not having Sweden as a neighbor both on the left and right is not important in this TL, trade is going through all ports and there are more important directions in which Russia wants to expand so the stimulus is absent.
 
True, Manchuria is the better option 😜. But it just doesnt look good, a Russia stretching from the vistula to both Bessarabia in the south and through Finland all the way to Varangerbotn in the North, though Mongolia into Manchuria and Kamchatka is aesthetically pleasing.

But joking aside, I get the Black Sea conquest will be more important for now. But I also think your alt Russia is a much better place to be for the Baltic States than OTL Russia (you already mentioned originalPeter's destruction of their potential ITOL). I'm a firm believer than many of the rebellious instances of separation, both in the old days and now, are all motivated by wealth. A newRussia where newPeter actually not destroy the Baltic ports in favour of Sint Petersburg, actually would probably benefit more from a wealthy Russia with many trade goods over Sweden, which has many other ports closer to their production. And sure Russia can trade via allied Sweden or the Black Sea (depending on the Ottomans) but less barriers is beter. So there is not a complete lack of incentive.
 
I think that in TTL Russia wont be a century-long ally of the Emperor.
As far as I have some say on it, it will not be Hapsburgs’ ally at all. 😂

Some occasional short-term purely pragmatic arrangements, probably, but that’s it: if Russia is successful in an ongoing war against the Ottomans and gets what it really wants (border on the Dniester and Kuban, Crimea and a right of passage through the Straits), it does not have common interests with the Hapsburgs and, while their potential expansion into Serbia, etc. is more or less OK, expansion down the Danube is not so and any attempt to destroy a beautiful Russian-Swedish-Saxon menage a trois in the PLC is a challenge to war.



However, even in TTL it makes sense that Russia would be a natural ally of Maria Theresia. Even in 1740, Russia will be the newest kid in the classroom of European Powers.
Which is not an argument to make itself a tool of somebody else’s politics (as in OTL). Russia is getting what it wants/needs and then it is a matter of the mutually profitable trade relations (AFAIK, pretty much none of those with Austria and Prussia) with Sweden, the maritime powers and the Ottomans (for as long as they behave). Maybe eventually with France on the Med. How exactly the Hapsburgs are fitting into this schema?



I think that instinctively the rulling elite will gravitate towards legalism in international relations and act as a "proper" power, not like power-hungry upstarts (Frederick).
In OTL Prussia and the Netherland recognized Russian imperial status (1721) earlier than Austria (1742 in exchange for recognition of the Pragmatic Sanction). Sweden - 1723, the Ottomans - 1739, Britain - 1742 (initial explanation was that this title is being used only for the Asiatic rulers, which probably puts the HRE to Asia 😂), France - 1745, Spain - 1759 and the PLC only in 1764. In other words, playing nicely did not produce any dividends so why stick to the losing scenario?


When it comes to actual state interests, by that point I expect Russia to control all the area between the Dniester and the Taman Peninsula. With ports and cities (even minor ones) at the mouths of the Dnieper and Southern Bug and fortresses/ magazines on Dniester east bank, the Russians can operate in the Danubian Principalities with the same ease as in OTL 1828.
And the obvious question is: to which purpose? AFAIK, the economic benefits were negligible while the political/military entanglements - enormous. “Ease” is quite optimistic: besides considerable military losses and quite a few upsets in 1828-29, Russian army had been losing thousands if not tens of thousands by the diseases.
This was classic “influence for the sake of influence” mentality.



It would still be challenging, but incredibly less compared to the OTL 18th century. However, Vienna would throw a fit if the Danubian Principalities became russian vassals.
First of all, this vassal thing is not going to happen in this TL: I thought that this was clearly stated in a section which described the Russian strategic goals. Second, why exactly would Russia care about the Austrian tantrums? What Austria can do in practical terms?


The only time Vienna would not mind russian influence along the Danube

See above. Not an issue because there is nothing worthy of being “influenced”.

would be during the War of Austrian Succession. Considering the OTL, the Austrians would be grateful for russian support and they would happily sign off the Principalities. When you lose the Imperial Crown and your Patrimony is close to dissolution, you don't care about an ottoman province.

Taking into an account that, except for the OTL idiotic policies of Osterman & Co, there was no Russian interest in this war, all schemas involving Russian participation in this war are off the table and, anyway, we are still in 1707, far away from this war.

Frankly, further russian expansion would have to be either towards the PLC

No need in this either because in OTL it happened only due to the Prussian-Austrian pressure and the circumstances which are quite unlikely within framework of this TL (not sure when it is going to end but so far it is already seriously different from OTL). No need to expand into it: Russia already got pretty much everything that made practical sense and from now one the PLC territory is sacrosanct under the Russian-Swedish protection. “The third parties do not have to apply”.
or turning the Danubian Principalities into buffer states or protectorates.

They already are the buffer states being the Ottoman vassals.
Encroaching the PLC would disrupt the lovely (for russian interests) state of affairs there and it would be against the interests of Sweden, their principal ally.

You see, no sense in rocking this specific boat or allowing anybody else to do this.
On the other hand, there is always Circassia and the Caucasus, but they will always be secondary targets compared to european affairs.
Conquest of “Circassia” took all the way to the reign of AII and the only tangible profit was settlement of the Kuban Cossacks in the area left pretty much empty after the natives had been expelled to the Ottoman Empire. As for the rest of the Caucasus, until oil of Baku became a valuable commodity (serious extraction started only in 1846), did not make practical sense because it was very little there to loot.
 
True, Manchuria is the better option 😜. But it just doesnt look good, a Russia stretching from the vistula to both Bessarabia in the south and through Finland all the way to Varangerbotn in the North, though Mongolia into Manchuria and Kamchatka is aesthetically pleasing.

But joking aside, I get the Black Sea conquest will be more important for now. But I also think your alt Russia is a much better place to be for the Baltic States than OTL Russia (you already mentioned originalPeter's destruction of their potential ITOL). I'm a firm believer than many of the rebellious instances of separation, both in the old days and now, are all motivated by wealth. A newRussia where newPeter actually not destroy the Baltic ports in favour of Sint Petersburg, actually would probably benefit more from a wealthy Russia with many trade goods over Sweden, which has many other ports closer to their production. And sure Russia can trade via allied Sweden or the Black Sea (depending on the Ottomans) but less barriers is beter. So there is not a complete lack of incentive.
Russia has its port on the Baltic. Maybe two, if Ust-Luga is developed as well. Ports of the Baltic provinces are not closer to the Russian “productive regions” and less convenient in the terms of transportation but some goods keep going through them traditionally and because they are outlets for the trade with Sweden-proper.
If there are some separatist movements in the Baltic provinces (unlikely for quite a while), there is no reason for Russia to be accommodating because the existing relations are much more important economically, politically and militarily. This is going to be Swedish domestic affair.
 
Top