No Peter The Great

What if the "great reformer" died in childhood? What would the history of Russia be like without So much western influence?
 
Peter the Great is probably third-most controvercial person in Russian history after Lenin and Stalin (OK, St. Vladimir must be added to the mix too). He had been praised or vilified for centuries so a lot of "what if"s had been discussed. One school of thought claims that Russia would be "Iranized" without him. Slow development of archaic society, devoid of mighty external enemies (Poland was on steep decline at this point, Russia successfully pushed it's marionette to become Polish king before Peter started his reforms, Sweden did not have manpower to conquer much more of the Russian north that it already owned and Ottomans had been busy enough on Balkans) and too big and landlocked to be colonized successfully by one of sea powers. Another group claims that Russia would repeat India's or China's fate without him, becoming colony of some adventurous power. There's third, pretty small group, which claims that modernization actually started before Peter and without his reforms (which actually decreased value of market forces within Czardom) could run natural way and make Russia successfull Eastern European power by mid-18th century.
 
Augustus II the Strong crowned himself against wishes of Seim's majority, owning to massive Russian and Austrian support. Even before that, "Lion of Lechistan" Jan Sobieski, who successfully fought feared Turks, avoided to pick on Russia even during turmoil between death of Alexei Romanov and Peter's raise.
 
Russia would be a weak country.
Without Peter the Great's reforms Russia might not be the Superpower it is (well was) but a weak country? no... At that time there were just too many
Orthodox Slavs that could later identify themselves as Russians for Russia to be a weak country; the aristocracy in particular was too developed and frankly too big and rich for it to be pushed aside so easily by foreign powers. The Muscovite state itself was too strong and too well situated geographically at that time to be transformed into a small unimportant country so easily.

Sure without Peter, Russia might lose the wars against Sweden and consequently lose influence in the Baltic or it's other western territories but to transform Russia into a small country i think it takes more than that. Regarding the Ottoman Empire (Russia's other strong rival), during Peter's time the Turks did win a war against the Russians but the subsequent treaty shows that the Ottoman Empire did not wish expansion in that region at that time.
 
the aristocracy in particular was too developed and frankly too big and rich for it to be pushed aside so easily by foreign powers.
Well, this is no bulwark. Poland has mighty aristocracy and look how much good it did to them...

Regarding the Ottoman Empire (Russia's other strong rival), during Peter's time the Turks did win a war against the Russians but the subsequent treaty shows that the Ottoman Empire did not wish expansion in that region at that time.
One have to remember that all wars won or lost by Russia against Ottomans in 100 years before Peter were started either by Russian's attempt to supress Ottoman client state Crimean Khanate or by Russian attacks on Ottomans proper. Obviously Russians weren't too terrified by Ottomans even before Peter.
 
Augustus II the Strong crowned himself against wishes of Seim's majority, owning to massive Russian and Austrian support. Even before that, "Lion of Lechistan" Jan Sobieski, who successfully fought feared Turks, avoided to pick on Russia even during turmoil between death of Alexei Romanov and Peter's raise.

Augustus II coudn't "Crown himself against the wishes of the Seym", because we was elected by one :confused:
The Russian dominance over Poland comes from 1717 ("The Silent Seyjm") ownards.
 
Well, this is no bulwark. Poland has mighty aristocracy and look how much good it did to them...


One have to remember that all wars won or lost by Russia against Ottomans in 100 years before Peter were started either by Russian's attempt to supress Ottoman client state Crimean Khanate or by Russian attacks on Ottomans proper. Obviously Russians weren't too terrified by Ottomans even before Peter.

Yes but a strong nobility makes a nation very hard to be assimilated; combining this with Orthodoxy, a relatively large population, and a lack of strong enough enemies, i don't see any foreign power staying very long in Russia.

Regarding the Ottomans:
Well that's my point exactly i don't see any power capable to occupy Russia's role during that time as the dominant power of Eastern Europe. Sweden could win all the wars but at most would restrict itself to occuping the Baltic countries and the Ottomans, as you've said, were never a threat to Russia's existence.

Besides... Russia was not as backwards as you would think. It had contact with the West for some time now.
 
Probably very different, maybe divided between the Ottomans, Polish
and Sverige, at least west of the Urals

The Poles they were already defeating, the Swedes could never conquer that much land and the Turks were on the decline. Unless you have the butterflies lead to the Ottoman Empire successfully imposing its dominance on the Cossacks in the Ukraine (they tried to do this from the late 1660s to the early 1680s*; it's what inspired this famous painting), this is completely ASB.

*As an interesting historical footnote, Moldavian prince George Ducas was appointed Hetman of Right-Bank Ukraine by the Porte between, IIRC, 1681 and 1683, bringing the 2 countries under a brief personal union.
 
Sweden continues to swallow russian land and move in clergy and school and force everyone to learn swedish. In 1800 Sweden is the entire former Russia and 50% speak swedish and in the year 1900 100% speaks fluent swedish. Russian is a dead language as finnish will be.

AH, Preussia and Sweden divides Poland.

I can dream of wanks cant i:D
 
I read once that a lot of what he did may ultimately have actually retarded Russia's development in some respects. I can't recall that exact cut of the argument, but it's an interesting suggestion.
 
I read once that a lot of what he did may ultimately have actually retarded Russia's development in some respects. I can't recall that exact cut of the argument, but it's an interesting suggestion.
Peter created very rigid economic system by extending serfdom to industry (allowing fat cats of industry which served Army to buy serfs to work on factories), basically killing Russian labour market for the next century, among other things.
 
Top