You are certainly right, the further the Greeks push against the Ottomans, the more push back they will get. Not just from the Ottomans, but also from the Bulgarians and the Russians as their competing claims will make them adversaries real quick, especially if they come close to Constantinople. Greece does not have the capacity to conquer all of Anatolia and restore the Byzantine Empire, despite my not so subtle interest in doing so. It simply doesn't have the people, nor the will necessary to completely subdue the Turks. If they tried to do it anyway, it would likely end in disaster for all involved as sectarianism and terrorism destroy Greece. Nevertheless, Greece is stronger and wealthier ITTL, which will enable it to push further than it reasonably should.

This quote confirms my suspicion that Greece will push as far as it can, not as far as it should. Even if they are capable of pushing the border further north than the population on the ground justify, and annexing parts of western Anatolia, or taking Constantinople in spite of Russian wishes, does not make it a good idea.

At least once in this timeline, and probably more than that, the Greeks will bite off more than they can chew. How dire the consequences are, or if losses are permanent, will depend on the direction history takes, but Greece will probably take a black eye or two during the 19th and 20th centuries.
 
This quote confirms my suspicion that Greece will push as far as it can, not as far as it should. Even if they are capable of pushing the border further north than the population on the ground justify, and annexing parts of western Anatolia, or taking Constantinople in spite of Russian wishes, does not make it a good idea.

At least once in this timeline, and probably more than that, the Greeks will bite off more than they can chew. How dire the consequences are, or if losses are permanent, will depend on the direction history takes, but Greece will probably take a black eye or two during the 19th and 20th centuries.

That Greek and Bulgarian or Turkish nationalisms will be conflicting can be taken for granted. As is sooner or later conflicting interests with Russian imperialism. So what are the Greeks supposed to be doing? Anything north of the Olympus will be bringing a backlash.
 
You are certainly right, I will definitely increase the number of Polish volunteers as soon as I get the chance.

In all honesty, I haven't decided on the exact details for Poland's future just yet. I'm pretty confident that they will get their independence eventually, their strong culture and history almost make that an inevitability in my opinion, but how and when they get their independence is still up for debate right now. Organic Works is definitely a possibility though.

If you want to look into the hsitory of Polish nationalism during this time, let me know, and I can throw you a few books to look into (once again, your TL is bumping up against my PhD studies. Lucky you ;) ) or drop me a line and I can give you the bare bones - though I'm just starting my studies and am still a bit of a neophyte. Basically, you can divide Polish Nationalism into three distinct eras. The first is the Romantic Nationalists, which held sway until 1861. Following the defeat of the Rising, there was a move towards Warsaw Positivism which stressed organic works, education and science. There was quite a bit more to it, but generally speaking, the Positivists felt that armed struggle was rather pointless at the time. They instead wished to nationalize the peasants (who's concept of nationalism was rather vague or non-existant) and also engage in Organic Works to make Poland prosperous, even if it remained part of the Russian Empire. This involved educating the peasants, introducing more modern forms of agriculture, establishing buisnesses and, of course, the all important newspapers and literary journals. Then, towards the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th, you have a new generation arise which grew out of the Positivists but also looked back upon the Nationalists fondly (because, you know, they actually fought and struggled!). This generation, over time, split into two opposed camps: the Socialists (who eventually came to be led by Pilsudski) and National Democracy (which was highly influenced by Dmowski). National Democracy grew out of the Nationalist left but eventually became its own beast entirely and was more in-line with 20th century European conservative ethno-nationalism.

Anyway, with the Romantic Nationalists falling out of favor in 1848, the process is being accelerated. I do suspect that Organic Works would develop in Polish Nationalist circles much as in OTL - it wasn't an uncommon idea in other nations. But I think that the post-Romantic school of Polish nationalism is also going to be heavily inspired by the scientific and nationalist writings coming out of Germany, France and Britain during this time (Germany and France being easiest, because translations of those works into Polish is likely to be done a bit faster than British works) - though there is room for ideocycracy. in OTL, two of the biggest influences on the Warsaw Positivists were Herbert Spencer and Johm Stewart Mill. The fact that the 1848 Revolutions were actually more successful in this ATL could also have a major impact: after all, Hungary won its freedom, and the nationalists were at least somewhat successful in Germany and Italy. I could definitely see the Poles looking to all of those nations for inspiration (and the fact that Poles fighting in the British Foreign Legion are going to be introduced to British thinkers and views is also an interesting avenue to chase down too)

 
Last edited:
I also had the Ottomans make a deal with Serbia, allowing them to recall their troops in return for increased autonomy and the Ottomans have begun pulling their troops from Thessaly and Epirus.
What an interesting choice! I wonder if it was influenced by way of that book I shared a bit ago. Lascaris had also months ago proposed a development such as this, of the garrisons in Belgrade, Smederevo, Šabac, Kladavo, Užice and Soko Grad being recalled. However, chronologically, Miloš Obrenović hadn't yet become Prince of Serbia in 1855, we're still stuck with Aleksandar Karađorđević. But now all this begs the question on what the power plays will be, given we're still deep in the era of the Constitutionalists, especially regarding Aleksa Simić.

Aleksa Simić's premiership fell in late 1855, which he served as not only Prime Minister but also as the Foreign Minister. I'm not exactly fully up on the details what exactly caused Simić's government to fall, but perhaps the agreement reached with the Ottomans ensures his governments stays in power for at least a time longer. Thus avoiding the rapid changes in government for the next three years, but not exactly preventing what was to come in 1858. I, for instance, doubt the lack of government collapse would prevent the frequent conflicts between the Prince and the Privy Council. The council demanded that ministers be elected from among its members, while the prince claimed he had the right to appoint ministers that weren't among their ranks, leading to them resenting the fact he appointed Stefan Stefanović Tenka as president of the council without their consent (even if Tenka would later hilariously lead a conspiracy to try and kill the prince, which while failing, only further added to the instability of the government). There was also conflict over the erection of Karađorđe Monument, the council claiming the funds were taken as a kind of levy, and not a voluntary contribution.

At best, this happening now is less of a boon for the Constitutionalists and Prince Aleksandar, and more of a boon for the incoming Liberals and incoming Princes Miloš and Mihailo, whom TTL have one less thorn at their side.
 
Last edited:

So first off I just wanna say that you have nothing to apologize for as far as the update is concerned. You work at your pace. We appreciate you getting updates out as fast as you do.

As for Poland I’m going to Echo a lot of what @DanMcCollum said. I think a Warsaw Positivist and organic work period is almost assured at this point. That said I also think the way the chips have fallen there’s likely to be a revolt during this period as well, one that might very well succeed where the others have failed.

Poland has numerous other examples to point at and learn from. Hungry, Greece, the Italians to a certain extent. They’ve seen that armed uprisings can work. They have Hungry on their southern border as a relatively secure route for supplies. Since Austria has lost their portion of Russia that’s one less great power they have to contend with, and one that will likely back them to a certain extent. They have ties to Britain and the ottomans military’s, and likely will have plenty of veterans and volunteers from both locations willing to help. Assuming the Russians are even slower to modernize in TTL we could see a revolt that focuses only on the Russians while Prussia is distracted by something else legitimately succeed. Trying to free both simultaneously likely would fail though.
 
So first off I just wanna say that you have nothing to apologize for as far as the update is concerned. You work at your pace. We appreciate you getting updates out as fast as you do.

As for Poland I’m going to Echo a lot of what @DanMcCollum said. I think a Warsaw Positivist and organic work period is almost assured at this point. That said I also think the way the chips have fallen there’s likely to be a revolt during this period as well, one that might very well succeed where the others have failed.

Poland has numerous other examples to point at and learn from. Hungry, Greece, the Italians to a certain extent. They’ve seen that armed uprisings can work. They have Hungry on their southern border as a relatively secure route for supplies. Since Austria has lost their portion of Russia that’s one less great power they have to contend with, and one that will likely back them to a certain extent. They have ties to Britain and the ottomans military’s, and likely will have plenty of veterans and volunteers from both locations willing to help. Assuming the Russians are even slower to modernize in TTL we could see a revolt that focuses only on the Russians while Prussia is distracted by something else legitimately succeed. Trying to free both simultaneously likely would fail though.

For some reason, I'm now envisoning a very unlikely scenerio where the Frankfurt government and Austria support the Polish revolutionaries as a way to chastize Prussia and lessen it's influence within Germany - all the while, Polish revolutionaries in the Congress Kingdom and Galicia fight the Russians off with the help of international volunteers and money/arms from Britain.

As I said, not very likely in the least: but really interesting all the same :D
 
For some reason, I'm now envisoning a very unlikely scenerio where the Frankfurt government and Austria support the Polish revolutionaries as a way to chastize Prussia and lessen it's influence within Germany - all the while, Polish revolutionaries in the Congress Kingdom and Galicia fight the Russians off with the help of international volunteers and money/arms from Britain.

As I said, not very likely in the least: but really interesting all the same :D
I mean it’s not that outrageous an idea. That said I think that the poles just acknowledging Poznań and the other Polish lands as Prussian territory for the moment and encouraging the more radical revolutionaries to cross the border would be a the smart move. “Poznań positivism” might be a thing in this world as the Poles in Prussia focus on preserving and possibly even spreading their culture. Meanwhile across the border Warsaw is leading the revolt to end all revolts. You can’t real beat two great powers as a revolution. Plus the Russian poles are likely to attract a lot more outside assistance.
 
If you want to look into the hsitory of Polish nationalism during this time, let me know, and I can throw you a few books to look into (once again, your TL is bumping up against my PhD studies. Lucky you ;) ) or drop me a line and I can give you the bare bones - though I'm just starting my studies and am still a bit of a neophyte. Basically, you can divide Polish Nationalism into three distinct eras. The first is the Romantic Nationalists, which held sway until 1861. Following the defeat of the Rising, there was a move towards Warsaw Positivism which stressed organic works, education and science. There was quite a bit more to it, but generally speaking, the Positivists felt that armed struggle was rather pointless at the time. They instead wished to nationalize the peasants (who's concept of nationalism was rather vague or non-existant) and also engage in Organic Works to make Poland prosperous, even if it remained part of the Russian Empire. This involved educating the peasants, introducing more modern forms of agriculture, establishing buisnesses and, of course, the all important newspapers and literary journals. Then, towards the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th, you have a new generation arise which grew out of the Positivists but also looked back upon the Nationalists fondly (because, you know, they actually fought and struggled!). This generation, over time, split into two opposed camps: the Socialists (who eventually came to be led by Pilsudski) and National Democracy (which was highly influenced by Dmowski). National Democracy grew out of the Nationalist left but eventually became its own beast entirely and was more in-line with 20th century European conservative ethno-nationalism.

Anyway, with the Romantic Nationalists falling out of favor in 1848, the process is being accelerated. I do suspect that Organic Works would develop in Polish Nationalist circles much as in OTL - it wasn't an uncommon idea in other nations. But I think that the post-Romantic school of Polish nationalism is also going to be heavily inspired by the scientific and nationalist writings coming out of Germany, France and Britain during this time (Germany and France being easiest, because translations of those works into Polish is likely to be done a bit faster than British works) - though there is room for ideocycracy. in OTL, two of the biggest influences on the Warsaw Positivists were Herbert Spencer and Johm Stewart Mill. The fact that the 1848 Revolutions were actually more successful in this ATL could also have a major impact: after all, Hungary won its freedom, and the nationalists were at least somewhat successful in Germany and Italy. I could definitely see the Poles looking to all of those nations for inspiration (and the fact that Poles fighting in the British Foreign Legion are going to be introduced to British thinkers and views is also an interesting avenue to chase down too)
Lucky me indeed! :biggrin:

Jokes aside, I'm truly grateful for all your help on this you have given me. You've also provided me with some interesting ideas for how I might want to develop Poland going forward ITTL.

What an interesting choice! I wonder if it was influenced by way of that book I shared a bit ago. Lascaris had also months ago proposed a development such as this, of the garrisons in Belgrade, Smederevo, Šabac, Kladavo, Užice and Soko Grad being recalled. However, chronologically, Miloš Obrenović hadn't yet become Prince of Serbia in 1855, we're still stuck with Aleksandar Karađorđević. But now all this begs the question on what the power plays will be, given we're still deep in the era of the Constitutionalists, especially regarding Aleksa Simić.

Aleksa Simić's premiership fell in late 1855, which he served as not only Prime Minister but also as the Foreign Minister. I'm not exactly fully up on the details what exactly caused Simić's government to fall, but perhaps the agreement reached with the Ottomans ensures his governments stays in power for at least a time longer. Thus avoiding the rapid changes in government for the next three years, but not exactly preventing what was to come in 1858. I, for instance, doubt the lack of government collapse would prevent the frequent conflicts between the Prince and the Privy Council. The council demanded that ministers be elected from among its members, while the prince claimed he had the right to appoint ministers that weren't among their ranks, leading to them resenting the fact he appointed Stefan Stefanović Tenka as president of the council without their consent (even if Tenka would later hilariously lead a conspiracy to try and kill the prince, which while failing, only further added to the instability of the government). There was also conflict over the erection of Karađorđe Monument, the council claiming the funds were taken as a kind of levy, and not a voluntary contribution.

At best, this happening now is less of a boon for the Constitutionalists and Prince Aleksandar, and more of a boon for the incoming Liberals and incoming Princes Miloš and Mihailo, whom TTL have one less thorn at their side.
I was considering having Miloš Obrenović retake the Serbian throne earlier, or simply retaining it outright due the effect of various butterflies on the country. But digging a little deeper, none of the divergences in this timeline should have had a major impact on them prior to the collapse of the Austrian Empire, so maybe Aleksandar Karađorđević still coming to power might make more sense here. Would a victorious Russia have any impact on Aleksandar's deposition?

So first off I just wanna say that you have nothing to apologize for as far as the update is concerned. You work at your pace. We appreciate you getting updates out as fast as you do.

As for Poland I’m going to Echo a lot of what @DanMcCollum said. I think a Warsaw Positivist and organic work period is almost assured at this point. That said I also think the way the chips have fallen there’s likely to be a revolt during this period as well, one that might very well succeed where the others have failed.

Poland has numerous other examples to point at and learn from. Hungry, Greece, the Italians to a certain extent. They’ve seen that armed uprisings can work. They have Hungry on their southern border as a relatively secure route for supplies. Since Austria has lost their portion of Russia that’s one less great power they have to contend with, and one that will likely back them to a certain extent. They have ties to Britain and the ottomans military’s, and likely will have plenty of veterans and volunteers from both locations willing to help. Assuming the Russians are even slower to modernize in TTL we could see a revolt that focuses only on the Russians while Prussia is distracted by something else legitimately succeed. Trying to free both simultaneously likely would fail though.
For some reason, I'm now envisoning a very unlikely scenerio where the Frankfurt government and Austria support the Polish revolutionaries as a way to chastize Prussia and lessen it's influence within Germany - all the while, Polish revolutionaries in the Congress Kingdom and Galicia fight the Russians off with the help of international volunteers and money/arms from Britain.

As I said, not very likely in the least: but really interesting all the same :D
I mean it’s not that outrageous an idea. That said I think that the poles just acknowledging Poznań and the other Polish lands as Prussian territory for the moment and encouraging the more radical revolutionaries to cross the border would be a the smart move. “Poznań positivism” might be a thing in this world as the Poles in Prussia focus on preserving and possibly even spreading their culture. Meanwhile across the border Warsaw is leading the revolt to end all revolts. You can’t real beat two great powers as a revolution. Plus the Russian poles are likely to attract a lot more outside assistance.
:evilsmile::evilsmile::evilsmile:
 
I was considering having Miloš Obrenović retake the Serbian throne earlier, or simply retaining it outright due the effect of various butterflies on the country. But digging a little deeper, none of the divergences in this timeline should have had a major impact on them prior to the collapse of the Austrian Empire, so maybe Aleksandar Karađorđević still coming to power might make more sense here. Would a victorious Russia have any impact on Aleksandar's deposition?
I personally don't think it would, honestly. We're dealing less with issues of governance (which is still important, mind you), and more with issues of people and personalities. Heck, a victorious Russia could make things worse, given how among the influential in Serbia we have Francophiles, Russophiles, Austrophiles, etc. However, there is one aspect that could possibly shift things significantly. Following the Crimean War OTL, at the 1856 Treaty of Paris, the Russian protectorate (read: protection of its rights and neutrality) over the country was expanded over the other signers, those of course being Britain, France, Austria, Prussia and Sardinia. Alongside that, the guarantee of freedom of commerce and navigation on the Danube was also important.

When the Tenka Conspiracy occurred in the fall of 1857, and failed, the Prince took the opportunity to strike against his Privy Council (of whom all but three were against the Prince, and some partook in the conspiracy) by making them resign due to being compromised (and if they didn't resign, they'd be arrested), despite not being involved. Six were specifically named to resign, those being Lazar Arsenijević, Stevan Magazinović, Jovan Veljković, Stojan Jovanović Lešjanin, Živko Davidović and Gavrilo Jeremić, which they did, while three more were considered compromised (including Aleksa Simić and Ilija Garašanin). Only four council members were considered safe, and we needn't mention the actual conspirators who were swiftly arrested and sentenced to life (originally death, until the Porte's intervention) upon the discovery of the conspiracy, leading them to Gurgusovac Tower in Knjaževac, where public opinion shifted on the convicted, going from loathing for what they had done (especially given a high-ranking official was at the head of the conspiracy), to sorrow for the cruel treatment they received in the tower's dungeon (to the point one of them died). With spots empty in the Privy Council, the Prince filled them all with loyalists.

The Prince had the opportunity to confirm his new power he had gained through law, but before he could, the trans-council opposition decided to appeal to the Great Powers and point to the fact that the Prince had carried out a coup d'état. OTL this resulted in France approaching Russia, interested in helping the Russians suppress Austrian influence in Serbia, as the prince's policies were Austrophilic. The two demanded the intervention of the Porte, in the same fashion they had done back in 1838 with Miloš and the Turkish Constitution. The Porte appointed Etem Pasha as commissioner to go and investigate, with the hope that they can be the ones to judge the situation, and avoid the Europeans sending one instead. Etem Pasha would go as far to threaten the Prince with his replacement, and thus, the Prince was forced to not only pardon the conspirators and hand them to Etem Pasha, but to also allow the deposed council members to return to the Privy Council. With momentum high, the opposition organized itself enough to convene the Saint Andrew Assembly, and finally replaced the Prince.

I'll say, first things first, I don't think there is a chance the conspiracy can succeed if it follows per OTL. They literally just hired some peasant from the Kragujevac area, Milosav Petrović, and just gave him what he needed to kill the Prince, but the man instead just went to Belgrade and began blackmailing the conspirators, taking upwards of 1000 ducats from them. And soon after, Milosav's brother-in-law found out and reported this situation to the authorities, leading to their imprisonment. The Porte's word might mean less now that their garrisons are out of the country TTL, but I imagine they'd still intervene to prevent the executions of the conspirators, thus leading to the same sort of shift of opinion that we saw OTL when they were sent to Gurgusovac Tower (which would just add further to the general dissatisfaction regarding the King, and further support for the return of Obrenović, whom unbeknownst to the populace had financed the conspiracy, while everyone else just thought Tenka wanted to establish a noble republic with him as its head). But the big change would be what would happen after the Prince decides to take advantage of the situation and fill the Privy Council with loyalists, since I imagine the other European powers not wanting Russia to decide alone (especially given the war just now), and while Austria may still have interests in Italy, I don't know if that would be enough to push France to get involved. And again, the Porte's slightly lessened influence due to the garrisons being out might embolden the Prince to stick it out, though dynamics may or may not influence what the opposition might do.

Given the circumstances, I still think it is inevitable that Aleksandar will be deposed, it's just that the process to it might now look a bit different. The writing was on the wall, so to say, you just need someone to interpret it because it reads like chicken scratchings.
 
Last edited:
I’ve been thinking about it and I realized that Russia might end up in a very strange position post war as far as modernization goes. While there were issues everywhere obviously, the one glaringly obvious failure was the Russian Navy. So Russia might assume that their mass infantry assault tactics are greats, and modern weapons for the army are a needless luxury. Same with serfdom and industrialization, although those seem like dominos that eventually will fall regardless of the wars result. But they might decide that they need a cutting edge navy to protect from raids and invasions on their coastlines. Russia as a prominent naval power but a backwards land power in this world is an oddly plausible result in this timeline.
 
I’ve been thinking about it and I realized that Russia might end up in a very strange position post war as far as modernization goes. While there were issues everywhere obviously, the one glaringly obvious failure was the Russian Navy. So Russia might assume that their mass infantry assault tactics are greats, and modern weapons for the army are a needless luxury. Same with serfdom and industrialization, although those seem like dominos that eventually will fall regardless of the wars result. But they might decide that they need a cutting edge navy to protect from raids and invasions on their coastlines. Russia as a prominent naval power but a backwards land power in this world is an oddly plausible result in this timeline.
I don't think that's possible, Russia's geography makes it virtually impossible to not become a massive land power. They will always have to focus on their land focus first and foremost. Common sense dictates that invasions to their motherland will always be on land, not on sea.

Any invasion through water will be blown immediately by the sheer size of Russian lands they have to look after to.

It's not as if Russia will suffer defeats, they will suffer ones that will help them rethink their strategies. As for their mass assault doctrine I don't think that's gonna change, but I believe it will evolve over time. After all Tsarist Russia/ Soviet Russia / Russian Federation have almost the same doctrine only changing in its principle and application. It's a reaction to their corresponding threats both local and global enemies. So while their navy may indeed get bigger the core focus on land will remain the same.
 
I don't think that's possible, Russia's geography makes it virtually impossible to not become a massive land power. They will always have to focus on their land focus first and foremost. Common sense dictates that invasions to their motherland will always be on land, not on sea.

Any invasion through water will be blown immediately by the sheer size of Russian lands they have to look after to.

It's not as if Russia will suffer defeats, they will suffer ones that will help them rethink their strategies. As for their mass assault doctrine I don't think that's gonna change, but I believe it will evolve over time. After all Tsarist Russia/ Soviet Russia / Russian Federation have almost the same doctrine only changing in its principle and application. It's a reaction to their corresponding threats both local and global enemies. So while their navy may indeed get bigger the core focus on land will remain the same.
Oh I’m not saying they won’t be a big land power. I chose my words very carefully. I said backwards, not small. This war has taught them that logistics matter and that their main weakness is the ocean and I expect both to be addressed sooner rather than later. I don’t think Russia will take the lesson that they’re incredibly behind technology wise. I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if they start the next war even more behind in tech than when they started this one. There’s little impetus for it in TTL as opposed to OTL
 
Oh I’m not saying they won’t be a big land power. I chose my words very carefully. I said backwards, not small. This war has taught them that logistics matter and that their main weakness is the ocean and I expect both to be addressed sooner rather than later. I don’t think Russia will take the lesson that they’re incredibly behind technology wise. I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if they start the next war even more behind in tech than when they started this one. There’s little impetus for it in TTL as opposed to OTL
Where is the Russia of 1856 incredibly behind the rest of Europe technologically?
 
Where is the Russia of 1856 incredibly behind the rest of Europe technologically?
Russia had a certain disdain for modernization. The Crimean War of OTL forced them too as they saw they weren’t keeping up. This conflict will probably not have the same result since they’re winning.

Specifically their infantry are armed with older and less effective weapons. Russia has next to no rail system at the time. I believe the only line was from St. Petersburg to Moscow. They have next to no industrialized locations, depending more on mass labor for production. They have access to this technology but they don’t implement it quickly or effectively. In ITTL they likely don’t see a real need to militarily.
 
Russia had a certain disdain for modernization. The Crimean War of OTL forced them too as they saw they weren’t keeping up. This conflict will probably not have the same result since they’re winning.

Specifically their infantry are armed with older and less effective weapons. Russia has next to no rail system at the time. I believe the only line was from St. Petersburg to Moscow. They have next to no industrialized locations, depending more on mass labor for production. They have access to this technology but they don’t implement it quickly or effectively. In ITTL they likely don’t see a real need to militarily.
Their army was about... oh 5 years behind Britain which itself was behind France. The French invented the Minie rifle adopting it in 1849. Britain istart making the French rifle in 1851 with Enfield coming in 1853, the Russian 6-line rifle was introduced in 1856. Too bad for them they stumbled into war with both Britain and France right at the time of adoption. By comparison both Austia and the United States introduced the Lorenz rifle and Model 1855 in 1855.
 
Their army was about... oh 5 years behind Britain which itself was behind France. The French invented the Minie rifle adopting it in 1849. Britain istart making the French rifle in 1851 with Enfield coming in 1853, the Russian 6-line rifle was introduced in 1856. Too bad for them they stumbled into war with both Britain and France right at the time of adoption. By comparison both Austia and the United States introduced the Lorenz rifle and Model 1855 in 1855.
I’m not trying to paint Russia as some backwater that doesn’t understand things. I’m just saying they’re typically a half step behind the rest of Europe in this time period. And their success in this war could make that habit worse. They might also see the error of their ways. I don’t know.
 
I’m not trying to paint Russia as some backwater that doesn’t understand things. I’m just saying they’re typically a half step behind the rest of Europe in this time period. And their success in this war could make that habit worse. They might also see the error of their ways. I don’t know.
They'll see the error of their ways, Russia's geography will naturally make them industrialise sooner than later. Their weather also makes it even more likely that they need to industrialise. Even if the tsar doesn't want to his cabinets and other rival parties will make point about it.

They'll be behind a few years in comparison to otl, but the trade off is that there is no mass deaths that would result in millions of Russian lives being killed by their own government.
 
They'll see the error of their ways, Russia's geography will naturally make them industrialise sooner than later. Their weather also makes it even more likely that they need to industrialise. Even if the tsar doesn't want to his cabinets and other rival parties will make point about it.

They'll be behind a few years in comparison to otl, but the trade off is that there is no mass deaths that would result in millions of Russian lives being killed by their own government.
Again I’m saying they might be slower and more behind than otl, particularly militarily since they succeeded on land to a large degree. Industrialization is inevitable but it can be to varying degrees. I think we mostly agree and are mostly quibbling over the degree of how far behind they’ll be.
 
Top