Russia without Ivan the Terrible ?

How would she look like? Since his rule is still very debatable about how good/bad in general it was what do you think?

On one hand he did conquer Kazan and Astrakhan and curbed severely the power of traditional boyars, but on the other he instituted Oprichnina, started disastrous Livonian war and in general set the stage for the Time of troubles.
 
well, the Russia would gain much more from it, you see, if they dont conquer the khaganate of Kazan and vechestate of Vjatka, there shall be some sort of a cultural diversiti and that is definitely gonna help russias culture, there will be more democracie in Russia, eventually that would be russia even I, an estonian would like
 
How would she look like? Since his rule is still very debatable about how good/bad in general it was what do you think?

On one hand he did conquer Kazan and Astrakhan and curbed severely the power of traditional Boyars, but on the other he instituted Oprichnina, started disastrous Livonian war and in general set the stage for the Time of troubles.

Well...chances are the power of the Russian state would be much weaker. The Boyer's would be much stronger, and be a constant obstacle towards centralization. They would have more land, wealth, and influence on the affairs of government. The Boyars would also be quite capable of playing Poland-Lithuania against the crown in Moscow

It will take longer for the Russian military to be "modernized" as Ivan created the nucleas behind Russia's professional standing army, the streltsy. His "modernizations" also led to the widespread use of gunpowder, both with arquebuses and artillery. This would by default also strengthen the Boyars who would continue to be the primary source of Russia's military.

Russia will also still have to contend with the Golden Hoard's successor Khanates. Kazan will continue to block Russian westward expansion. The Khanates of Kazan, Astrakhan, and Crimea will continue to menace Russia with slave raids. They will also provide a barrier for Russian overland merchants traveling east, significantly stymieing trade.
 
Russia will also still have to contend with the Golden Hoard's successor Khanates. Kazan will continue to block Russian westward expansion. The Khanates of Kazan, Astrakhan, and Crimea will continue to menace Russia with slave raids. They will also provide a barrier for Russian overland merchants traveling east, significantly stymieing trade.

The boyar domination as you mention is sure to continue but is the quoted part this deffinitive to go on? I mean the conquest of the GH successor khanates was imminent, even the boyars would come to some sort of unilateral agreement for their conquest for if anything the prospect of an increased trade that came with total control of Volga. Traders and nobility sponsored cossack expeditions instead of tsar that end up with military conquest aren't that hard to imagine.

But what of ordinary population? I man how much did she shrunk during the my stated oprichnina?
 
The main problem with a Boyar dominated Russia, is that a Boyar dominated Russia is unlikely to do much to change the status quo. It is not in necessarily in their interest to create a more centralized state, nor will they be as compelled to pool their resources for matters of national defense or conquest. Despite the questionable effectiveness of imperial "modernizations" Czars tended to be more open to innovation and reform than the often insular Boyars.

While the eventually conquest of Kazan is likely, given the khanate's frequent drubbings by the ascendent Muscovy, things are far trickier with Astrakhan where lengthy supply lines will threaten to unravel all but the most determined Russian army.

As for the Russian people its hard to say. Despotism would eventually transform the relatively free peasantry, into a class of bonded serfs. That being said, is tyranny worse frequent slave raids or conquest and annexation by a foreign power.
 
Top