"Russian" culture, society and history without Mongol conquest

Let't say Genghis Khan never unites the Mongols. The Mongol continue being a menace to China and Central Asia, but they never reach the territory of the successor states of Kievan Rus, let alone conquer them. No Mongo empire is ever created, at least non as huge as the one IOTL. ITTL, occassionaly, Turkic speaking peoples raid Kiev and other states, but they are never conquered, at least not for long.

How do these "Russian" states evolve? Do they unite, or do they remain separated? Does one of them conquer the rest?

How does their societies evolve? Will they still see themselves as members of the same culture, distinct from that of their Western, Eastern, Northern and Southern neighbours? Would their religion and common origin contribute to this sense of shared identity? Would Orthodox religion be an unifying force?

How would "Russian" languge evolve?

And what about society? Would serfdom eventualy become aswidespread as it would IOTL? Would they be more in touch with western European states (by comparison to OTL), or would religion act as a barrier for stronger links? Would there be autonomous cities, with civil liberties, as in parts of western Europe?

Would this alt Russia (or alt Russias) still expand southwards and eastwards?

And what about their culture? And their economic wellbeing?

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:

mad orc

Banned
First, i would like to say, that the black death would not have come as it did in OTL, so that their would make a very big difference.
 

Vuu

Banned
I can tell you some larger-scale effects: without the eternal Mongol (and Tatar) harassment, not just Russia, but the entirety of Eastern Europe would probably become much more like Western Europe, and develop faster. South Ukraine was hit up so bad by Crimean slavers that the area was opened for settlement only when the american prairies were, despite being considered Europe since forever
 
Let't say Genghis Khan never unites the Mongols. The Mongol continue being a menace to China and Central Asia, but they never reach the territory of the successor states of Kievan Rus, let alone conquer them. No Mongo empire is ever created, at least non as huge as the one IOTL. ITTL, occassionaly, Turkic speaking peoples raid Kiev and other states, but they are never conquered, at least not for long.

How do these "Russian" states evolve? Do they unite, or do they remain separated? Does one of them conquer the rest?

Structure of the "Kievan" and post-"Kievan" Rus was a little bit more complicated than you are implying. :cool:

In the simplest form general schema can be described as following: there was the most senior princedom (Kiev and then Vladimir) and a set of the lesser princedoms which also could have their lesser princedoms. All these princedoms had been rules by the Rurikid princes but, IIRC, there were some occasional non-Rurikids (for example, Lithuanians).

Succession, in general, had been passed by seniority within the whole family with the princes moving to the vacant thrones according to their closeness to the current Grand Prince. IIRC, the schema was already slowly changing toward "father - son" by the XIII: Daniel, Grand Prince of Galitz had been succeed by his son (but it seems that Galitz was somewhat outside of this schema) but after the death of Yaroslav Vseqolodovich, Great Prince of Vladimir, this throne had been given to his brother, while his sons had been given the lesser princedoms.

Consolidation, was happening but there is no reason to expect that it would be happening overnight and most probably it would be around 2 centers: Galitz on the West and Vladimir in the Central Russia with the Southern areas (Kiev, Chernigov, etc.) being up for grabs. Presumably, in OTL the Mongols were instrumental in creating unified Russian state (except that at least half of the "Russian" lands remained under Lithuanian rule) by promoting a single line of the Russian princes so it is up to anybody's imagination to figure out if this would not happen without the Mongolian factor.

How does their societies evolve? Will they still see themselves as members of the same culture, distinct from that of their Western, Eastern, Northern and Southern neighbours? Would their religion and common origin contribute to this sense of shared identity? Would Orthodox religion be an unifying force?

They saw themselves as the members of the same entity before the Mongols, which did not prevent them from fighting and killing each other. Not that the medieval France of Germany had been too different in this respect. Of course, it can be argued that the Orthodox Church got a lot of prestige by providing an "ideological foundation" in the ...er.... "liberation" from the Muslim Golden Horde but for a considerable time the same Orthodox Church was quite subservient to the rulers of the Golden Horde and, based on the fact that the Muslims from the Horde had been gladly accepted to the service of the princes of Moscow, there could be at least some doubts. There was even a vassal "Tsardom of Kasimov" given to the renegade Tatar princes and "descent from the Horde" was as honorable as from Rurik and Gedeminas.

Without the Mongols the Southern neighbors would be Polovtsy and by the time of the conquest there were already numerous princely intermarriages. Eastern neighbors? Probably the Great Bulgar on Volga. Predominantly Muslim but not sure if there were some unusual troubles with them. West and North - mostly usual border fighting which did not change too much after the Mongolian conquest: anyway, they did not come to the Baltic coast. So the main opponents - Lithuania, Poland, Hungary and Livonian "entities". So-called "White Rus" was peripheral to either Kiev or Vladimir so Lithuania may get it anyway and Princedom of Kiev, while still formally prestigious, had been losing its importance by the end of the XII century.




How would "Russian" languge evolve?
Why would there be serious differences in its evolution?


And what about society? Would serfdom eventualy become aswidespread as it would IOTL?

There were centuries between disappearance of the Golden Horde and the form of a "serfdom" you are presumably talking about (started in XVIII century) so who can tell for sure?

Would they be more in touch with western European states (by comparison to OTL), or would religion act as a barrier for stronger links? Would there be autonomous cities, with civil liberties, as in parts of western Europe?

How exactly the Mongols were preventing these links to the "West"?

Would this alt Russia (or alt Russias) still expand southwards and eastwards?

If it ends as a more or less coherent state, it most probably would: important trade routes by Volga and to the East from it, furs from Siberia, etc.
 
I can tell you some larger-scale effects: without the eternal Mongol (and Tatar) harassment, not just Russia, but the entirety of Eastern Europe would probably become much more like Western Europe, and develop faster. South Ukraine was hit up so bad by Crimean slavers that the area was opened for settlement only when the american prairies were, despite being considered Europe since forever

But to be fair most of the territory you are talking about (Southern Ukraine) was a nomadic zone, never a part of the Kievan Rus and most of its population remained the same after the Mongolian conquest. The same goes about the slavers: the Pecheneg slave-capturing raids were mentioned by Vladimir Monomash and the Polovtsy, who replaced the Pechenegs were not noticeably better in that area. Decline of the Southern part of the Kievan Rus was due to the nomadic raids and it happened before the Mongolian conquest. It can be argued that, without the Mongolian contribution to their military culture the Polovtsy/Kipchaks (Tatars) would be easier to defeat and squeeze out of their territory but the evidence is not there. If anything, it is easier to assume that an absence of the Crimean Khanate would mean a greater Ottoman footprint on the peninsula with a continued support of the nomads in the Black Sea steppes.

Not too sure how absence of the Mongolian factor would make a serious difference in the relations with the Western Europe. The religious differences would still be there and Vladimir-Suzdal Rus did not have excessively close western connections before the Mongols. In the case of Galitz, the relations did exist (with Hungary, Poland and Lithuania) but mostly in the form of the territorial conflicts. Not that Poland or Lithuania or even Hungary really qualified as "Western Europe" or that medieval Lithuania was among the most advanced regions of Europe. The only meaningful contact with the "West" was Novgorod's trade with the Hanseatic cities but it was somewhat one-sided: the German merchants had been coming to Novgorod but not other way around.
 
Let't say Genghis Khan never unites the Mongols. The Mongol continue being a menace to China and Central Asia, but they never reach the territory of the successor states of Kievan Rus, let alone conquer them. No Mongo empire is ever created, at least non as huge as the one IOTL. ITTL, occassionaly, Turkic speaking peoples raid Kiev and other states, but they are never conquered, at least not for long.

How do these "Russian" states evolve? Do they unite, or do they remain separated? Does one of them conquer the rest?

How does their societies evolve? Will they still see themselves as members of the same culture, distinct from that of their Western, Eastern, Northern and Southern neighbours? Would their religion and common origin contribute to this sense of shared identity? Would Orthodox religion be an unifying force?

How would "Russian" languge evolve?

And what about society? Would serfdom eventualy become aswidespread as it would IOTL? Would they be more in touch with western European states (by comparison to OTL), or would religion act as a barrier for stronger links? Would there be autonomous cities, with civil liberties, as in parts of western Europe?

Would this alt Russia (or alt Russias) still expand southwards and eastwards?

And what about their culture? And their economic wellbeing?

Thoughts?
No serfdom ? Wasn't serfdom not implemented before the Lage Middle Ages in Russia die to pressure for the Russian aristocracy to pay the tributes to their Mongolia/ Tartars overlords ?
 

Vuu

Banned
But to be fair most of the territory you are talking about (Southern Ukraine) was a nomadic zone, never a part of the Kievan Rus and most of its population remained the same after the Mongolian conquest. The same goes about the slavers: the Pecheneg slave-capturing raids were mentioned by Vladimir Monomash and the Polovtsy, who replaced the Pechenegs were not noticeably better in that area. Decline of the Southern part of the Kievan Rus was due to the nomadic raids and it happened before the Mongolian conquest. It can be argued that, without the Mongolian contribution to their military culture the Polovtsy/Kipchaks (Tatars) would be easier to defeat and squeeze out of their territory but the evidence is not there. If anything, it is easier to assume that an absence of the Crimean Khanate would mean a greater Ottoman footprint on the peninsula with a continued support of the nomads in the Black Sea steppes.

Not too sure how absence of the Mongolian factor would make a serious difference in the relations with the Western Europe. The religious differences would still be there and Vladimir-Suzdal Rus did not have excessively close western connections before the Mongols. In the case of Galitz, the relations did exist (with Hungary, Poland and Lithuania) but mostly in the form of the territorial conflicts. Not that Poland or Lithuania or even Hungary really qualified as "Western Europe" or that medieval Lithuania was among the most advanced regions of Europe. The only meaningful contact with the "West" was Novgorod's trade with the Hanseatic cities but it was somewhat one-sided: the German merchants had been coming to Novgorod but not other way around.

I thought of developing further like western Europe, but independently. Said yourself that Hungary was the most developed, and it had the least amount of worries compared to the others, until the Turks that is
 
I thought of developing further like western Europe, but independently. Said yourself that Hungary was the most developed, and it had the least amount of worries compared to the others, until the Turks that is

Hungary was most "Western" in its culture which is not the same as "most developed": talking about industrial development in the XIII century is a little bit preposterous so you are talking mostly about the fashions and differences caused by the regional specifics (availability of stone vs. timber, etc.). Even weaponry and armor had been approximately the same, again, with adjustment to the regional specifics like a need to deal with the light horse archers.

Not sure if Hungary had "the least amount of worries": its history before the Ottomans looks (at least superficially) very ... err .... "active" and it can be said that Rus did not have too many unusual "worries" not only before the Mongols but during most of the Golden Horde's rule as well, The main "worries" began when the Horde started falling apart but when it was stable the activities mostly amounted to getting tribute collected by the Russian princes and settling the squabbles between these princes (not always even with a direct military intervention).

Most definitely, the Horde had nothing to do with the attitude of the Orthodox Church toward the Catholics and resulting growing isolationism. It could be "blamed" (or "credited") with opening the markets and trade lines East of Russia but this framework had been pretty much destroyed by Timur. Not that too much of the "Western" contacts existed in pre-Mongolian Vladimir-Suzdal Rus.

BTW, your statement about the Black Sea steppes ".... the area was opened for settlement only when the american prairies were" is a poetic exaggeration. The area became open after the war of 1768 - 74, decades more than a century before massive settlements in the American "West" began (anyway, not too much could even happen prior to the Louisiana Purchase). ;)
 
No serfdom ? Wasn't serfdom not implemented before the Lage Middle Ages in Russia die to pressure for the Russian aristocracy to pay the tributes to their Mongolia/ Tartars overlords ?

No, it was not and its "popular" form (de facto slavery) did not exist until the time of Peter I and his immediate successors. By that time the "Tatar overlords" had been rather hard to find. ;)
 
Top