Siberia & the Far East not Russian

Yeah. China claimed the world IOTL. Right up until the 19th century they called the British ambassador the tribute payer from the barbarian queen Victoria (or something along those lines, they were rather out of touch with reality....).

On the other hand, the Treayt of Nerchinsk recognized equality between Russia and China.
 
On the other hand, the Treaty of Nerchinsk recognized equality between Russia and China.

Though a stronger China in the 19th Century could have given that treaty as much weight as did the Russians in OTL. That said, I really don't see the Chinese putting much effort into possessing Siberia under any circumstances.
 
Kazan? Would it have much of a chance unless not only does Russia/Muscovy decide not to expand east (or is unable to), but Sibir somehow falls apart? I don't know how strong the militaries of Sibir and Kazan were relative to another, but unless Kazan is a lot stronger than I thought, Sibir has the upper hand.
Yes Kazan was at the beggining of 1300 stronger than Muscovy, Muscovy paid them tribute, however when IVAN III and it all changed, so just have a tl where he is butterflied away and Kazan remains a power.....
 
If you get rid of Russian unification then yes, there's tons of ways to make it not Russian.

If you don't, there are still ways, but it's harder. Russia's going to have to be weaker and its population somehow reduced, since the main imperative to drive eastward was mostly for its minimally settled land. It was like U.S. Western settlement: it didn't have to happen, but demographically it was sort of the thing to do.
 
If you don't, there are still ways, but it's harder. Russia's going to have to be weaker and its population somehow reduced, since the main imperative to drive eastward was mostly for its minimally settled land. It was like U.S. Western settlement: it didn't have to happen, but demographically it was sort of the thing to do.

Not true. The Russians had a lot of empty or nomad-crossed black-earth that wasn't a zillion miles from everywhere to settle just to the south of them. The whole area around modern Kharkov was a "wild field" being actively settled when the Cossacks were heading into Siberia, and the tsars were still filling up New Russia in the 19th century, as a glance at the population figures for the Kherson governorate in several editions of Brockhaus can tell you. The conquest of Siberia was undertaken for the sake of the fur-trade, and there weren't any serious attempts to settle large numbers of farmers there until Stolypin.

In fact, the Russian state didn't have much role in the initial colonisation beyond giving town-rights to the fur-forts when they got big enough. It was done by Cossack freebooters in the pay of merchant houses.
 
Last edited:
As to the far east, I'm partial to a Manju/Jurchen wank of some kind. (They never get any love here...:confused:)

As to Siberia...the Russians are going to move east, thats a given, so they're going to get a chunk of Siberia no matter what, but expansion across the whole of Eurasia could be checked by a strong Turkic state smack dab in the middle of Asia that blocks their way. Perhaps a large, powerful Kazakhstan that reaches all the way north to the arctic?

Space between these two states (Great Manchuria and Mega-Kazakhstan) being filled in by China in the lower latitudes around Mongolia and the rest of it disputed amongst the Kazakhs, Manjus and Chinese.
 
On the other hand, the Treayt of Nerchinsk recognized equality between Russia and China.

Well, the Chinese had their asses kicked often enough by barbarians from the north (including the current ruling house) that they probably felt it paid to be cautious.... :)

Bruce
 
Top