Slavic Great Powers other than Russia and Poland

Bohemia, with strong and consolidated leadership and a few PODs, could easily meet this requirement. A number of Balkan powers theoretically could, but the terrain and the geopolitics of being sandwiched between Hungary and the Ottomans for most of history isn't conducive to it.
 
Bulgaria and Serbia/Yugoslavia has best changes. Perhaps Czechoslovakia could be such but you probably need weakened Poland and balkanised Germany.
Czechoslovakia was an artificial byproduct of WWI with no serious historical roots: Slovakia was a part of Hungary since Xth century. So you would need to go all the way back to Great Moravia (existed between 833 and 902/07) and make it sustainable for a longer period.
1579282483137.png
 
How about Great Moravia surviving? At its maximum extent under Svatopluk I, it inluded (at least according to some accounts) not only what are now the Czech Republic and Slovakia but also Lusatia (much more extensive then than it is now), Silesia, part of Galicia, eastern Austria, Hungary (or rather the area inhabited by the Pannonian Slavs before the arrival of the Magyars), much of Transylvania, etc.



Admittedly, the obstacles to Great Moravia surviving were formidale:

"By the time of Svatopluk I's death in 894, the Great Moravian state had already begun to weaken. According to the chronicle of Byzantine emperor Constantine Porphyregenet, Svatopluk had warned his three sons upon his deathbed that their continued unity would be essential to the preservation of Great Moravian territory and power. Failure to heed that advice contributed to the rapid demise of Svatopluk's fragile kingdom as fraternal disputes in the face of external threats and weak internal organization left Great Moravia in a vulnerable state. A product of conquests and composed of fairly autonomous Slavic tribes and principalities, Svatopluk's state lacked the centralized authority or administrative structure needed to hold its disparate pieces together without his personal leadership.

"After Svatopluk's eldest son succeeded him as Mojmir II (r. 894-907), a power struggle began between the new king and his younger brother Svatopluk II, ruler of the appanage principality of Nitra. With the support of the East Frankish king Arnulf, Svatopluk II precipitated rebellions against Mojmir II in 895 and then again in 897, when Arnulf sent Frankish troops to help defend Svatopluk ll against his brother's attacks.

"A new threat then emerged in the form of the Magyar tribes, which moved into the Carpathian Basin after attacks by the nomadic Pechenegs forced the Magyars to move westward from their lands near the Black Sea in 895..."

https://books.google.com/books?id=sPbqDSWXK7QC&pg=PA31
 
Last edited:
Czechoslovakia was an artificial byproduct of WWI with no serious historical roots: Slovakia was a part of Hungary since Xth century. So you would need to go all the way back to Great Moravia (existed between 833 and 902/07) and make it sustainable for a longer period.
View attachment 516918
Honestly, I hadn't seen your post when I was working on my own!
 
Ukraine in particular could Wank
you would need to wipe out russia magically
“Ukraine” is a rather misleading term: it appeared in the XII as designation of the border areas (which is what it literally means) of the Southern princedoms of the Kievan Rus. Later it was applied to the South-Eastern border territories of the PLC. In this context it appeared only in the XVI century and as a semi-independent state in the mid-XVII after Khmelnitsky Uprising. Needless to say that by this time it was rather too late to eliminate the Tsardom of Moscow and that without this Tsardom (and its war with Poland) creation of the semi-independent Hetmanate was hardly possible (unless there is a big scale Ottoman involvement).

Anyway, expansion of the Hetmanate all the way to the status of the Great Power would be extremely unlikely. It was weaker than the PLC, weaker than the Tsardom and alliances with the Crimea (and by extension with the Ottomans) were not improving the situation: the Ottomans insisted on turning a big part of it into “no man land” and the Crimeans had been routinely using it as a source of the slaves. Add to this an absence of the “natural borders” and a rather weak economy.
 
“Ukraine” is a rather misleading term: it appeared in the XII as designation of the border areas (which is what it literally means) of the Southern princedoms of the Kievan Rus. Later it was applied to the South-Eastern border territories of the PLC. In this context it appeared only in the XVI century and as a semi-independent state in the mid-XVII after Khmelnitsky Uprising. Needless to say that by this time it was rather too late to eliminate the Tsardom of Moscow and that without this Tsardom (and its war with Poland) creation of the semi-independent Hetmanate was hardly possible (unless there is a big scale Ottoman involvement).

Anyway, expansion of the Hetmanate all the way to the status of the Great Power would be extremely unlikely. It was weaker than the PLC, weaker than the Tsardom and alliances with the Crimea (and by extension with the Ottomans) were not improving the situation: the Ottomans insisted on turning a big part of it into “no man land” and the Crimeans had been routinely using it as a source of the slaves. Add to this an absence of the “natural borders” and a rather weak economy.
Could the Swedes reward Mazepa with a mega-Hetmanate if his gamble on Charles paid off?
 
View attachment 516749
If these early Slavs could unite and create some kind of a state then you have a truly Great Power that had nothing to do with then nonexistent Russians or Poles.
I wonder how the 3-parts Slavic would look in a word where all Slavs had a continuous connection. It's not like they isolated from each other but on the ground the territorial division prevent a real continuum from forming between North and South Slavic.
 
Could the Swedes reward Mazepa with a mega-Hetmanate if his gamble on Charles paid off?
How could a vassal of Sweden become a Great Power? Anyway, under the most optimistic scenario it would be too small, too backward and too open for the invasion.
 
Last edited:
Interestingly, the thing about Bulgaria is that the Bulgars were originally a tribe of Turkic people who migrated from Central Asia into Southeastern Europe. It was only after they had been established in the region for some time that they went native and Slavicized. With a slightly different migratory history, something similar could probably happen with any number of different Eurasian nomadic groups - Avatar, Huns, Magyars, etc.
 
Somehow get Samo's Empire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samo's_Empire to last (granted it was hardly a superpower, but it could have been the nucleus of a fairly large Slavic state):

"Several Slavic tribes began to organize into political entities. In the West, Slavic tribes pressured by the Germanic Frankish Kingdom and still under Avar domination turned in 623 to a Frankish warrior merchant named Samo, who helped them revolt. The victorious Samo was proclaimed leader of a Slavic state, which from its center (perhaps in northern Moravia near Mikulčice or Decin) united several tribes into a political entity for over three decades." Paul Robert Magocsi, Historical Atlas of Central Europe, p. 8.

ScanImage001.jpg
 
Somehow get Samo's Empire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samo's_Empire to last (granted it was hardly a superpower, but it could have been the nucleus of a fairly large Slavic state):

"Several Slavic tribes began to organize into political entities. In the West, Slavic tribes pressured by the Germanic Frankish Kingdom and still under Avar domination turned in 623 to a Frankish warrior merchant named Samo, who helped them revolt. The victorious Samo was proclaimed leader of a Slavic state, which from its center (perhaps in northern Moravia near Mikulčice or Decin) united several tribes into a political entity for over three decades." Paul Robert Magocsi, Historical Atlas of Central Europe, p. 8.

View attachment 517129
"According to Fredegar, "Samo [was] a Frank by birth [or nation] from the pago Senonago", which could be present-day Soignies in Belgium or present-day Sens in France. Although he was of Frankish origin, Samo demanded that an ambassador (Sicharius) of Dagobert I (King of the Franks) put on Slavic clothes before entering his castle."

Perhaps the earliest Slavic empire and it wasn't even formed by a Slav. The Slavs can't truly catch a break.
 
"According to Fredegar, "Samo [was] a Frank by birth [or nation] from the pago Senonago", which could be present-day Soignies in Belgium or present-day Sens in France. Although he was of Frankish origin, Samo demanded that an ambassador (Sicharius) of Dagobert I (King of the Franks) put on Slavic clothes before entering his castle."

Perhaps the earliest Slavic empire and it wasn't even formed by a Slav. The Slavs can't truly catch a break.
Well, remember the controversy over the Normanist theory of the origins of Kievan Rus. There are serious scholarly reasons to doubt it, but the real objection in the Soviet era was "The Normanist theory is politically harmful, because it denies the ability of the Slavic nations to form an independent state by their own efforts." https://books.google.com/books?id=ktyM07I9HXwC&pg=PT31
 
How could a vassal of the Mongols become a great power?
By the time Russian state became a Great Power (XVIII century) the issue of being Mongolian (or rather Tatar) vassal became an ancient history: it ceased to be the case during the reign of Ivan III and the leftovers of the GH had been conquered by Ivan IV.

OTOH, Hetmanate created by Charles would be too weak to stand up on its own.
 
Top