Tatar Siberia

Is there any way for the Tatars to dominate Siberia in place of the Russians?

Basically, this would be a mix of a Volga Bulgaria and Golden Horde wank. When would the POD need to be to allow Volga Bulgaria to dominate Siberia? Would it have to avoid the Mongol conquest, or could it still re-emerge from it stronger? Would this simply be a Russian screw, or can an independent center of power arise in Sarai, Kazan, or wherever to challenge the Russians.

I guess the government would be a monarchy ruled by descendents of Genghis Khan, because of the prestige such a lineage entails. It may or may not be abolished at some point.

Such a state should at least be capable of modernisation to at least the degree of the OTL Ottoman Empire, if not Russia itself. The main language should be Tatar of any sort, probably Volga Tatar as opposed to any other branch. Territorially, this state should at least encompass the Volga basin that OTL was under Kazan as well as the Asian part of the Russian federation minus that gained from the Chinese in the 19th century.

So how plausible is this state? What does Tatar Siberia, ruled by a reformed Golden Horde or a successor state to it, need to succeed?
 
Is there any way for the Tatars to dominate Siberia in place of the Russians?

Basically, this would be a mix of a Volga Bulgaria and Golden Horde wank. When would the POD need to be to allow Volga Bulgaria to dominate Siberia? Would it have to avoid the Mongol conquest, or could it still re-emerge from it stronger? Would this simply be a Russian screw, or can an independent center of power arise in Sarai, Kazan, or wherever to challenge the Russians.

I guess the government would be a monarchy ruled by descendents of Genghis Khan, because of the prestige such a lineage entails. It may or may not be abolished at some point.

Such a state should at least be capable of modernisation to at least the degree of the OTL Ottoman Empire, if not Russia itself. The main language should be Tatar of any sort, probably Volga Tatar as opposed to any other branch. Territorially, this state should at least encompass the Volga basin that OTL was under Kazan as well as the Asian part of the Russian federation minus that gained from the Chinese in the 19th century.

So how plausible is this state? What does Tatar Siberia, ruled by a reformed Golden Horde or a successor state to it, need to succeed?
The important parts basically were, you would just need some king of 4th gunpowder Empire in the Golden Horde area that takes Central Asia and you are set.
 
The important parts basically were, you would just need some king of 4th gunpowder Empire in the Golden Horde area that takes Central Asia and you are set.

Is that all it would really take? Could a strong leader truly save the Golden Horde or else take hold of the Khanate of Kazan (probably the best choice of successor state) and turn it into a gunpowder empire? Weren't there structural issues that needed to be resolved in order to withstand the force of the Russians?

I think the Siberian expansion might be the easy part for this, once the Sibir Khanate is dealt with. After all, there's a demand for furs in Europe, and the Tatars are just as well-placed as the Russians to take advantage of it, although the Russians as middlemen will profit off of the trade. Geographically, the Russian states are a formidable obstacle, whereas Siberia presents a minimal obstacle, allowing expansion to the east to be a sensible policy.
 
Is that all it would really take? Could a strong leader truly save the Golden Horde or else take hold of the Khanate of Kazan (probably the best choice of successor state) and turn it into a gunpowder empire? Weren't there structural issues that needed to be resolved in order to withstand the force of the Russians?

I think the Siberian expansion might be the easy part for this, once the Sibir Khanate is dealt with. After all, there's a demand for furs in Europe, and the Tatars are just as well-placed as the Russians to take advantage of it, although the Russians as middlemen will profit off of the trade. Geographically, the Russian states are a formidable obstacle, whereas Siberia presents a minimal obstacle, allowing expansion to the east to be a sensible policy.
I´m definitely not an expert but I guess that if made the Golden Horde stronger and more unity, even if just a bit you could postpone events like Ugra river and have the Ottomans being allied to them and capable to support them against the Russians, instead of being confined to Crimea.
 
I´m definitely not an expert but I guess that if made the Golden Horde stronger and more unity, even if just a bit you could postpone events like Ugra river and have the Ottomans being allied to them and capable to support them against the Russians, instead of being confined to Crimea.

That's just the Crimean Khanate, which seized the mantle of Golden Horde but by no means was capable of reclaiming the glory of that state. The events on the Ugra River basically just confirmed what was already known to everyone. Now, I think the Golden Horde can lose its rule over the Russian states while still standing strong.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Golden Horde and its successor states prize nomadism and thus limit the agricultural potential of their lands in ways the Russians did not? I don't know if this extended back as far Volga Bulgaria, but it might have considering the origin of the Bulgars. This seems like a policy in need of reform. Or does it? In any case, all we need is a Tatar state which can resist conquest by the Russians and expand to the Pacific Ocean. I'm of the belief that any state which rules Siberia is guaranteed to be an important player on the global scene based on the resources in Siberia to be exploited, so we'll need this state to be a regional power at miminum. Demographically, I think a state within the constraints I noted in my OP (which is minimum) could easily be a Great Power, especially if China declines as it did in the 19th century. Since the heartland of this Tatar state around Kazan and the lower Volga is vulnerable to Russian attack, such a state could in some sense "retreat" into Siberia behind the Urals leading to more early Siberian colonisation than Russia ever did.
 
That's just the Crimean Khanate, which seized the mantle of Golden Horde but by no means was capable of reclaiming the glory of that state. The events on the Ugra River basically just confirmed what was already known to everyone. Now, I think the Golden Horde can lose its rule over the Russian states while still standing strong.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Golden Horde and its successor states prize nomadism and thus limit the agricultural potential of their lands in ways the Russians did not? I don't know if this extended back as far Volga Bulgaria, but it might have considering the origin of the Bulgars. This seems like a policy in need of reform. Or does it? In any case, all we need is a Tatar state which can resist conquest by the Russians and expand to the Pacific Ocean. I'm of the belief that any state which rules Siberia is guaranteed to be an important player on the global scene based on the resources in Siberia to be exploited, so we'll need this state to be a regional power at miminum. Demographically, I think a state within the constraints I noted in my OP (which is minimum) could easily be a Great Power, especially if China declines as it did in the 19th century. Since the heartland of this Tatar state around Kazan and the lower Volga is vulnerable to Russian attack, such a state could in some sense "retreat" into Siberia behind the Urals leading to more early Siberian colonisation than Russia ever did.
I think you just need to have some Mongol victories all around and keep them just a big longer around, I think the Ottoman influx is going to be helpful to them, more so than it was to Crimea.

Not sure about that, probably a general Mongol thing.

I don´t think Siberia is important actually, it gives the buffer zone but I don´t exactly see those resources helping before 1900. I think it´s unlikely for such a state to be stable with a Russia in the North, one united at least.
 
I think you just need to have some Mongol victories all around and keep them just a big longer around, I think the Ottoman influx is going to be helpful to them, more so than it was to Crimea.

Not sure about that, probably a general Mongol thing.

I don´t think Siberia is important actually, it gives the buffer zone but I don´t exactly see those resources helping before 1900. I think it´s unlikely for such a state to be stable with a Russia in the North, one united at least.

It's still many decades before the Turks can reliably project power into Crimea. And since Crimea is just one part of the region, with mainly agriculture to give. By the structures of the Russian states, it seems impossible you won't get one or two strong states. The Horde did great against Tver, sure, but you have other Russian states (i.e. Moscow) playing the Horde against their rivals. The Tatar yoke seems fleeting. Not to mention the actions of Timur against the Golden Horde.

The Tsarists were so late to exploit the resources of Siberia in part because of their backwardness and in other part because of the underpopulation. In the nearer parts of Siberia like the Urals, resources were exploited in the 19th century and known since the 17th century. I think we can see Siberia as the place which keeps places like Kazan alive and competitive against the Russians. Even in the 15th century, the Russians (divided as they were) outnumbered the Turkic peoples (also divided) west of the Urals.
 
It's still many decades before the Turks can reliably project power into Crimea. And since Crimea is just one part of the region, with mainly agriculture to give. By the structures of the Russian states, it seems impossible you won't get one or two strong states. The Horde did great against Tver, sure, but you have other Russian states (i.e. Moscow) playing the Horde against their rivals. The Tatar yoke seems fleeting. Not to mention the actions of Timur against the Golden Horde.

The Tsarists were so late to exploit the resources of Siberia in part because of their backwardness and in other part because of the underpopulation. In the nearer parts of Siberia like the Urals, resources were exploited in the 19th century and known since the 17th century. I think we can see Siberia as the place which keeps places like Kazan alive and competitive against the Russians. Even in the 15th century, the Russians (divided as they were) outnumbered the Turkic peoples (also divided) west of the Urals.
The bit about Timur seems quite good, what if we remove him entirely? Thus making both the Golden Horde and the Ottomans stronger?
 
I was envisioning the capital of this state being in either Bolghar, Kazan, or Sarai (either Old Sarai or New Sarai), but in the event of Russia still becoming strong or other enemies emerging, like (Poland-)Lithuania or a strong Persia, would there be any chance for a capital in Siberia, maybe in one of the cities of the OTL Siberian Khanate like Qashliq? In a Tatar Siberia, I think a capital beyond the Urals is a sensible idea. I kind of like Novosibirsk as a site for this capital. It has a good location (besides a good crossing of the Ob River), is pretty central in Siberia, between the Pacific and the Tatar heartland, and OTL had an extremely rapid growth thanks to the actions of both Tsarists and Soviets.

*Novosibirsk is also far enough away from China and Mongolia to not be threatened by anyone in that region. However, since I envision a Tatar state in Siberia developing a pan-Turkisk or Turanist ideology, I think that China, with their influence over Mongolia, Turkic nations, and Siberia, will become an important enemy. Novosibirisk is thus nice as a good base for campaigning against China.

The bit about Timur seems quite good, what if we remove him entirely? Thus making both the Golden Horde and the Ottomans stronger?

There still is the need for reform in the Golden Horde to make it a more proper state.
 
I was envisioning the capital of this state being in either Bolghar, Kazan, or Sarai (either Old Sarai or New Sarai), but in the event of Russia still becoming strong or other enemies emerging, like (Poland-)Lithuania or a strong Persia, would there be any chance for a capital in Siberia, maybe in one of the cities of the OTL Siberian Khanate like Qashliq? In a Tatar Siberia, I think a capital beyond the Urals is a sensible idea. I kind of like Novosibirsk as a site for this capital. It has a good location (besides a good crossing of the Ob River), is pretty central in Siberia, between the Pacific and the Tatar heartland, and OTL had an extremely rapid growth thanks to the actions of both Tsarists and Soviets.

*Novosibirsk is also far enough away from China and Mongolia to not be threatened by anyone in that region. However, since I envision a Tatar state in Siberia developing a pan-Turkisk or Turanist ideology, I think that China, with their influence over Mongolia, Turkic nations, and Siberia, will become an important enemy. Novosibirisk is thus nice as a good base for campaigning against China.



There still is the need for reform in the Golden Horde to make it a more proper state.
If The Horde is so weak they can´t prevent the Russians from invading and sieging down their European capital they would just lose their land as IOTL and end up being conquered completely.

Sarai Berke is a good choice.




I have no idea how you would do that, I imagine reforming under image of the Ottoman state and with their help it should be possible.
 
Last edited:
Top