The Pivot of History: A Tsar Simeon Bekbulatovich Thread

This line of Tsars would have claims linking them to some of the greatest houses of their time, and, would be inheriting the Russian claim, perhaps more legitimately, to the Byzantine succession.

I like the idea of a Chinggisid monarch taking Constantinople...though, that would only become an option several generations down the line.

True. Certainly a 'Mongol Tsar' might make for useful propaganda?

Definitely. The Poles/Lithuanians got on Ivan IV's case just for marrying a Muslim princess. They'd milk Simeon Bekbulatovich's ancestry for all it's worth, if (when?) the need for propaganda against the Russian Tsardom arises.
This too is a good questionn, and one that merits further discussion. My thought was Kasimov.

AFAIK, Qasim was an appanage that was temporarily granted to Tatar princes of various different origins. And not, like, an inherited duchy or anything. So it wouldn't be a likely name for the dynasty. I think the most probable surname is some variation of "Simeonov", which was already suggested.
 
To my mind sounds about as reasonable a name as Romanov. Although the khans of Qasim also claimed the name "Kasimov" AFAIK.

I'd pretty much say so. And perhaps Tsar Simeon should try inside Russia first. There's bound to be some people who aren't all that comfortable with getting a former Muslim, and a descendant of the same Mongols who levied tribute on Moscow, as a tsar. Good news being that the Godunov (provided they don't do anything stupid) and Shuisky families (AIUI Vasili IV was the last representative of his line) will survive, Feodor (Filaret) Romanov never ends up in a monastery. Simeon's grandson can maybe start looking abroad for a wife, but I'm not sure how successful he'd be.
It seems possible that t least one of his OTL sons might have married by our POD anyway, and you are right that it could make sense to find domestic matches in order to further consolidate his position. There may for a grandson be a daughter of Sigismund III to marry.
I don't think that religious aspect would be much different from OTL: Tsardom of Moscow did not care too much for conversion of its Muslim or Buddhist subjects. Conversions had been routinely happening on the top of a social ladder because they had been opening way to the high administrative positions and possibility of the marriages with the Russian aristocratic families. Take, for example, Yusupov family. They went to the Russian service during the reign of Ivan IV and had been given a territory near town Romanov on Volga but they were qualified as "mirza" (aka, had been outside the Russian aristocracy). After converting to the Orthodoxy Abdul Mirza became Russian prince and got a high court title Steward and his descendants had been among the top (and the richest) Russian aristocrats.
This is a good point. I was just thinking that there's a history of the dominant descendant of Genghis Khan managing to influence the religion of others in the greater Mongol space. On the other hand, this was not universally so historically.



Claim to the Byzantine "succession" and the notion of the 3rd Rome had been mostly religious issue. The practical plans for taking Istanbul started appearing only in the XVIII century.

That makes sense, but I do wonder what relations would be like for this dynasty with the Girays and the Ottomans.

It would not really matter and the same goes for any serious plans of the Ruthenian unification with the Muscovite state: unlike unification of the Russian territories (Smolensk was considered one of them), the White, Little and Red Rus had been more or less abstract things listed in a title the same way as the kings of England had "King of France" in their title after the 100YW. If an opportunity was there (or it looked like it was there), then there could be (but not "must be" ;)) an attempt to grab them but the failure was not a big thing worthy of a persistent pursuit: most of these territories remained within the PLC all the way to the Partitions even if the physical opportunity to annex them without too much of a trouble existed for the decades. Galicia (the Red Rus) was not seemingly even on the list and ended up in the Austrian hands.



No, it would not. Except for providing a natural border barrier of forests and swamps (something not very important until WWI) there was/is nothing valuable in this area.
Apt points.



Or it could be Bekbulatowy or Semenovy (after founder of the dynasty). Kasimovy could be an unneeded pointer to the dynasty origin.
What about something pertaining to his particular line of descent from Genghis Khan?
I like the idea of a Chinggisid monarch taking Constantinople...though, that would only become an option several generations down the line.
No doubt.


Definitely. The Poles/Lithuanians got on Ivan IV's case just for marrying a Muslim princess. They'd milk Simeon Bekbulatovich's ancestry for all it's worth, if (when?) the need for propaganda against the Russian Tsardom arises.
I do think they will clash militarily at some point.

AFAIK, Qasim was an appanage that was temporarily granted to Tatar princes of various different origins. And not, like, an inherited duchy or anything. So it wouldn't be a likely name for the dynasty. I think the most probable surname is some variation of "Simeonov", which was already suggested.
There is ample precedent for naming a dynasty after its first ruler.
 
I like the idea of a Chinggisid monarch taking Constantinople...though, that would only become an option several generations down the line.

To be precise, it would be "Istanbul" even if the Russians kept calling it Constantinople for quite a while after its fall. :)

However, taking it would not be something realistic until well into the XVIII century: no matter who was ruling the Russian Tsardom/Empire, the state's military strength was not adequate for such a task and, again, no matter who was ruling it, there were almost inevitable engagements on the Western borders which would not allow to concentrate on this direction. Anyway, the plan would require:
(a) Complete removal of the Khanate (including Nogai Horde) as a potential danger - either annexation (as in OTL) or bottling it within the peninsula with the Nogais being either destroyed (say, by the combination of the Russian forces and the Kalmuks) or brought to the Russian side or pushed beyond the Kuban River.
(b) Securing the right flank, which means that before any strategic offensive against the Ottomans there would be a need to get control of at least the Left Bank Ukraine (which belonged to the PLC) and perhaps of some part of the Right Bank as well (or to have the PLC completely neutralized as was pretty much the case in the OTL at the time of Catherine II).
(c) Establish a reliable operational base in Moldavia/Walachia to put Istanbul within a realistic striking distance.
(d) Ideally, but not necessarily, to have the Black Sea Fleet capable of preventing the Ottoman activities along the coast.

As an alternative, to have something like the OTL Mediterranean expeditions on the steroids: more powerful Baltic squadron carrying a lot of infantry not bothering with the Greece but going directly to the Straits; for a meaningful conquest this should be going in parallel with a successful campaign of conquest along the Black Sea shore with the penetration across the Danube.

By the time any of these scenarios is possible, ancestry of the rulers of Russia would not matter.

Definitely. The Poles/Lithuanians got on Ivan IV's case just for marrying a Muslim princess. They'd milk Simeon Bekbulatovich's ancestry for all it's worth, if (when?) the need for propaganda against the Russian Tsardom arises.

Propaganda where? It would not make any difference within the Tsardom and within the PLC the Poles would be just working hard convincing themselves in what they already knew and rather meaningless because the PLC was routinely allying with the Crimea and the Ottomans. :openedeyewink: For 2 other European powers that could matter, the Hapsburgs and Sweden, the geopolitical interests would overweight all these ancestry talk.
 
The same as it was between the Romanov dynasty and the Crimea: the Khanate could not survive without a loot and Tsardom was trying to prevent it.
I thought that both being Chinggisids might effect things, but as I think about it, you're right, as other Chinggisid regimes quarreled regularly with one another too.
 
I thought that both being Chinggisids might effect things, but as I think about it, you're right, as other Chinggisid regimes quarreled regularly with one another too.

The GH and Crimean Khanate were routinely fighting each other and Tatars of Kasimov were routinely fighting on the Muscovite side against any of them so I would not do too much out of a shared ancestry.
 
There isn't a tag saying "I am aware this thread is rather old,d o I want to post", so I guess it's not necro'ing (yet).

This is the family tree I worked up for Tsar Simeon II (and apparently he's listed as such due to his stint as "tsar" in 1575-1576. I couldn't find dates of birth or even the birth order for his kids (beyond him having (at least) three sons, and the oldest son dying in infancy, and Ivan being supposedly murdered by Boris Godunov), so I sort of just improvised with the dates. Names are what rodovid spat out, so I went with those.

Simeon II, Tsar of all the Russias [1598-1616], Grand Prince of Tver [1576-1585], Grand Prince of Rus [1575-1576] (1545-1616) m: 1575 Anastasia Ivanovna Mstislavskaya (-1607)

Feodor (1576-1580)

Eudoxia (b.1578)

Dmitri (1580-1580)

Ivan, Tsarevich of all the Russias (1581-1604) 1m: 1597 Maria of Oldenburg (1580-1597); 2m: 1599 Maria Vasiliëvna Barbaszyn (d.1633)​

[1m.] Ivan V, Tsar of all the Russias [from 1616] (b.1597) 1m: 1616 Maria Ivanovna Khlopova (d.1624); 2m: 1624 Anna Borisovna Sheremeteva (d.1654)​

[2m.] Simeon, Tsarevich of all the Russias (b.1626)​

[2m.] Anna (b.1628)​

[2m.] Alexei (b.1631)​

[2m.] Maria (1632-1638)​

[2m.] Dmitri (b.1634) [twin of Boris]

[2m.] Boris (b.1634) [twin of Dmitri]

[2m.] Anna (b.1600)​

[2m.] Vasili (b.1602) m: 1624 Marfa Vladimirovna Dolgorukova (d.1634)​

[2m.] Vladimir (b.1625)​

[2m.] Maria (b.1627)

[2m.] Ivan (1628-1638)

[2m.] Elizabeth (b.1631)

[2m.] Margarita (1635-1638)​

[2m.] Elena (b.1605)​

Maria (b.1583)

Anastasia (b.1587) m: 1605 Mikhail Vasilievich, Prince Skopin-Shiuski (b.1586)​

Vasili (b.1610, d.1615)​

Anna (b.1611)

Simeon, Prince Skopin-Shiuski (b.1612)​

Simeon Bekbulatovich becomes tsar following the death of Tsar Feodor (so no Godunov/Time of Troubles crap - or at least, less of it). I wed Simeon [II]'s son to Maria of Oldenburg - not so much because it's a foreign bride in Russia (that factored into it too), but also she's the last descendant of Ivan III and Sophia Palaiologina. Ivan III is her and her husband's closest common ancestor, so that gets around the cousin thing. However, I do also think that where Boris Godunov had Maria Vladimirovna (and her daughter) stuffed in a convent because of their possible rival claim, Simeon might not be so paranoid and instead see it as a good thing to marry Maria of Oldenburg and Ivan Simeonovich (both as a way of emphasizing the continuity with the Ruriks as well as tying up a loose end).

TBH, I don't know much about which families were considered good enough to provide a tsarina, so I sort of went with OTL candidates, or close to it (Maria Vasilievna Barbaszyna was the stepmother of Mikhail Feodorovich's Dolgorukov wife), while Khlopova was his OTL choice for a wife but his mommy told him hell no.

@alexmilman, @Valena: feel free to criticize and pull it apart
 
I'm thinking that it might not necessarily stop at a foreign match for the tsarevich. Perhaps Prince Johan of Holstein/Gustaf Eriksen Vasa for one of Simeon's daughters (à la Xenia Godunova)?
 
It delights me to no end to see interest in this thread continue. I think it's a really smart idea to go with Maria of Oldenburg as the bride for Simeon's son.
 
Top