What if the Cossack revolt led by Stenka Razin in early 1670's Russia had been much more successful in its scope?
I don't think Razin could have succeeded in utterly destroying the tsarist government -- the boyars, the tsar and the patriarchate were against him for the entirety of the rebellion, and it's not likely that the Cossacks could have maintained the cohesion necessary to run a state as burgeoning as the Russian Empire. On the other hand, if Razin and his followers had managed to reach and sack Moscow (as they had done to many of the cities they captured for the duration of the rebellion), could this have instigated a recurring trauma in the minds of the tsardom that would complicate its future relations with the remaining Cossacks?
I don't think Razin could have succeeded in utterly destroying the tsarist government -- the boyars, the tsar and the patriarchate were against him for the entirety of the rebellion, and it's not likely that the Cossacks could have maintained the cohesion necessary to run a state as burgeoning as the Russian Empire. On the other hand, if Razin and his followers had managed to reach and sack Moscow (as they had done to many of the cities they captured for the duration of the rebellion), could this have instigated a recurring trauma in the minds of the tsardom that would complicate its future relations with the remaining Cossacks?