WI: Peter III is not a poorly-adjusted prussophile?

Redbeard

Banned
Why would East Prussia be. Good bite? It is far away and filled with Germans and Poles. Historically Elizabeth didn't even want to keep it.

East Prussia is close to Russia and being filled with say Poles didn't really stop the Russians elsewhere.

Controlling Denmark? The intention was not to control Denmark. The intention was to take Schleswig and reunite it with Holstein.

Controlling Denmark does not necessarily mean occupying or annexing but meaning that Denmark would oppose Russian interests.


The war with be far from Russia but close to the Russian held Holstein and Kolberg, which was intended to act as a supply depot once the war started.
Holstein? That is definitively Danish controlled. But anyway I don't think supplies will be the big problem in a short campaign. After all it is mid summer and in a cultivated landscape. But once the Kolberg depot is empty the Russian army may experience problems as the Danish Navy will be capable of preventing its resupply.


If the Danes retreat to Fyn then the Russians can occupy far more than just Schleswig (which is all they desire), so Russia wins the war.

The landscape leading to Holstein is rather channeling, i.e. giving an advancing army relatively few routes in between the numerous lakes, rivers and swamps. That also give the defender a lot of opportunities to select good positions. AFAIK of St. Germains plan it was to try to engage outside Holstein, and the landscape gives a lot of good opportunities to do that favourably, not just at Wismar. If a strong enemy goes up the Jutland peninsula the usual plan would be utilising your naval superiority and withdraw to one of the islands on the eastcoast of Jutland and/or a fortress like Fredericia and from there land in Jutland again in the back or flank of the invader. If the Russians had advanced up Jutland that probably would have been the plan and just occupying Jutland or S-H isn't a war winning position vs. Denmark.



The war certainly would t have been a walkover as you correctly state the Danish army was competent. However, it was against a larger, more experienced, more competent army led by one of the greatest Russian generals of the time, Rumyanstev. I mean you have to remember the Russian armies were the ones mainly responsible for devastating Prussia during the Seven Years' War.
[/QUOTE]

St. Germains army was 27.000 and the Russian army when it started its march 40.000, so certainly numerically superior, but not significantly if having to break through at a place like Wismar - anything can happen. And sure the Russians gave an important contribution to fighting the Prussians in the SYW especially in the end phase, but I don't agree they were mainly responsible for devastating Prussia. The Austrians.would IMHO at least share the title.

I considder both Generals competent above average, which again makes it very difficult to predict an outcome. I must admit that I'm not deep into the SYW or the Russian army at that time, but my impression is that it mainly excelled in defensive battles.
 
I think a more interesting question is what would happen if he was a well adjusted Frederick fanboy who was a competent at internal affairs. The OP's request simply turns him into a Catherine the Great clone (with a Y chromosome), which means most of our changes would be small and more about personal stuff at the court than ruler policy.

Kind of like how if Stephen of Blois swore fealty to Empress Matilda instead of usurping her, most of the changes would not be related to policy of the ruler either. Henry II took every single advice from his mother, except for Thomas Beckett thing. That POD would makre its main effects on court intrigue (no, intrigue does not always mean assassination) and the lack of civil war than the ruler policy.
 
Is the English wikipedia page so wrong then?
The English Wikipedia page heavily relies on sources with a particular revisionist slant. It's not reflective of the majority view on Peter III, but rather the view of those who bother to invest time in revising the page. It may or may not be an accurate view, but it's certainly not a majority one.

It's sadly a fairly common problem with Wikipedia; while Wikipedia has generally become decent at labeling outright nonsense as nonsense (e.g. the "Did we fake the moon landing" folks), it's much worse at distinguishing between semi-respectable minority and majority views (in pretty much any field) in a manner that makes it clear where the balance of expert opinion lies.
 
I think there are various factors that could have turned Peter into a less pro Prussia and more effective ruler.

From all the books I've read it seems clear that Peter's early childhood coloured his impressions of Russia and bolstered his love of Prussia. His father had gone to Russia as a young man in the hope of forming an alliance and getting back his territories in Schlesvig. Though he married Peter the Great's daughter he never got his lands back. His wife died shortly after Peter was born so Peter grew up at a Court that viewed Russia as treacherous and backwards. To make matters worse, when Peter's father died he was left in the care of a tutor called Brummer who appears to have been a sadist who terrorised the orphaned boy. Then suddenly without warning Peter is yanked away from home, brought to Russia and made heir to the throne. Brummer came with him and the ill treatment continued for some time.

I think what Peter really wanted was to be loved. Unfortunately he never managed to connect with his aunt Elizabeth and Brummer's hated presence may have been part of the reason. So if Brummer had been left behind in Holstein and Peter had managed to form a loving relationship with his aunt his attitudes might have been very different. Also the terrible attack of smallpox he suffered in 1744 seems to have affected his character. If that hadn't happened he might have remained a more positive person who was more willing to learn about his new country and embrace its culture.
 
... good stuff.....

Excellent points. But how about keeping the love for both? I’d say he had potential to reform Russia on the Prussian model, bringing innovation to Tsardom. If he can connect with his aunt and negate Cat, either be being charismatic or by showing positive results from his reforms that make his guards more loyal, you could have a formidable wank.
 
Whether I am a victim of Catherine propaganda, but I have yet to read a serious historic account where Peter III did not come off as a spoiled brat with the instincts and world-outlook of Flashman meets Uncle Rico. I am having a very hard time picturing him as a serious reformer or a serious anything. Russian romantics did a Hell of a job rehabilitating Paul I by pitying him and self-identifying, but I can't think of anyone who has had any success in making Peter III likeable. That being said, a competent non-ASB Peter III would be a lot of work, and good luck to anyone who will try such a thing.
 
In my studies he came across as a truly bizarre character who cared nothing for Russia and switched sides during the 7 years war for little reason other than his taste in uniforms.

War with Prussia was not particularpy in Russia interest at the time. Sure they could gain East Prussia.... But really. Is that worth the massive bloodletting of the SYW? Far better to do as Catherine did and carve the Polish turkey together.
 
I have always thought that OTL's writer is in love with Prussia and that this whole 'Prussia is saved because Catherine die and her son like prussia for some reason' was the most blatant exemple of it...
 
Edit: I read OP, not OTL. I’ve should have read better.

Well OTL writer has given us a good person to pick for an alternative timeline for Russia, with good chances for a wank compared to OTL without being completely ASB imho.
 
Last edited:
I have always thought that OTL's writer is in love with Prussia and that this whole 'Prussia is saved because Catherine die and her son like prussia for some reason' was the most blatant exemple of it...
Except for the part where it doesn't exists anymore.
 
I have always thought that OTL's writer is in love with Prussia and that this whole 'Prussia is saved because Catherine die and her son like prussia for some reason' was the most blatant exemple of it...
tbh not even the most shameless writer would expect the reader to seriously buy that Frederick would be saved by such an incredible stroke of luck [though, to be fair, 'they' did 'foreshadow' it with the empress's failing health and the pro-Prussia faction in court].
 
Alright, I'll try to contribute. First of all, I checked the Wikipedia site about him and it lacks a lot of info. Peter had a lousy childhood and upbringing although he seems to have been quite intelligent and interested in a number of subjects. But he was raised as a true German and the the age of 12 they dragged the boy away from his home to Russia, he had to convert to the Orthodox and was living in a Russian court whose language and customs he did not know and soon grew to despise them. He didn't care for his new wife (who was chosen by Elizabeth and seemed much more of a Russian eventually then Peter himself). The Empress didn't even give much thought to him and only wanted to see an heir born and it is rather possible that Peter wasn't Paul's father, no matter all the slander and revinisionism. But, from what I gather Peter wasn't sterile, it seems more he just wasn't interested in Catherine, although he was overall weird and a little childish, not surprising seeing as ge was raised.

As for his reign, he really did try to rule. Yes, he adored the Prussians for their style, their military, uniforms, he admired Frederick endlessly but his foreign policy doesn't seem so unreasonable. Holstein was his home, that's one reason to fight Denmark and retake it. The other is the fact that owning the entire region allows Russia much greater control of the Baltic and also an outlet to the open sea, meaning Atlantic. Such goals were pursued by later Russian Emperors in wars that were much bloodier and difficult to win. Continued fighting against Prussia didn't seem worth it from a realistic point of view as the main enemy, the British, had already won. As for Peter's planned war with the Danes I'd give him a good chance to win, seeing as the British were at the time busy with France and Spain and with Prussian support, which they seemed willing to provide, the Russians had a good base in Pomerania to carry the war into Holstein and Schleswig. Besides, his goals were limited, not outright conquest of entire Jutland but only the souther regions that he actually had claim on.

On his internal policy he did have his peculiarities. He introduced new Prussian-style uniforms that were hated by the soldiers, he ordered a number of cannons in St. petersburg to fire every day because he liked the sound of it, to huge consternation of the citizens. However, he also issued a huge number of new laws and edicts during his short reign that benefitted the peasants and aimed to improve their positions, he tried to limit the power of the Church and even the low nobility seemed to like him. The problem was with the Empress and her favourites at the court, mostly high nobility that hated him, resulting in his removal. But long- term I think his rule would've done Russia much more good than bad.

Now, I'm not sure how to make him not a Prussophile. As long as he is raised in Holstein at his father's forner court it's difficult to change it. Maybe if he has different tutors but he won't be that much different as he still has to go to Russia, change his religion and spend his formative years there. It would be interesting though to see hin raised in Russia from the start. Say that Anna Petrovna and her husband remain in Russia, maybe by having her inherit the throne from Catherine I (by killing off Peter II or a POD like that). That way he'll be completely different
 
War with Prussia was not particularpy in Russia interest at the time. Sure they could gain East Prussia.... But really. Is that worth the massive bloodletting of the SYW? Far better to do as Catherine did and carve the Polish turkey together.
War with Prussia has already happened and essentially been won. That's a sunk cost (and while you can debate the value of East Prussia, it's certainly better than "nothing" which is what Peter III got from his peace treaty with Prussia). Holstein is a pipe dream; holding it will just incite hostility in the rest of Europe and divert resources that would better be spent elsewhere. Prussia is a worse ally than Austria (weaker, no use in Turkey, with conflicting goals in Poland and northern Germany, and likely to drag you into a useless conflict with Austria). Much better to eliminate Prussia as a significant player, keep a firm alliance with Austria, and rely on Franco-British conflicts to keep Western Europe from being a threat while you continue to expand in the east (since Austria+Russia+one of France/UK is a sufficiently strong alliance to keep the rest of Europe in check).

Poland is already under heavy Russian influence, much better to keep it that way (and maybe exchange East Prussia for Polish lands as mentioned above), rather than give a good chunk of it to Prussia to keep them happy.
 
War with Prussia has already happened and essentially been won. That's a sunk cost (and while you can debate the value of East Prussia, it's certainly better than "nothing" which is what Peter III got from his peace treaty with Prussia). Holstein is a pipe dream; holding it will just incite hostility in the rest of Europe and divert resources that would better be spent elsewhere. Prussia is a worse ally than Austria (weaker, no use in Turkey, with conflicting goals in Poland and northern Germany, and likely to drag you into a useless conflict with Austria). Much better to eliminate Prussia as a significant player, keep a firm alliance with Austria, and rely on Franco-British conflicts to keep Western Europe from being a threat while you continue to expand in the east (since Austria+Russia+one of France/UK is a sufficiently strong alliance to keep the rest of Europe in check).

Poland is already under heavy Russian influence, much better to keep it that way (and maybe exchange East Prussia for Polish lands as mentioned above), rather than give a good chunk of it to Prussia to keep them happy.
There were no real conflicting goals in Poland, both wanted to keep Poland down.
Austria is only useful in the short term, in the long term it becomes a rival, I do agree going to war with Prussia to get essentially nothing was a bad move but the war with Prussia ultimately proved to be a convoluted way of trying to get polish territory, so why not just take it directly from Poland with allying Prussia? And if you are looking to take and hold Holstein Prussia is a pretty useful ally.
All in all id say there was nothing wrong with Peter's line of thinking it's just his execution that was poor, he implemented his plans with no consideration for what was already happening.
 
Top