WI Peter the Great dies at Narva in 1700?

[raniE]

For historical background see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Narvahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Narva_(1700)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Northern_War

In OTL Peter left the besieging russian army just days before the battle of Narva, to hurry on his reinforcements. So, what if Peter didn't leave and was killed in the battle? None of his children are over the age of ten at this point, so who takes power in Russia? What happens in the war with Sweden now? Does Sweden retain its baltic provinces? In OTL, Swedens army was succesful against her other enemies in the war, Denmark had already been defeated and for the next several years the army under king Karl XII marched through Poland-Lithuania and Saxony, succesfully defeating this enemy as well.

 

[Max Sinister]

Either their mother or the strongest man in court (a priest? a minister?) takes the regency until they're old enough.

Whoever it is, probably they might not have the stubbornness of Peter, so after Sweden takes out Denmark and Saxony-Poland-Lithuania, and maybe Turkey enters the war, they'd make peace. Peter's idea of St Peterburg is scrapped, capital stays Moscow. Sweden will stay a great power for longer. However, some decades later the growing strength of Russia might lead to the fall of Sweden and P-L again.

 

[raniE]

Either their mother or the strongest man in court (a priest? a minister?) takes the regency until they're old enough.

Whoever it is, probably they might not have the stubbornness of Peter, so after Sweden takes out Denmark and Saxony-Poland-Lithuania, and maybe Turkey enters the war, they'd make peace. Peter's idea of St Peterburg is scrapped, capital stays Moscow. Sweden will stay a great power for longer. However, some decades later the growing strength of Russia might lead to the fall of Sweden and P-L again.

Although the defeat of Russia in the great northern war could perhaps spark a russian fear of Sweden like the fear Sweden has had of Russia ever since the Great northern war (our military still shoots at targets designed to look like russian soldiers), and make Russia expand through Poland while avoiding Swedens baltic possesions (or maybe I'm just dreaming).

 

[Redbeard]

Without Peter I guess the transformation of Russia into a relatively modern nation will at least be postponed by a number of decades or centuries. That will simultaneously remove Russia from being a serious bid for Baltic dominance, but I doubt that automatically hands it to Sweden. It will rather have the Baltic rivavlry between Denmark-Norway and Sweden(-Finland) supplemented by German and Polsih players go on.

By 1700 only a 9 years truce was concluded with Denmark-Norway. The Danes threatened the Swedish possesions in Germany and Swedish troops landed in N.Zealand threatened Copenhagen so a truce was concluded.

With this PoD Karl XII will be back in Sweden some years ahead of schedule (no Russian campaign and Turkish internment etc.) but I doubt he will/can break the truce without serious diplomatic setbacks. That would only hand over the European great powers a too good opportunity to stem the Swedes, and Scandinavian wars would anyway still be decided by great power intervention.

In OTL Denmark-Norway and Sweden(-Finland) went to war after the truce expired in 1709, but I guess this time it would be Karl who declares war. At this time the Swedish army was at a zenith numerically with more than 100-120.000 men in the army, but Denmark-Norway (appr. 50.000 man army) had a rather lucky hand at sea largely nullifying the Swedish options for deploying their large army. Anyway Sweden wasn't big enough for such an army and never really gained its breath again. The OTL Great Nordic War ended with Karl killed in Norway and Sweden paying indemnities to Denmark-Norway to leave the areas occupied.

With Russia at least temporaily out of the way I guess the Swedish presence in Ingermannsland, Estonia etc. will have a chance to consolidate, but more prominently Poland has a chance to survive her 18th century crisis. That could give a very strong Poland by early 19th century, one that both can stem Russia and be a serious player in central Europe as well in the Baltic.

In OTL Denmark-Norway had a golden age from mid 18th century until early 19th century making big money on transporting goods for the British and French combatants. That could be significant if the Scandinavian rivalism goes on into 18th century.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

I think you are going too far by saying Russian modernization could be delayed by centuries.

In general, reform is impossible even by a strong leader unless the ground is fertile. Being crushed by Sweden could be te bucket of water in the face that Napoleon's invasion of Egypt was to the Ottoman world.

Without Peter I guess the transformation of Russia into a relatively modern nation will at least be postponed by a number of decades or centuries. That will simultaneously remove Russia from being a serious bid for Baltic dominance, but I doubt that automatically hands it to Sweden. It will rather have the Baltic rivavlry between Denmark-Norway and Sweden(-Finland) supplemented by German and Polsih players go on.

By 1700 only a 9 years truce was concluded with Denmark-Norway. The Danes threatened the Swedish possesions in Germany and Swedish troops landed in N.Zealand threatened Copenhagen so a truce was concluded.

With this PoD Karl XII will be back in Sweden some years ahead of schedule (no Russian campaign and Turkish internment etc.) but I doubt he will/can break the truce without serious diplomatic setbacks. That would only hand over the European great powers a too good opportunity to stem the Swedes, and Scandinavian wars would anyway still be decided by great power intervention.

In OTL Denmark-Norway and Sweden(-Finland) went to war after the truce expired in 1709, but I guess this time it would be Karl who declares war. At this time the Swedish army was at a zenith numerically with more than 100-120.000 men in the army, but Denmark-Norway (appr. 50.000 man army) had a rather lucky hand at sea largely nullifying the Swedish options for deploying their large army. Anyway Sweden wasn't big enough for such an army and never really gained its breath again. The OTL Great Nordic War ended with Karl killed in Norway and Sweden paying indemnities to Denmark-Norway to leave the areas occupied.

With Russia at least temporaily out of the way I guess the Swedish presence in Ingermannsland, Estonia etc. will have a chance to consolidate, but more prominently Poland has a chance to survive her 18th century crisis. That could give a very strong Poland by early 19th century, one that both can stem Russia and be a serious player in central Europe as well in the Baltic.

In OTL Denmark-Norway had a golden age from mid 18th century until early 19th century making big money on transporting goods for the British and French combatants. That could be significant if the Scandinavian rivalism goes on into 18th century.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

 

[Fabilius]

I think you are going too far by saying Russian modernization could be delayed by centuries.

In general, reform is impossible even by a strong leader unless the ground is fertile. Being crushed by Sweden could be te bucket of water in the face that Napoleon's invasion of Egypt was to the Ottoman world.

Yes but could it be to late for reform like in the Ottoman case?

 

[raniE]

But will the western powers have any interest in the northern war? The war of the Spanish Succesion would probably still continue, perhaps Sweden could get embroiled in this conflict after the end of the great northern war (what's the use of having the kind of army Sweden did if you don't use it?)

I doubt that hostilities with Denmark would reopen so soon if the Swedish army doesn't suffer in Russia like in OTL. The last few times it tried to go it alone against Sweden it was defeated, so attacking a strong victorious Sweden would probably be out of the question for the moment.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Yes but could it be to late for reform like in the Ottoman case?

Well, it wasn't really TOO late in the Ottoman case, since reform led to Turkey - likewise, was Peter's reform too late because of the Revolution?

But in any case, Peter had the huge advantage that he started out as an autocrat, whereas Mahmud II had to make himself one - thus in the Ottoman case a lot of time and resources were consumed crushing rival power centers that could resist reform whereas in Russia this was a much lesser issue.

 

[Calgacus]

Wasn't defeat in the Balkan Wars and the loss of empire more of a direct cause of Turkey than Napoleon? I would have thought that Turkish nationalism was from the time of the Young Turks?

I think Russia's modernisation was inevitable, but probably would have been delayed about 20 years or so in the event of Peter's death - really it depends who might be able to inherit the throne. If internecine feuding takes place to decide the future Tsars, then maybe longer.

I'm not too sure Sweden would have profited much - Karl XII I think would have found other people to fight if he had beaten Russia. Despite being a good military commander, he didn't know when to quit and rest on his laurels. Plus the other powers viewed Sweden as dangerous and would have crushed her if her own limitations hadn't prevented her from rising any further.

 

[raniE]

Well, it wasn't really TOO late in the Ottoman case, since reform led to Turkey - likewise, was Peter's reform too late because of the Revolution?

But in any case, Peter had the huge advantage that he started out as an autocrat, whereas Mahmud II had to make himself one - thus in the Ottoman case a lot of time and resources were consumed crushing rival power centers that could resist reform whereas in Russia this was a much lesser issue.

But if Peter dies, he doesn't have any advantages at all, because he's dead. So what does this mean for Russian reformation?

 

[Tom_B]

This is one of the TL's which can be widely divergent going in many possible different directions so any talk of inevitability is skating on thin ice. The real wild card here is Charles XII, a tactical genius and a strategic imbecile (some historians have accused him as literally regarding war as a sport). With Peter dead the Great Northern War will play out differently but I would see Charles overreaching eventually. It might be that Prussia comes more into the fray against Sweden (they had some limited involvement OTL) and end up as Charles' downfall.

If Sweden prevails despite Charles, I would see Russia making at least some effort of modernization quickly. I would also see them looking to Prussia as allies.

If Charles stumbles badly say due to greater Prussian involvement or perhaps General Winter, this is the scenario where modernization is likely to be pushed back the most but even here I think it a case of slower more incremental modernization for a few decades and not complete stasis.


.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

I meant the institutional reform that led in a direct line to Turkey. Depsite nationalist rhetoric and ideology, the Turkish Republic did not spring fully-formed from the forehead of Ataturk.

Prior to Napoleon's invasion of Egypt, lost territories had been predominantly Christian, like Hungary, or at least remote and vassal, like the Crimea. Egypt was the heartland of Islam, and so easily violated by a relatively small infidel invader.

This is what started the long process of reform - first the false start by Selim III, but then the more deliberative and broad-based efforts of Mahmud II, leading to the consolidation of central authority and continuing with the Tanzimat and Hamidiyan periods, which established the direction of development that made Turkey possible. All of Ataturk's reforms (except abolition of the monarchy, of course) were continuations of Ottoman programs and trends, including secularization.

Wasn't defeat in the Balkan Wars and the loss of empire more of a direct cause of Turkey than Napoleon? I would have thought that Turkish nationalism was from the time of the Young Turks?

I think Russia's modernisation was inevitable, but probably would have been delayed about 20 years or so in the event of Peter's death - really it depends who might be able to inherit the throne. If internecine feuding takes place to decide the future Tsars, then maybe longer.

I'm not too sure Sweden would have profited much - Karl XII I think would have found other people to fight if he had beaten Russia. Despite being a good military commander, he didn't know when to quit and rest on his laurels. Plus the other powers viewed Sweden as dangerous and would have crushed her if her own limitations hadn't prevented her from rising any further.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

As stated earlier this is something that can go alot of different ways... Peter dies then the Yevdokiya Theodorovna comes back to court as regent...though there might be some reactionaries that want to bring Sophia back as well...Russia probably signs at least a ceasefire like D-N to let any ensueing power struggle play out. karl will accept because he wants to turn his attention on P-L anyways The point being what will be the terms of the ceasefire and does Sweden actually benefit materially from it...Do they get indemnities or an enlarged Ingermanland

the young Alexis' upbringing will be somewhat different....without the emphasis on the hatred for his father TTL but still somewhat reactionary and very Orthodox....He will be the only heir as none of Catherine Skavronska's children will be born.
the question remains how he reacts when he finally gets his mother to give up the regency. He will marry someone other than Charlotte of Wolffenbuttel-Brunswick. This bride will no doubt have to convert to Orthodoxy if he marries outside of Russia for political advantages...though I am betting he marries within the Russian nobility to one of the major factions at court...He will be conservative being brought up by the reactionary boyars and since his mother and father by this point had a distinct disdain for each other..she will likely undo some of Peter's unpopular reforms to secure her regency.

It will likely be mid century before Russia sees another chance to reform/westernise, probably under Alexei's successor.

Augustus is thrown off his thrown in 1706 installing Stanislaus Leczynski who should also likely reign until mid century, barring any further wars to unseat him.

At this point Karl will have made his point in spades by defeating/humbling all his enemies. there is no reason to go starting another war unless any of his enemies initiate another alliance against him.. theoretically you could see D-N, Russia and Saxony team up again but i don't see it. If they do the whole course of the war could go differently.

the Baltic provinces for instance will not have been ravaged. The southern frontier with P-L is somewhat more secure with Stanislaus on the throne.

Karl will probably have his own heirs in Sweden not being consumed with so much warfare. Can P-L reform and westernise under Stanislaus and rid itself of some of its fundamental flaws so that it survives. That would be the question I think. It depends on who his supporters are likely to be within the Commonwealth and whether he can retain friendly relations with Sweden to the North. He will have to do something if he wants to keep Augustus from attempting to regain his crown. Gaining as much support as possible would seem the best course. Can the P-L military be reformed on the Swedish model. Would co-operation between the two continue, at least for a time anyways.

 

[abas]

Without Peter I guess the transformation of Russia into a relatively modern nation will at least be postponed by a number of decades or centuries. That will simultaneously remove Russia from being a serious bid for Baltic dominance, but I doubt that automatically hands it to Sweden. It will rather have the Baltic rivavlry between Denmark-Norway and Sweden(-Finland) supplemented by German and Polsih players go on.

Modernization in Russia begun prior to Peter I, he only accelerated them. Some of Russian historians argue that reforms of Peter I actually slowed down modernization.

 

[Redbeard]

Modernization in Russia begun prior to Peter I, he only accelerated them. Some of Russian historians argue that reforms of Peter I actually slowed down modernization.

That is an interesting point of view, but from the accounts I'm familiar with it appears like the modernisation was stubbornly resisted and took a a very determined, brutal and talented regent like Peter to get any way. Included in the preconditions probably also is Peter's personal views and experiences from his previous stay in W. Europe.

Russia of course can't stay uninfluenced by the surrounding world for ever, but I fear that very long time could pass before a factor similar to Peter happens again. If "long time" in this context is a couple of decades or a couple of centuries I or anybody else by nature can't know, but I believe that is the span. But until reforms weigh through Russia will probably remain a strong regional power centered on Moscow, but hardly expanding much in any direction. But if the neighbours are allowed to consolidate in the time "lost" by Russia, the opportunity for expansion might have passed once reforms come. Not only in the Baltic and Poland, but I guess we might also see some PoDs in the south.

Without the outward pressure from Russia I doubt the Ottomans will stand any longer than in OTL, and the Caucasian peoples might instead of shifting from Ottoman to Russian supremacy can seize the opportunity to create their own businesses. Or the Persians might expand here, AFAIK the Persians as late as 1795 sacked Tiblisi and was later only stopped by a Russian army leading to Russian annexation of Georgia. The Caucasus in this ATL could very well have similar carachteristics to OTL Balkans, but in this ATL the Balkans probably will be more inside the Habsburg zone of influence.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

 

[raniE]

So assuming that Russia goes for peace with Sweden and Karl proceeds to hammer P-L and Saxony just like in OTL, does anyone think that he will intervene in the war of the Spanish succession? And if so, on what side? Would such an intervention lead to another attempt by Swedens neighbours to humble the nation?

 

[Redbeard]

So assuming that Russia goes for peace with Sweden and Karl proceeds to hammer P-L and Saxony just like in OTL, does anyone think that he will intervene in the war of the Spanish succession? And if so, on what side? Would such an intervention lead to another attempt by Swedens neighbours to humble the nation?

To your last question: Definately yes!

In OTL there was a strong desire in Denmark-Norway for revanche after the Scanian wars in 17th century and took the first opportunity to declare war after the truce expired in 1709.

Considdering Karl's unimpressive strategic abilities I could well imagine him becomming entangled in the War of Spanish Succession. As Denmark-Norway already was a de facto ally of the Habsburg/British/Dutch side (leasing troops to the campaign in Germany) I guess Sweden would be found on French side. As the French not will be able to do much to aid Sweden, being separated by the strong navies of UK, Netherlands and Denmark-Norway, that could easily turn into a disaster for Sweden. I doubt Denmark-Norway will get Scania back, the seapower allies would not want one power again controlling the Baltic entrances, but the Swedish ambitions in N.Germany might be finally over and Norway become broader at the expense of Sweden. That could produce a Sweden focussing even more on eastern expansion across the Baltic. Sans-Peter that could produce some lasting presence before the Russians get back into the game.

In OTL the Great Nordic War from 1701-1721 if not formally then much in real terms was a sideshow of the Spanish War of Succession with Denmark-Norway presenting the British/Dutch/Habsburg colurs and the Swedes the French ditto. The biggest difference would be the absense of Russia after the Narva PoD. In the first instance that would leave Sweden a free back, but it will be of little comfort as outside intervention is more determining than internal nordic strengths. The wise thing for Sweden to do would be to focus on the NE Baltic area and keep as low a profile as possible in Europe, incl. North Germany.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Without the outward pressure from Russia I doubt the Ottomans will stand any longer than in OTL, and the Caucasian peoples might instead of shifting from Ottoman to Russian supremacy can seize the opportunity to create their own businesses. Or the Persians might expand here, AFAIK the Persians as late as 1795 sacked Tiblisi and was later only stopped by a Russian army leading to Russian annexation of Georgia. The Caucasus in this ATL could very well have similar carachteristics to OTL Balkans, but in this ATL the Balkans probably will be more inside the Habsburg zone of influence.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

I don't understand this perspective. The Ottomans were hobbled by the need to support a huge military establishment specifically to resist Russian expansionism. With a much weaker Russia, the Ottomans are going to enjoy greater success at reform than they did historically.

Also, it seems odd that you would credit Persia, a much more backward and unstable polity with the ability to expand into the Caucasus.

 

[abas]

That is an interesting point of view, but from the accounts I'm familiar with it appears like the modernisation was stubbornly resisted and took a a very determined, brutal and talented regent like Peter to get any way. Included in the preconditions probably also is Peter's personal views and experiences from his previous stay in W. Europe.

Russia of course can't stay uninfluenced by the surrounding world for ever, but I fear that very long time could pass before a factor similar to Peter happens again. If "long time" in this context is a couple of decades or a couple of centuries I or anybody else by nature can't know, but I believe that is the span. But until reforms weigh through Russia will probably remain a strong regional power centered on Moscow, but hardly expanding much in any direction. But if the neighbours are allowed to consolidate in the time "lost" by Russia, the opportunity for expansion might have passed once reforms come. Not only in the Baltic and Poland, but I guess we might also see some PoDs in the south.

Without the outward pressure from Russia I doubt the Ottomans will stand any longer than in OTL, and the Caucasian peoples might instead of shifting from Ottoman to Russian supremacy can seize the opportunity to create their own businesses. Or the Persians might expand here, AFAIK the Persians as late as 1795 sacked Tiblisi and was later only stopped by a Russian army leading to Russian annexation of Georgia. The Caucasus in this ATL could very well have similar carachteristics to OTL Balkans, but in this ATL the Balkans probably will be more inside the Habsburg zone of influence.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

I think resistance to modernization is greatly overemphasized due to affection that is felt to Peter I in Russia. While "Westernisation" affected mostly military and nobles its influence to all society was different. One example: prior to Peter I the manufactories were operated by hired workers. After Peter I most of them (while their numbers had increased many times and this is always emphasized) were operated by bond workers and that tendency remained till 19th century.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

To your last question: Definately yes!

In OTL there was a strong desire in Denmark-Norway for revanche after the Scanian wars in 17th century and took the first opportunity to declare war after the truce expired in 1709.

Considdering Karl's unimpressive strategic abilities I could well imagine him becomming entangled in the War of Spanish Succession. As Denmark-Norway already was a de facto ally of the Habsburg/British/Dutch side (leasing troops to the campaign in Germany) I guess Sweden would be found on French side.


While that may be possible the strategic situation this time around is somewhat different... the best time for that to occur would be after the occupation of Saxony and Augustus's removal from the throne... in P-L in 1706 The French might try bu with his objectives obtained in chastising those who have provoked him, there will be those in Sweden who will council against intervention in the Western War without there being any significant gains for Sweden readily available. Karl was not very pro-French and once the second treaty of Altranstadt with the Emporer is signed His intervention seems unlikely. there would be nothing for Sweden to gain. Even if the French sweeten their offer the hapsburgs will no doubt make a counter offer... So just what might those offers be...reviewing the strategic situation its not really very favourable for the French but shortly won't be for the allies either. Without a preoccupation with Russia they will likely be bound by a ceasefire of some kind similiar to D-N. As long as he respects that ceasefire agreements he will not antagonise the maritime powers and he would probably want to court their favour anyway...its where most of the products passing from the Baltic are going anyway...why would he antagaonize them. He was amenable to their interests/concerns when he initally pushed D/N from the War so i doubt that will change. They for their part will be councilling the Danes not to anger the Swedes as they themselves are fully occupied with the French and Spanish interests.

...As the French not will be able to do much to aid Sweden, being separated by the strong navies of UK, Netherlands and Denmark-Norway, that could easily turn into a disaster for Sweden.

that is the point of course....the Swedish ministers Will know this and with his point made against his three erstwhile aggressors there is no reason for him to seek direct compensation for himself....miffed as he may be because of the Emporer's support for Augustus. Perhaps the Emporer simply has to sweeten things a bit by offering further fiefs or guarantees to the Swedish ally in Holstein-Gottorp (nothing directly for himself of course) to strengthen them against the Danes and would be a good counter to any French offers...As long as they are not directly at Danish expense it will not cost the Emporer all that much...and Holstein is still within the Empire. It would be an indirect gain for Sweden of course, if Karl has no heirs as OTL the Succession could very well go to Holstein-Gottorp instead of Ulrika Eleonora. He could also guarantee Stanislaus L. on the P-L throne in the face of any resurgence by Augustus in that direction...


Its likely to be 1710/11 before there can be a renewal of hostilities of some kind after the expiration of the various cease-fire agreements...The Russian one would likely be timed to expire after the one with D/N to allow time for Swedish diplomats to take the measure of the political winds in the aftermath of Alexei's succession. Indeed if the swedish ceasefire terms are not onerous and the succession turns nasty...then the ceasefire might become a permanent peace as long as Swedish terms are not onerous for the Russians.

Though I am still not sure what they would be.(Evacuation of the Russia's border fortresses perhaps...not really certain there would be any terr. exchange though.), and Swedish ministers/emmissaries will be looking for opportunities to counter any resurgence of the D/N Russia alliance Even courting a more direct alliance with the Otttoman's....or urging Alexei's court to look in that direction, perhaps in concert with P-L.

Diplocmacy between 1705/6 and 1709 will be interesting to say the least.

the Maritime powers though will not want to get involved in another theatre when their rtesources are already being more than consumed with France.

I doubt Denmark-Norway will get Scania back, the seapower allies would not want one power again controlling the Baltic entrances, but the Swedish ambitions in N.Germany might be finally over and Norway become broader at the expense of Sweden. That could produce a Sweden focussing even more on eastern expansion across the Baltic. Sans-Peter that could produce some lasting presence before the Russians get back into the game.

I am not certain the Swedes would want " a lot" of eastern expansion. they have alot of land now....marginal aggrandizement of Ingermanland perhaps perhaps historic Pskov. but how much more do they want to push...
Karl is likely to forsake large scale terr. in favour of simply installing a pro-Swedish faction in Moscow(or at least one that is not totally antagonistic towards them).

The wise thing for Sweden to do would be to focus on the NE Baltic area and keep as low a profile as possible in Europe, incl. North Germany.

Thats a given...any gains there should be made to pre-empt the rise of Brandenburg-Prussia but that does not have to occur now...it could easliy come later...say during the War of the Austrian succession. If that even occurs....Frederick might not chance it this time around given a pro-Swedish regime in P-L or at least one not under the thumb of the Russians and a Sweden not devastated or weakened by the Northern War. And Russia will not have had the benefit of the strong autocrat Peter to push through his reforms or his more enlightened successors as its likely to be a somewhat conservative Alexei....

Just an thought though, if Stanislaus does stay on the throne.... Maria will not mary Louis XIV, marry here to August Aleksander Czartoryski instead and the "Familia" may be able to initiate their reform program in Poland-Lithuania much earlier say while the Emporer is trying to gather support for his "Pragmatic Sanction". Mind you I am not certain exactly what they are and whether they would lead to the constituion like that of May 1791, but I suppose it could incrementally evolve over time to achieve many of those features by that time if started early enough. Russia will be delayed somewhat...and not be able to counter Poland's reforms until after mid century at least.

Thoughts?