With any PoD after the mongols, who can create a larger contiguous land empire?

Who, if anyone, is capable of creating a continuous land-empire larger than the mongols?


  • Total voters
    103
Just as it says on the tin. who has the potential to make a land-empire rivaling the mongols? OTL the brits beat the mongols in terms of territory, but it was scattered around the world. who is the most capable of one-upping the mongols in the modern era? More importantly, could an empire as large or larger than the mongol one survive with more advanced technology and/or different circumstances?
 
Russia have otl expansion east but they win much more of the wars out there so they get a much bigger area of territory out of that best case scenario all of mongol lore all of northern China, they win the great game they conquer large parts of the Balkan after a early Austria Hungary collapse same with the ottomans they conquer parts of Iran
 
Russia already got pretty close in OTL. I'll go with having Elizabeth of Russia survive a few years longer and finish the war against Prussia when she had Frederick right where she wanted him, beginning by annexing East Prussia. With Prussia knocked out of the war, Britain sues for peace, Austria regains Silesia, Saxony gains some Brandenburger territory, and France is left in much better condition. Before too long, Russia and Austria begin taking further territory from Poland-Lithuania, but is left as a smaller, harmless rump state between Austria and Russia. After Elizabeth finally dies, Peter accedes and reigns unremarkably for a few years before passing away unexpectedly, his son Paul from Catherine is emperor as a teenager with Catherine as the dowager empress calling all the shots in his name and oversees Russia's eastward expansion to the Pacific, taking all the territory taken in her OTL reign. TTL Catherine raises TTL Paul to be a much better, more enlightened ruler and he keeps Russia at the forefront of technological advancement and reform to lead Russia as a foremost world power. They also slowly take bits and pieces of territory from the Ottomans, though they face opposition from Austria, Great Britain, and France when they make continued incursions or try to expand their own influence in the Balkans.

Russia finds itself turning Persia into a client state, as well supporting the independence movements in the Balkans over the years at the Ottomans' expense, which causes Austria to seek alliances to hedge Russia's ascendency with France and Britain. With a slightly weaker Great Britain and a more stable France in play cancelling each other out, Russia is quietly able to make further expansionist moves in East Asia and they, instead of the British, are the first to maul the Qings and take Mongolia and Manchuria.
 

Skallagrim

Banned
A British conquest of Persia could give you a land mass from North Africa to Myanmar under the British Empire.

Go just a bit further with the conquering and you can get a Cape-to-Singapore railroad. Not only can you get an impressive land empire, but this would pretty much turn the Indian Ocean into a big British lake.

Bruce Munro in fact made a map of that idea.

d2pntvb-97a7cee7-6615-48b3-9e55-95289aad7449.png


Some serious Britwanking could add the rest of Arabia and East Africa, as well as Madagascar, Afghanistan and Indonesia. That would ensure that the British Empire encircles the entire Indian Ocean.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
Go just a bit further with the conquering and you can get a Cape-to-Singapore railroad. Not only can you get an impressive land empire, but this would pretty much turn the Indian Ocean into a big British lake.

Bruce Munro in fact made a map of that idea.

d2pntvb-97a7cee7-6615-48b3-9e55-95289aad7449.png


Some serious Britwanking could add the rest of Arabia and East Africa, as well as Madagascar, Afghanistan and Indonesia. That would ensure that the British Empire encircles the entire Indian Ocean.
Cape to Capes(one at Kanyakumari and another at Singapore) railroad! Sounds good but maintaining stability in that expansive empire would be a challenge.
 
Definitely the ottomans, if they manage to ease the european front they can successefully subdue Morocco, then conquer persia and vassalize central asia before rushing to India, not mentioning the southern west african muslim entities that could very easily enter under ottoman rule, as OTL the Askiah Isaac was going to make himself a subject of the Sublime Porte, giving the sultan authority over balkans, All of North-Africa, Persia and central asia, Sindh and northern India, and eventually western africa, then they collapse due to overextension, colonizers, rebellions etc... You know the song.
 
The Iberian Union doesn't break up and you have a contiguous empire from California or B. Columbia (depends on how it develops) including everything west of the Mississipi and almost all of South America.
 
Russia have otl expansion east but they win much more of the wars out there so they get a much bigger area of territory out of that best case scenario all of mongol lore all of northern China, they win the great game they conquer large parts of the Balkan after a early Austria Hungary collapse same with the ottomans they conquer parts of Iran

In practical terms:

1st, Peter I abandons idea regarding the Baltic coast and concentrates exclusively upon the South & South-East directions of expansion because they can provide the greater land mass acquisitions. As a pre-requisite of the earlier success, he need to modernize his army with the Ottomans as the main enemy in mind: in OTL his attempt to fight them with the "anti-Swedish" army proved to be a failure but within few decades the winning tactics had been developed with essentially the same technology and, he had to pay more attention to the available existing experience of Charles of Lorraine and Prince Eugene. However, the eventual OTL winning formula for the Russian army was quite simple and consisted of 2 main components: (a) to have troops trained to act aggressively relying more on a bayonet (for infantry) and sword (for cavalry) than on fire and (b) find where enemy is an attack regardless the odds. In other words, ideas absolutely opposite to those used for training Peter's army and much easier to implement. Something should be done about cutting the huge baggage trains, arranging for the longer and faster marches and, preferably, introduction of the uniforms which look less "western" but much better suited for the Russian troops (and the new theaters of war). This may take a couple years after the Peace of Constantinople (1700) - let's assume that Peter did analysis of his Azov campaigns and came to the right conclusions rather than being born a genius who knows everything in advance.

2nd, in 1702 - 03 Peter attacks the Crimea (pretext always can be found), crosses the steppe by the fast marches and attacks Perekop fortifications, which were a joke: 10 kilometers long dry moat and earthworks which nobody did or could seriously defend and in the middle a single small stone fort. In OTL in 1736 Munnich simply crossed the moat, got to the fort from the rear, took and destroyed it (the whole storm operation took a single day). Just for the fun of it, Peter may have a parallel attack by crossing Syvash entry at Genichesk and marching by Arabat Split to the "rear" of the Crimean Peninsula and taking Kerch and Feodosia while the main army marches toward Bakhchisaray. If his troops on the same level of the logistical efficiency as those of 1768 - 74, this is not a big deal (in 1735 - 39 Russians occupied the peninsula but had been defeated by a lousy logistics).
c2fd2c50.jpg


3rd, the next steps are: (a) occupation of the Northern coast of the Black Sea (capturing Ochakov and few more fortified places) and then (b) moving the main theater of operations on the Danube. After the main Ottoman armies are defeated, the Russians are occupying Moldavia, Wallachia and Bulgaria (Constantinople being an option but not a necessity). At that point peace with the Ottomans is signed. Unlike numerous OTL cases, in that AH the rest of Europe is busy fighting WoSS and can't interfere on Ottomans' behalf.

4rd, taking an advantage of the turmoil in Persia, Russia is easily annexing Azerbaijan and both Ottoman and Iran held parts of Armenia (don't remember which of them owned what exactly at that point).

5th, the first expeditions into the CA started but their goal is land grabbing (even if initially on a smaller level).

At that time Peter dies. During the reigns of Peter's successors Russia keeps staying out of the European entanglements and concentrates exclusively on expansion in Asia. As a result, the OTL Russian borders there are established by the late XVIII - early XIX (I'm not sure that expansion into Afghanistan makes sense). Then Russia expands into Eastern Turkistan and Mongolia, "fixing" Russian-Chinese border established by Nerchinsk Treaty.
Government sponsors the road construction (yes, I understand that for XIX century Russia this is almost ASB :teary:) and resettlement (of the personally free peasants) to the Eastern areas to create at least some base for the future conquest of (the whole) Manchuria in the early XIX with a potential annexation of Korea.

The Western Europe keeps fighting its wars ....

Ah, yes. At some point Austria and Prussia decided to get pieces of the PLC and Russia reluctantly agrees ending up with Belorussia (we are still in a race for a landmass ;)). But not Poland or Lithuania (so Prussia and/or Austria will have that pain in their butts).


220px-Manchuria.png


Alaska is in the Russian possession on OTL timeline and, with an earlier firmer grip on the Pacific Coast, Russians are getting more ambitious and are grabbing a big chunk of California from Spain (there are not too much of a Spanish military presence there so the claim is mostly of nobody's lands).

Are we almost there in the terms of a landmass? Probably not quite yet, but the initial premise is misleading because by the time of its greater extent the Mongolian empire ceased to be a single state in anything but name. :)

Well, let's say that while Britain and France are still trying to figure out who has a bigger p... oops hand, Russia invades Persia and conquers Kurdistan after which attacks the Ottomans in Asia (so that nobody can interfere) and conquers, in the modern terms, Iraq.

It already grabbed all Armenia in the XVIII so it is not a big distance to Syria and Mediterranean coast, especially if there is a handy uprising somewhere in the Ottoman Empire so shall we say Norther Syria and Antakya. BTW, in OTL Russian Mediterranean expedition took Beirut in 1773 so you can add some naval acquisitions as well.

Hopefully, the mission is accomplished..... :openedeyewink:
 
Last edited:
In practical terms:

1st, Peter I abandons idea regarding the Baltic coast and concentrates exclusively upon the South & South-East directions of expansion because they can provide the greater land mass acquisitions. As a pre-requisite of the earlier success, he need to modernize his army with the Ottomans as the main enemy in mind: in OTL his attempt to fight them with the "anti-Swedish" army proved to be a failure but within few decades the winning tactics had been developed with essentially the same technology and, he had to pay more attention to the available existing experience of Charles of Lorraine and Prince Eugene. However, the eventual OTL winning formula for the Russian army was quite simple and consisted of 2 main components: (a) to have troops trained to act aggressively relying more on a bayonet (for infantry) and sword (for cavalry) than on fire and (b) find where enemy is an attack regardless the odds. In other words, ideas absolutely opposite to those used for training Peter's army and much easier to implement. Something should be done about cutting the huge baggage trains, arranging for the longer and faster marches and, preferably, introduction of the uniforms which look less "western" but much better suited for the Russian troops (and the new theaters of war). This may take a couple years after the Peace of Constantinople (1700) - let's assume that Peter did analysis of his Azov campaigns and came to the right conclusions rather than being born a genius who knows everything in advance.

2nd, in 1702 - 03 Peter attacks the Crimea (pretext always can be found), crosses the steppe by the fast marches and attacks Perekop fortifications, which were a joke: 10 kilometers long dry moat and earthworks which nobody did or could seriously defend and in the middle a single small stone fort. In OTL in 1736 Munnich simply crossed the moat, got to the fort from the rear, took and destroyed it (the whole storm operation took a single day). Just for the fun of it, Peter may have a parallel attack by crossing Syvash entry at Genichesk and marching by Arabat Split to the "rear" of the Crimean Peninsula and taking Kerch and Feodosia while the main army marches toward Bakhchisaray. If his troops on the same level of the logistical efficiency as those of 1768 - 74, this is not a big deal (in 1735 - 39 Russians occupied the peninsula but had been defeated by a lousy logistics).
c2fd2c50.jpg


3rd, the next steps are: (a) occupation of the Northern coast of the Black Sea (capturing Ochakov and few more fortified places) and then (b) moving the main theater of operations on the Danube. After the main Ottoman armies are defeated, the Russians are occupying Moldavia, Wallachia and Bulgaria (Constantinople being an option but not a necessity). At that point peace with the Ottomans is signed. Unlike numerous OTL cases, in that AH the rest of Europe is busy fighting WoSS and can't interfere on Ottomans' behalf.

4rd, taking an advantage of the turmoil in Persia, Russia is easily annexing Azerbaijan and both Ottoman and Iran held parts of Armenia (don't remember which of them owned what exactly at that point).

5th, the first expeditions into the CA started but their goal is land grabbing (even if initially on a smaller level).

At that time Peter dies. During the reigns of Peter's successors Russia keeps staying out of the European entanglements and concentrates exclusively on expansion in Asia. As a result, the OTL Russian borders there are established by the late XVIII - early XIX (I'm not sure that expansion into Afghanistan makes sense). Then Russia expands into Eastern Turkistan and Mongolia, "fixing" Russian-Chinese border established by Nerchinsk Treaty.
Government sponsors the road construction (yes, I understand that for XIX century Russia this is almost ASB :teary:) and resettlement (of the personally free peasants) to the Eastern areas to create at least some base for the future conquest of (the whole) Manchuria in the early XIX with a potential annexation of Korea.

The Western Europe keeps fighting its wars ....

Ah, yes. At some point Austria and Prussia decided to get pieces of the PLC and Russia reluctantly agrees ending up with Belorussia (we are still in a race for a landmass ;)). But not Poland or Lithuania (so Prussia and/or Austria will have that pain in their butts).


220px-Manchuria.png


Alaska is in the Russian possession on OTL timeline and, with an earlier firmer grip on the Pacific Coast, Russians are getting more ambitious and are grabbing a big chunk of California from Spain (there are not too much of a Spanish military presence there so the claim is mostly of nobody's lands).

Are we almost there in the terms of a landmass? Probably not quite yet, but the initial premise is misleading because by the time of its greater extent the Mongolian empire ceased to be a single state in anything but name. :)

Well, let's say that while Britain and France are still trying to figure out who has a bigger p... oops hand, Russia invades Persia and conquers Kurdistan after which attacks the Ottomans in Asia (so that nobody can interfere) and conquers, in the modern terms, Iraq.

It already grabbed all Armenia in the XVIII so it is not a big distance to Syria and Mediterranean coast, especially if there is a handy uprising somewhere in the Ottoman Empire so shall we say Norther Syria and Antakya. BTW, in OTL Russian Mediterranean expedition took Beirut in 1773 so you can add some naval acquisitions as well.

Hopefully, the mission is accomplished..... :openedeyewink:


Of course, the scenario is mostly a joke but if during the XVIII - XIX centuries Russian foreign and domestic policy was Asia-centric, there could be obvious (or at least potential) bonuses:

1. The decades of the exhausting wars in the West are avoided (GNV, War of the Polish Succession, 7YW, Napoleonic Wars) and conquests in Asia could be done while Western Europe is fighting its wars and interference into the final settlements can be avoided.

2. Strictly speaking, Peter’s idea of “opening” Russia to the West (not that it was not open before him) basically doomed Russia to the role of a food & raw materials supplier all the way until the reign of Alexander III and, realistically, until WWI. OTOH, limited availability of the foreign imports (with the technological know how) would trigger development of the domestic manufacturing (as happened between Tilsit an 1812 and after Aleksander III raised tariffs on imports). Absence of the big markets for Russian grain may contribute (besides increased production of vodka :) ) to the workforce redistribution: it becomes more profitable to allow serfs to work on “obrok” (with money payments) in the industrial enterprises outside the estates rather then keep using them as the field hands. While the goods produced in Russia may not be competitive on the European markets, they are more than ok in CA (in OTL the Brits had been seriously pissed off with inability to get into the Russian sphere of influence in the CA; of course their advocacy of the free trade was not quite convincing).

3. A “good” part of the eastern conquests is that, besides providing more territory and rather compliant population (comparing to the Poles), a defeated opponent can be mercilessly looted with the minimal objections from a “civilized world” (because the said world was engaged in the same practices). The war still may not pay for itself but at least it would not be too expensive.

4. Not having Poles as the subjects would be a great bonus for Russia.
 

xsampa

Banned
Britain could easily establish an empire around the Indian Ocean. Britain could annex Indonesia during the Napoleonic wars. Next, it could annex Madagascar and Somalia since the French Navy was bottled in the Mediterranean and wouldn't be able to reach East Africa. Since Qajar Persia was a French ally, it isn't too difficult to imagine the UK demanding a treaty territory or two that seals Iran out of the Indian Ocean outside of the Persian Gulf. Controlling the Red Sea coast of Arabia would be difficult, but with a broken Ottoman Empire, a Hejazi protectorate is doable.
 
if the Canadian arctic islands and Greenland would count a USA the acquired Canada, Mexico, Central America and Greenland would be larger
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
Area of North America: 24 709 000 km² (9,540,000 sq. freedom lengths)

Area of the Mongol Empire: 24 000 000 km² (9,270,000 sq. freedom lengths)

The math checks out.
Or with a suitable POD,we could have the Northern parts of the South America with significant amount of large British settlements there,eventually incorporated into the Former British Dominion republic of America(FBDRA instead of USA).
 
Here's an unorthodox idea: The Mughals expand into the Steppe as well as India. They end up fighting with an alternate Russia and winning, triggering them seizing large chunks of Siberia. They probably won't be able to hold it together for long, but with a few lucky decades, they could probably get close to the Mongol Empire size.
 
Obviously, the Russians; there's plenty of space in Asia they could have expanded into that was neither wealthy nor densely populated, had their priorities been different. We might need to flavor in a China-screw somewhere, but China had plenty of instability and spent (noncontinuous) centuries in civil war, so that's nothing unusual.

Equally obviously, an Expanded States of America - fiddle with history around the Mexican-American War so that total annexation is on the table, screw Britain into the ground so that Canada joins in voluntarily, buy Greenland, and we're most of the way there.

There were times when China had the power, but not the interest, to expand her borders, so if the horse nomads were brought to heel and nominal dominance over Siberia established, that does it. If we wank the Yuan Empire, it's even a Mongol dynasty doing it, and the Yuan were close to the (original) Mongols in terms of territory, so they don't need to grab much. The Qing were likewise pretty close, so a Russian collapse while Japan is still weak could do the trick.

The Islamic caliphates are a longer shot, but at their height they were something like two thirds the size of the Mongol Empire; the problem is that significant further expansion is going to be difficult.
 
Top