-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
MichaelK said:
1) I don't care how much or how little history he knows, if he cannot discuss it in a friendly manner he goes.
2) As a friendly piece of advice I will point you to Board rule #2.
Bash said:
If you want to be banned from the whole board you are going about it the right way!
This post clearly violates board rule #2, which I told you to read and review before posting again.
I also asked you to read the subforum rules which cover this situation specifically.
If you feel you have explained your position over and over again and the other person does not change their view to yours, then one of three things is happening.
1) Your view is wrong.
2) You are not explaining it clearly.
3) The other person is so entrenched in their own position that they are not listening to your argument.
You clearly feel that #3 is the case here, so what do you do, belittle the person in a condescending way or call them names.
No you IGNORE them. If they then get abusive to you, then you continue to ignore them and PM a Moderator.
This is not rocket Science we are I hope not children here, rather Adults and we should act like it.
I did not just poke my head in here, I received complaints on your actions.
This is the second time in a short while I have had to intercede in this subforum, the first time led to the new subforum rules, I don't see how I can make them any clearer.
Rather than having your posting privileges in this forum revoked, I will close this thread for a few days, to prevent you from self Destructing anymore. Also note that this would have all been sent by PM and thus private if you had not chosen to break board rules by responding in public.
To all members: I really would not open a new thread on this topic until this one reopens, as that is expressly prohibited under board rules.
Back open for business, I expect everyone to disuss matters in a friendly matter.
*Open
*Open
MichaelK said:
I'm sure - this question is your fair attempt to improve our personal relations here, because you've already know answer, but I'll answer any way.
Short answer is: - check in your own example of chart (in russian letters). Do you see a small "brown" finger of Tver' lands just below "green" Rzhev position? Yep, it is Zubtsov placement and Zubtsov is closer to Vyazma and Moscow then Rzhev.
Long answer is quite long, but is very interesting. If you check in historical charts of WWII in Soviet-German front in 1942-1943 - you will see the same pattern: Germans dug in so named Rzhev-Vyazma "Pocket"/Army Group, but Zubtsov is considered as most principal jumping board for Soviet troops - onto quite curvy and strange line of German positions. Soviet army made more then 20 assault attempts from Zubtsov onto Rzhev direction and all of them were crushed by Germans. "Rzhev-Vyazma" pocket was uprooted at last due to German withdrawing of their troops after great Kursk battlefield in strategy of "leveling" their lines of defences - it means both sides silently acknowledged fact of impregnability of German Rzhev positions, but their absolute pointlessness in whole course of war.
Morale of this story is - "Zubtsov finger" inside Rzhev territories is result of some hidden reason, some hidden Law of Nature - because if we've got some warring in these land - both sides took the same stance (one side hold Zubtsov, another hold - Rzhev) every time in history, - then this thing isn't coincidence. Let's check in this hidden Law of Nature.
You can study any Law of Nature only - by materialistic approach. Find out - materialistic/structure reason for existing facts and you will understand hidden law.
We've got next interesting facts: Rzhev and Zubtsov was found in the same 1216 year and we know exact day of founding of both cities. This year is relatively late for "core-Russian" lands, then we've got some hidden reason for founding these cities in this year and some reason for rather late their appearance. Second part of reason is simpler - these lands are swamplands with quite poor soils - both cities didn't grow at all due to very small population increase here due to non-fertility of these lands. Nobody like to live in these non-hospitable lands before 1216 year. It's simple.
Then we realize - there was some really strong non-economical reason for spending money in these swamps. Somebody liked to claim these moors and pit-bogs in 1216 pretty hard - and there was quite big reason for this thing.
First glance in russian annales explained this reason - in start of XIII century there was civil war in North-East russian lands (Suzdal-Vladimir Great Principality). Sons of Vsevolod Big Nest under harsh economical crisis condition couldn't divide revenue from Novgorodian trade "in fair way" (Novgorod belong to Suzdal-Vledimir Princes "sphere of influence" in these times) and made war. Due to great havoc around - Moscow region made huge rebellion and "spliced away" from Vladimir' Great Principality to Chernigovian Prince' Family realms. Chernigovian princes - were most hated enemies of Vladimir princes - then muscovites move made strong barrier between Great Principality of Vladimir and all other Russian principalities. Then Princes of Vladimir tried to make new way into other Russia pretty hard - and became to seek new roads into South-West direction.
It was big reason for Tver, Rzhev and Zubtsov founding - it was only possible way around Moscow - from Vladimir/Suzdal/Rostov region to Smolensk (which belong to far relatives and friends of Vladimir Princes Family and traditional enemy of Chernigovian Princes family - descendants of Rostislav of Smolensk). Most interesting thing is Muscovites tried to prevent these fortresses building, but couldn't do it. There isn't any road from Moscow into Rzhev-Zubtsov region through local wastelands. (Germans were really puzzled by this strange quirk of local geography in XX century - they were quite close to Moscow, but couldn't attack Moscow at all! Then Rzhev was held by Germans only for local airfields.) By the way - local moors created only possible path from Tver to Smolensk through this wasteland and Zubtsov, which closer to Vyazma (then Rzhev) by geography chart is closer to Tver (then Rzhev) by only possible road, but Rzhev is closer by the same only road to Vyazma. By the way in means - only local road (in XIII-XVI centuries terms) led from Tver to Smolensk' Vyazma, but there wasn't any possible path here from Moscow or Novgorodian lands at all! Do you see?
Some side-talk: I remember Almoravid or someboldy else in his post recently stated - Princes of Suzdal-Vladimir didn't fight with Mongols onto Kalka, because "they hadn't any interests in any southern/steppe affairs". I'm afraid it is quite wrong opinion.
Main Russian forces in Kalka battlefield were troops of Chernigovian origin - most hated enemies of Princes of Vladimir - it was enough reason for their (Vladimir troops) absence.
More then that - Vladimir region was effectively cut out from other Russia by "Moscow rebellion" and they tried to find new bounding way into south through Rzhev moors. Riding through moors by windy way via a lot of hasty made bridges from just cutted trees is quite difficult thing. If you check in later (XVI century) evidence - any rider by Rzhev swamp road was used to go by own legs and led his horse after him - it was quite dangerous to ride this road on horseback then this way of movement was strict forbidden. I can't imagine any method of transporting any meaningful army (especially Cavalry detachements) through this only road into south region - in time for Kalka battle.
In other words - Suzdal Vladimir troops presence in Kalka battle-field was impossible as soon as political (traditional bitter grudge between Vladimir and Chernigov troops) as physical (impossibility to transport any army via Rzhev road in time) reasons. Do you see?
If you don't like to read this quite materialistic stuff any more you can stop here, because I'd like to explain - traditional Moscow insurgency against Princes of Vladimir rule in XII-XIII century and hidden reasons for Moscow-Tver bitter bloody struggle in 1314-1341. These things are out from EU2 timespan, then...
Well, let's check in the root of "Rzhev-Zubtsov" problem - why this geographical phenomena like "Rzheva moors" is existing in first place?
Answer is quite simple. "Russian plain" (in geographic meaning of this term) is quite flat geology platform with a very rare sineclyse/anteclyse elements. One of the most eminent anteclyse (heightening) here is so named - Klin-Dmitrov Hill-ridge formation. These Hills isn't mountains of any sort (just-rising or eroded - no difference) - they are just anteclysis heightening of sediments - nothing more. But they are quite high (in comparison with quite flat lands around) - any way.
For example:
North) - In their northern point in Jahkroma (just around of Dmitrov) there are only mountain sky resorts for whole Russian plain platform;
Center) - In mid point - from Klin hills German FO's could see by Zeiss optik in good weather Moscow Church crosses and Kremlin rooftops, but they couldn't do it from Krjukovo region - closest point of German advance - just in mid-way between of Klin and Moscow - by this observation you can understand real heights of Klin hills in flat Moscow surrounding;
South) - In southern side hills became to be quite flat, but they still got highest point of Medieval Moscow - Vorobjevy Gory (Vorobjevy Mountains - "Mountains of Sparrow-size") and highest point of modern Moscow - Teply Stan (Warmland Place).
If you see on this geologic structure from bird-view - you will see great crescent-moon (semicircle) hill-lines enveloping Moscow from N/NW/W/SW quadrants. Stop in this moment - try to realize what is hidden meaning in this observation?
From history point of view it means - this hill-line was most natural frontier for medieval Muscovy and if you check in history charts - you will see - boundaries of Muscovy Principality/Governory-Municipy of Moscow in Russian Empire/Soviet Union times - didn't crossed this Hill-Ridge in N/NW/W quadrants. Fine.
From geography point of view it means... I'm sure you know - main source of water for Russian plain region is rain/snow transport from Atlantic. It means - Atlantic clouds bring on a lot of water with WEST (North-West and South-West) winds here. But in Moscow has hills shield in these directions, then most part of rain/snow will drop onto western slopes of this hillridge - do you see? If you check in climatic data you will see - snow coverage in Rzhev region is usually on 30 cm higher then in Shatura region (Rzhev is on the same distance from Moscow in NW direction like Shatura in ESE direction). It's quite impressive difference for one and the same region, isn't it?!
It means - west slopes of this Hill-land have excessive watering, but eastern slopes are rather dry. Then we've got a lot of swamps and moors in Vyazma-Rzhev-Tver region, but Moscow was traditionally water-thirsty place of Russia. Moscow is only place in core-Russian lands with pre-industrial era aqueduct from Mytishchy - how much cities in Europe can boast of really old aqueduct of 30 km long? Sum up this fact with next thing - Moscow is situated on converging point of Moscow and Jauza rivers and both rivers water input wasn't enough for giving muscovites clear water!
More then that - actual temperature is depending from amounts of freezing/melting water and amount of clear sky days in region. Moscow traditionally has more clear sky days then any city around - especially her west and north neighbors, then median yearly temperature for Moscow region is on 2-3 grade of Celsius higher then in Tver, Smolensk or Kaluga. This climatic situation has special name of "Moscow temperature anomaly" and is big reason for quite special Moscow landschaft - in comparison with landschaft of surrounding territory.
By its temperature profile Moscow is equal to Orel-Kursk-Belgorod climatic zone - not to neighbouring Tver or Smolensk. Then Orel and Kursk lie in steppe landschaft and Moscow district have a lot of steppe-bound plants and animals in quite tight "forest-bound" surrounding. In other words - Moscow region is northernmost and western-most part of Great Steppe, but not part of Great "Okovsky Forest" which became to be birth-place for "Russian core-lands culture".
Another - quite important moment - Moscow region is on 300-400 km to north from Orel-Kursk-Belgorod god-blessed famous very fertile "Black-soils". This distance was enough for another climatic thing - Moscow region was under Great Scandinavian glacier of Quarternary Ice Age, then this soils are relatively poor in comparison with non-glaciered lands of "Black-soiled" Russia. But due to fact Moscow region had rather Steppe Landschaft in comparison with surrounding forestry regions, its soil ereoded in more spectacular and fast manner. If Suzdal Vladimir region of so-named "Zalessje" (Behind the Forest) has rather fertile grey and ashen-grey soils, Moscow has her common "Red Moscow" name for her rather non-fertile red clays.
These red clays was used - after discovering special technology - to make rather famous red clay-bricks, then all relatively old stone building has the same non-forgettable blood-red colour, which gave some creepy ideas for newcomers like "Walls of Kremlin was made from clay mixed with human blood".
Well, there faury-tales is one thing, but history is another. Most important idea from understanding about relative non-fertility of Moscow soil is - this region never was grain-raiser in whole course of Russian histrory. This region was "Meat-raiser", main agricultural output of Muscovy region was Cows and Sheeps. Wait a moment... Do you realize - what it means?
Ancient Slavs never specialized in "meat-raisning"! Then we've got some quite steppe (by its landschafts) region, which is filled by livestock raisers and hadn't necessary ecological niches for grain-raisers at all! By Absolute Laws of Nature it means - Moscow region wasn't suitable region for Ancient Slavs for early colonization by this ethnocultural properties. Then - we must to find out - who were ancient inhabitants of this quite special region.
Let's check in archeological finding for revealing some rather strange answer.
<to be continued>
Bash
To Bash
Thank you for sharing your knowledge.
"I'm sure - this question is your fair attempt to improve our personal relations here, because you've already know answer, but I'll answer any way."
Sure I'd like to improve our relations, but I really did not know about this Zubtsov-Rzhev geographical situation.
As for question about the Kalka that was really a very interesting situation:
After Vsevolod, prince of Vladimir and Syzdal (and the most powerful of the Russian princes in the beginning of the 13 century) died it was a struggle for power between his sons. In 1216 his eldest son Konstantin won a great battle on the Lipice river against his brothers Yuri and Yaroslav (father of the future Alexander Nevskii). The real hero of this battle was prince Mstislav (owner of Toropetz) who was a Konstantin ally and commanded a Novgorodian forces. Later the same prince Mstislav became a prince of Galitz (in the south of Russia, not the nortern one) and relative of the polovetz khan Kotyan. When Kotyan was attacked by the mongols Mstislav agreed to help him and convince many other russian princes to join. Of course Yuri (who became a great prince of Vladimir and Syzdal after Konstantin's death) refused to go. But, according with the sources, Vasilko, prince of Rostov (Konstantin's son) participated. It seems logical to me that old alliance between Mstislav and Konstantin was renewed with his son.
I would not exactly said that majority of the russian army on Kalka was "Chernigovians". Between the princes were Danilo (prince of Volyn, future prince of Galitz) and Mstislav Romanovich, prince of Kiev. But of course, there were no real unity between russian princes, which was one of the reasons for loosing the Kalka battle.
Thank you for sharing your knowledge.
"I'm sure - this question is your fair attempt to improve our personal relations here, because you've already know answer, but I'll answer any way."
Sure I'd like to improve our relations, but I really did not know about this Zubtsov-Rzhev geographical situation.
As for question about the Kalka that was really a very interesting situation:
After Vsevolod, prince of Vladimir and Syzdal (and the most powerful of the Russian princes in the beginning of the 13 century) died it was a struggle for power between his sons. In 1216 his eldest son Konstantin won a great battle on the Lipice river against his brothers Yuri and Yaroslav (father of the future Alexander Nevskii). The real hero of this battle was prince Mstislav (owner of Toropetz) who was a Konstantin ally and commanded a Novgorodian forces. Later the same prince Mstislav became a prince of Galitz (in the south of Russia, not the nortern one) and relative of the polovetz khan Kotyan. When Kotyan was attacked by the mongols Mstislav agreed to help him and convince many other russian princes to join. Of course Yuri (who became a great prince of Vladimir and Syzdal after Konstantin's death) refused to go. But, according with the sources, Vasilko, prince of Rostov (Konstantin's son) participated. It seems logical to me that old alliance between Mstislav and Konstantin was renewed with his son.
I would not exactly said that majority of the russian army on Kalka was "Chernigovians". Between the princes were Danilo (prince of Volyn, future prince of Galitz) and Mstislav Romanovich, prince of Kiev. But of course, there were no real unity between russian princes, which was one of the reasons for loosing the Kalka battle.
< continued >
Archeological finding show quite simple truth - banks of Moscow river have negligible traces of Slav and Ugric artefacts till XII century, but artefacts of nomadic origin of these times are found in abundance. But as soon as we are leaving quite small Moscow/Jauza river Valley - nomadic artefacts is disappearing from archeological sites, but artefacts of Kriviches origin come in droves. Interesting thing is - width of combined Moscow/Jauza Valley isn't enough for supporting independent culture and fertility of Moscow soils isn't enough for keeping local nomads population in stable number. It means this land wasn't native or core for any nomads, but they preferred local rather steppe-like landschaft for surrounding deep forests. In other way nomadic population of Muscovy region was non-stable diaspora of some sort with constant input of manpower from South-East regions. Moscow was "dead-end" for this steppe visitors and they preferred to live in more common steppe, but Moscow became to be quite important gathering/trade center for any goods from surrounding forests. Most important feature of this region was "tunnel" character of local roads/clearings. I've mentioned previously - if you imagine geographic triangle - Moscow/Kaluga/Tula, you can reach Kaluga from Tula only - via Moscow. If you like to ride from Tula to Ryazan, you must ride from Tula to Moscow and from Moscow to Ryazan - not any other way.
In other words, - all roads around led to Moscow region, because any road in steppe clearing is more natural then road through forest wilderness or treacherous swampland. Nature itself made "natural star-shape roadnet" in this region and in later times Muscovites gain from this phenomena in a big way.
But in more ancient times - ethnic differencies between ancient Muscovites and their forest neighbours were more important. Archeologic finding in Moscow region in sites of IX-early XII century show growing number of things with definite Muslim symbols. It means this region had strong influence of "Islam wave", which include all nomadic and semi-sediment tribes of Volga Valley. It seems, Moscow was westernmost point of this "Islamic Conquista" because there are not steppe-like landschafts to West from this point - then there isn't any dwelling points for nomads. In ethnocultural terms it means - New Testament was created by sediment people for sediment population of Europe, Koran was written by nomadic guys for rather nomadic population of steppe/arid regions. Then Islam will get a big problem in preaching amidst sediment population of deep forests, as well as Christianity will get similar problem amidst nomadic population of steppe/arid zone. There is an interesting history support for this statement - big cities of Mesopotamia region held to remnants of Christianity considerable longer then it was allowed by usual pace of ethnocultural processes. Nestorian (Christian) Patriarch held his post in Baghdad in times when all rural population around Baghdad was totally Muslim. This example shows strong initial difference between both Faiths considering OBJECT of their preaching.
In Moscow case - we can see next phenomena - local landschaft couldn't sustain enough nomadic population for creating "normal city" here, but this population was enough for resist any invader for getting in these quasi-steppe realms and local traders need to have some stores for collecting local forest-originated goods. If we've got some stores, marketplaces and such in some closed region we can miss Fortress of some sort (especially in case of nomadic inhabitants), but we must find some spiritual place anyway.
Let's check in arabic source abour "Moscow" name origin. It says: "Local saint from Bulgar (proto-Kazan) came in this region and was killed by local heathen/infidels/savages while converting them into True Faith. Local Muslims buried this Saint IN PLACE OF HIS KILLING and erected GREAT MOSQUE there. Then this city has name "MOSQUE".
Let's study this story a bit closer. Saint was killed by savages/infidels in moment of preaching for them. It means - there was strong majority of local infidels around. But in the same place we can find enough Muslims with enough resources for erecting Great Mosque and these strange infidels didn't any move for preventing them instead of fact - they've just killed some Saint for the same thing. It is strange story - isn't it? But this story is quite applicable to interesting Moscow situation - there isn't constant Muslim/nomadic population as well as meaningful fortress, but local Ugric Slavonic guys didn't come into Moscow River Valley - in fright of local nomads. Nomads are constantly drifting inside Valley and they are definitely hostile to forest dwellers and so on and so on. It means - arabic source story is strange, but quite plausible for Moscow region.
OK. Let's find out what was results of this strong ethnic difference of Muscovy inhabitants from their forest neighbors. The same huge "Okovsky Forest", which became to be main barrier for "Islam Conquest" in IX-X century, became to be main barrier for Kievan Rus colonists as well.
From ethnic point of view - Slavs neither steppe nor forest dwellers. They are River Valley inhabitants. According to Ethnogenesis Laws - new Nation can be created as result of two different ethnos interaction with one ethnos will get leading part and another will become sub-ethnic strata. If one and the same ethnos/Nation is involved in two different processes: like the same ethnos have leading role with two different ethnic substrata - we will got two different Nations from one and the same ethnic "parent".
If you are - "River Valley" ethnos you can move only along rivers and seashores with temporal "short-jumps" between different River Valleys. Alas, there isn't any "short-jump" between Dniepr and Volga River Valleys. It means - rather sediment Ancient Eastern Slav society couldn't expand into "juicy"/fertile Volga Valley without "ethnic help" from side. There were two possible way from one Valley to another - via Great Steppe and via Great Okovsky Forest. Eastern Slavs could make ethnic mixing with steppe dwellers or with forest dwellers, but according to Universal Law of Ethnogenesis result of these two different mixing would be different and hostile to each other.
Way through the Steppe was simpler. Eastern Princes of Kievan Rus start to mix with Polovtzy noble families as soon as Dniepr Valley became to be "overpopulated" for Kievan Rus inhabitants. Very soon whole Chernigovian branch of Rurikides became to be rather alien to all other branches of Russian Princes and named by russian annalists as "polovchane".
Chernigovian Family reached Volga Valley in one hundred years earlier then their main later counterparts, but they met fierce opposition of proto-Tartar local inhabitants. Reason for this opposition was - Volga Bulgars as main component of proto-Tartar entity were River Dwellers themselves - then Chernigovians start to concur with them for most important habitats here.
Initial struggle was most strong and evil, then Chernigovian first dwelling place - Murom was erected in rather deep forests, because proto-Tartars were quite dangerous opponents. But "Chernigovians" as ethnic descendants of Slavonic river-dwellers and Polovtzy steppe-dwellers couldn't survive in Murom surrounding and first thing which they did as soon as quantity of "Chernigovian"-originated warriors were enough - they start to war with "proto-Tartars" and breaking through them into South. They next stop was Ryazan, which became to be most important Fortress of Chernigovian Family in the region.
I will repeat - any New nation can cold only two "basic" ethnic elements. Next ethnic addition is possible only after the moment while two initial component stop differ each other from one entity. "Chernigovian" entity held already two elements, then forest-inhabitants of Murom region start to be their most hated enemy. If you check in "Skazanie o Grade Kitezhe i Deve Fevronii" ("Fairy-tale about Kitezh City and Virgin Fevronia") - instead of rather fabulous name - this thing is about real people and real history of region, you will find out - both sides came to quite evil atrocities to each other in mutual hating process. In some sense - this struggle had quite genocidal struggle and you can get a picture.
Okovsky Forest is quite formidable structure. It isn't coincidence - why Suzdal-Vladimir region had common name of "Zalessje" (exact translation is - "Behind the Forest" or "On other side of Forest"). Northern Russian Princes of Monomach branch of Rurikides Family reached Volga Valley pastures in one hundred years after Chernigovians coming through Forest. For full understanding of this process you must realize - Kievan chronists wrote about "Zalessje" region like about hidden side of Moon or Marsian plains. It was - so far for their perception.
Let's make some side-stepping again.
Previously We've met Almoravid explanation about "gold rush" of some sort - when throngs of Kievan/Dniepr Valley inhabitants dropped all their possesions in Dniepr region and run to "new lands" in "Zalessje". I'm afraid it's quite wrong picture of process. Slavs are quite - ground-bound nation.
1) In start of XX century in Stolypin reform times number of Russian/Ukrainian people who liked to transfer themselves into Siberia WITH DIRECT GOVERNMENTAL helping - was negligible.
2) Ekaterine the Great asked Russian serfs to fill in "empty lands" in Volga region in exchange for personal freedon - when she tired without any visible response she filled Volga lands by German colonists.
3) Alexander I and Nicholas I tried to fill in by population - "Novo-Russia" or lands on northern shore of Black Sea (belong to modern Ukraine) promising all possible personal gains as well as freedom to Ukrainians/Russians. No response again. Situation was resolved by granting to biggest local city - Odessa - status of "porto-franco" and some special liberty for Jews. Then these regions were filled by Jew population.
If these three example aren't enough for explaining - Eastern Slavs (Russians/Ukrainians) are rather inert in colonization sense Nations, please check in population numbers in modern Siberian regions/major cities with relative numbers in United States/Canada/Australia. Compare date of founding of these cities with date of founding their North American/ Australian counterparts and compare population numbers of Russian Siberia cities and population numbers in America/Australia situation. You will realize real worth of "gold rush into Zalesje" statement.
By the way Gold Finding sites in Kolyma/Magadan region is 1000 times more rich then Gold Finding sites in Klondike river in Alaska. But number of Russians came into these gold-filled lands by their own volition in 1000 times less then number of Americans came into Klondike. (We don't sum up to this number - quantity of Soviet people coming in these lands without any volition in Stalin' times, - United States never got their concentration camps on Gold mines - this idea would be quite weird for common American which is ready to go into gold mine by his own volition.)
Oh, let's return to our main course. Let's realize - direct transfer of River-dwellers without any helping from forest-dwellers through huge Okovsky Forest is impossible. Then we've got Krivichi appearance - result of fast ethnogenesis process between Slavonic "river-dwellers" and Ugric "forest-dwellers". I've mean - people who came into "Zalessje" wasn't Kievan Russes (ruthenians) any more, they were initial phase of ethnogenesis of "Great Russian" nation. By the way - their arrival into upper part of Volga Valley small creeks and rivers was quite more peaceful then "Chernigovian" arrival. First of all - they hadn't to concur with proto-Tartars for the same habitats. "Proto-Tartars" prefer river valleys in steppe surrounding, "Kriviches" preferred the same river valleys, but in forest surrounding and these habitats were almost empty in population sense. Then as soon as "Kriviches" reached these empty habitats, they had "population burst" like any form of biologic species under favorable living condition without any outer pressure.
Very soon all these habitats in Upper Volga small rivers/creeks were filled by Kriviches population and they've met "Chernigovians". "Kriviches" took side of oppressed by "Chernigivians" local Ugric guys immediately - then constant bloody war between Suzdal-Vladimir Princes and Chernigov-Ryazan Princes started. This war had rather "supernatural" character of two close, but definite different entities, and has got definite ethnic character.
Due to ethnic character of Vladimir-Chernigov epic struggle, Moscow region start to be rather constant battle-ground between two sides. Local inhabitants were rather "Chernigov" side oriented guys, but "Chernigovians" couldn't keep this very important strongpoint surrounded by "Vladimir" forestry strongholds at all. Then Moscow region start to belong to Princes of Vladimir, but became to be main center of local troubles, place of constant insurgency of local nomads against "Forest Rulers".
If this situation would keep in this form, Moscow would become some russian equivalent of local Barselona - constantly rebellious/ethnically different city/province inside ethnically homogenous country. Princes of Vladimir couldn't raze Moscow - anyway, it was only their province, which raised livestock in considerable numbers, then there was popular saying in Medieval Russian times: "Moscow is as important as Red meat on your bread. Bread can be White, Grey, Black or Brown, but Meat is Red as Moscow - anyway".
Situation became to be different in Mongol Invasion times. Moscow - Fortress of Chernigovians in 1237 was razed to dust as Ryazan, Kozelsk and other Chernigovian Fortresses of the Region. Big reason was - Mongol Invaders were Human-Lemmings, who run out from clymatic cataclysm - dissapearance of their Mongolia under sands of Gobi Desert in Dry cycle. Then they destruct any other entity, which share with them the same habitats.
Mongols were exclusive Steppe-Dwellers, then whole Chernigovian group of Principalities (mixed steppe-river inhabitants) were vanquished by them without any mercy, but Core-Russian forest-dwelling Principalities were kept rather intact as vassals. Mongols weren't interested in any forestry territories at all. You can check it yourself - Mongols stopped their raids as soon as they realized - there isn't any steppe habitats further in this direction.
It means - if you like to name Great Okovsky Forest as Symbol of Russia, then Russia kept Europe from Mongol Steppe invaders as soon as it kept Dniepr Valley from previous "Muslim Conquest" of IX-X century
.
In biology terms it means - if mighty pack of sharks start to dying in strong oceanic watercurrent of different temperature and had to return to more convenient temperature waters and this watercurrent had some own inhabitants, you can name these inhabitants as "mighty brave warriors, which save all ocean from shark invaders from cold waters into our hot lagoon", but this statement is rather funny. Do you get the picture?
Returning to Russian history - Mongol Invasion made big difference for Muscovites (but I'm afraid there wasn't many of them after global massacre made by Mongols in 1238) or some rather Mongol-mixed new inhabitants of this Valley. In previous time they were oppressing minority, they became to be oppressors themselves from this moment. Moscow region was taken from Chernigovian possession and became to be region with direct ruling by Khan of Horde from 1238. Very soon (due to its strategic placement) Moscow became to be main Mongol-Tartar Fortress in region and permanent place of residence of Tartar "baskak" (Governor) of whole Russia. But "Star moment" of Muscovy was ahead.
In 1250s Aleksander Nevsky helped Horde to squash down rebellion of his own younger brother Andrej of Vladimir. More then that Alexander - made some quite spectacular prosecution for his own son Basil and found him guilty in "conspiracy against our blessed Tartar masters". Basil was executed and Horde rulers were pleased to no extent. Alexander was considered by them as most trustworthy and loyal friend - he became to named brother for Batu Khan and Berke Khan. This new position sides decided to strenghtening by dinastic marriages, then all three remaining sons of Alexander Nevsky received Tartar Princessin as wives and Khan Berke made quite spectacular speech like: "I've asked you to convert into True Faith, but you refused. I asked you to convert your sons, my friend, into True Faith, but you refused again. Now I gave my daughter and my nieces to your sons as only and true wives, please, keep your promise for remaining to be Christians and don't seek any other women, because Christians must keep Monogamy".
Due to quite political nature of this "group marriage" all sons of Alexander Nevsky were married to Tartar Princessin of different branches of Juchi family. According to tartar sources, Khan Berke ("Sword of Islam", "Bullwhip of Infidels") choose youngest from Alexander sons - Daniil as his favorite and married him onto his own only daughter.
Daniil was held in Saray as only "Son-in-Law" (and a bit like a hostage) of most powerful Juchid - Berke Khan, which has rather offensive (for Mongol) nickname of "Tartar".
This nickname has most close equivalent - "Savage". Ancient Tartars were most principal Mongol "savage" enemies, which killed Ghenghis-khan father by poisoning. Then Berke - most principal executor/killer of Mongol Princes of Chagatay/Udegey families was named as "Tartar", because "his attitude to natural Mongols were like attitude of natural Tartars".
Later name of "Tartars" was applied to all backers of Berke Khan cause, like Khan Uzbekh supporters became to be "Uzbekhs".
I'm afraid - marriage to only daughter of "Tartar" Khan - founder of whole modern Tartar Nation was really big thing, and all descendants of "Tartar Khan" Berke are deserving to be named as "tartar czarevitches". In any case - paradox of this history is - only direct descendants of first "Tartar Khan" ruled in Moscow and were considered as - non-Tartars.
Oh, I'm afraid - Khan Berke made quite royal wedding present for his "Son-in-Law" and most loved daughter. He presented them one small city with Muslim Tartar dominant population and very big trade importance in exchange of written promise from Alexander Nevsky and small Daniil - Daniil and all his descendants promised to keep Moscow as "hereditary city" and don't transfer their ruling place from this city. Tartar Khan (Sword of Islam) saw hope in this promise to slow converting of Daniil of Moscow Dynasty into True Faith under dominant Muslim population of Moscow - according to tartar and arabic sources.
Human expectation is quite interesting thing - Daniil and all his descendants kept their promise to first Tartar Khan to yota. But result is quite different to hoped by "Sword of Islam" Khan.
I would to tell you this never-ending story - pretty long, but I'm afraid I became to be quite boring now. In any case you understand "special value" of Moscow in Horde rulers eyes a bit better. I'm sure - you start to realize - why Muscovites razed and destroyed Tver and Rostov and all other Russian cities without any pity.
By the way - Mongol Invasion became to be stopping point in initial ethnogenesis of Russian nation. Slav elements stopped to mix with Ugric substrata - anymore. All Ugric tribes of "taken by Kriviches" region became to be part of new nation and all their names - Merja, Muroma, Meshchera became to be toponimic artefacts of ancient tribes existence. But all Ugric tribes which lived "behind proto-Tartar/Bulgar and Chernigovian" steppe "wall" remain to be Ugric - and modern Mordva, Mariy, Komi tribes of East direction, or Karela, Eesti, Suomi tribes which lived behind "novgorodian defences" didn't became to be Russians and don't like to be them.
Ethnogenetic process of modern Russians creation took completely another twist - Russians start to mix with Tartars (steppe dwellers) and after considerable period of time, Russians began to mix in with remnants of former Chernigovian lands. It is most important reason for Ryazan to be most important russian-originated - Moscow enemy. But any ideas - like Muscovy could expand into former Chernigovian lands like Tambow - is nonsense from ethnogenesis point of view. More then that - Russians couldn't expand into more southern lands as well - modern Russian Cossacks are direct descendants of "Chernigovian" steppe/river warriors, then idea of quite calm mixing of these guys with descendants of their both principal enemies (Kriviches and Tartars) is impossible. It is main reason for self-identification of Cossacks in independent ethnic unity (constantly opposing to central power of Muscovy/Russian Empire/Soviet Union). Yep, Almoravid is right - "Cossacks are despising Tartars till present moment". He is wrong in his main issue - he considered Cossacks as "cornerstone" of Russian nation, but in reality modern Tartars are ethnically more close to "Core Russians" then Cossacks and Cossacks are traditional enemies of "Core Russians" - by the way. Check in - "Calm Don-River" by Sholokhov, or history of Cossack army fought on German side in WWII times. Or something about "Ignat movements". Or story about Peter the Great massacring Cossacks of Don and Kouban region. Or story about Katherine the Great moving Cossacks from Zaporoje region.
Are you sure if you can find any story of something like - Russian/Soviet Government did something to Volga Tartars in the same magnitude like Peter the Great, Ekaterina the Great, Lenin or Stalin made to Russian Cossacks - pls, reveal this thing for me, I will appreciate this story and whole "Ethnogenesis Theory" concept will be undermined in its core.
By the way what about story of expulsion of Poles from Kremlin - leader of Russian Cossacks Prince Trubetzkoy asked cooperation from other Russian leaders Minin and Pojarsky and received quite interesting (but ethnically approved) answer: "Never we did stay with Cossacks as one, don't like and never will". Then main bloodbath in this battle wasn't battle of Russian volunteers against Poles, but their quite bloody fighting against RUSSIAN Cossacks". (They demanded from Cossacks to return stolen by Cossacks Orthodox Saint Relics, but Cossacks refused to return them on reason - there were a lot of Muslim Tartars amidst Russian volunteers of Minin and Pojarsky, then Cossacks insisted - these relics can fall into Muslim hands.) As result - there were a lot bloodbath between both of Russian armies and Volunteers after victory (and mass-killing of Cossacks as side-result) proclaim Icon of Kazan GodMother as their victory mascot (allow to remind you - Kazan is capital of modern Tatarstan and in time of question quantity of Christians in this region was around nihil - then this proclamation was most important political step in claiming - "Tartars are most important and only possible ethnical group in Ethnogenesis process of Great Russian nation".
Situation changed a bit later, but not in Cossack favour at all. After Nikonians reform which became to be stopping line for convergence of Great Russian and Tartar nation - next episode of convergence Great Russians and Ukrainians started.
Then statement: "Russian Cossacks are despising Tartars" is quite right and valid, but was used in wrong sense, wrong place and so on... It was quite simple situation when right statement can lead anyone to wrong conclusions.
Dixi.
Sincerely yours, Bash
History is interesting thing
Archeological finding show quite simple truth - banks of Moscow river have negligible traces of Slav and Ugric artefacts till XII century, but artefacts of nomadic origin of these times are found in abundance. But as soon as we are leaving quite small Moscow/Jauza river Valley - nomadic artefacts is disappearing from archeological sites, but artefacts of Kriviches origin come in droves. Interesting thing is - width of combined Moscow/Jauza Valley isn't enough for supporting independent culture and fertility of Moscow soils isn't enough for keeping local nomads population in stable number. It means this land wasn't native or core for any nomads, but they preferred local rather steppe-like landschaft for surrounding deep forests. In other way nomadic population of Muscovy region was non-stable diaspora of some sort with constant input of manpower from South-East regions. Moscow was "dead-end" for this steppe visitors and they preferred to live in more common steppe, but Moscow became to be quite important gathering/trade center for any goods from surrounding forests. Most important feature of this region was "tunnel" character of local roads/clearings. I've mentioned previously - if you imagine geographic triangle - Moscow/Kaluga/Tula, you can reach Kaluga from Tula only - via Moscow. If you like to ride from Tula to Ryazan, you must ride from Tula to Moscow and from Moscow to Ryazan - not any other way.
In other words, - all roads around led to Moscow region, because any road in steppe clearing is more natural then road through forest wilderness or treacherous swampland. Nature itself made "natural star-shape roadnet" in this region and in later times Muscovites gain from this phenomena in a big way.
But in more ancient times - ethnic differencies between ancient Muscovites and their forest neighbours were more important. Archeologic finding in Moscow region in sites of IX-early XII century show growing number of things with definite Muslim symbols. It means this region had strong influence of "Islam wave", which include all nomadic and semi-sediment tribes of Volga Valley. It seems, Moscow was westernmost point of this "Islamic Conquista" because there are not steppe-like landschafts to West from this point - then there isn't any dwelling points for nomads. In ethnocultural terms it means - New Testament was created by sediment people for sediment population of Europe, Koran was written by nomadic guys for rather nomadic population of steppe/arid regions. Then Islam will get a big problem in preaching amidst sediment population of deep forests, as well as Christianity will get similar problem amidst nomadic population of steppe/arid zone. There is an interesting history support for this statement - big cities of Mesopotamia region held to remnants of Christianity considerable longer then it was allowed by usual pace of ethnocultural processes. Nestorian (Christian) Patriarch held his post in Baghdad in times when all rural population around Baghdad was totally Muslim. This example shows strong initial difference between both Faiths considering OBJECT of their preaching.
In Moscow case - we can see next phenomena - local landschaft couldn't sustain enough nomadic population for creating "normal city" here, but this population was enough for resist any invader for getting in these quasi-steppe realms and local traders need to have some stores for collecting local forest-originated goods. If we've got some stores, marketplaces and such in some closed region we can miss Fortress of some sort (especially in case of nomadic inhabitants), but we must find some spiritual place anyway.
Let's check in arabic source abour "Moscow" name origin. It says: "Local saint from Bulgar (proto-Kazan) came in this region and was killed by local heathen/infidels/savages while converting them into True Faith. Local Muslims buried this Saint IN PLACE OF HIS KILLING and erected GREAT MOSQUE there. Then this city has name "MOSQUE".
Let's study this story a bit closer. Saint was killed by savages/infidels in moment of preaching for them. It means - there was strong majority of local infidels around. But in the same place we can find enough Muslims with enough resources for erecting Great Mosque and these strange infidels didn't any move for preventing them instead of fact - they've just killed some Saint for the same thing. It is strange story - isn't it? But this story is quite applicable to interesting Moscow situation - there isn't constant Muslim/nomadic population as well as meaningful fortress, but local Ugric Slavonic guys didn't come into Moscow River Valley - in fright of local nomads. Nomads are constantly drifting inside Valley and they are definitely hostile to forest dwellers and so on and so on. It means - arabic source story is strange, but quite plausible for Moscow region.
OK. Let's find out what was results of this strong ethnic difference of Muscovy inhabitants from their forest neighbors. The same huge "Okovsky Forest", which became to be main barrier for "Islam Conquest" in IX-X century, became to be main barrier for Kievan Rus colonists as well.
From ethnic point of view - Slavs neither steppe nor forest dwellers. They are River Valley inhabitants. According to Ethnogenesis Laws - new Nation can be created as result of two different ethnos interaction with one ethnos will get leading part and another will become sub-ethnic strata. If one and the same ethnos/Nation is involved in two different processes: like the same ethnos have leading role with two different ethnic substrata - we will got two different Nations from one and the same ethnic "parent".
If you are - "River Valley" ethnos you can move only along rivers and seashores with temporal "short-jumps" between different River Valleys. Alas, there isn't any "short-jump" between Dniepr and Volga River Valleys. It means - rather sediment Ancient Eastern Slav society couldn't expand into "juicy"/fertile Volga Valley without "ethnic help" from side. There were two possible way from one Valley to another - via Great Steppe and via Great Okovsky Forest. Eastern Slavs could make ethnic mixing with steppe dwellers or with forest dwellers, but according to Universal Law of Ethnogenesis result of these two different mixing would be different and hostile to each other.
Way through the Steppe was simpler. Eastern Princes of Kievan Rus start to mix with Polovtzy noble families as soon as Dniepr Valley became to be "overpopulated" for Kievan Rus inhabitants. Very soon whole Chernigovian branch of Rurikides became to be rather alien to all other branches of Russian Princes and named by russian annalists as "polovchane".
Chernigovian Family reached Volga Valley in one hundred years earlier then their main later counterparts, but they met fierce opposition of proto-Tartar local inhabitants. Reason for this opposition was - Volga Bulgars as main component of proto-Tartar entity were River Dwellers themselves - then Chernigovians start to concur with them for most important habitats here.
Initial struggle was most strong and evil, then Chernigovian first dwelling place - Murom was erected in rather deep forests, because proto-Tartars were quite dangerous opponents. But "Chernigovians" as ethnic descendants of Slavonic river-dwellers and Polovtzy steppe-dwellers couldn't survive in Murom surrounding and first thing which they did as soon as quantity of "Chernigovian"-originated warriors were enough - they start to war with "proto-Tartars" and breaking through them into South. They next stop was Ryazan, which became to be most important Fortress of Chernigovian Family in the region.
I will repeat - any New nation can cold only two "basic" ethnic elements. Next ethnic addition is possible only after the moment while two initial component stop differ each other from one entity. "Chernigovian" entity held already two elements, then forest-inhabitants of Murom region start to be their most hated enemy. If you check in "Skazanie o Grade Kitezhe i Deve Fevronii" ("Fairy-tale about Kitezh City and Virgin Fevronia") - instead of rather fabulous name - this thing is about real people and real history of region, you will find out - both sides came to quite evil atrocities to each other in mutual hating process. In some sense - this struggle had quite genocidal struggle and you can get a picture.
Okovsky Forest is quite formidable structure. It isn't coincidence - why Suzdal-Vladimir region had common name of "Zalessje" (exact translation is - "Behind the Forest" or "On other side of Forest"). Northern Russian Princes of Monomach branch of Rurikides Family reached Volga Valley pastures in one hundred years after Chernigovians coming through Forest. For full understanding of this process you must realize - Kievan chronists wrote about "Zalessje" region like about hidden side of Moon or Marsian plains. It was - so far for their perception.
Let's make some side-stepping again.
Previously We've met Almoravid explanation about "gold rush" of some sort - when throngs of Kievan/Dniepr Valley inhabitants dropped all their possesions in Dniepr region and run to "new lands" in "Zalessje". I'm afraid it's quite wrong picture of process. Slavs are quite - ground-bound nation.
1) In start of XX century in Stolypin reform times number of Russian/Ukrainian people who liked to transfer themselves into Siberia WITH DIRECT GOVERNMENTAL helping - was negligible.
2) Ekaterine the Great asked Russian serfs to fill in "empty lands" in Volga region in exchange for personal freedon - when she tired without any visible response she filled Volga lands by German colonists.
3) Alexander I and Nicholas I tried to fill in by population - "Novo-Russia" or lands on northern shore of Black Sea (belong to modern Ukraine) promising all possible personal gains as well as freedom to Ukrainians/Russians. No response again. Situation was resolved by granting to biggest local city - Odessa - status of "porto-franco" and some special liberty for Jews. Then these regions were filled by Jew population.
If these three example aren't enough for explaining - Eastern Slavs (Russians/Ukrainians) are rather inert in colonization sense Nations, please check in population numbers in modern Siberian regions/major cities with relative numbers in United States/Canada/Australia. Compare date of founding of these cities with date of founding their North American/ Australian counterparts and compare population numbers of Russian Siberia cities and population numbers in America/Australia situation. You will realize real worth of "gold rush into Zalesje" statement.
By the way Gold Finding sites in Kolyma/Magadan region is 1000 times more rich then Gold Finding sites in Klondike river in Alaska. But number of Russians came into these gold-filled lands by their own volition in 1000 times less then number of Americans came into Klondike. (We don't sum up to this number - quantity of Soviet people coming in these lands without any volition in Stalin' times, - United States never got their concentration camps on Gold mines - this idea would be quite weird for common American which is ready to go into gold mine by his own volition.)
Oh, let's return to our main course. Let's realize - direct transfer of River-dwellers without any helping from forest-dwellers through huge Okovsky Forest is impossible. Then we've got Krivichi appearance - result of fast ethnogenesis process between Slavonic "river-dwellers" and Ugric "forest-dwellers". I've mean - people who came into "Zalessje" wasn't Kievan Russes (ruthenians) any more, they were initial phase of ethnogenesis of "Great Russian" nation. By the way - their arrival into upper part of Volga Valley small creeks and rivers was quite more peaceful then "Chernigovian" arrival. First of all - they hadn't to concur with proto-Tartars for the same habitats. "Proto-Tartars" prefer river valleys in steppe surrounding, "Kriviches" preferred the same river valleys, but in forest surrounding and these habitats were almost empty in population sense. Then as soon as "Kriviches" reached these empty habitats, they had "population burst" like any form of biologic species under favorable living condition without any outer pressure.
Very soon all these habitats in Upper Volga small rivers/creeks were filled by Kriviches population and they've met "Chernigovians". "Kriviches" took side of oppressed by "Chernigivians" local Ugric guys immediately - then constant bloody war between Suzdal-Vladimir Princes and Chernigov-Ryazan Princes started. This war had rather "supernatural" character of two close, but definite different entities, and has got definite ethnic character.
Due to ethnic character of Vladimir-Chernigov epic struggle, Moscow region start to be rather constant battle-ground between two sides. Local inhabitants were rather "Chernigov" side oriented guys, but "Chernigovians" couldn't keep this very important strongpoint surrounded by "Vladimir" forestry strongholds at all. Then Moscow region start to belong to Princes of Vladimir, but became to be main center of local troubles, place of constant insurgency of local nomads against "Forest Rulers".
If this situation would keep in this form, Moscow would become some russian equivalent of local Barselona - constantly rebellious/ethnically different city/province inside ethnically homogenous country. Princes of Vladimir couldn't raze Moscow - anyway, it was only their province, which raised livestock in considerable numbers, then there was popular saying in Medieval Russian times: "Moscow is as important as Red meat on your bread. Bread can be White, Grey, Black or Brown, but Meat is Red as Moscow - anyway".
Situation became to be different in Mongol Invasion times. Moscow - Fortress of Chernigovians in 1237 was razed to dust as Ryazan, Kozelsk and other Chernigovian Fortresses of the Region. Big reason was - Mongol Invaders were Human-Lemmings, who run out from clymatic cataclysm - dissapearance of their Mongolia under sands of Gobi Desert in Dry cycle. Then they destruct any other entity, which share with them the same habitats.
Mongols were exclusive Steppe-Dwellers, then whole Chernigovian group of Principalities (mixed steppe-river inhabitants) were vanquished by them without any mercy, but Core-Russian forest-dwelling Principalities were kept rather intact as vassals. Mongols weren't interested in any forestry territories at all. You can check it yourself - Mongols stopped their raids as soon as they realized - there isn't any steppe habitats further in this direction.
It means - if you like to name Great Okovsky Forest as Symbol of Russia, then Russia kept Europe from Mongol Steppe invaders as soon as it kept Dniepr Valley from previous "Muslim Conquest" of IX-X century
.In biology terms it means - if mighty pack of sharks start to dying in strong oceanic watercurrent of different temperature and had to return to more convenient temperature waters and this watercurrent had some own inhabitants, you can name these inhabitants as "mighty brave warriors, which save all ocean from shark invaders from cold waters into our hot lagoon", but this statement is rather funny. Do you get the picture?
Returning to Russian history - Mongol Invasion made big difference for Muscovites (but I'm afraid there wasn't many of them after global massacre made by Mongols in 1238) or some rather Mongol-mixed new inhabitants of this Valley. In previous time they were oppressing minority, they became to be oppressors themselves from this moment. Moscow region was taken from Chernigovian possession and became to be region with direct ruling by Khan of Horde from 1238. Very soon (due to its strategic placement) Moscow became to be main Mongol-Tartar Fortress in region and permanent place of residence of Tartar "baskak" (Governor) of whole Russia. But "Star moment" of Muscovy was ahead.
In 1250s Aleksander Nevsky helped Horde to squash down rebellion of his own younger brother Andrej of Vladimir. More then that Alexander - made some quite spectacular prosecution for his own son Basil and found him guilty in "conspiracy against our blessed Tartar masters". Basil was executed and Horde rulers were pleased to no extent. Alexander was considered by them as most trustworthy and loyal friend - he became to named brother for Batu Khan and Berke Khan. This new position sides decided to strenghtening by dinastic marriages, then all three remaining sons of Alexander Nevsky received Tartar Princessin as wives and Khan Berke made quite spectacular speech like: "I've asked you to convert into True Faith, but you refused. I asked you to convert your sons, my friend, into True Faith, but you refused again. Now I gave my daughter and my nieces to your sons as only and true wives, please, keep your promise for remaining to be Christians and don't seek any other women, because Christians must keep Monogamy".
Due to quite political nature of this "group marriage" all sons of Alexander Nevsky were married to Tartar Princessin of different branches of Juchi family. According to tartar sources, Khan Berke ("Sword of Islam", "Bullwhip of Infidels") choose youngest from Alexander sons - Daniil as his favorite and married him onto his own only daughter.
Daniil was held in Saray as only "Son-in-Law" (and a bit like a hostage) of most powerful Juchid - Berke Khan, which has rather offensive (for Mongol) nickname of "Tartar".
This nickname has most close equivalent - "Savage". Ancient Tartars were most principal Mongol "savage" enemies, which killed Ghenghis-khan father by poisoning. Then Berke - most principal executor/killer of Mongol Princes of Chagatay/Udegey families was named as "Tartar", because "his attitude to natural Mongols were like attitude of natural Tartars".
Later name of "Tartars" was applied to all backers of Berke Khan cause, like Khan Uzbekh supporters became to be "Uzbekhs".
I'm afraid - marriage to only daughter of "Tartar" Khan - founder of whole modern Tartar Nation was really big thing, and all descendants of "Tartar Khan" Berke are deserving to be named as "tartar czarevitches". In any case - paradox of this history is - only direct descendants of first "Tartar Khan" ruled in Moscow and were considered as - non-Tartars
.Oh, I'm afraid - Khan Berke made quite royal wedding present for his "Son-in-Law" and most loved daughter. He presented them one small city with Muslim Tartar dominant population and very big trade importance in exchange of written promise from Alexander Nevsky and small Daniil - Daniil and all his descendants promised to keep Moscow as "hereditary city" and don't transfer their ruling place from this city. Tartar Khan (Sword of Islam) saw hope in this promise to slow converting of Daniil of Moscow Dynasty into True Faith under dominant Muslim population of Moscow - according to tartar and arabic sources.
Human expectation is quite interesting thing - Daniil and all his descendants kept their promise to first Tartar Khan to yota. But result is quite different to hoped by "Sword of Islam" Khan.
I would to tell you this never-ending story - pretty long, but I'm afraid I became to be quite boring now. In any case you understand "special value" of Moscow in Horde rulers eyes a bit better. I'm sure - you start to realize - why Muscovites razed and destroyed Tver and Rostov and all other Russian cities without any pity.
By the way - Mongol Invasion became to be stopping point in initial ethnogenesis of Russian nation. Slav elements stopped to mix with Ugric substrata - anymore. All Ugric tribes of "taken by Kriviches" region became to be part of new nation and all their names - Merja, Muroma, Meshchera became to be toponimic artefacts of ancient tribes existence. But all Ugric tribes which lived "behind proto-Tartar/Bulgar and Chernigovian" steppe "wall" remain to be Ugric - and modern Mordva, Mariy, Komi tribes of East direction, or Karela, Eesti, Suomi tribes which lived behind "novgorodian defences" didn't became to be Russians and don't like to be them.
Ethnogenetic process of modern Russians creation took completely another twist - Russians start to mix with Tartars (steppe dwellers) and after considerable period of time, Russians began to mix in with remnants of former Chernigovian lands. It is most important reason for Ryazan to be most important russian-originated - Moscow enemy. But any ideas - like Muscovy could expand into former Chernigovian lands like Tambow - is nonsense from ethnogenesis point of view. More then that - Russians couldn't expand into more southern lands as well - modern Russian Cossacks are direct descendants of "Chernigovian" steppe/river warriors, then idea of quite calm mixing of these guys with descendants of their both principal enemies (Kriviches and Tartars) is impossible. It is main reason for self-identification of Cossacks in independent ethnic unity (constantly opposing to central power of Muscovy/Russian Empire/Soviet Union). Yep, Almoravid is right - "Cossacks are despising Tartars till present moment". He is wrong in his main issue - he considered Cossacks as "cornerstone" of Russian nation, but in reality modern Tartars are ethnically more close to "Core Russians" then Cossacks and Cossacks are traditional enemies of "Core Russians" - by the way. Check in - "Calm Don-River" by Sholokhov, or history of Cossack army fought on German side in WWII times. Or something about "Ignat movements". Or story about Peter the Great massacring Cossacks of Don and Kouban region. Or story about Katherine the Great moving Cossacks from Zaporoje region
.Are you sure if you can find any story of something like - Russian/Soviet Government did something to Volga Tartars in the same magnitude like Peter the Great, Ekaterina the Great, Lenin or Stalin made to Russian Cossacks - pls, reveal this thing for me, I will appreciate this story and whole "Ethnogenesis Theory" concept will be undermined in its core
.By the way what about story of expulsion of Poles from Kremlin - leader of Russian Cossacks Prince Trubetzkoy asked cooperation from other Russian leaders Minin and Pojarsky and received quite interesting (but ethnically approved) answer: "Never we did stay with Cossacks as one, don't like and never will". Then main bloodbath in this battle wasn't battle of Russian volunteers against Poles, but their quite bloody fighting against RUSSIAN Cossacks". (They demanded from Cossacks to return stolen by Cossacks Orthodox Saint Relics, but Cossacks refused to return them on reason - there were a lot of Muslim Tartars amidst Russian volunteers of Minin and Pojarsky, then Cossacks insisted - these relics can fall into Muslim hands.) As result - there were a lot bloodbath between both of Russian armies and Volunteers after victory (and mass-killing of Cossacks as side-result) proclaim Icon of Kazan GodMother as their victory mascot (allow to remind you - Kazan is capital of modern Tatarstan and in time of question quantity of Christians in this region was around nihil - then this proclamation was most important political step in claiming - "Tartars are most important and only possible ethnical group in Ethnogenesis process of Great Russian nation".
Situation changed a bit later, but not in Cossack favour at all. After Nikonians reform which became to be stopping line for convergence of Great Russian and Tartar nation - next episode of convergence Great Russians and Ukrainians started.
Then statement: "Russian Cossacks are despising Tartars" is quite right and valid, but was used in wrong sense, wrong place and so on... It was quite simple situation when right statement can lead anyone to wrong conclusions.
Dixi.
Sincerely yours, Bash
History is interesting thing
MichaelK said:
Thank you for rather kind words. By the way - in this quoted sentence you've made some funny statement. Excuse me for bothering - Kievan Prince in 1223 (Kalka battle) was definitely Mstislav "the Old". You are quite right about it. Can you remind me birthplace city of Mstislav "Old" Romanovich? He came into Kalka battlefield with 80,000 of his army. Please, can you remind me - city of origin of his huge army (OK, not whole army - just "hardcore veteran" group)? By the way - Kalka river lies inside quite arid-steppe region then Russian army in majority was Cavalry army and main episode of this fighting was direct clashing of Mongol-Tartar and Russian CAVALRIES. (Russian infantry of Kievan origin was considered by Russian leaders as "second-line support" and didn't participitated in actual battle - but was massacred later - after total Russian defeat.)
Quite interesting Russian Army on Kalka-battlefield we are having - with strong dominance of Cavalry element. Do you realize what it means in ethnology terms? How much river-bound Kievan Rus/ruthenians could allow to themselves to have battle-horse, eh? But it means they've got quite strong different steppe-bound element amidst their ranks - and mixing of Kievan Rus river-bound ethnic elements with this Steppe-bound nomadic element has got quite simple definitions: "Chernigovians", South-East russian ethnos, and... Cossacks (in most modern ethnic definitions). Gotcha?
By the way, we've got quite different Strategy of survival in Mongol Invasion times. If you check in annales - you will find out:
Prince of Ryazan came out from Ryazan Fortress and preferred to make fierce battle with Mongols in open battlefield and this battle had Cavalry meeting engagement Nature. (As soon as you realize - Ryazan was Fortress of "Chernigovian Nature" steppe-bound ethnic elements preferred to decide batlle as far from home city-walls as possible for preventing attrition damage to home principality - you will realize Russian history a bit better.)
Prince of Vladimir came out from Vladimir Fortress as well, but he preferred to hide in forestry wilderness and Vladimir made quite fierce resistance while Vladimir Prince Army tried to outflank invaders in maze of Great Forest. In other words - Prince of Vladimir military decision was quite different from Prince of Ryazan (or Prince of Moscow) decisions. He behaved himself as forest-dweller himself - he preferred to hide in the wilderness and tried to ambush invaders in narrow forest roads while Ryazan and Moscow rulers tried to destroy them in direct Cavalry meeting in open battlefield.
It means - local customs and common habits of "Kriviches" and "Chernigovians" diverged in quite spectacular manner - and both ethnic groups wasn't intermixable any more.
By the way compare Kalka battle of two definitely Steppe armies with Lipica battle of two definitely Forest armies. You will get two absolutely different patterns of engaging sides, non-comparable tactic and a lot of quite interesting military features, which deserves special article (or maybe book) on this matter. One and the same Kievan Rus Nation produced two quite different ethnoses with the same name of "Russians" which differed in any kind of things up to "different way of thinking". Do you see?
Sincerely your, Bash
P.S. You are stirred some most interesting thing in Mongol Invasion problem, then I'd like to make some more baable about Russian tactic/strategy onto Lipice/Kalka battle. Anybody who didn't like to hear about these rather special thing didn't need to read any more.
Mstislav of Toropetz (Mstislav Udatny) was married on elder daughter of Polovetz Khan Kotyan.
Most interesting thing is - he won battle Lipice battle in the same manner like he lost Kalka battle.
In Lipica battle his Cavalry Novgorod' guard (of Chernigovian origin) hided behind wall of Novgorodian Infantry while long maneuvring process - then his Steppe Raised Cavalry suddenly made diagonal strike through whole Lipice battlefield - pinning most important in his enemies ranks Perejaslav guard of Jaroslav the Great. Perejaslav guard start to make pin wheeled movement triying to repel strong Cavalry surge, but they hadn't time enough, because Novgorodian volunteers start to fell down their heavy shields, helms and armor and run to their direction as fast as possible. Part of Perejaslav guard start to wheel on opposing direction and fluid Novgorodian Cavalry dropped in between Perejaslav ranks moving in different direction wheels. Job was done. Trick of some dedicated Steppe dweller of Chernigovian origin won him a day against dedicated Forest-dwellers army.
Mstislav Udatny tried to make the same trick in Kalka battle-field, but Steppe-raised Mongols were ready for this sort of diversion - then they start to fall back and speed of their Cavalry was higher then speed of Mstislav Guard. In next moment group of Mstislav was cut from all other Russian battlegroups, but instead of attacking Mstislav Mongols start to ride their cavalry in Russian side and speed of their horses was higher then speed of Horses of Mstislav. Immediately Mongol reserves start to pour in center of Russian position - directly in the same place which was abandoned by Mstislav Cavalry. As soon as this place was filled - Mongols made enveloping engagement onto rather tired Polovtzy Cavalry and overrun them from three different directions by one strong concentric blow. Then Mongol Cavalry made big wheeling movement and crushed rather tired by lond ride Mstislav Guard Cavalry. Then half-Infantry/half-Cavalry Army of Prince Danilo (future Over-powerful Danilo Galitzky) start to falling back to river crossing in panick and so on and so on. Domino principle - you know.
Morale of this story - if you fight against dedicated Forest Army and win don't be sure if the same tactic will won you day against dedicated Steppe Army.
Different way of thinking of different Army Commanders.Kalka battle became to be most important reason for Mongols for Invasion into Russia - if russian forces couldn't make anything spectacular against Mongol with happy 8 Russian onto 1 Mongol advantage, what would be result if Mongol will get the same happy advantage in next fighting?
Another big reason and actually - a bit more heavy reason for Mongols was treacherous killing of Jebe-noyon by Chernigovian arrow in peace negotiation talks. Mongols were heavily outnumbered and like to breaking through Russian ranks back to Great Steppes, then their military leader Jebe noyon made peace-talks himself. By the way - Jebe-noyon (his real name was Jarchi-Uday) was father-in-law for eldest son of Ghenghis - Juchi, then his grandsons - Ordu, Batu, Berke and Munke promised to Great Eternal sky to fight with "Chernigovians till last of their Princes will drop dead for their eternal treason on our granddad - Jebe". Reason for fighting "Chernigovians" for their ethnic habitats was happy bonus to Mongols in this situation as well as main/principal enemy of their named "hereditary enemy" hold population habitats unwanted by Mongols. In other words - all chips fell in predestinied places in this story, then we've got some rather fair assumption about inventing by Mongol leaders of "Chernigovian treacherous arrow". Modern historians - have opinion it was some chance arrow from Russian side, but Chernigovians were most desired goal for applying "hereditary claim"/target thing on their heads for Jebe' grandsons.
"You are guilty on reason - I'm hungry", - said Wolf and took Sheep in dark Forest.
.Dixi
To Bash
"Thank you for rather kind words. By the way - in this quoted sentence you've made some funny statement. Excuse me for bothering - Kievan Prince in 1223 (Kalka battle) was definitely Mstislav "the Old". You are quite right about it. Can you remind me birthplace city of Mstislav "Old" Romanovich? He came into Kalka battlefield with 80,000 of his army. Please, can you remind me - city of origin of his huge army (OK, not whole army - just "hardcore veteran" group)? By the way - Kalka river lies inside quite arid-steppe region then Russian army in majority was Cavalry army and main episode of this fighting was direct clashing of Mongol-Tartar and Russian CAVALRIES. (Russian infantry of Kievan origin was considered by Russian leaders as "second-line support" and didn't participitated in actual battle - but was massacred later - after total Russian defeat.)
Quite interesting Russian Army on Kalka-battlefield we are having - with strong dominance of Cavalry element. Do you realize what it means in ethnology terms? How much river-bound Kievan Rus/ruthenians could allow to themselves to have battle-horse, eh? But it means they've got quite strong different steppe-bound element amidst their ranks - and mixing of Kievan Rus river-bound ethnic elements with this Steppe-bound nomadic element has got quite simple definitions: "Chernigovians", South-East russian ethnos, and... Cossacks (in most modern ethnic definitions). Gotcha?"
1. Mstislav the "Old" belonged to the line of princes of Smolensk. They were descendants of the Mstislav, first son of the Vladimir Monomax. As for princes of Chernigov: they were descendants of the Oleg Svyatoslavich, traditional enemy of the Monomax. Mstislav the "Old" and Mstislav "Udatnui" were both enemies of the Chernigov. In 1214 Mstislav "Udatni" and his brother won a war against Chernigov's princes.
2. Mstislav the "Old" himself was not very strong or powerful prince and I don't understand: how could he bring army of 80000 man ? This figure seems to me very exagerrated as it often was in the old documents. Soloviev estimated that all the russian principalities of these times together could raise an army of 100000 man. The population of all the Rus in 13 century is estimated by the different authors as 6 000 000 people, so army of 100 000 figure is credible. I could not precisely tell the ethnic origin of the Mstislav the "Old" army or its hardcore element, but IMHO it was professional warriors from the Kiev and Smolensk regions.
3. Are you sure that Jebe was killed on the Kalka ? It's very interesting. Jebe was one of the principal mongolian commanders and I could not find any russian sources confirming his death. It would seems natural to boast about the killing such a famous enemy. But may be they were silent, because it was done by the treason rather than in honest battle ?
4. "According to tartar sources, Khan Berke ("Sword of Islam", "Bullwhip of Infidels") choose youngest from Alexander sons - Daniil as his favorite and married him onto his own only daughter."
Bash, I doubt very much about this sources. Daniil was born in 1261 and Berke died in 1266 (according with the russian sources). Of course Berke could keep 5-year old boy as a hostage and even pre-arrange his marriage, but why he should choose such a young child as his favorite ?
Regards
Michael
"Thank you for rather kind words. By the way - in this quoted sentence you've made some funny statement. Excuse me for bothering - Kievan Prince in 1223 (Kalka battle) was definitely Mstislav "the Old". You are quite right about it. Can you remind me birthplace city of Mstislav "Old" Romanovich? He came into Kalka battlefield with 80,000 of his army. Please, can you remind me - city of origin of his huge army (OK, not whole army - just "hardcore veteran" group)? By the way - Kalka river lies inside quite arid-steppe region then Russian army in majority was Cavalry army and main episode of this fighting was direct clashing of Mongol-Tartar and Russian CAVALRIES. (Russian infantry of Kievan origin was considered by Russian leaders as "second-line support" and didn't participitated in actual battle - but was massacred later - after total Russian defeat.)
Quite interesting Russian Army on Kalka-battlefield we are having - with strong dominance of Cavalry element. Do you realize what it means in ethnology terms? How much river-bound Kievan Rus/ruthenians could allow to themselves to have battle-horse, eh? But it means they've got quite strong different steppe-bound element amidst their ranks - and mixing of Kievan Rus river-bound ethnic elements with this Steppe-bound nomadic element has got quite simple definitions: "Chernigovians", South-East russian ethnos, and... Cossacks (in most modern ethnic definitions). Gotcha?"
1. Mstislav the "Old" belonged to the line of princes of Smolensk. They were descendants of the Mstislav, first son of the Vladimir Monomax. As for princes of Chernigov: they were descendants of the Oleg Svyatoslavich, traditional enemy of the Monomax. Mstislav the "Old" and Mstislav "Udatnui" were both enemies of the Chernigov. In 1214 Mstislav "Udatni" and his brother won a war against Chernigov's princes.
2. Mstislav the "Old" himself was not very strong or powerful prince and I don't understand: how could he bring army of 80000 man ? This figure seems to me very exagerrated as it often was in the old documents. Soloviev estimated that all the russian principalities of these times together could raise an army of 100000 man. The population of all the Rus in 13 century is estimated by the different authors as 6 000 000 people, so army of 100 000 figure is credible. I could not precisely tell the ethnic origin of the Mstislav the "Old" army or its hardcore element, but IMHO it was professional warriors from the Kiev and Smolensk regions.
3. Are you sure that Jebe was killed on the Kalka ? It's very interesting. Jebe was one of the principal mongolian commanders and I could not find any russian sources confirming his death. It would seems natural to boast about the killing such a famous enemy. But may be they were silent, because it was done by the treason rather than in honest battle ?
4. "According to tartar sources, Khan Berke ("Sword of Islam", "Bullwhip of Infidels") choose youngest from Alexander sons - Daniil as his favorite and married him onto his own only daughter."
Bash, I doubt very much about this sources. Daniil was born in 1261 and Berke died in 1266 (according with the russian sources). Of course Berke could keep 5-year old boy as a hostage and even pre-arrange his marriage, but why he should choose such a young child as his favorite ?
Regards
Michael
MichaelK said:
3. Jebe' death was main excuse for his army to return to main Mongol forces. Most important thing with Jebe - he was leader of group of tribes, which were most important opponent to Ghenghis own Tribe in rather loose Mongol Federation.
If you remember this story - you will realize - Ghenghis started as "Van" - leader of mercenary forces on service of Chinese Emperor. By the way it means - zone of nomadic base for his group of tribes was in direct vicinity of Chinese (except from Churgheng tribes, which become to that moment principal ethnic element of Jing Empire and covert to Manchu tribal group a bit later - all other Ghenghis opponent lived in open Great Steppe on west from his Heimat-land.
Sum in to this information - traditional base of core of Ghenghis troops were in Kerulen river Valley with special mentioning of Onon Forest as "hiding place" for young Temuchin.
And at last - personal "payzsa" - totem animal for Ghenghis himself was Tiger, instead of traditional animal God for all Borghighin clan as Father Wolf.
All these facts reveal to us - quite interesting thing about Ghenghis base of power: Tiger is non-common animal for Outer/Inner Mongolia region, but it is most common Animal God for Churgheng - Amur Valley inhabitants (Manchu ancestors). Ghenghis start his military career as Churgheng (Jing/Manchu) leader, his Councellor (main economical/Political advisor) was Eluy Chu-Qay - Chinaman with Churgheng ancestry and Ghenghis main opponents were nobles of his own tribe. Main tarhet for Ghenghis activity in start of his military career were loose Mongolian tribes and Chinese Dynasty Sung (main Jing opponent in the region).
All these facts taken as whole show quite interesting picture - Ghenghis came to power as Jing puppet with Cauncellor, core-troops and Animal God of Churgheng/Manchu origin. But Churgheng/Manchu hold to slightly different then "pure Mongols" ethnical habitats.
You can check it by structural proportions of Ghenghis army - up to 40% - in anti-Sung campaign up to 65% of warriors were INFANTRYMEN - quite funny thing for traditional perception of Chenghis forces as dedicated fierce Steppe warriors.
This quite huge/disproportional for nomad tribe quantity of infantrymen means - very heavy input from sediment population with rather strong alienation to steppe/nomadic population by Ghenghis himself. By the way - this observation is backed by next fact - Ghenghis created quite stable Empire, but any State-structures created by dedicated nomads are very short-living due to nature of nomadic way of living.
It means - if Ghenghis liked to create stable state he had to alienated - to push out "destabilising" nomadic elements - as far as possible (preferentially - for good). Some stars had to loose a big part of their mass in "Nova explosion" - for getting in stable condition. In other way - excessive unstable mass could bring "SuperNova explosion" with total destruction of Star itself.
Let's check in this situation a bit closer - we must find a big "splitter" group of dedicated nomad send out from main territory with definitely suicidal mission. Gotcha - we've got famous Jebe/Subuday Army which stomped through all Mid-Asia, Caucausus and came into Europe through "Derbent gates". Pls, check in - it was "pure Cavalry" army running ahead without any reserves, spare wagons or camp-followers. Its mission were quite suiciadal - these fierce cavalrymen fought without any backing support from Motherland and definite goal ahead. They fought only for purpose - "fighting around" - they didn't tried to hold any Fortress or keeping any habitats - just carnage, destruction and all such. Quite strange strategy for "Empire creators".
But - let's check in leader of this strange "killing Army". "Jebe" is nickname with meaning - "Spear". Modern onomastic explain old Mongol nicknames with an ease - "Spear" means - "Straight", "Direct", "Simple" (in comparison with "Arrow", which could have quite weird form) and maybe - "Honest" (many arrows were poisoned, but Spears - never).
Mongol nicknames are quite - interesting topic, because they are quite reliable source for psychological description of some guy. Bad thing is - many accents and shades of meaning is lost from time-flow and quirks of perception. By the way name of "Ghenghis" - "snow leopard"/"Tiger" had quite offensive meaning in all Asian societies with quite strong implication of "TRAITOR". (Pls, check in rather widespread Chinese saying about non-eatability of some parts of Dog and Tiger, because these animals are "cursed", or Chinese usual comparison of Japanese guys with "Tiger" for "their utter shamelessness".) Pls, belive me - naming somebody as "Tiger" isn't just respect for some things, but - utter disgust for some other traits as well).
Let's return to Jebe. Real name of this guy was Jarchi-Uday and we are coming into quite interesting speculation.
"Uday" - suffix of this name has meaning of belonging to Old Steppe Nobility, then common name of this guy was - Jarchi. Stop in this moment.
Jarchi-Uday was main opponent of Ghenghis in final battle of Ghenghis forces against forces of combined Mongol federation, but was spared from execution and received name of Jebe with getting main Cavalry force. This fair and friendly approach to enemy is quite strange for Ghenghis character and hadn't explanation in Mongol sources.
But if we check in Chinese sources we'll find out quite puzzling fact - Jarchi-Uday (Cavalry leader of opposing to Ghenghis Mongol troops - cornerstone of Old Mongolian Nobilitet) in the moment of this "final battle" already had two grand-sons - Ordu and Batu, who were raised in his (Jarchi-Uday!) headquarters. In other words - only daughter of Jarchi-Uday and eldest son of Temuchin (he wasn't Ghenghis yet) - Juchi were married couple, and their children by some hidden reason were raised in "mother house".
Then we came into quite "dark moment" of Mongol history - Temuchin (strictly speaking - brigand and rascal of some sort) couldn't met any Mongol Noble in his initial ventures, more then that - he couldn't impress this Noble enough for getting his ONLY daughter for his son for marriage. From other hand, idea of any Old Noble, who was making close friendship with plain bandit like Temuchin was quite alien for Mongol society.
This paradox can be resolved by only possible way and we can find answer in "Hidden history of Mongols" source. Strange thing is - name of leader of anti-Ghenghis Cavalry - Jarchi-Uday didn't appearing before this final battle, but Nobody from Nowhere couldn't be leader of Cavalry - at all! It means - this guy must be mentioned earlier under quite different name. First glance show us this guy - immediately.
Closest friend of Temuchin himself (and leader of Temuchin' Cavalry) has name of ... Jarchi. Without - Uday, - it's big difference. Origin of Jachi in "Hidden history" is quite clear - he is son of Sorgan-Shira (i.e. he is belonging to priesthood of some sort - Russian equivalen of "Shira" is "Popovich" and English is... "Vicar-son" - it seems.) In any case it's not - Nobility at all.
Fate of Jarchi after "Dzeren Valley battle" (last principal battle before Final battle in Ghenghis Mongolia conquest) is unclear. Majority of historians are sure - Jarchi was rather old guy in this time then he just died in this "calm" period (there were around 12 years of peace between both battles), but minority pointed fingers onto partially dissolution of Ghenghis forces after his "treacherous killing of his blood-relation - Buri-buka and sacrilegous killing of Highest Shaman - Kishlik", then Jarchi could abandon Ghenghis cause and return to peaceful life. I'm sure - there was third - quite radical way to Jarchi.
If we remember Jarchi' ancestor name as form of "Popovich" - any religious issues could be quite important for this guy. More then that - killing of Mongol religious leader had to alienate a lot of nomads from Ghenghis then Dzeren Valley battle became last battle for him as leader of rather Cavalry army. From this moment we can se constantly growing Infantry component of Ghenghis troops. But Infantry means - proto-Manchu or Chinesemen - no other sources around. Proto-Manchu - means heavy usage of poisoned arrows, Chinese element means growing political intrigues around Ghenghis himself - not very good athmosphere for guy, which would receive name "Jebe" very soon.
Then we've got quite natural leader for "staunch nomads" which disgusted "forest dwellers" of Amur Valley or Chinamen. But these shifty nomadic elements was open danger for Ghenghis - Emperor, then all of them were send out in "Lemming run". Do you see?
By the way - we've another implication here: - eldest sons of Juchi (grandsons of Jebe) were born in quite Mongol surrounding in Jebe' stake. But more younger Jebe' grandsons - like Berke were born in Jebe' marching army in time of Mid-Asia conquest - in heavy Muslim surrounding. Then we've got Berke (Tartar) phenomena - first "pure Muslim" Mongol leader, which fought with his own Mongol brethren for "religious cause" and had full-scale popular support of all nomads in steppe/arid zone.
By the way - Berke (Tartar) preference to make religious (not national!) cause as main ideology motif for his army gave tremendous input of non-Mongol elements in his ranks and in far shot - gave him ultimate victory over all other Ghenghis descendants (Berke/Tartar wiped out almost all Chagatay/Udegey descendants from existence of reason of "converting them into True Faith").
I'll repeat - Koran is especially good for preaching amidst nomadic population of arid/steppe climatic zone and Jebe/Subuday/Batu/Berke conquests belong to this climatic/ethnic habitats - almost exclusively then - first Mongol Khan who was converted into Islam and start further conversion of his followers had tremendous advantage over all other his opponents.
About Jebe' killing. Please, check in Russian history. Jebe' descendants became to be Muscovy rulers and Russian Czars - a bit later. Jebe was killed by Russian (Chernigovian - no difference) arrow. It means - some Russian in ancient time made - "REGICIDE" of some form and it means - any Russian can shoot any Russian Czar by Arrow. Are you sure if Russian ruler would allow this information to come in minds of Russian commoners? Especially in situation of disgusting - Russian slavery?
Idea - any Russian serf could shoot Czar of All Russians or somebody of his parents were rather dangerous. I'm sure - if you would like to repeat it in Russian medieval times - you would reach "Lobnoe mesto" (with extracted tongue, of course - for sure) in no time at all. No, there isn't any Russian source - for sure - with this story, but there is a lot of them in whole mid-Asian, Arabic and all other Muslim regions. Berke never made secret from this "honest cause" and local Muslim rulers in later times liked to remind for their commoners about "treacherous character of Russians".
4. Main Berke' reason for Daniil choosing was - exact the same like you described. Daniil was small - quite small. Then all teachers, tutors and friend of small child were local Muslims (Tartars). It was quite important for religiously jealous Khan Berke to create future "Convertor of Russia into True Faith". All his steps show only one idea - rise some quite young Prince of Rurikides Dynasty in heavy Muslim surrounding, give him Muslim tutors and advisors and - most important this - place him into principality with nomadic/Muslim majority. Then - convert Russia a step by step into True Faith. It was quite clever and far-seeing plan made by quite devious and religious opinionated great mind and it isn't Berke/Tartar fault - why this plan sizzled.
If you like to realize - what was reason for Berke- ideas failure, you must see into so-named "Alexandroviches war" which started in 1270s.
Dmitry Alexandrovich of Perejaslav (second son of Alexander Nevsky - his eldest son Basil was executed by Alexander himself) was by marriage - son-in-law of Nogay ruler - later he became "brother-in-law" for Horde ruler - Khan Tohta-beki, then he has full-scale support of Crimea, Don, Kouban Rivers Tartar population.
Andrey Alexandrovich of Gorodetz - later of Vladimir (third son of Alexander Nevsky) was by marriage - son-in-law of Khan of Horde, and later had full scale support of Tartars from Lower Volga Valley and from Mid-Asian Region. His backing Tartar base was stronger then he won quite bloody Civil war, but we didn't interested in this issue.
Most interesting case and line of behaviour had Daniil Alexandrovich the Saint - first Prince of Muscovy son-in-law of very soon died Berke. He has strong support of Upper Volga Tartar population - main military base of Khan Berke himself. By some hidden and ironic smile of God, Berke didn't have sons and other daughter except Daniil wife, then this Tartar group was rather silent and calm in full scale Civil war around.
Daniil himself was rised in so heavy Muslim/Tartar surrounding then he has a big difficulties in contacting with plain Russians - he knew Russian language - very bad. But in full-scale Civil-war time it became to be blessing - he can't ask other Russians to back his own cause, because he can't made long speech in Russian Language and his Upper Volga Tartar supporters hadn't any popular leader. Then Muscovy of Daniil became to be "safe haven" for any Russians in these troubled years. (Mind you - coming into Moscow from neighbouring Perejaslav Principality, which was losing Civil War was quite different thing then crossing Okovsky Forest from Kievan region into Vladimir grounds
.But Muscovy was (and is) food and water deficient region. Local population is increasing from emigration from other sources and decreasing from natural reasons. Initial tartar population (Daniil Guard and close surrounding) start to thin out with time-flow, but their places was filled by Noble emigrants of Russian origin. Perejaslav was losing Civil war then majority of new Daniil surrounding had Perejaslav origin. Allow to remind you - Perejaslavl was hometown for Alexander Nevsky himself, then all "death wishes" of this famous Prince was followed by former Perejaslav inhabitants with a fervor. This city inhabitants follow most important Alexander order - "Tartars are friends", then there weren't any traces of antagonosm between different part of Daniil surrounding. Strong input of Russian nobles didn't convert Moscow in "pure Russian den", but made her more "pro-Tartar" oriented then in "pure Tartar" times. By the way, Perejaslav inhabitants follow another Alezander Nevsky order - Russia must be Orthodox country, then only new influence of these Nobles was strong Christian influence onto Daniil.
Most interesting moment in this story was - Khan Berke wanted for his only daughter some stable position and sure survival for his grandsons - he was aware about complete wiping out all ruler-brothers in Muslim-harems. I'm not sure if Khan Tartar was definitely against this custom - he killed more half-brothers and cousins then any other ruler in his time in Universe
, but he liked for just one of his grandson to survive this possible carnage. Then he had to have proofs - his daughter would be ONLY wife for his son in law. It means - his son-in-law couldn't be Muslim, or Mongol, or something similar else. This thing is giving quite interesting psychological portrait of "Bullwhip for Infidels, Sword of Islam" Berke/Tartar Khan. As jealous ruler he wanted one thing for all his country, but for his only daughter as human being - something quite opposite.When strong religious disput in Moscow between Orthodox and Muslim clergymen started, Muslim position was seriously undermined in its core - "Khan Tartar made unequivocal order - Daniil had to keep his Christianity by any means and his wife - daughter of Berke had to be Christian as well!" It was unbeatable reason of Russian Orthodox Church Hierarchs in any discussion with Tartar Clergy. You can't fight direct order of founder of your Nation without crushing basic reasons for existence of your own country - it was "no win" for Upper Volga Muslims - situation.
Oh, I'm afraid I become quite boring again, then let's stop here - for a while.
Dixi.
Sincerely yours, Bash
P.S. By the way - if you like to rename "Tula" province into "Moscow", you must rename "Moscow" into "Vladimir" because Vladimir was most important principality in this region. If you like - you can rename "Vologda" into "Jaroslavl"b because inportance of Jaroslavl Principality and small city of Vologda is non-comparable (and laughable).
"Vladimir" (271) province had to be renamed into "Perm" (my kudos for Almoravid for this quite right suggestion) or to be exact if you like to keep history flavour - "Great Barmia" (country). It was most important for Russia development region, because it was only source of Iron for our country. Iron deposits was found here in Simeon Ivanovich the Proud times then his stance to Tartar rulers changed immediately, but full-scale mining started only in Ivan III the Great ruling. Nizhgorod province didn't (and doesn't) have any Iron resources, then renaming it to "Nizhgorod" isn't right thing.
If you don't like "Perm/Great Barmia" ideas, "Vjatka" would be right call, but Vjatka province is definitely secondary choice to "Perm" name.
By the way - existence of "Perm" was main reason for "Kazan" crushing. Growing Russia couldn't allow for anyone to control paths into her only "Iron
Producing" province. Kazan existence was constant threat "over jugular vein" of Russian military Industry - it was almost the same words, which were said By Silvester and Diakon Adashev, when they dragged opposing Ivan the Terrible onto Kazan siege. These guys understood situation - quite right, Ivan the Terrible - not right (he already liked to fight for Baltic
.To Bash
1. Considering situation with the sons of the Alexander Nevskii.
Dmitrii Alexandrovitch was supported by the Nogai (as you mentioned) and his brother Andrey by the khan Toxta, enemy of Nogai. In 1294 mongolian army with Toxta's brother at the head crushed Dmitrii and his supporters. It was so-called "Dudeneva rat" which cause a great movement of population in the North Russia (people tried to escape from the approaching army). What is interesting, is that Moscow were also robbed inspire Daniil neutrality. May be mongolian generals could not control their soldiers (but that contradicted everything which I read about the discipline in the mongolian army) ?
2. In the "Hacking the Map" thread a good job was done to change the provinces names.
3. When I studied Ivan the Terrible history I found 2 turning points:
a) Before the 1560 he was very successful, but in 1560 he had 2 political options: to fight against Crimea or against Livonian Order. Both choices had advantages and disadvantages.
Attack on Crimea (idea was supported by Adashev and Silvester) was difficult from the military point of view. Russia was not able to successfully invade Crimea even in the end of 17 century. But from the diplomacy angle, the moment for attack in 1560 was ideal. Neigher Poland, no Lithuania would help Crimeans, and some Lithuanian nobleman could actually help Russia. The only help for Crimea could come from the Ottomans. But Porta was heavily involved in the number of conflicts: war against Spain and Venice on the Mediterranian, fight against Habsburg's supporters in Hungary and conflict with Persia. It would be difficult for them to actively interfere in Crimea.
Possible gains: get rid from the Crimean raids and get a very important strategic forpost on the Black Sea.
Attack on Livonia (idea was supported by Basmanov). Easy from military point of view (Livonia was very weak). Moreover Livonians blockaded Russia. They did not allow to sell weapons or metals to Russia, did not allow foreign specialists go to Russia. If one add the protestants attacks on the orthodox churches (fight against icons) and constant insults of russians than choice to attack Livonia was understandable. But Ivan should be able to understand that Poland-Lithuania, Sweden and Denmark would never allow him to annex all Livonian lands. And war with these countries was beyong the possibilities of Russia in 1560.
IMHO Ivan made a serious and tragic mistake. He should eigher attack Crimea first or make an alliance on the West. He actually tried to ally with Sweden in 1567, but IMHO it was not a possibility. Sweden dreamed about making Baltic sea a "Swedish lake" and was much more interested to keep Russia from Livonia than Poland. So, the only logical possibility was an alliance with the Poland. In 1560 Poland was not yet fully united with Lithuania. May be Ivan should try to offer Poland and Lithuania to divide Livonia and make an alliance against Crimea (which was a threat to all 3 countries). Peter the Great actually made an alliance with Poland against Sweden, but Russia was much stronger and Poland much weaker then. Could Ivan do the same in 1560 ? IMHO it was worth a try.
b) I could not understand his reasons for the "oprichnina" in 1565. No explanation in historical sources seems satisfactory to me. Is it possible that he was really mad ? Apart from the misery and destruction he completely demoralised Russian army.
Regards
Michael
1. Considering situation with the sons of the Alexander Nevskii.
Dmitrii Alexandrovitch was supported by the Nogai (as you mentioned) and his brother Andrey by the khan Toxta, enemy of Nogai. In 1294 mongolian army with Toxta's brother at the head crushed Dmitrii and his supporters. It was so-called "Dudeneva rat" which cause a great movement of population in the North Russia (people tried to escape from the approaching army). What is interesting, is that Moscow were also robbed inspire Daniil neutrality. May be mongolian generals could not control their soldiers (but that contradicted everything which I read about the discipline in the mongolian army) ?
2. In the "Hacking the Map" thread a good job was done to change the provinces names.
3. When I studied Ivan the Terrible history I found 2 turning points:
a) Before the 1560 he was very successful, but in 1560 he had 2 political options: to fight against Crimea or against Livonian Order. Both choices had advantages and disadvantages.
Attack on Crimea (idea was supported by Adashev and Silvester) was difficult from the military point of view. Russia was not able to successfully invade Crimea even in the end of 17 century. But from the diplomacy angle, the moment for attack in 1560 was ideal. Neigher Poland, no Lithuania would help Crimeans, and some Lithuanian nobleman could actually help Russia. The only help for Crimea could come from the Ottomans. But Porta was heavily involved in the number of conflicts: war against Spain and Venice on the Mediterranian, fight against Habsburg's supporters in Hungary and conflict with Persia. It would be difficult for them to actively interfere in Crimea.
Possible gains: get rid from the Crimean raids and get a very important strategic forpost on the Black Sea.
Attack on Livonia (idea was supported by Basmanov). Easy from military point of view (Livonia was very weak). Moreover Livonians blockaded Russia. They did not allow to sell weapons or metals to Russia, did not allow foreign specialists go to Russia. If one add the protestants attacks on the orthodox churches (fight against icons) and constant insults of russians than choice to attack Livonia was understandable. But Ivan should be able to understand that Poland-Lithuania, Sweden and Denmark would never allow him to annex all Livonian lands. And war with these countries was beyong the possibilities of Russia in 1560.
IMHO Ivan made a serious and tragic mistake. He should eigher attack Crimea first or make an alliance on the West. He actually tried to ally with Sweden in 1567, but IMHO it was not a possibility. Sweden dreamed about making Baltic sea a "Swedish lake" and was much more interested to keep Russia from Livonia than Poland. So, the only logical possibility was an alliance with the Poland. In 1560 Poland was not yet fully united with Lithuania. May be Ivan should try to offer Poland and Lithuania to divide Livonia and make an alliance against Crimea (which was a threat to all 3 countries). Peter the Great actually made an alliance with Poland against Sweden, but Russia was much stronger and Poland much weaker then. Could Ivan do the same in 1560 ? IMHO it was worth a try.
b) I could not understand his reasons for the "oprichnina" in 1565. No explanation in historical sources seems satisfactory to me. Is it possible that he was really mad ? Apart from the misery and destruction he completely demoralised Russian army.
Regards
Michael
MichaelK said:
Thank you for pointing into other thread - I posted my little objections (about 270 and 271 proposed provinces names - especially) there.
Yep, you are right it seems, but I was sure - Tokhta-Beki supported Dmitry as result of all problems, but I can mistake. We've got quite shifty and unstable situation in Mongol-Tartar ranks in this period.
I've mentioned about it previously - end of any century is traditional "crisis time" for Russia in all her incarnations. But maybe I didn't express it previously - hard economy crisis used to hit mid-Asian region just before Russia. In other words - Mongol Army became to be underpaid and under-nourished in these times in quite spectacular way. "Duden' warriors" were considered as simple cut-throaters and rascals by Russian sources, but mid-Asian sources had quite surprising stories about samples of cannibalismus in "Duden' ranks". These cases were prosecuted by Mongol/Tartar authorities very harshly, but any order like: "Strictly forbidden to eat flesh of fallen comrades, or killing prisoners for eating purpose" - is quite laughable for historians, but on serious side show quite harsh grade of discipline deterioration in this Army. (By the way - next wave of mid-Asian crisis was "Death-spell" for whole Golden Horde structure.)
By the way - Russian annalists explained their disrespect for both Dmitry and Andrej in most visible manner, but lamentation can be summed up into quite simple sentence: "These ... start fighting, then Duden' came in and Duden' guys ate all our resources, then Great Hunger came into Russia".
Well, from economical point of view - harsh economy crisis was unevitable for whole Russian plain in this moment, but Civil war made by Alexandoviches made all affairs - worse in times!
But most interesting thing was - "Duden' army" behaviour. If anyone annalist is agreed on main feature of these warriors like - "they were constantly hungry", it means - discipline was last thing for checking by their commanders.
Do you see - I'm sure Mongol nobility was better feeded then Mongol commoners, then Mongol Officers were more weighty and fat then simple soldier, and it had to stir up some interesting ideas in common thugs heads.
Situation - while your soldiers start to see on you with definite GASTRONOMIC interest are quite creepy for any officer, I'm afraid.
Sincerely yours, Bash
P.S. We are just coming to Moscow-Tver struggle, it seems. If we start to jump through big time periods to Ivan the Terrible times - very many subtle moments and quirks can be passed, then I'll answer you about Ivan the Terrible affairs a bit later
.
I've made small mistake here.Bash said:
In next wave of Mid-Asian crisis, which hit Horde pretty hard, Russia in case of Dmitry Donskoy made couple of strong initial kicks in Horde butt (in form of Crimea and Lower Volga inhabitants led by their leader Mamay) on Koulikov battlefield. But Horde still was rather live then dead in XIV century.
Horde didn't survive next centennial wave of crisis and dissolved in XV century - completely.
You can see this deterioration process of Mongol Horde in East Europe in these three stages:
XIII century Mid-Asian crisis) Discipline falling in army, soldiers permanently are hungry, harsh Civil war between Mongol nobility (all is fighting all). As soon as crisis came into recuperative phase Horde is united and quite strong again - Khan Uzbeck had quite great popularity and people support;
XIV century Mid-Asian crisis) Country is broken up onto few faction and any faction is proclaiminig its independency from each other in previous stage of deterioration it was fight for supremacy in UNITED country. More then that - all of these new-boprn quasi-stated suffered quite bitter military defeat (Tochtamysh from Tamerlanus, Mamay from Dmitry). As soon as crisis are came into recuperative phase - country reunited again, but didn't receive some real Re-Unifier like Uzbekh in previous cycle;
XV century Mid-Asian crisis) Full-scale collapse. Period.
Sincerely yours, Bash
MichaelK said:
Well, some MSU' friend pointed finger to me: there were two different questions inside the same question about Ivan the Terrible times.
If second (and we are used to remember last part of question much better
are impossible to answer - without rather tedious way of explanation of whole Russian state history development, we've got all necessary information for answering first part of this question.Well, answer is quite simple - both ways in your description is dead-end, which would led to utter disaster. Maybe it's not your mistake or anything else - it's problem of correct translation of written sources from ancient Russian to any modern language.
Yesterday I re-read annales especially and I'm able to make next statement: initial proposition of Silvester and Adashev didn't propose to crush Crimea completely or hold any port on Black Sea. Their initial idea was "containing Crimeans at bay", closing them into Crimean peninsula, while attempting to hold for fertile steppe-lands of Don/Kouban Valleys. I'm not sure if Russian resources would be enough for this quite ambitious goal, but this goal was quite valid and reachable.
In the same time any ideas about holding Crimean peninsula itself - especially some waterless region around Djankoj/Bakhchisarai - Crimean capital region or mountainous ridge of Southern Crimea was utterly impossible and as disastrous as idea of holding Livonien sea-shore - in Ivan the Terrible times anyway.
Big reason is the same like in case of initial and rather evil fighting between "Chernigovians" and "Kriviches" in initial stages or Russian ethnos development - ethnopsychology types mismatch.
Let's repeat cornerstone axiome of Ethnogenesis - any New Ethnos is result of ethnic close relationship of two different ethnical units. No third ethnic units can be added to this structure while New Ethnos didn't formed.
Let's check in Russian Nation ethnical structure:
1) Eastern Slavs were dedicated River Valley dwellers;
2) Kriviches were result of mixing of Eastern Slavs (River-dwellers) with Ugric tribes of Okovsky Forest (Forest dwellers). Side-kick of this process was alienation of Kriviches from Ancient Eastern Slavs in rather spectacular manner. (Juri Dolgoruky and his sons Andrej and Vsevolod started to harass al other Russian states in very bloody way.)
Resulting Kriviches habitats are River Valleys and Forests;
3) Modern Russians are result of mixing of Kriviches (Rivers+Forests) and Tartar (steppe-dwellers) invaders. Side-kick of this process was strong alienation with former Kriviches brethren. (Muscovy rulers became razing other Kriviches strongholds - Tver, Rostov, Jaroslav and so on...)
Resulting Russian habitats are River Valleys and Forests and Steppes.
All subsequent additions to modern Russian Nation were quite unsuccessful, because Russian rulers hadn't patience enough for waiting for Ethnogenesis process would be complete. More then that - by changing normal course of ethnic mixing they interrupted existing processes - then no one of them was completed. Normal timespan of two different ethnic unit mixing into one whole is around 200-300 years (depend from initial ethnic differencies) - 100 years as absolute minimum. Please, check in yourself:
4') Nikonian Reforms stopped further mixing of modern Russians with remnants of Tartar population of Upper Volga region. This stage of development would led us to re-creation of Great East-Slavonic entity, because Russians started to mix with Ukrainians (pure River Valley dwellers). Side-kick is strong alienation of Russians with Tartar' Upper Volga population, but we hadn't got a big bloodbath, because Ukrainian habitats were the same like Russians (but more narrow) - big fighting used to start only in case of strong switching for new habitats, but in this case - transition was rather smooth.
Alas this process was stopped almost immediately in hext stage. Possible result would be: RIVER + Forest + Steppe;
5') Peter the Great seeked Naval Supremacy, then he had to hold onto some seashore habitats. Alas - Russians didn't have any ethnic component which would be possible matching for this task, then Peter start to fill Noble ranks by North Germans, which had "sea-shore dwellers" necessary component for keeping all-important sea-bound habitats. Side-kick of this process was strong alienation with ethnic co-mixants from previous stage - Ukrainians and Cossacks. (Really huge bloodbath in Don/Kouban Valleys, Ukrainian Mazepa' uprising drown in blood.)
But Peter national/ethnic policy was rather unclear - he wanted to hold on Baltic shore lands, but had quite wrong ideas about - what was necessary steps for this task, then he tried to remove local population from their common habitats by replacing them by Russian population. Russians as any biological species couldn't survive in unusual Nature conditions and died out in New Lands in spectacular manner, local inhabitants due to absolute absence of attempts to be more friendly to them from Peter administration took openly hostile stance to Russian invaders - long way of complete alienation between Russians and Baltic states population started. Then Germans became to be only possible partner for uneasy alliance in these lands.
Alternative for Ostsee German population to mixing with Russians would be Sweden population presence and it would be more dangerous way of thing.
Russians were complete ethnic mismatch for Ostsee Germans, because they were used to cling to different habitats and it would be open way for some sort of uneasy co-existence, but Swedes concurred with Germans in open way for the same sea-shore habitats. It means German-Sweden ethnic antagonism had more pushing character then complete German-Russian ethnic habitats incongruency.
But reason of quite feeble and VERY slow process of inclusion of Ostsee German population in Russian entity led to very unstable situation. Peter II government tried to push this uneasy equilibrium into "mixing with Ukrainians/Cossacks" back, Anna Ioannovna in German side, Elisabeth Pertovna into Ukrainian side again, while in Ekaterine the Great ruling times "German party" have got upper hand at last - and for good.
Check in yourself - it means not only appearance of German-blood nobles in "Russian disquiser" like Suvorov and Ushakov and whole Orlov brethren, but - prosecution of Ukrainian Cossacks and their most natural friend Poland - as well. Poland suffered in most spectacular and bloody way...
Reason of German side victory was quite simple - every time when Germans were victorious - Russia improved her Economy situation due to huge trade improvement.
Reason was - better manageability of sea-shore habitats by German nobles in times of their favour, because in times of "Ukrainian strenghtening" times German nobles were alienated from Emperor court and sea-trade suffered in quite spectacular way, because local inhabitants took hostile to Russian government stance again and not-sea trade input of Russian Empire was negligible.
In any case - ethnic mixing of Russians and Germans had to be quite slow due to complete incongruency on their initial ethnic habitats and more then that - this process was constantly interrupted by political struggle of Germans and Poles/Ukrainians in the Imperial Court.
I've mentioned previously - Russian internal policy and way of perception is more "Black and White" then common for Europe "Colourful" way of perception. It means - any political changing in Emperor Court for ethnic policy had more disrupting impact for ethnogenesis process then in European condition.
Then in end of XIX century all faults of this policy became to be quite visible - Russian Empire was "caught in between" political struggle of both factions and can't add any other ethnic element as result.
This uneasy equilibrium was broken by Oktober Revolution. First person in Russia/Soviet Union who start to think about national/ethnic problems in our country was - Josef Stalin (first Comissar of Soviet Republic of National Problem). Then he just stomped out any traces of former problems of BOTH parties (harsh Leningrad political cleansing with rather broad target on any German/European descendants of "sea-shore dwellers" with combination of Great Hunger on Ukraine with total ethnic cleansing of Ukraine political leaders - means Russia stop any attempts to ethnic grow in any West direction.) All evil doings of Stalin in Ukraine, Byelorussia, against Finland and Baltic states means just one message - he tried to crush/alienate local population into definite non/anti Russian entity. But in the same time - Stalin made huge steps into quite different direction - he became to be over-friendly with population of mid-Asian and Caucasian region. It means Stalin idea of "United Soviet Nation" was - Rivers, Forests, Steppes and MOUNTAINS. Any opposers of this ethnic policy - like German/Baltic/Ukrainians from one side (as bearers of "wrong ethnic features") and Chechens and other mountaineeer ethnoses from other side (who didn't like to "melting in the same Nation") were prosecuted merciless.
It is main idea of Stalin' national/ethnic policy. (By the way it means - "Iron Curtain" was most important moment in this construction - sea-trade import issues wasn't negligible thing, then Stalin favoured situation when there wasn't any trade via Baltic/Black seas at all. You can't add two different ethnic units to big ethnos in the same time. Then if you like to add some "Mountain dwellers" to whole Nation (small hint - Stalin had Georgian "mountaineer" origin) you had to prevent any attempt of "sea-shore"/"swampland" or dedicated "river" dwellers to add into your resulting ethnic construction.
Fine. "Let's return to our cattle". In Ivan the Terrible times Russian Nation had next ethnic components - River, Forest and Steppe dwellers.
We've got two different way of fighting - against Crimea or against Livonia and we like to hold taken lands as war bounty.
Crimean lands hold - Rivers, STEPPE (as main component), Seashore and Mountains, but we must take a notice - if initial war would be victorious, this habitats will lose River habitats initially, then Steppe and will became to be pure Seashore and Caucasian MOUNTAINS at the result.
Livonien lands hold - SEASHORE (as main component) and Forests.
Russian didn't had SEASHORE ethnic component in our Nation at all, then all Livonien racket was complete NONSENSE.
Please, imagine - you can hold Livonien territory for a while, but growing alieation of local inhabitants with constant dying of Russian colonists which couldn't survive in local lands would bring whole campaign to disaster.
Russians didn't had MOUNTAIN ethnic component as well. Then idea of COMPLETE Crimea acquiring would be NONSENSE as well.
Russia could cut from Crimea and digest all Crimean lands in River+Steppe zone (and Mother Russia did it a bit later without any problem), but in Ivan the Terrible time gobbling whole Crimea would be rather stupid and Ethnically impossible idea.
Pls, check in yourself - Russia came into SEASHORES and MOUNTAINS later, but in both cases it was done by really heavy price. Absolute majority of SEASHORE habitats just loathes Russians now. Due to partial success of Stalin ethnic policy inhabitants of MOUNTAIN habitats has whole specter of different attitudes for Russian presence. In River+Steppe+Mountain zone they are the best, in Steppe+Mountains, or River+Mountains they are definitely worse, inhabitants of pure Mountainous regions (like Chechens) show their ethnic attitude in quite spectacular manner.
It means Soviet Union had to hold strong "pacifying forces" in dedicated Seashore/Mountains region with big pressure on state coffers.
It is the same process - like modern USA "supports democracy" in quite alien (in ethnic sense) habitats by huge pressure on US treasure and US manpower with rather clear understanding - as soon as this money/military units input will dry out - "US democracy" would dry out in these regions - like Russian presence dried out in Baltic seashore zone as soon as Soviet budget was hit by really evil economical crisis.
Laws of Economy and Ethnosociology are universal and applicable to any country in existence in any time of Humankind history.
Ivan the Terrible hadn't enough moneys and human resources for the same task - then idea of "complete Livonia" or "complete Crimea" acquiring by his forces was pure state suicide in his times.
Oh, I start to repeating myself again, then it is stop for a while.
Sincerely yours, Bash
I wasn't saying anything here for quite a while, but now, one could tell I'm back.
First, @Bash
Talking the same 'nonsense' again, eh? I don't want to sound offensive, really. It's just we already discussed much of this and got nowhere. Still, I'll give it a shot and try to mention things that bug me in a couple of thesises and hope that you explain how this fits what you say.
In which source did you read that Jebe died at Kalka? Rashid ad Din doesn't mention his post-Kalka fate, but indirectly says that he at least survived it ? in one place he writes ?After the death of Genghis Khan, when Jebe and Subedei returned...? which implies that Jebe survived Kalka by a couple of years, at least. It is well-known that the Russians killed mongol embassy, but I yet didn't hear that he died there. Such an end of such a personality could not just have been neglected by the historians, whose silence always made me believe that he died on retirement, in the period between 1223 and 1237, as he didn't take part in Batu Khan's capaigns in eastern Europe. This impression is strenghtened by the fact that his descendants served to the Il-Khans, not to the Golden Horde, whose Khans would see them as brothers, according to you. But I may be wrong. What source could you quote? That vow, with Chernigovians, you made it up, not?
Also, if we should believe your theory, the tatars would have devastated Chernigov especially severely, but this wasn't the case. In fact, Mongols didn't invade the princedom at all, and never ever took the city of Chernigov itself! How would you explain this? Even if the princes of Chernigov met the Mongols in open field (of which we have no report either), their lands would not avoid dismantling if Mongols wanted to target it, as that's something they were very good at - but no mongol army ever entered their princedom, so that I'd rather believe you if you claimed there was a special alliance between them and the Tatars. Did they want to torture the prince by making him wait for his doom in terror and vain? I for one think that Chernigov lost much of it's wealth, strengh and importance in it's wars against the rest of Russia throughout the 12th century, and was a pitiful sight by 1240. The death of some martyr prince in the horde doesn't change anything.
Both Mstislav Stary and Mstislav Udaloy (or Udatny, if you prefer) were Rostislaviches (members of the Smolensk line), which were, in contrary to the princes of Vladimir, rabidly hostile to the Olgoviches. Since Vsevolod III., the princes of Suzdalia were not really interested in southern affairs, because their princedom + Novgorod was self-sufficent, and as Mstislav clearly demonstrated his power when he backed and lead to victory the weaker Konstantin of Rostov in the suzdalian succession crisis, Yuri and Yaroslav did not dare to directly oppose his strenghtening in south Russia. I never heared of the mythic chernigovian-backed Moscow revolt, and I think Suzdalians would aid the southern princes if they wouldn't wish the decline of the Rostislaviches, not Olgoviches. Just before 1223, Rostislaviches owned Smolensk, Kiev, Novgorod(until 1221) and Galich, were allied to the Polovtsy due to Mstislav's marriage, and thus were the hegemons of southern Russia ? and would there be no tatar invasion, they would surely question Suzdalian supremacy estabilished since Andrey Bogolyubski. Chernigov had to send troops on Rostislavich wars against Hungary and the Tatars because it was encircled, and thus had to behave or get crushed in no time. Ryazan, on contrary, did not send any troops to Kalka. Why? Would they betray their chernigovian cousins? Or would they rather silently wish the decline of Smolensk, just like the Suzdalians? You should realize that Mstislav Udatny enjoyed the same position of a primus inter pares like Vsevolod III before him.
There are maybe swamps around Rzhev. I don't know, I've never been there. But there were swamps around Novgorod as well, so that the tatars did not attack it. But Vitautas made a way through the swamps, and Novgorod paid tribute. There are swamps in Pripyat, but our troops have been advancing against Germans through these swamps. The swamps around Rzhev must be 'magic' swamps. Whatever may be there, in 1941, Germans were in Tver, Dmitrov and Naro Fominsk! They didn't take Moscow because of heroic defence, fresh sibirian troops, and the harsh winter, not because of some swamp of some kind. Anyway, no impregnable position is ever pointless, unless you can walk around it without any problem. You say it is not true in this case, as Rzhev is the only road.
What do you mean by proto-tatars? There was a (sedimental) turkish-speaking Bulgaria state on rather small space around modern Kazan, and turkish Polovtsy, or Kipchaks in the Steppes from Dniepr through Volga valley all the way to Kazakhstan and Khorezm, where they formed the bulk of the militant aristocracy. In Crimea, greeks lived. You always try to antagonize some 'Moscow tatars' and Chernigov/Crimea 'polovtsy', while the Golden Horde was always called the Kipchak (polovets) Khanate. Why? And how are tatars prefered in Russia, when that country did not see any muslim in charge since the decline of tsarism and thus creation of a state close to secular in 1905, while 100 years are quite a while. And I bet we won't have a muslim leader in the next 100 years. That muslims were tolerated is normal ? that's the nature of every large modern Nation. When France and Spain conquered North Africa, they could not persecute muslims there because everybody was muslim. They rather sent in a small amount of French/Spanish colonists to form an upper class. The same goes for Russia in Kazan and Astrakhan.
What is the arabic source about the mosque story? I'd really love to read it because you always talk about it. To which year does it date? And why don't we have any sources on that from Bulgar or Kazan? According to logic, that legend would be rather known nearby then come up in another half of the world!
I will not debate on ethnologic theories, as I believe they are false science. Since we have seen in what they result, they don't belong into 21st century. Neither do I believe in any mystic meanings, signs and superstitions, but you already know this. Anyway, I didn't want to insult you, and ask you to excuse me if I did. Still, I hope you'll answer some of my questions, even if it's off-topic.
First, @Bash
Talking the same 'nonsense' again, eh?
I don't want to sound offensive, really. It's just we already discussed much of this and got nowhere. Still, I'll give it a shot and try to mention things that bug me in a couple of thesises and hope that you explain how this fits what you say.In which source did you read that Jebe died at Kalka? Rashid ad Din doesn't mention his post-Kalka fate, but indirectly says that he at least survived it ? in one place he writes ?After the death of Genghis Khan, when Jebe and Subedei returned...? which implies that Jebe survived Kalka by a couple of years, at least. It is well-known that the Russians killed mongol embassy, but I yet didn't hear that he died there. Such an end of such a personality could not just have been neglected by the historians, whose silence always made me believe that he died on retirement, in the period between 1223 and 1237, as he didn't take part in Batu Khan's capaigns in eastern Europe. This impression is strenghtened by the fact that his descendants served to the Il-Khans, not to the Golden Horde, whose Khans would see them as brothers, according to you. But I may be wrong. What source could you quote? That vow, with Chernigovians, you made it up, not?
Also, if we should believe your theory, the tatars would have devastated Chernigov especially severely, but this wasn't the case. In fact, Mongols didn't invade the princedom at all, and never ever took the city of Chernigov itself! How would you explain this? Even if the princes of Chernigov met the Mongols in open field (of which we have no report either), their lands would not avoid dismantling if Mongols wanted to target it, as that's something they were very good at - but no mongol army ever entered their princedom, so that I'd rather believe you if you claimed there was a special alliance between them and the Tatars. Did they want to torture the prince by making him wait for his doom in terror and vain?
I for one think that Chernigov lost much of it's wealth, strengh and importance in it's wars against the rest of Russia throughout the 12th century, and was a pitiful sight by 1240. The death of some martyr prince in the horde doesn't change anything.Both Mstislav Stary and Mstislav Udaloy (or Udatny, if you prefer) were Rostislaviches (members of the Smolensk line), which were, in contrary to the princes of Vladimir, rabidly hostile to the Olgoviches. Since Vsevolod III., the princes of Suzdalia were not really interested in southern affairs, because their princedom + Novgorod was self-sufficent, and as Mstislav clearly demonstrated his power when he backed and lead to victory the weaker Konstantin of Rostov in the suzdalian succession crisis, Yuri and Yaroslav did not dare to directly oppose his strenghtening in south Russia. I never heared of the mythic chernigovian-backed Moscow revolt, and I think Suzdalians would aid the southern princes if they wouldn't wish the decline of the Rostislaviches, not Olgoviches. Just before 1223, Rostislaviches owned Smolensk, Kiev, Novgorod(until 1221) and Galich, were allied to the Polovtsy due to Mstislav's marriage, and thus were the hegemons of southern Russia ? and would there be no tatar invasion, they would surely question Suzdalian supremacy estabilished since Andrey Bogolyubski. Chernigov had to send troops on Rostislavich wars against Hungary and the Tatars because it was encircled, and thus had to behave or get crushed in no time. Ryazan, on contrary, did not send any troops to Kalka. Why? Would they betray their chernigovian cousins? Or would they rather silently wish the decline of Smolensk, just like the Suzdalians? You should realize that Mstislav Udatny enjoyed the same position of a primus inter pares like Vsevolod III before him.
There are maybe swamps around Rzhev. I don't know, I've never been there. But there were swamps around Novgorod as well, so that the tatars did not attack it. But Vitautas made a way through the swamps, and Novgorod paid tribute. There are swamps in Pripyat, but our troops have been advancing against Germans through these swamps. The swamps around Rzhev must be 'magic' swamps. Whatever may be there, in 1941, Germans were in Tver, Dmitrov and Naro Fominsk! They didn't take Moscow because of heroic defence, fresh sibirian troops, and the harsh winter, not because of some swamp of some kind. Anyway, no impregnable position is ever pointless, unless you can walk around it without any problem. You say it is not true in this case, as Rzhev is the only road.
What do you mean by proto-tatars? There was a (sedimental) turkish-speaking Bulgaria state on rather small space around modern Kazan, and turkish Polovtsy, or Kipchaks in the Steppes from Dniepr through Volga valley all the way to Kazakhstan and Khorezm, where they formed the bulk of the militant aristocracy. In Crimea, greeks lived. You always try to antagonize some 'Moscow tatars' and Chernigov/Crimea 'polovtsy', while the Golden Horde was always called the Kipchak (polovets) Khanate. Why? And how are tatars prefered in Russia, when that country did not see any muslim in charge since the decline of tsarism and thus creation of a state close to secular in 1905, while 100 years are quite a while. And I bet we won't have a muslim leader in the next 100 years. That muslims were tolerated is normal ? that's the nature of every large modern Nation. When France and Spain conquered North Africa, they could not persecute muslims there because everybody was muslim. They rather sent in a small amount of French/Spanish colonists to form an upper class. The same goes for Russia in Kazan and Astrakhan.
What is the arabic source about the mosque story? I'd really love to read it because you always talk about it. To which year does it date? And why don't we have any sources on that from Bulgar or Kazan? According to logic, that legend would be rather known nearby then come up in another half of the world!
I will not debate on ethnologic theories, as I believe they are false science. Since we have seen in what they result, they don't belong into 21st century. Neither do I believe in any mystic meanings, signs and superstitions, but you already know this. Anyway, I didn't want to insult you, and ask you to excuse me if I did. Still, I hope you'll answer some of my questions, even if it's off-topic.
Now to current concerns of Russia in AGC-EEP
1.The provinces of Moscow are where they are, to reflect the political, geographical, economical and military potential of Moscow in relation to other princedoms and Lithuania. In 1419, Moscow was not just three times as big as Tver or Ryazan. It was totally supreme amongst russian princedoms already, and, still being weaker then Lithuania, it could pick up a fight with it without being annihilated. That is also the reason why Ryazan was moved to Voronezh ? to make Moscow bigger. The price was having Tula letters over the Russian capital province and Ryazan letters next to Ryazan state. Now, by the genius of WiSK, we can rename provinces on map, which makes it no concern at all.
2.The provinces that have to be renamed for our setup are:
Tula - Moscow
Moscow - Yaroslavl or anything else
Voronezh - Ryazan
Ryazan - Vladimir
Vladimir - Viatka
The provinces where renaming is not crucial but prettier:
Uralsk - Yaik
Ukraina - Kiev
Bogutjar - Voronezh
3.Another concern is the terribly fast decline of Novgorod. Many people are happy as long as Moscow is the eater, but I think we should seek ways to make it live longer. I've experimented with giving Novgorod more money, putting it at better relations with Moscow, Pskow and LO, and editing the AIs (especially Muscovite). The results were better, but still not perfect (Novgorod always conquered LO). We could also/alternatively put Novgorod into alliance and vassalization with Muscowy which would both expire on Vasily I.'s death. Any other solution ideas?
4.In 1520 scenario, Russia destroys Lithuania far too fast. I propose that Smolensk would be owned by Lithuania but controlled by Russia, since it took Smolensk after this war. Other things should be tweaked, so that Lithuania is the leader of the polish side in the war, as else, Russia makes separate peace with them, conquering nearly everything, and goes on with the war on Poland. Russia on the other hand needs to be tweaked down. (Just like the Ottomans by the way, I've seen them conquering Poland all the way till Danzig and sailing the Baltic in one game, and taking all the lands till Astrakhan in the other.)
5.We still have to decide which province in Lithuania represents what. Welikia and Kursk are two cases where changes may be worth it, because the border went through them. Also, Russia actually reached Dniepr by 1520. We also could think about giving Lithuania and later Poland a core on Kurland, or even all the province. On my map, LO did not even border TO, and owned roughly a half of the province. So IMO we could move LO capital back to Livland, and make them form Courland if they own the province only. If they lost it to LIT, too bad, they get annexed.
6.The shift of Tula to Asia is still worth being mediated on. We need to find ways how to balance this shift as the player's Moscow/Russia could exploit it for a world conquest.
1.The provinces of Moscow are where they are, to reflect the political, geographical, economical and military potential of Moscow in relation to other princedoms and Lithuania. In 1419, Moscow was not just three times as big as Tver or Ryazan. It was totally supreme amongst russian princedoms already, and, still being weaker then Lithuania, it could pick up a fight with it without being annihilated. That is also the reason why Ryazan was moved to Voronezh ? to make Moscow bigger. The price was having Tula letters over the Russian capital province and Ryazan letters next to Ryazan state. Now, by the genius of WiSK, we can rename provinces on map, which makes it no concern at all.
2.The provinces that have to be renamed for our setup are:
Tula - Moscow
Moscow - Yaroslavl or anything else
Voronezh - Ryazan
Ryazan - Vladimir
Vladimir - Viatka
The provinces where renaming is not crucial but prettier:
Uralsk - Yaik
Ukraina - Kiev
Bogutjar - Voronezh
3.Another concern is the terribly fast decline of Novgorod. Many people are happy as long as Moscow is the eater, but I think we should seek ways to make it live longer. I've experimented with giving Novgorod more money, putting it at better relations with Moscow, Pskow and LO, and editing the AIs (especially Muscovite). The results were better, but still not perfect (Novgorod always conquered LO). We could also/alternatively put Novgorod into alliance and vassalization with Muscowy which would both expire on Vasily I.'s death. Any other solution ideas?
4.In 1520 scenario, Russia destroys Lithuania far too fast. I propose that Smolensk would be owned by Lithuania but controlled by Russia, since it took Smolensk after this war. Other things should be tweaked, so that Lithuania is the leader of the polish side in the war, as else, Russia makes separate peace with them, conquering nearly everything, and goes on with the war on Poland. Russia on the other hand needs to be tweaked down. (Just like the Ottomans by the way, I've seen them conquering Poland all the way till Danzig and sailing the Baltic in one game, and taking all the lands till Astrakhan in the other.)
5.We still have to decide which province in Lithuania represents what. Welikia and Kursk are two cases where changes may be worth it, because the border went through them. Also, Russia actually reached Dniepr by 1520. We also could think about giving Lithuania and later Poland a core on Kurland, or even all the province. On my map, LO did not even border TO, and owned roughly a half of the province. So IMO we could move LO capital back to Livland, and make them form Courland if they own the province only. If they lost it to LIT, too bad, they get annexed.
6.The shift of Tula to Asia is still worth being mediated on. We need to find ways how to balance this shift as the player's Moscow/Russia could exploit it for a world conquest.
To Bash:
"Peter the Great seeked Naval Supremacy, then he had to hold onto some seashore habitats. Alas - Russians didn't have any ethnic component which would be possible matching for this task, then Peter start to fill Noble ranks by North Germans, which had "sea-shore dwellers" necessary component for keeping all-important sea-bound habitats. Side-kick of this process was strong alienation with ethnic co-mixants from previous stage - Ukrainians and Cossacks. (Really huge bloodbath in Don/Kouban Valleys, Ukrainian Mazepa' uprising drown in blood.)"
IMHO you are going too far. Peter the Great tried to invite to Russia almost every European specialist, not just people from the North Germany. As for Mazepa, he just decided that Sweden will win the war and he will be able to became a really independent ruler of Ukraine (big miscalculation). People who followed Mazepa (and their were not a lot of them) fought rather against the Peter's policy to fully incorporate Ukraine into Russia than against German's influence.
"All evil doings of Stalin in Ukraine, Byelorussia, against Finland and Baltic states means just one message - he tried to crush/alienate local population into definite non/anti Russian entity. But in the same time - Stalin made huge steps into quite different direction - he became to be over-friendly with population of mid-Asian and Caucasian region. It means Stalin idea of "United Soviet Nation" was - Rivers, Forests, Steppes and MOUNTAINS. Any opposers of this ethnic policy - like German/Baltic/Ukrainians from one side (as bearers of "wrong ethnic features") and Chechens and other mountaineeer ethnoses from other side (who didn't like to "melting in the same Nation") were prosecuted merciless.
It is main idea of Stalin' national/ethnic policy."
Comrade Stalin was famous for his maxim: "If there is a man, it could be a problem. No man, no problem". In Baltic republics, Western Ukraine and Western Belorussia in 1939-1940 people were killed or sent to the Sibiria not by ethnic principles, but by the class logic. They were noblemans, priests, polismans, lawyers, former politicians and rich peasants. And his as you put it "over-friendliness" to mid-Asia and Caucas did not prevent him from repressions against Mingrelia and kalmyuks and organazing for all practical purposes slavery work in Central Asia to get more cotton. In 1950s he planned to exile people from Dagestan and divide the territory between Russia and Azerbaidzan but was talked out by Beria and Malenkov. They very cleverly reminded him that it was he who in 1920 pronounced Dagestan's independence (of course inside the communist Soviet Russia) and since Stalin could not be wrong, Dagestan should not be destroyed.
But let's go back to the Ivan's Terrible dilemma.
Close your eyes and imagine that time mashine brought you in Russia at 1560. Your are sitting on the throne and listening your councellors.
Adashev: "Sir, hundreds of thousands russian man, woman and children became slaves because of the attacks from Crimea. To put at end to such things you very recently conquered Kazan, to the glory of Russia. We need to crush the Crimea and make our south borders save. There are plenty of good land which could be populated by our peasants. But they need to be defended against the Crimea."
Basmanov: "Crimea could wait. We have a problem on the West. Livonians are blockading us. Riga and Revel became extremely rich by monopolising Baltic trade and discriminating against Russia. They are insulting russian people and desecrecating orthodox churches. Moreover their army is a joke and we could crush them very quickly."
Now you need to make a decision. According with what you wrote, the right answer will be: "Get lost, all of you. Because of the economy and ethnic realities we could not and should not start eigher war".
Well, it may be right. The only question is: how long Ivan would stay a tzar if he will continue like this ?
Sometimes, statesman or general need to make not the right, but the best possible decision.
"Peter the Great seeked Naval Supremacy, then he had to hold onto some seashore habitats. Alas - Russians didn't have any ethnic component which would be possible matching for this task, then Peter start to fill Noble ranks by North Germans, which had "sea-shore dwellers" necessary component for keeping all-important sea-bound habitats. Side-kick of this process was strong alienation with ethnic co-mixants from previous stage - Ukrainians and Cossacks. (Really huge bloodbath in Don/Kouban Valleys, Ukrainian Mazepa' uprising drown in blood.)"
IMHO you are going too far. Peter the Great tried to invite to Russia almost every European specialist, not just people from the North Germany. As for Mazepa, he just decided that Sweden will win the war and he will be able to became a really independent ruler of Ukraine (big miscalculation). People who followed Mazepa (and their were not a lot of them) fought rather against the Peter's policy to fully incorporate Ukraine into Russia than against German's influence.
"All evil doings of Stalin in Ukraine, Byelorussia, against Finland and Baltic states means just one message - he tried to crush/alienate local population into definite non/anti Russian entity. But in the same time - Stalin made huge steps into quite different direction - he became to be over-friendly with population of mid-Asian and Caucasian region. It means Stalin idea of "United Soviet Nation" was - Rivers, Forests, Steppes and MOUNTAINS. Any opposers of this ethnic policy - like German/Baltic/Ukrainians from one side (as bearers of "wrong ethnic features") and Chechens and other mountaineeer ethnoses from other side (who didn't like to "melting in the same Nation") were prosecuted merciless.
It is main idea of Stalin' national/ethnic policy."
Comrade Stalin was famous for his maxim: "If there is a man, it could be a problem. No man, no problem". In Baltic republics, Western Ukraine and Western Belorussia in 1939-1940 people were killed or sent to the Sibiria not by ethnic principles, but by the class logic. They were noblemans, priests, polismans, lawyers, former politicians and rich peasants. And his as you put it "over-friendliness" to mid-Asia and Caucas did not prevent him from repressions against Mingrelia and kalmyuks and organazing for all practical purposes slavery work in Central Asia to get more cotton. In 1950s he planned to exile people from Dagestan and divide the territory between Russia and Azerbaidzan but was talked out by Beria and Malenkov. They very cleverly reminded him that it was he who in 1920 pronounced Dagestan's independence (of course inside the communist Soviet Russia) and since Stalin could not be wrong, Dagestan should not be destroyed.
But let's go back to the Ivan's Terrible dilemma.
Close your eyes and imagine that time mashine brought you in Russia at 1560. Your are sitting on the throne and listening your councellors.
Adashev: "Sir, hundreds of thousands russian man, woman and children became slaves because of the attacks from Crimea. To put at end to such things you very recently conquered Kazan, to the glory of Russia. We need to crush the Crimea and make our south borders save. There are plenty of good land which could be populated by our peasants. But they need to be defended against the Crimea."
Basmanov: "Crimea could wait. We have a problem on the West. Livonians are blockading us. Riga and Revel became extremely rich by monopolising Baltic trade and discriminating against Russia. They are insulting russian people and desecrecating orthodox churches. Moreover their army is a joke and we could crush them very quickly."
Now you need to make a decision. According with what you wrote, the right answer will be: "Get lost, all of you. Because of the economy and ethnic realities we could not and should not start eigher war".
Well, it may be right. The only question is: how long Ivan would stay a tzar if he will continue like this ?
Sometimes, statesman or general need to make not the right, but the best possible decision.
@Almoravid. Good post.
1: If Moscow was 3 times bigger than Tver and Ryazan then the old map was quite fitting (as Moscow was 3 times bigger there). Now it's about 5 times bigger! - But then again, it would quite likely be annihilated by LIT with its old size, so I guess something is either wrong with LIT or else the game engine doesn't reflect reality.
2: Would be nice to have Moscow be Moscow and not Tula ... but I have no clue what Russian geography justifes in therms of other province names.
3: I think that MOS' early success against NOV is due to this early conquest. If NOV gets to live longer RUS might fare worse in the long run ... or so I think ...
4: Never played 1520 ...
5: I have no need for Courland either ... but it does seem to me as though LIT takes LO too often too easily. Perhaps LIT needs to be nerfed (also with regard to MOS as per 1.
6: All this exploitation is a bit alien to me, but if the majority here thinks it is necessary I guess we must figure something out
1: If Moscow was 3 times bigger than Tver and Ryazan then the old map was quite fitting (as Moscow was 3 times bigger there). Now it's about 5 times bigger! - But then again, it would quite likely be annihilated by LIT with its old size, so I guess something is either wrong with LIT or else the game engine doesn't reflect reality.
2: Would be nice to have Moscow be Moscow and not Tula ... but I have no clue what Russian geography justifes in therms of other province names.
3: I think that MOS' early success against NOV is due to this early conquest. If NOV gets to live longer RUS might fare worse in the long run ... or so I think ...
4: Never played 1520 ...
5: I have no need for Courland either ... but it does seem to me as though LIT takes LO too often too easily. Perhaps LIT needs to be nerfed (also with regard to MOS as per 1
.6: All this exploitation is a bit alien to me, but if the majority here thinks it is necessary I guess we must figure something out
To Almoravid:
1. Fully agreed with the provinces changes.
2. The ways to keep Novgorod and not deviate too much from the history:
a) Increase Novgorod's strength.
b) Did not give other russian principalities a cores on the Novgorod's lands (could somebody explain me why Ryazan should have Karelia as a core ?).
c) In 1471 Novgorod should have a choice to became Moscow's vassal (historical) or start a war with Moscow. Pre-condition: Moscow is reasonably strong (5 provinces ?).
d) In 1478 Novgorod should eigher became inherited by Moscow (historical choice) or start a war with Moscow. Pre-condition: Novgorod is Moscow's vassal.
e) If Moscow inherited Novgorod in 1478 or Moscow becames Russia it should receive a cores for all the Novgorod's lands.
3. There are some additional changes which IMHO are historical:
a) Novgorod should receive latin technology group in 1419.
b) Only Moscow, Tver and Ryazan should be able to create Russia. Bash vetoed my proposal for Lithuania, and I could not imagine how republican Novgorod or Pskov could create Russia.
1. Fully agreed with the provinces changes.
2. The ways to keep Novgorod and not deviate too much from the history:
a) Increase Novgorod's strength.
b) Did not give other russian principalities a cores on the Novgorod's lands (could somebody explain me why Ryazan should have Karelia as a core ?).
c) In 1471 Novgorod should have a choice to became Moscow's vassal (historical) or start a war with Moscow. Pre-condition: Moscow is reasonably strong (5 provinces ?).
d) In 1478 Novgorod should eigher became inherited by Moscow (historical choice) or start a war with Moscow. Pre-condition: Novgorod is Moscow's vassal.
e) If Moscow inherited Novgorod in 1478 or Moscow becames Russia it should receive a cores for all the Novgorod's lands.
3. There are some additional changes which IMHO are historical:
a) Novgorod should receive latin technology group in 1419.
b) Only Moscow, Tver and Ryazan should be able to create Russia. Bash vetoed my proposal for Lithuania, and I could not imagine how republican Novgorod or Pskov could create Russia.
Judging from the shift of North African nations to Europe there are unforseen problems. Nations seem eager to involve in wars and take provinces in their home continent. The NA states have been seen taking provinces on the other side of the Med, something extremely rare before. Having Russian capital in Asia would most probably give a much weaker expansion inn Europe but more provinces in the Steppes, Persia etc.
Ukraina -> Kiev you say. I think it's nice to have the city named differently than the province. Like Firenze -> Tuscany. What's the reason behind your suggested change?
Ukraina -> Kiev you say. I think it's nice to have the city named differently than the province. Like Firenze -> Tuscany. What's the reason behind your suggested change?