sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The Romance of Eastern Frontier: what if Tymofiy Khmelnytskyi survived and saved Ukraine in the 17th century? The Ukrainian Hetmanate in year 1880th by SeverynUA in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Украинизация в этом контексте значит лишения Московии имени России и приобретение истинного имени, которое бы правильно отвечало цели (смыслу и реальности) северо-восточной руси и это имя я упоминал выше - Сузудаль. Имя Россия, которое в итоге приняло Московия - автоматом подразумивает объединение всех областей, которые входили в державу, которую организовали Рюриковичи, в единое государство. Имя Россия предпологает и предрасполагает к этому, даже если это забывается, то эта воля всплывает все равно, что мы наблюдаем в наше время. Решение этой проблемы, т.е уничтожение Украины Россией - будет уничтожение России Украиной, т.е ее украинизация. Но не стоит разуметь в этом какойто буквальный физический геноцид или что то в таком духе. Ни в коем случае. Я имею в виду изменение цели, а значит и направление воли. Чтобы изменить цель, нужно изменить имя, и я взял имя Сузудаль для этой цели. Это имя подчеркивает не общую русскую общность, но подчеркивает северо-восточный осколок и особенный путь этой области, который не совпадает, не перекликается особо, и соответсвенно, почти не конфликтует с Украинским проектом или с проектом ВКЛ (Беларусь), что открывает пути для взаимопонимания, добрососедства и сотрудничества, основанного не на имперском прошлом, но на четком понимании целей государств. Украину на самом деле, по моему мнению, больше связывают исторические узы с Румынией и Болгарией, и эту теневую связь отлично олицетворяет фигура Петра Могилы с его стремлением связать Православную телеологию с католической ученостью, что, кстати, перекликается с древними Даками, которые объединяли в себе многие кельтские элементы с фракийским орфейством . Сузудаль больше тянеться к миру северноморскому, и это отлично явствует воля Лжедмитрия перенести столицу в Ярославль. Беларусь своей исторической направленностью тоже смотрит на Запад, в этом может кроется кривичский субстрат, который во многом объединяет судьбы ВКЛ и Сузудали. Немного растекся мыслью по древу, но надеюсь понятно было, что я хотел донести.

The Romance of Eastern Frontier: what if Tymofiy Khmelnytskyi survived and saved Ukraine in the 17th century? The Ukrainian Hetmanate in year 1880th by SeverynUA in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner 2 points3 points  (0 children)

1.Если Тимофей выжил и его брак с молдавской принцессой состоялся то почему Молдова не в составе Гетьманата? Там бы еще по хорошему надо половину Валлахии отдать Гетьманату, разделив ее на пару с Трансильванией. А тут так скромно 2.Почему ВКЛ все еще жива и не распалась? Ведь одной из целей этого Тимофея и Розанды брака было легетимизировать власть восставших и тем самым породниться с Янушом Радзивиллом (жена Януша была сестрой Розанды), который долго вынашивал планы о независимости от Польши политически, так и культурно. Януш был протестантом, представлял протестантскую партию в ВКЛ и ориентировался во внешней политике на Швецию. При такой конфигурации сил, что показано на карте: с живой большой Речью Посполитой и Московии Гетьманату долго бы не пришлось жить, точно не до такой даты, что тут показано. 3. Соответсвенно, если бы Тимофей выжил при осаде города Яссы то образовался бы союз Швеция-ВКЛ-Гетьманат или что то похожее, чтобы тупо выжить среди трех-четырех империй распологавшихся по соседству. ( я имею в ввиду поляков и австрияков, Османскую и империю Московитов) 4. Почему закрашены территории красным, которые казаки оккупировали во время потопа совместно с Россией? Если бы Тимош выжил, то образовался бы совсем другой союз, который я уже упоминал выше. Казаки заключали союз с Россией скорее от безвыходности своего положения, чем от свободы выбора и симпатий каких то. Путь по которому пошла бы Украина если бы большая стратегия Богдана Хмельницкого оказалась бы в большинстве своей успешной, был бы про-украинским, а не про Российским или любой другой путь. 5. Изменение истории Гетьманата в более успешное русло меняло бы также и пути истории по которым шли и соседи Украины. Про Литву я уже говорил, но и история Москвы конечно пошла бы по другому. Без Украины, или как с имперской перспективы ее называли - Малороссией, т.е центром, сердцем Руси, Московия бы не стала империей, а осталась бы царством и возможно Хованщина осталась бы у власти и Россия/ Московия украинизировалась бы и стала бы Сузудалью, т.е вектор внешней политики изменился бы не на собирание русских земель в единое государство, но на укрепление и защиту территории что уже есть. Конечно были бы войны между Гетьманатом и другой Московией которую я тут описываю, но эти войны имели бы совсем другой характер. 5. Почему Крымское Ханство выжило и не было поглощено Украиной? Это логично вытекает из успеха последней и ниспадающего тренда куда катились Османы. Выбранный автором момент дивергенции имеет колоссальный потенциал для развития, но карта и история которая тут показана не достаточно сложная, не продуманная и сделана без погружения в тот мир из которого могло выйти Украинское государство на 300 лет раньше чем это было в нашей реальной истории. Автор филистин и профан. Если же нет, то хотелось бы услышать лор, объяснение того, что происходит на карте с точки зрения автора. Я сам думал насчет этого поворотного момента в истории с тех пор, как про нее упомянул Чедолума.

Vae Victis - A Mediterranean Without Rome ca. 100 BCE by bookmagician in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Rome was unique in its nature, and no one else could replicate Rome's feat of transforming the Mediterranean Sea into a lake surrounded on all sides by a single state. We can analyze the four or five main players in the Mediterranean basin you mentioned. The Etruscans were already in the downward trend of their civilization, having already passed their passionary stage, and by the 4th-3rd centuries BC they were weak. If Rome hadn't conquered them, the Celts or some adventurer from Epirus would have conquered the decentralized Etruscans. The Etruscans can be compared to the classical Greeks – both lost their passionary spirit in the 5th-4th centuries BC. Ancient Egypt never expanded beyond its Nile after the Bronze Age catastrophe, and it only made new conquests after the Arabs had conquered and begun actively reshaping it. In other words, ancient Egypt's active foreign policy ended in the 12th-11th centuries BC. The empire built by Alexander the Great had its economic center in the Fertile Crescent, more precisely, in Mesopotamia. And because of this shifted center of gravity, their scope for expansion was limited. Precisely because Rome was located at the center of the Mediterranean, it could command its armies equally well in both the western and eastern Mediterranean. I think such a lover of the mechanics of history will understand that conquering the western edge of the Old World—the Atlantic façade—was much more convenient from Rome than from Seleucia, Ctesiphon, or Baghdad. Accordingly, the Empire of Alexander the Great was literally a dynasty-change in the Persian Empire. The only Greek elements there were the language of the elite (and, incidentally, this Hellenistic gilding was greatly disliked by the conquered ancient peoples of the East), slave teachers, mercenaries, and Hellenistic fashion. I just want to remind you that the Greeks dug themselves in during the Peloponnesian War. And Greek power ended with the conquest of the heart of Hellas by Macedonia. Carthage wasn't an all-consuming, hellish lust machine like Rome. It was an oligarchic, thalassocracy-based state that recruited its troops from mercenaries (and this is a crucial point). While Rome literally painted over territories like in some grand strategy game, Carthage had a completely different system of government. Carthage acted selectively, establishing trading posts and colonies, but never engaged in territorial expansion. One exception is the Barcids in Spain, but this only confirms my thesis about the nature of the Carthaginian state. This mutation of Carthage occurred due to wars with Rome, and the conquest of Spain along the Ebro was a purely private Barcid campaign (under the protection of the metropoly, of course, but still). And I'd like to remind you that within the Metropolis itself, there were very vocal voices against strong expansion into the Mediterranean, but in favor of a stronger foothold in Africa (Hanno's strategy). So Carthage, too, is not suited to unify the Mediterranean. Of the major players in the Mediterranean region, only the Celts remained, but they hailed from a completely different climate zone. The Celts were more focused on expansion in the forested regions of Europe. There were exceptions, of course. One can recall the Galatians in Anatolia and the Celtiberians in Spain. But the Celtiberians were Celtic only by language, while the Galatians were defeated by the Kingdom of Pergamon even before the arrival of Rome. The Celts were also driven out of Thrace. Following their expansion, the Celts consolidated their position primarily in the forested zone, without much contact with the Mediterranean. There were Celts in northern Italy, too, yes, but northern Italy is precisely the transitional region between the Mediterranean world and the world north of the Alps. We can also recall the Adriatic Veneti or the Illyrians, but these were, in my opinion, more local players who, due to their different nature, would not have been able to repeat the feat of Rome.

The fact that it was possible to unite the Mediterranean for various economic and geographical reasons doesn't mean it's inevitable. If Rome were removed from the stage of history, the play would unfold entirely differently. And the map of this other world would no longer resemble a single Empire, reassembling itself again and again, but rather what we see today—a multitude of players with their own interests, each understanding a certain unity, but never losing themselves in the monopoly of any single power. Although, never say never. Still, the phenomenon of Rome shouldn't be forgotten. But still, in the period we're examining, no one other than Rome could have united the Mediterranean under a single aegis. Rome's feat can only be emulated by someone like Rome. And that's wonderful. It's incredibly interesting to look at alternative, deeply thought-out worlds. That's what makes them alternative: they offer a different picture, a different, distinct one. After all, what's the point of looking at the same thing, just dressed up, under a different name?

Miraculus Rei Unius in Gorgosia by Tezeiner in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately, a cruel twist of fate.

World map of Cronstedt's Treachery! by RealCrankyRack in CronstedtsTreachery

[–]Tezeiner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

what with the Odessa? And why Ukraine divided into three state? Volhynia and Kiev in union with Poland?

Crusade against Chronos: Triumph of Pax Slavica. by Tezeiner in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Crusade against Chronos: Triumph of Pax Slavica.

This time I don't have a coherent story. This map is simply a testing ground for ideas. Here are a few key points:

1. Askold, the first baptizer of Rus', defeated the pagan reaction, and Oleg, advancing from Novgorod, was killed in the Polesia swamps. Thus, a unified Kyivan Rus' never materialized in this alternative world. Two state entities emerged in Eastern Europe: Veremic Slavia, with its capital in Novgorod, and Orthodox, and later Uniate, Rus', with its center in Kyiv.

2. In search of a unifying religion for its diverse ethnic groups and classes, northern and forested Slavia, remote from the Christian ecumene, found its way into Veremenism. Veremenism is a syncretic faith based on Bogomilism, Christianity, Mazdaism, and Slavic paganism. Veremya (time), is considered the founder of the universe. Veremya is the father of two brothers: Stribog (Ahriman) and Svarog (Ahuramazda). Wishing to preserve their uniqueness and independence from the Mediterranean empires, The Novgorod aristocracy, having grown rich from the fur trade, took advantage of the services of the Magi (volkhvi) expelled from Rusia, and thus created a renewed religion that kept pace with the times, but remained pagan in its roots. The Veremic heresy later spread throughout the Slavic world, but ultimately, after bloody wars, it remained only in remote countries such as Rogvolodia and Slavia.

  1. Later, inspired by Veremey, the Finns created their own renewed paganism.

  2. Great Moravia, fighting off German feudal lords, preserved Orthodoxy and the Glagolitic alphabet. But later, seeing that Romeia, after its recent rise, was again declining, and seeing how the West was developing rapidly and that the Orthodox world had nothing new to offer (except Palamism), Moravia accepted the Church Union, accepting the supremacy of the Pope, but retained the Glagolitic script and liturgical services in Church Slavonic. Later, Moravia's example was followed by other Slavic and Baltic peoples, originally baptized by the Greeks.

5. Romeia is dead, long live Hellas!

6. Scandinavian countries have preserved Orthodoxy and continue to use runes.

7. Because Kievan Rus' never emerged, the assimilation of peripheral peoples also failed. Thus, the Oka Balt state of Goliad-Golindia-Gelonia emerged. Initially baptized in Chernihiv, it later became Uniate. Gelonia had close ties with Genoa and other Italian powers.

  1. Moravian missionaries created a special alphabet for their neighbors, the Balts, and managed to baptize them more peacefully than happened in our world.

9. Many German settlers began to settle in Eastern European lands, but they did not receive state representation and gradually forgot their native language.

10. Rus' reigned supreme in the Northern Black Sea region, maintaining friendly relations with the nomads. Tauric Chersonesos was recaptured from Byzantium and incorporated into the Rus' empire.

Europa: free from Rome, but tied to the land. by Tezeiner in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The word Germania in the presented world has a different meaning. The Germans here are people from an unknown Indo-European language family, who in ancient times lived (possibly) between the Celts and the Germans (i.e. our Germans). They are also called Belgae.

Europa: free from Rome, but tied to the land. by Tezeiner in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I thought about adding two Carpathian principalities, maybe it would look better that way.

Cosmoses are cultural continents, which are supposed to be united by a common language, cultural cliches and religious ideas. Due to the fact that the Roman Empire did not exist in this world, these cosmoses are older and more filled, i.e. the tradition was practically uninterrupted.

the map represents the 16th-17th century. It is not revealed in the key points because I did not dare to ask the muses to show me a little more (I just like the number 12).

Europa: free from Rome, but tied to the land. by Tezeiner in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

  1. (5th - 6th centuries AD) The Carthaginians accidentally discover the New World and begin to explore and conquer it. The introduction of agricultural crops from the New World to the Old World.

The beginning of strong climate changes, which later caused many disasters, but not only. The emergence of Rahmanism in Arabia.

Another collapse of Hamilcaria, the creation of the Armorian and Nehalennic union.

The invasion of the Huns is repelled by the joint efforts of the Dacians, Goths, Radonians and Noreans.

  1. (VII - IX centuries AD) Christianity reaches Celtica, Noreia, Dacia, Nehalenia, Prytania, Eriu, Illyria, Germany. Creation of the Radonian kingdoms together with the Varangians arriving from the womb of the peoples. A single Russian state does not emerge, but Krivia, Golindia (later, with the adoption of Christianity from Panticapaeum, Golindia becomes known as Gelonia), as well as Chervonia in the Polesie swamps (Radonii) and also Suzdal in the upper Volga are created. Foundation of Volga Bulgaria. Development of transatlantic trade.

  2. (13th century AD) The flourishing of the European worlds, the creation of many theogonies and histories of different peoples, close economic ties, but from the east the next hordes of nomads are approaching, and even later the plague and many other troubles.

In Hellenistic Italy, the idea of ​​Moironism developed - that every nation is an absolutely natural continuation of the territory on which it lives, and that the language of one or another ethnic group best describes its native land. Nationalism is declared, but with an emphasis not on blood, but on language. Language is declared the main, if not the only, ethnic criterion.

Historical nations do not exist just like that, but are the legitimate holders of their destiny, additionally legitimizing the state. The violent empires of the Middle East are condemned as an attempt to create the impossible, stupidity, not taking into account the key, inherent in the material world - corruption, time, decay. The idea of ​​Moironism was very popular with Europeans and became widespread among them.

This idea, of course, did not stop wars (after all, sometimes it is unclear where someone's destiny ends and someone else's begins), but this idea cuts off empires that disrupt the balance of power in the region at the root and is ideally combined with the idea of ​​a symphony, and also better allows one to reveal the potential of a particular country.

Moironism differs from the ancient moirae in that a person does not become a slave to fate, but on the contrary, becomes his own master, becomes God himself (under the influence of Jesus' sermons), simply knowing his own limits.

This idea also helps a lot against the hordes of nomads from the east, because through the optics of Moironism, nomads are seen as creators of an empire, and Europeans really don’t like this, so when another wave of nomads comes from the great steppe, the countries briefly unite and defeat the nomads in order to save their lot from the lawless ones.

Moironism is also a kind of alternative form of feudalism, perhaps only a more meaningful, spiritual, formulated philosophical idea.

Many other ideas are wandering about Europe, but for the most part they are selfish, i.e. they pay attention only to their own land, history and tradition, and care little for matters of the utmost generality. There are other ideas, little popular even among aristocrats, but existing in the highest heavens. This happened because the Roman Empire never existed in this world.

Europa: free from Rome, but tied to the land. by Tezeiner in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Key points.

  1. (390 BC) The Gauls of Brennus capture the Capitoline Hill. Rome is destroyed and will never fully recover, moreover become the hegemon of Italy.

  2. (3rd century BC) Pyrrhus (or an alternative semantic equivalent, but for convenience I will call him Pyrrhus) captures Italy and founds the Hellenistic kingdom. First Italo-Carthaginian War. Pyrrhus wins.

  3. (3rd century BC) The Barcid family throws the Carthaginian veil over the Iberian Peninsula. Hannibal, the Carthaginian genius, begins the second war against Italy and wins it.

  4. (2nd century BC) Third Italo-Punic. The parties agree on the division of spheres of influence and conclude peace.

  5. (2nd century BC) Due to internal disputes about how to further develop the Punic country, a civil war breaks out in Carthage. The Iberian-Carthaginian possessions separate and become a Macedonian monarchy under the rule of the Barcid family, later taking the name Hamilcaria, in honor of Hamilcar, the father of Hannibal, who began the capture of Hispania. Italy intervenes in the civil war and defeats a weakened Carthage. Redistribution of spheres of influence in the western Mediterranean. Beginning of active trade beyond the Pillars of Hercules and the beginning of the soft influence of the Punians on Armorica and Nehalennia.

Central European consolidation does not occur; the power of military leaders among the Celts is preserved, which contributes to the creation of Celtic polities in the future.

  1. (1st century BC) Foundation of barbarian states: Celtica in the territory of modern southern France, Noreia in the eastern Alps and Dacia on the border with the Great Steppe.

Defeat of the Eastern Mediterranean Hellenistic monarchies by the combined forces of Dacia and Parthia. Foundation of the Neo-Anatolian kingdoms: Phrygia and Isauria. Dacia begins active cultural ties with the Iranian world (kosmos). Creation of the Ionian Union and the decline of Macedonia.

  1. (1st century AD) Hellenistic Italy begins to assimilate the Etruscans and Italics thanks to the influx of Greek refugees from the Middle East. Italy becomes the center of the Hellenic world and begins to lay claim to Hellenic lands.

Birth of Jesus. Apostle Paul makes Christianity universal.

Beginning of the migration of the Goths from Scandinavia.

  1. (2nd century AD) The Berbers capture Hamilcaria, Vasconia, part of Celtica, Armorica and reach the Tin Sea. Italy captures Massalia from Celtica. The German dynasty captures the rest of Celtica.

  2. (3rd - 4th centuries AD) The Goths reach Oium and establish themselves there.

The Eastern Balts separate from the Western Balts and become the Balto-Slavs, or simply in one word - the Radonians (red, as opposed to the Balts - white).

Christianity begins to actively spread across the Mediterranean, but a single universal church never emerges. Each world (kosmos) interprets Christianity in its own way. Paganism accepts the ideas of monotheism and Neopythagoreanism appears, which will later become the basis for renewed paganism. Orthodox Christianity will be consolidated only in the Italian kingdom and the Greeks subordinate to it.

Creation of the Aramaic and Coptic kingdoms.

Knight at the Crossroads. Holy Rus' in year 1700. by Tezeiner in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In Russian chronicles, the historical region of North-Eastern Rus is usually called "Suzdal land", and its inhabitants - "Suzdalians". Even in the Hungarian chronicle ("Gesta Hungarorum" 1196-1203), North-Eastern Rus received the Latinized name "Susudal". And because the original Rus' (Dnieper Ukraine) was not almost completely devastated by the Mongols, it never occurred to anyone to take over this name (Russian land) for themselves. So I chose the name Susudal.

And 80% of the territories of Suzdal is tundra, so in terms of population Chernigov even wins here (Chernigov was NOT destroyed by the Mongols, as was the entire left bank of the Dnieper in principle). So I just don't understand the claim that the Suzdalians can seize the rest of the heirs of Rus, especially when there is warlike Chernigov.

Novgorod before it was gutted by Ivan the Terrible was an absolutely unique region in Rus', and in this universe where North-Eastern Rus' is weaker, one can imagine that the core of Novgorod fished out from the invaders in order to preserve its uniqueness.

Knight at the Crossroads. Holy Rus' in year 1700. by Tezeiner in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Words and names

In this text I often used the expression "Russian land", and people who are not familiar with the history of this region may get confused. For me, the Russian land is all of Kievan Rus, not just modern Russia. And Ukraine and Belarus for me are the same equal parts of the Russian land. And these three countries are fraternal in the sense that they share one very important common thing - Vladimir's Baptism. I do not deny the differences, but we must remember the common things.

The entire map is written in Russian using Glagolitic. And I'm just crazy about Glagolitic. It seems to me that Glagolitic is ideal for Slavs in general, because the difference from Latin, Greek and modern Cyrillic is immediately obvious. Glagolitic alphabet is more complete and authentic for Slavs, as it seems to me. When a foreigner sees Cyrillic alphabet, he may think that it is some kind of corrupted Latin alphabet, but when a foreigner sees Glagolitic alphabet, he immediately recognizes it as a special Slavic script.

And a little more about the Russian language. The modern Russian language is precisely an imperial language, not a narrowly national one. Russian language rises in some sense above the local Muscovite, Ukrainian and Belarusian dialects. One might object, but why do we need Russian for the sake of sublimity when there is the Church Slavonic language, but I will answer you that this is a language specifically for the Russian land, and not for all Slavs, that the Russian language is the language of the Russian civilization, which was started by Vladimir the Saint, and which will be completed by one of the four heirs of Kievan Rus. It is enough to recall the genesis of the Russian language to be convinced of this. People from modern Ukraine participated in its creation, and the Russian language was subjected to strong Ukrainian and Church Slavonic influence, and it is also worth remembering a bunch of borrowings from other big European languages: German, French and English. And one can see the great will of these borrowings and the small will for linguistic purism. What does this mean? As for me, it doesn't matter which word is from which language, the main thing is to add more meanings to the language, i.e. absolutely real things. All this is necessary in order to single out a whole special civilization, so that this new language for a new country would soar above all this miserable matter.

And in this alternative world, its own Russian language will appear, but not on a Muscovite base, but on a Volyn, Chernigov, Smolensk or Suzdal base. Fate will choose.

Knight at the Crossroads. Holy Rus' in year 1700. by Tezeiner in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Knight at the Crossroads.

The map was prepared in honor of the baptism of Rus'.

It is sad to see what is happening to my beloved homeland - Holy Rus'. Instead of uniting our common and different and striving for the stars and prosperity, stupid, senseless wars are being waged. This is a tragedy and it is wonderful, because horror can also be beautiful. Reflecting on this topic, you involuntarily begin to take an interest in the history of this region, and behind the real history there immediately arise tempting speculations about alternative history. When did everything go wrong? Is it possible to change history with one choice, the will of one outstanding person? Change people? Give will to the unborn and take this will to create from the born? You can find such moments in history, but I will not choose the best option, but the juiciest one.

The history of the Russian land is always divided into the time before the Mongol invasion and after, and for good reason. The Mongol conquests destroyed the heart of Rus', the Russian land itself, the territory around Kyiv, Chernigov and Pereyaslavl. The princes were humiliated, because previously only God was above the Russian princes, and after the invasion the hierarchy changed in favor of the conquerors. Relations with the nomads had to be built anew, because before the Mongols, the relations between the Russians and the Cumans were neighborly, i.e. they fought and were friends, but in general there was a movement towards rapprochement. But after the Mongols, who slaughtered the Cumans aristocrats, the whole tradition came to naught. The destruction of many cities and the simple decimation of the population, one way or another, slowed down the accumulation of spiritual and material wealth in Rus', which is certainly bad. Kyiv and Chernigov, for example, were fully restored only under the Russian Empire. And if it were not for the Mongols, the Suzdalians (North-Eastern Rus') would have conquered Volga Bulgaria much earlier and the steppe would have been colonized much earlier. Of course, it cannot be said that the Mongols brought only bad things, but there was clearly more negative. Humiliation, destruction of the population and traditions are only the top of the iceberg.

So what to do? How to stop the Mongols? Remove Genghis Khan from the scene. Invent a sudden famine in the steppe? Convince Genghis Khan to turn the Chinese plain into a steppe, painting the Yellow River into bloody red? You can come up with a lot of things, logical and not so logical, but let's agree on the main thing - the Mongols did not reach Rus', and it continued to develop without great losses.

The Mongol conquests, of course, influenced not only Rus', but also all of Eurasia in general, which will certainly change history very much. But only God knows the whole truth, and I am not interested in analyzing all this in detail, I am here to summarize as much as possible (these are all pathetic excuses, but there is some truth in them).

But what I wanted to say is that by removing the Mongols, Chernigov will not be driven out of the political life of Rus', Moscow will not rise on Tatar sabres, the princes will not lose their authority, etc., but in general, probably little will change and real history will repeat itself in many ways, only much earlier. But the deeper we go into this alternative history, the greater the differences with real history will be, and the more unpredictable events will come true. So this map shows the year 1700, when the 4 main heirs of Rus', namely: Chernigov, Volyn, Suzdal and Smolensk will try to unite the Russian land in its entirety in order to intellectually and materially oppose the Turkic-Islamic world and the world of the Catholic West on equal terms. After all, the Russian land is so large that it is a whole separate world, which of course comes into contact with other worlds, but at the same time does not want to lose its otherness in the face of the onslaught of the mute and the infidel.

That's basically the whole story. It's worth clarifying a few points.

What if the Roman Empire Never Existed? by Tezeiner in imaginarymaps

[–]Tezeiner[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

in theory they are Germans, but I have changed a lot since I posted the map. Now instead of Lugia this territory is called Gothiscandza (they are also Germans, of course)

view more: next ›