What would Russia, if the Princess Sophia on the throne

Another 14/02/20 What would become Russia, if the Princess Sophia on the throne

No Peter it is difficult to imagine the history of Russia not only XVIII but also in the subsequent centuries. However, if due to unavoidable circumstances he could not control the country which way they go to Russia?

the Dynastic intricacies

it is Known that Poroshenko was the third heir to the throne after elder brothers Fedor and Ivan. Fedor’s health failed; he died in 1682, protsarstvovav 6 years. However, Peter had another competitor – the son of Theodore, Ilya. He by law had the first right to the throne, and only the death of an infant is moved out of the way the two remaining brothers Fedora.

Peter took the throne of Moscow in 1682, acting as co-Regent with Ivan. But in fact the country was ruled by powerful families of their mothers: to 1689 – Miloslavskii (Maria Miloslavskaya – mother of Ivan), and since 1689 – Naryshkin (Natalia Naryshkina, the mother of Peter).

the clan of the Miloslavskys were represented by another pretender to the throne – the daughter of Alexei Mikhailovich, tsarevna Sofia, however, in the presence of male heirs, did not have a chance. Seizing power in a Streltsy uprising in 1682, she as Regent young brothers ran the government until 1689.

Only after the deposition of Sophia in 1689 and the death of Ivan in 1696 Peter finally became the autocratic ruler of Russia. Don’t be this complicated chain of circumstances – not to see Peter throne, and his descendants – Petrine Russia. However, allow yourself to imagine what would be our country without Peter?

“Polish Russia”

During the last six years of the reign of Fedor Alekseevich, though not managed to bring innovations to the end, but still asked clear direction that would develop the country. In 1678 he had a General census of the population. Its importance is evidenced by the fact that Peter cancelled the results of the census of 1710, was ordered to collect a duty on the books of 1678. However, direct taxation imposed by Fedor, which increased tax burden, continued financial reform of Peter.

Fedor Alekseevich began and military reform, in particular, has abolished parochialism and eliminated a bit of the book, which provided the position of the nobility, and paralyzed the functioning of the army. This was dealt a serious blow to the nobility: now promotions are not dependent on the origin and personal characteristics.

in addition, when Tsar Fyodor was a new development shelves foreign order. What are the conclusions? The reign of Feodor III largely anticipated the ideas of Peter I. we Can assume that Fedor had he lived twenty years more, and we would still when it saw the fall of the nobility and the army on the European model.

However, there are differences. 1676 and 1681 Theodore A. was waging war against the Ottoman Empire and the Crimean khanate. Under the signed on 13 January 1681 Bakhchisarai the world, Russia has annexed itself a left-Bank Ukraine and Kiev area.

It is Turkey, not Sweden Feodor III were regarded as the main opponent. It is not excluded that we could go to the Black sea, died of his militancy in the West. Theodore A. was known as a polonofil and instilled a love of the courtiers of Polish to everything: language, customs, costumes, dances. “Polish Russia” Fedor Alekseevich would be significantly different from the German-Dutch Russia of Peter.

But the fate of the believers when Fyodor III could have been very sad. If Peter actually allowed dissenters semi-legal existence, Fedor gave them repression. It was on his conscience the death of the Archpriest Avvakum.

the Black sea

you Can prevent the scenario that the Regent Sophia Alexeyevna would become the rightful ruler of the country. Voltaire wrote about her: “She had a lot of mind, wrote poems, wrote and spoke well, with a pleasant appearance combined a multitude of talents; they were marred only by its ambition.”

Following his ambition, the Queen probably would have continued to struggle with the split: Her “12 stories”, which determined the degree of punishment for conservatives, would be only the beginning of massive repression. “Eternal peace” with Poland, prisoner Sophia in 1686, would have meant a long Alliance with its powerful neighbor and may use it to deter Sweden.

would Not leave the Princess alone, and the Crimean Tatars. It was during her Regency was organized the Crimean campaigns of Vasily Golitsyn, who, though not brought obvious dividends, but also strengthened the authority of Russia.

However, make it his and make agreement with the “Holy League”, perhaps, this Alliance of European powers against the Ottoman Empire would have lasted longer and would have brought Russia its fruits in the Crimea and on the black sea coast in the early eighteenth century.

the Tsar Ivan to be

If Peter has not led to Russia, you obviously would not be the ill-fated “law of succession”, which abolished the tradition to pass on the throne only direct descendants and entrusted the fate of the throne to the will or whim of the monarch. An alternative history of Russia would not know the series of Palace revolutions, which cost the lives of monarchs and heirs, and also influenced the political structure of the state. Perhaps there would have unbelted guard and all-powerful favorites.

While maintaining the law of succession after Ivan V the place of the monarch would take his eldest daughter Catherine. Suppose she would have married Karl Leopold of Mecklenburg-Schwerin: then the throne would have passed to their daughter Anna Leopoldovna, followed by her son Ivan VI was killed in the real story when you try to release from captivity.

Without Peter and Russia is not

Journalist Yulia Latynina sure that without Peter there would be no Russian Empire, at least in the form in which it emerged in the XVIII-XIX centuries. What could it be? Latynina says: would be formed by two major powers: one with the centre in Kiev, the other with its capital in Warsaw. In the tsardom of Muscovy, “stupid and archaic”, to subdue these areas with musketeer army there would be no chance – sums up the journalist.

According to most researchers, Russia without Peter I would be hopelessly behind developed European countries, following the example of Japan and China – that is, becoming one of the world leaders only to the XX century.

the Author of a series of books on economic history of Russia Yuri Kuzovkov draws attention to the fact that after the victory in 1709 over Sweden throughout the eighteenth century in our possession no one interfered, what is the great merit of Peter. Otherwise, Russia could not survive. Thanks to Peter I Sweden, which in the beginning of XVIII century was one of the strongest powers of the Old world, and turned into an Empire.

Without Peter things would be different: the story of the Russian fleet would have begun not in the Baltic and in the Black sea; the Western border of our state was held not for Pskov, and closer to the Great Novgorod; the coming year we would have met on January 1, and September 1. But most importantly, there would have Saint Petersburg, which increased through the madness and genius of Peter the Great.

Taras Repin

© Russian Seven

Featured articles Share: Comments Comments on the article “What would Russia, if the Princess Sophia on the throne” Please log in to leave a comment! br>
Share on Tumblr