PDA

View Full Version : The Conquest of Siberia



The Journeyman
11-07-2011, 10:01 AM
A significant, yet seemingly neglected part of the historical curriculum here in the states. Similar, in a way, to the American conquest of the west, but perhaps harder fought and occurring 3 centuries earlier.

Russian conquest of Siberia

The Russian conquest of Siberia took place in the 16th and 17th centuries, when the Siberian Khanate had become a loose political structure of vassalages which were becoming undermined by the activities of Russian explorers who, though numerically outnumbered, pressured the various family-based tribes into changing their loyalties and establishing distant forts from which they conducted raids. To counter this Küçüm Khan attempted to centralize his rule by imposing Islam on his subjects and reforming his tax collecting apparatus.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b6/Surikov_Pokoreniye_Sibiri_Yermakom.jpg/800px-Surikov_Pokoreniye_Sibiri_Yermakom.jpg

Conquest of the Khanate of Sibir

The conquest of Siberia began in July 1580 when some 540 Cossacks under Yermak Timofeyevich invaded the territory of the Voguls, subjects to Küçüm, the Khan of Siberia. They were accompanied by 300 Lithuanian and German slave laborers, whom the Stroganovs had purchased from the Tsar. Throughout 1581 this force traversed the territory known as Yugra and subdued Vogul and Ostyak towns. At this time they also captured a tax collector of Küçüm. Following a series of Tatar raids in retaliation against the Russian advance Yermak's forces prepared for a campaign to take Qashliq, the Siberian capital. The force embarked in May 1582. After a three day battle on the banks of the river Irtysh, Yermak was victorious against a combined force of Küçüm Khan and six allied Tatar princes. On June 29 the Cossack forces were attacked by the Tatars but again repelled them.

Throughout September 1582 the Khan gathered his forces for a defence of Qashliq. A horde of Siberian Tatars, Voguls and Ostyaks massed at Mount Chyuvash to defend against invading Cossacks. On October 1 a Cossack attempt to storm the Tatar fort at Mount Chyuvash was held off. On October 23 the Cossacks attempted to storm the Tatar fort at Mount Chyuvash for a fourth time when the Tatars counterattacked. Over a hundred Cossacks were killed but their gunfire forced a Tatar retreat and allowed the capture of two Tatar cannons. The forces of the Khan retreated and Yermak entered Qashliq on the 26 October 1582.

In 1583 on the orders of Ivan IV has made a great tour of Moscow "ship battle" in Western Siberia. Pitched Voguls (Mansi) in Pelym, the army is on Tavda, followed by Toure and the Irtysh to the mouth of it in the Ob River. As a result of this campaign is set vassalage Vogul princes of Muscovy, Ivan IV and receives the title of Grand Prince Ugra, Prince Kondinsky and Obdorsk

Küçüm Khan retreated into the steppes and over the next few years regrouped his forces. He suddenly attacked Yermak on August 6, 1584 in the dead of night and killed most of his army. The details are disputed with Russian sources claiming Yermak was wounded and tried to escape by swimming across the Wagay river which is a tributary of the Irtysh tributary), but drowned under the weight of his own chainmail. Tatar sources claim this story was invented to save his honour, and in fact he was slaughtered with the rest of his soldiers and suffered an anonymous death. The remains of Yermak's forces under the command of Mescheryak retreated from Qashliq, destroying the city as they left. In 1586 the Russians returned and after subduing the Khanty and Mansi people through the use of their artillery they established a fortress at Tyumen close to the ruins of Qashliq. The Tatar tribes that were submissive to Küçüm Khan suffered from several attacks by the Russians between 1584-1595; however, Küçüm Khan would not be caught. Finally, in August 1598 Küçüm Khan was defeated at the Battle of Urmin near the river Ob. In the course of the fight the Siberian royal family were captured by the Russians. However, Küçüm Khan escaped yet again. The Russians took the family members of Küçüm Khan to Moscow and there they remained as hostages. The descendants of the khan's family became known as the Princes Sibirsky and the family is known to have survived until at least the late 19th Century.

http://www.oilpaintinghk.com/paintingpic/0822d/-Oil-painting-The-Conquest-of.jpg

Despite his personal escape, the capture of his family ended the political and military activities of Küçüm Khan and it is understood that he retreated to the territories of the Nogay Horde in southern Siberia. It has been known that he had been in contact with the Tsar and had requested that a small region on the banks of the Irtysh River would be granted as his dominion. This was rejected by the Tsar who proposed to Küçüm Khan that he to come to Moscow and "comfort himself" in the service of the Tsar. However, the old khan did not want to suffer from such contempt and preferred staying in his own lands to "comforting himself" in Moscow. It is thought that Küçüm Khan then went to Bokhara and as an old man became blind, dying in exile with distant relatives sometime around 1605.

Conquest and Exploration

In order to subjugate the natives and collect yasak (fur tribute), a series of winter outposts (zimovie) and forts (ostrogs) were built at the confluences of major rivers and streams and important portages. The first among these were Tyumen and Tobolsk — the former built in 1586 by Vasilii Sukin and Ivan Miasnoi, and the latter the following year by Danilo Chulkov.[1] Tobolsk would become the nerve center of the conquest.[2] To the north Beryozovo (1593) and Mangazeya (1600-01) were built to bring the Nenets under tribute, while to the east Surgut (1594) and Tara (1594) were established to protect Tobolsk and subdue the ruler of the Narym Ostiaks. Of these, Mangazeya was the most prominent, becoming a base for further exploration eastward.[3]

Advancing up the Ob and its tributaries, the ostrogs of Ketsk (1602) and Tomsk (1604) were built. Ketsk sluzhilye liudi ("servicemen") reached the Yenisei in 1605, descending it to the Sym; two years later Mangazeyan promyshlenniks and traders descended the Turukhan to its confluence with the Yenisei, where they established the zimovie Turukhansk. By 1610 men from Turukhansk had reached the mouth of the Yenisei and ascended it as far as the Sym, where they met rival tribute collectors from Ketsk. To ensure subjugation of the natives, the ostrogs of Yeniseysk (1619) and Krasnoyarsk (1628) were established.[3]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2d/IstSib098_1.jpg/765px-IstSib098_1.jpg
Muscovite voevodas in the new-built fortress of Tyumen, from the Remezov Chronicle.

Following the khan's death and the dissolution of any organised Siberian resistance, the Russians advanced first towards Lake Baikal and then the Sea of Okhotsk and the Amur River. However, when they first reached the Chinese border they encountered people that were equipped with artillery pieces and here they halted.

The Russians reached the Pacific Ocean in 1639.[4] After the conquest of the Siberian Khanate the whole of northern Asia - an area much larger than the old khanate - became known as Siberia and by 1640 the eastern borders of Russia had expanded more than several million square kilometres. In a sense, the khanate lived on in the subsidiary title "Tsar of Siberia" which became part of the full imperial style of the Russian Autocrats.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/73/Repin_Cossacks.jpg/800px-Repin_Cossacks.jpg


Yermak Timofeyevich

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Yermak_Timofeyevich.jpg

Yermak Timofeyevich (Russian: Ерма́к Тимофе́евич, also Ermak) (born between 1532 and 1542 – August 5 or 6, 1585), Cossack leader, Russian folk hero and explorer of Siberia. His exploration of Siberia marked the beginning of the expansion of Russia towards this region and its colonization. ("Timofeyevich" is his patronimic, not the last name, so in references he must be looked up as "Yermak" or "Yermak Timofeyevich"; his last name, if any, is unknown).

In the mid 16th century the Tsardom of Russia conquered the Tatar khanates of Kazan and Astrakhan, thus annexing the entire Volga Region and making the way to the Ural Mountains open. The colonisation of the new easternmost lands of Russia and further onslaught eastward was led by the rich merchants Stroganovs. Tsar Ivan IV granted large estates near the Urals as well as tax privileges to Anikey Stroganov, who organized large scale migration to these lands. Stroganovs developed farming, hunting, saltworks, fishing, and ore mining on the Urals and established trade with Siberian tribes.

In 1558, the Stroganov merchant family received their first patent for colonizing "the abundant region along the Kama River", and in 1574 lands over the Ural Mountains along the rivers Tura and Tobol. They also received permission to build forts along the Ob and Irtysh rivers. Around 1577, the Stroganovs hired the Cossack leader Yermak to protect their lands from attacks of the Siberian Khan Kuchum.

In 1581 Yermak began his voyage into the depths of Siberia, that led to the conquest of the Khanate of Sibir. After a few victories over the khan's army, Yermak's people defeated Kuchum's main forces after a 3-day battle (October 23–25, 1582) on the banks of Irtysh. The remains of the khan's army retreated to the steppes. On October 26, Yermak captured the capital of the Siberia Khanate, Qashliq (17 km from the city of Tobolsk). Since Kuchum still had enough forces to resist, he suddenly attacked Yermak on August 6, 1585 in the dead of night and killed most of his people. Yermak was wounded and tried to swim across the Wagay River (Irtysh's tributary), but drowned under the weight of his own chain mail. The remains of Yermak's forces under the command of M. Mescheryak retreated from Qashliq.

Yermak's Cossacks had to withdraw from Siberia completely, but every year new bands of hunters and adventurers, supported by Moscow, poured into the country. Thanks to Yermak's having explored all the main river routes in West Siberia, Russians successfully reclaimed all Yermak's conquests just several years later.

Yermak's exploration of Siberia is reflected in the so-called Siberian Chronicles. His life and death have been subjects for numerous Russian songs, books, and paintings since the 16th century. In 1995 a historical biopic "Yermak" was shot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_conquest_of_Siberia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yermak_Timofeyevich

Pallantides
11-10-2011, 08:07 PM
Tragic event...


Free Siberia!:D

Albion
11-11-2011, 02:47 PM
I see it as a good thing. It provided Russia with resources, prevented Chinese expansion and gave new territory for European settlement.

It is also still ruled by a European state, so it's all good.

Austrvegr
11-15-2011, 04:42 PM
Thank you, but Repin's painting of Zaporozhian Kozaks has nothing to do with the topic, and also the Western European picture of Yermak in conquistador armor is purely fictitious.

Austrvegr
11-16-2011, 08:14 PM
Yermak played by Viktor Stepanov in the afore-mentioned biopic

http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h364/meon11/Stepanov_Viktor10.jpg

http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h364/meon11/Stepanov_Viktor09.jpg

http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h364/meon11/Stepanov_Viktor08.jpg

http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h364/meon11/Stepanov_Viktor07.jpg

http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h364/meon11/Stepanov_Viktor06.jpg

http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h364/meon11/Stepanov_Viktor05.jpg

http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h364/meon11/Stepanov_Viktor04.jpg

http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h364/meon11/Stepanov_Viktor03.jpg

http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h364/meon11/Stepanov_Viktor02.jpg

http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h364/meon11/Stepanov_Viktor01.jpg

Turkey
11-18-2011, 09:52 AM
Those paintings seem inaccurate

Money Shot
11-18-2011, 10:02 AM
Cool topic.


You are correct, it does not get much attention in schools in the U.S.


Going to have head over to Amazon and find some reading material on this.


Thanks for the post. :cool:

Motörhead Remember Me
11-24-2011, 12:53 PM
I see it as a good thing. It provided Russia with resources, prevented Chinese expansion and gave new territory for European settlement.

It is also still ruled by a European state, so it's all good.

Russia is not a European state.

R4ge
11-24-2011, 01:05 PM
Russia is not a European state.

It is, at least moreso than Finland.

Pallantides
11-24-2011, 01:14 PM
It is, at least moreso than Finland.

Lol...
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_5ykC4HkT6Io/S_MDB92fhXI/AAAAAAAAAKw/Xwi3VUjVsMg/s1600/facepalm23.jpg


Then again the opinion of non-Europeans really don't matter on the subject of who is European or not....

R4ge
11-24-2011, 01:18 PM
http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/images/time/russia/european-russia.jpg

Motörhead Remember Me
11-24-2011, 01:33 PM
It is, at least moreso than Finland.

Ask a Russian and he would answer "Russia is not European, it's Russian".

Russian morale, mentality, ethics, perception, religion e.t.c. belong to a different, eastern (Byzantine) cultural sphere. They have a different standard than what we have. A standard which is based on Orthodox religion, chauvinism, double morale and Asian brutality.

Motörhead Remember Me
11-24-2011, 01:35 PM
http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/images/time/russia/european-russia.jpg

I think your map contradicts what you just wrote. But hey, that's just me. Maybe I learned geography a different way than you?

R4ge
11-24-2011, 01:39 PM
I think your map contradicts what you just wrote. But hey, that's just me. Maybe I learned geography a different way than you?

Russia has much more land in the European sphere than Finland and has several borders with other nations in the continent, something which Finland lacks. Not that that alone makes Russia more European, but Russia has had much more influence on Europe than Finland has.

Finns speak a non-European language.

The Ripper
11-24-2011, 01:42 PM
Russia is not a European state.

On what grounds...? What a stupid assertion. It's not 1939, let's get with the times.

Hess
11-24-2011, 01:43 PM
Finns speak a non-European language.

And Armenians/Iranians do speak a European language

Now who is more European, Finns or Armenians/Iranians? :coffee:

R4ge
11-24-2011, 01:44 PM
And Armenians/Iranians do speak a European language

Now who is more European, Finns or Armenians/Iranians? :coffee:

Don't ask such stupid questions, bro.

The Ripper
11-24-2011, 01:46 PM
Finns speak a non-European language.

Indo-European =/= European.

Or would you say the Basques speak a non-European language? :rolleyes:

R4ge
11-24-2011, 01:48 PM
Indo-European =/= European.

Or would you say the Basques speak a non-European language? :rolleyes:

There we have it, we've arrived to a conclusion. Finland and Russia are more or less equally European.

The Ripper
11-24-2011, 02:07 PM
There we have it, we've arrived to a conclusion. Finland and Russia are more or less equally European.

I don't know which measure you use to determine the Europeanness of whatever, but both are obviously European, regardless to what "degree".

But you did not answer my question. Is Basque a non-European language?

Hess
11-24-2011, 02:11 PM
There we have it, we've arrived to a conclusion. Finland and Russia are more or less equally European.

There are no degrees of Europeanism. There are only two categories- European and Non-European

R4ge
11-24-2011, 02:13 PM
That's your opinion and if you were actually right then there would be no way to draw the borders for "Europe" since it's not an actual continent but more of a peninsula which is part of a super-continent.

But, whatever.


I don't know which measure you use to determine the Europeanness of whatever, but both are obviously European, regardless to what "degree".

But you did not answer my question. Is Basque a non-European language?

Basque is a native European language which predates Indo-European while Uralic arrived at a much later date. Does not compare.

The Ripper
11-24-2011, 02:23 PM
Basque is a native European language which predates Indo-European while Uralic arrived at a much later date. Does not compare.

The ur-heimat of the Uralic languages is in Europe, according to most theories.

Monolith
11-24-2011, 04:29 PM
There are no degrees of Europeanism. There are only two categories- European and Non-European
Sounds like some kind of totalitarian slogan. :D

http://memegenerator.net/cache/instances/400x/11/11362/11635327.jpg

The Ripper
11-24-2011, 04:31 PM
http://www.emersonkent.com/images/9_11_BUSH.jpg

Either you are with the Europeans, or you are with the non-Europeans.

Hess
11-24-2011, 08:43 PM
That's your opinion and if you were actually right then there would be no way to draw the borders for "Europe" since it's not an actual continent but more of a peninsula which is part of a super-continent.

But, whatever.



Basque is a native European language which predates Indo-European while Uralic arrived at a much later date. Does not compare.

Europe is much more than just a piece of land. It is a civilization of which you either are a part or not- there is no middle ground, there are no "half Europeans" or "quarter Europeans"

Ouistreham
11-24-2011, 08:57 PM
The Conquest of Siberia was the White Race's Greatest Feat.

Period.

Joe McCarthy
11-24-2011, 09:13 PM
The Conquest of Siberia was the White Race's Greatest Feat.

Period.


Manifest Destiny was the 19th century American belief that the United States was destined to expand across the continent. It was used by Democrat-Republicans in the 1840s to justify the war with Mexico

Advocates of Manifest Destiny believed that expansion was not only wise but that it was readily apparent (manifest) and inexorable (destiny).



http://echo-sierra.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/788px-American_progress.jpg


This painting (circa 1872) by John Gast called American Progress, is an allegorical representation of the modernization of the new west. Here Columbia, a personification of the United States, leads civilization westward with American settlers, stringing telegraph wire as she sweeps west; she holds a school book. The different stages of economic activity of the pioneers are highlighted and, especially, the changing forms of transportation. Native Americans and animals flee in terror.

The Journeyman
11-24-2011, 09:31 PM
The Conquest of Siberia was the White Race's Greatest Feat.

Period.

It was an amazing feat, alright.

There was a Russian poster named Niccola on Skadi who said something about the inhabitants of Siberia being predominantly of western (European) Russian descent, descendants of frontiersman and settlers including many Ukrainians and even Germans. Apparently it's a common misconception that there are mostly eskimos and nomads still roaming around everywhere.

I wouldn't mind having a cabin of my own somewhere in somewhere in the remote Forests of Siberia.

Stars Down To Earth
11-24-2011, 09:34 PM
The Conquest of Siberia was a pretty awesome feat, though I sadly don't know much about it. On the other hand, I guess those curb-stomp battles with Russian guns against Tatar archers must have been as one-sided as the Blood River battle...

It definitely ranks alongside the Manifest Destiny, which it has many parallels with. Both involved white settlers displacing natives and expanding all the way to the Pacific coast.


Apparently it's a common misconception that there are mostly eskimos and nomads still roaming around everywhere.
Chinamen are roaming around there, though. The totally unchecked massive Chinese immigration across the border into Siberia, and the forests that get chopped down by them, is a major concern for Russia. With their low birthrate and the sparse Russian population in Siberia, things are looking pretty dark. In a century, it's likely that place will belong to China.

Also, I found out there are nignogs in the Ural Mountains. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tt80FthEajs&feature=player_embedded)

Joe McCarthy
11-24-2011, 09:38 PM
It definitely ranks alongside the Manifest Destiny, which it has many parallels with. Both involved white settlers displacing natives and expanding all the way to the Pacific coast.

Siberia looks more like what had been New Spain before the US conquered it than Manifest Destiny. The inability or unwillingness of Russia to develop the land any more than it has is very unimpressive imo. Just imagine what Brits or Americans would have done with it.

The Journeyman
11-24-2011, 09:46 PM
The Conquest of Siberia was a pretty awesome feat, though I sadly don't know much about it. Those curb-stomp battles with Russian guns against Tatar archers must have been as one-sided as the Blood River battle.

It definitely ranks alongside the Manifest Destiny, which it has many parallels with. Both involved white settlers displacing natives and expanding all the way to the Pacific coast.

Well, that was during the time of Arguebuses, hardly a game changer against Tartar composite bows. The size of the expedition parties too were very small. I guess it was somewhat similar to the campaigns of the Conquistadores, but against a much tougher enemy. The Sibir Khanate was ruled by a dynasty that descended from Ghengis Khan himself.

The Journeyman
11-24-2011, 09:50 PM
Siberia looks more like what had been New Spain before the US conquered it than Manifest Destiny. The inability or unwillingness of Russia to develop the land any more than it has is very unimpressive imo. Just imagine what Brits or Americans would have done with it.

One thing about Siberian soil is that most of it is covered by permafrost, if not that the ground is frozen for most of the year. It's not ideal farmland.

Joe McCarthy
11-24-2011, 09:56 PM
One thing about Siberian soil is that most of it is covered by permafrost, it's not ideal farmland.

That's true, but the Russian culture idea is not permeated by the merchant ethic of Anglos. I can't see Americans or British letting all of that land stand idle for centuries. There are untapped resources that would have been developed long before now.

The Journeyman
11-24-2011, 10:00 PM
That's true, but the Russian culture idea is not permeated by the merchant ethic of Anglos. I can't see Americans or British letting all of that land stand idle for centuries. There are untapped resources that would have been developed long before now.

Who cares about Anglos? Anglos never made it to the party, and good thing because they would have probably decimated that beautiful land of endless forests and pristine nature.

Joe McCarthy
11-24-2011, 10:04 PM
Who cares about Anglos? Anglos never made it to the party, and good thing because they would have probably decimated that beautiful land of endless forests and pristine nature.

In other words Siberia looks like what the American west would have had Indians/Mexicans/Spaniards gotten their way. :coffee:

The Journeyman
11-24-2011, 10:16 PM
In other words Siberia looks like what the American west would have had Indians/Mexicans/Spaniards gotten their way. :coffee:

Yeah, they would have had overgrown, decadent cities filled with immigrant workers. :rolleyes:

Stars Down To Earth
11-24-2011, 10:19 PM
In other words Siberia looks like what the American west would have had Indians/Mexicans/Spaniards gotten their way. :coffee:
I prefer it that way, actually. Forests and unspoiled natural beauty are among my favourite things in the world.

Of course, Joey prefers to ignore that Siberia has the same climate as Iceland, and looks nothing like the fertile US Midwest.

Joe McCarthy
11-24-2011, 10:31 PM
Yeah, they would have had overgrown, decadent cities filled with immigrant workers. :rolleyes:

Not exactly. As you've alluded to, the land is not made for that, but the only people who think undeveloped land is preferable to civilization are people like Indians, apparently Russians, and apparently yourself.

Joe McCarthy
11-24-2011, 10:33 PM
I prefer it that way, actually. Forests and unspoiled natural beauty are among my favourite things in the world.

Of course, Joey prefers to ignore that Siberia has the same climate as Iceland, and looks nothing like the fertile US Midwest.

West, not Midwest, and there's nothing stopping Russians from developing Siberian resources.

Other than being Russians, that is.

The Journeyman
11-24-2011, 10:56 PM
Not exactly. As you've alluded to, the land is not made for that, but the only people who think undeveloped land is preferable to civilization are people like Indians, apparently Russians, and apparently yourself.

Well, not quite. Civilization requires both land for development and nature, people need nature to thrive otherwise we would be living like rats in some concrete cage. Besides, Russia is the largest country in the world and has done more than enough development of its own.

Joe McCarthy
11-24-2011, 11:06 PM
Well, not quite. Civilization requires both land for development and nature, people need nature to thrive otherwise we would be living like rats in some concrete cage. Besides, Russia is the largest country in the world and has done more than plenty of development of its own.

We can have both, naturally, and do. Let's just say that the development vs. nature dynamic is unusually lopsided in one direction in Russia's case. ;)

I'm not complaining though. Figures like Tocqueville and Palmerston predicted Russian world domination or a new Roman Empire. Their failure to live up to their potential prevented that from occurring.

Osweo
11-25-2011, 12:01 AM
The Conquest of Siberia was a pretty awesome feat, though I sadly don't know much about it.
Forsyth wrote a good 'History of Siberia' in English, even though it's a bit too russophobic.


On the other hand, I guess those curb-stomp battles with Russian guns against Tatar archers must have been as one-sided as the Blood River battle...

Not at all. It took serious balls to be out there, so far from home, reinforcements or shelter. Do not underestimate the Tatars. Fascinatingly, one of the biggest fights was put up by the Chukchi, in the very far northeast. Very few parts of that savage zone were won with ease.

The Journeyman
11-25-2011, 01:12 AM
...there's nothing stopping Russians from developing Siberian resources.

Other than being Russians, that is.

What resources are you talking about? :confused:

Joe McCarthy
11-25-2011, 05:38 AM
What resources are you talking about? :confused:

Oil, natural gas, coal, prescious metals and diamonds, various minerals, timber, etc. It's a real treasure chest potentially but it's historically been hampered by misdevelopment, particularly during the Soviet era. Communist planners moved large numbers of people there, but in isolated cities with poor roads and infrastructure. People actually started moving back to European Russia post-Communism.

Naturally they've developed some of it though.

Motörhead Remember Me
11-25-2011, 06:30 AM
On what grounds...? What a stupid assertion. It's not 1939, let's get with the times.
Russia does not behave like a European state, and we both know it.

The Journeyman
11-25-2011, 10:07 AM
Oil, natural gas, coal, prescious metals and diamonds, various minerals, timber, etc. It's a real treasure chest potentially but it's historically been hampered by misdevelopment, particularly during the Soviet era. Communist planners moved large numbers of people there, but in isolated cities with poor roads and infrastructure. People actually started moving back to European Russia post-Communism.

Naturally they've developed some of it though.

You do know that Russia is the number one exporter of petrolium and natural gas, right?

Joe McCarthy
11-25-2011, 10:41 AM
You do know that Russia is the number one exporter of petrolium and natural gas, right?

You realize this is perhaps the most backward country in Europe with a quality of life below that of some Third World countries?

The outstanding characteristic of Russian history is not its achievements. It's that given what it has to work with it hasn't accomplished far more. This is not the Roman Empire of Lord Palmerston's nightmares. It is a country with arguably a lower quality of life than Botswana.

Pallantides
11-25-2011, 12:14 PM
Russia does not behave like a European state, and we both know it.

Do a European state have to behave in a particular way?


...
Atleast here is something Swedes and Finns have very much in common, a dislike of Russians:D

The Ripper
11-25-2011, 12:20 PM
Russia does not behave like a European state, and we both know it.

Neither does America. And what do you expect? Russia is still a major power that asserts its own sovereignty and national idea, something most European states have given up, more or less. You can't expect Russia to go about as if it was a country the size of Finland.

And Palla, Swedes dislike Russians because Russians dislike genus theory (http://www.friatider.se/dn-sura-nar-pedofilpropaganda-forbjuds-i-ryssland). Finns have an almost mythical conception of the threat from the East, or had.

Pallantides
11-25-2011, 12:41 PM
theory[/URL]. Finns have an almost mythical conception of the threat from the East, or had.

In Norway we also had a concept of a threat from the east, it was called "Den finske fare"(The Finnish danger):D

The Ripper
11-25-2011, 12:54 PM
In Norway we also had a concept of a threat from the east, it was called "Den finske fare"(The Finnish danger):D

We remember. We do not forget.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/85/Suur-Suomen_kartta.png

Ruija je Finland!

Pallantides
11-25-2011, 01:08 PM
We remember. We do not forget.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/85/Suur-Suomen_kartta.png

Ruija je Finland!

:D


Kvener ble regnet til ”den mongolske rasen” og ble sett pċ som laverestċende.

”en betydelig del av befolkningen (i Lyngen) er av mongolsk avstamning.” -Fylkesutvalget i Troms 1923

”Det er sĉrlig den (delen av befolkningen) med mongolsk islett som ikke er sċ energisk som ĝnskelig.” - Fylkesutvalget i Troms 1925

”den finsk-ugriske rase er avgjort av sadistisk natur.” - Fra en debatt om kvenene, Arbeiderbladet 1931


"The Finno-Ugric race is definitly of a sadistic nature" :p

The Ripper
11-25-2011, 01:15 PM
"The Finno-Ugric race is definitly of a sadistic nature" :p

Yes, not even Norwegians are entirely innocent of this kind of racism, even if it was far more common among Swedish chauvinists. On a further, off-topic note, this makes me wonder how Karl would react to this. I mean he is absolutely livid about Latvia's assimilationist policies directed against Livonians and Estonians in the interbellum period, I wonder how he'd react to his beloved Nordic brothers doing the same while calling his kin Mongoloid. :D

As for the actual quote, unfortunately the Germans disproved any notions of Germanic moral superiority in this matter. :ohwell:

Waidewut
11-25-2011, 05:48 PM
Yes, not even Norwegians are entirely innocent of this kind of racism, even if it was far more common among Swedish chauvinists. On a further, off-topic note, this makes me wonder how Karl would react to this. I mean he is absolutely livid about Latvia's assimilationist policies directed against Livonians and Estonians in the interbellum period, I wonder how he'd react to his beloved Nordic brothers doing the same while calling his kin Mongoloid. :D

As for the actual quote, unfortunately the Germans disproved any notions of Germanic moral superiority in this matter. :ohwell:

Karl has over exaggerated the Estonian and Livonian assimilation politics in the interbellum period. In fact the Livonians experienced a national revival in that period, after hundreds of years they again were aware of their own ethnic identity. Estonians assimilated so quickly due to their low national identity. There were all kinds of Estonian cultural organizations in Latvia, but the bigger half of Estonians didn't take part of them, as they thought their life would be easier if they spoke Latvian and taught their children Latvian.

Stars Down To Earth
11-25-2011, 06:14 PM
Yes, not even Norwegians are entirely innocent of this kind of racism, even if it was far more common among Swedish chauvinists.
Aye, didn't the Swedes at one point designate the Finns as "mongoloids" and "Asians", because they didn't speak an Indo-European language? It's very odd, how the Finns went from being a valued part of the Swedish empire and their best footsoldiers, to being disliked labour immigrants who got their skulls measured by race-anthropologists.

I guess this was a part of the general racialist trend that was popular through Europe in the early 1900s, but the Swedish attitude to the Finns still strikes me as odd and schizophrenic.

W. R.
11-25-2011, 10:14 PM
West, not Midwest, and there's nothing stopping Russians from developing Siberian resources.There were some efforts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolypin_reform#Colonization).

Morrigan
11-25-2011, 10:32 PM
Well, this thread pulled an Acela.

Lurker
11-30-2011, 08:22 PM
That's true, but the Russian culture idea is not permeated by the merchant ethic of Anglos. I can't see Americans or British letting all of that land stand idle for centuries. There are untapped resources that would have been developed long before now.

Well, lots of Canada and Australia are deserts. Ice deserts or sand deserts, they aren't being used very much, just as Siberia isn't. All these vast expanses of inhospitable land serve for is resource extraction.

Joe McCarthy
11-30-2011, 08:32 PM
Well, lots of Canada and Australia are deserts. Ice deserts or sand deserts, they aren't being used very much, just as Siberia isn't. All these vast expanses of inhospitable land serve for is resource extraction.

On what basis do you say Canadian and Australian resources aren't being used very much? You're correct that resource extraction is the main use for these lands, but relative to population both Canada and Australia are major extractors of resources. The Chinese, for example, are major purchasers of Australian raw materials.

Gaztelu
11-30-2011, 08:37 PM
Great.

Joe has instigated the second Cold War.

Let's all try and stay on topic.

Joe McCarthy
11-30-2011, 08:49 PM
Great.

Joe has instigated the second Cold War.


This is an internet forum dude. You give me far too much credit here.

Gaztelu
12-01-2011, 05:44 AM
This is an internet forum dude. You give me far too much credit here.

Understand the context Joe.

BeerBaron
12-01-2011, 06:43 AM
Well, lots of Canada and Australia are deserts. Ice deserts or sand deserts, they aren't being used very much, just as Siberia isn't. All these vast expanses of inhospitable land serve for is resource extraction.

LOL, you know Canada only has a population of 35 million right? And that the arctic circle does no encompass all of Canada. There are mines all over the canadian shield. Just stfu

Joe McCarthy
12-01-2011, 09:54 AM
Needless to say Canada and Australia are very sparsely populated and have little need to settle people in remote, inhospitable regions. Resource extraction is not wanting though.

By contrast I think few may realize that for much of its history the Soviet Union and Russia had a larger population than even the US, and though Soviet commissars attempted to settle Siberia they neglected to build adequate infrastructure for transportation, thus mismanaging the enterprise. One of Russia's great failings has been an inefficient transportation network. This cost them the Russo-Japanese War. Given the advanced nature of railroads and transportation infrastructure in the US and British Empire, it's implausible that Anglo-Saxons would have experienced the same record of failure as Soviet Marxist commissars or corrupt Russian nobles.