Alternate Locations For St Petersburg?

Sevarics

Sevarics

As the tin says, what are some alternate locations for St Petersburg and what are the ramifications of these alternate locations?

I know Peter was focused on the Baltic for its connection to the west... Perhaps he uses Reval (Talinn) or Riga as alt locations for Petersburg? IOTL he did build a palace in Reval.
 

Arcavia

Both Reval and Riga would make sense, I think the real reason St Petersburg was selected was because Peter was in more effective control of the Neva region than of Estonia/Livonia when construction began (as the GNW was still ongoing).

If the Swedes are more effective at harassing the region then I could see him actually building the capital at (Velikiy) Novgorod with Neva and Novgorod having a similar relationship as Rome and Ostia or Athens and Piraeus.
 
Lusitania

Lusitania

Donor
Peter started St. Petersburg in 1703 while Tallinn was only captured in 1710. Also for first century or so Tallinn was ruled as separate country by Russia and retained most of its Estonian traditions and character. It was only in the late 19th century that Russia moved to introduce Russian in the area and city.

So any decision to use it in place of St. Petersburg would of required the city snd region become Russian much sooner.
 

Bison

Banned
Neva contains a nice natural harbour, one of the best in Eastern Europe, and is closer to Moscow and the rest of the Empire than Tallin or Riga, improving communication efficiency throughout the nation. However, Riga was already a major regional center and didnt require the total building from the ground up that took place in Ingria. Peter was also famously pro-German, and Riga was a German city. Also it is further west and south than St. Petersburg, and less prone to freezing over. I'm not as fond of Reval.

Pskov may also be an interesting consideration, as, I believe, it has access to the Sea via lake Pskov/Peipus, is more Russian than either Neva, Reval, or Riga. It was also a fairly large city at the time.
 
Sevarics

Sevarics

So, let's say Riga becomes St Petersburg... does that lead to larger Russian settlement in the Baltic States? Earlier pushes at Russification of them?
 
Lusitania

Lusitania

Donor
TimTurner said:
I think that this is certain to butterfly the Baltic region separating from Russia post-1990.
Click to expand...
It would have to, the Baltic nations would be majority Russian. You are not going to build your main Baltic port in a foreign city even if part of Russia.
 

mikegold

An alternate capitol focused on Russia's opening to the West? While there's been discussion here of other Baltic locations, Russia has access to another marginal inner sea. So, Sebastopol, Livadia or Yalta, in a world where Russia conquers the Crimea early? Of course that's a vulnerable geography...

Another possibility of course is Constantinople (Tsargrad), as the Third Rome restores the Second.
 
Vuu

Vuu

Banned
Peter the Great is severely overrated and imo massively damaged Russian culture to the point half their words of unnecessary foreign origin haven't been violently expunged, for whatever insane reason.

Now, that we have gotten past the eternal reminder, let's see...

The city must be on the coast. If on the Baltic, then the choices become quite limited by military conquests, but let's consider that territorially it's all as OTL, at the same time. Imo, Azov is a "safe" option, as it was de jure Russian even prior to the great northern war.
 

samcster94

Banned
Vuu said:
Peter the Great is severely overrated and imo massively damaged Russian culture to the point half their words of unnecessary foreign origin haven't been violently expunged, for whatever insane reason.

Now, that we have gotten past the eternal reminder, let's see...

The city must be on the coast. If on the Baltic, then the choices become quite limited by military conquests, but let's consider that territorially it's all as OTL, at the same time. Imo, Azov is a "safe" option, as it was de jure Russian even prior to the great northern war.
Click to expand...
The Black Sea seems like an obvious place to put it. Peter was a bit crazy and narcissistic. He dressed in a way that never made sense for a man living in Russia, much less one ruling it.
 
Sevarics

Sevarics

samcster94 said:
The Black Sea seems like an obvious place to put it. Peter was a bit crazy and narcissistic. He dressed in a way that never made sense for a man living in Russia, much less one ruling it.
Click to expand...

It would require an earlier Russian conquest of the Ukraine and Crimea.
 

RGB

Sevarics said:
It would require an earlier Russian conquest of the Ukraine and Crimea.
Click to expand...

Mazepa and Golitsyn get their act together and don't faff around while the Crimeans dig in, it's all over before Peter even takes the seat. On the other hand, that might really complicate succession for Peter too.
 

Kaze

Banned
How about inside Finland? Russia takes Finland as reparations for their victory against Sweden. Peter could take it with ease once he won, but he decided not to - he knew the length of supply lines from Moscow would only stretch to the Neva.
As for the Black Sea? You would have to have a war with the Ottomans and win. Wherein - I would say Constantinople would be his only goal.
 
Mirror

Mirror

I cannot quote any sources at the moment, but I have read a lot about the Great Northern War and I am pretty sure it was going to be Narva.

Narva was already an important trading hub and one of the most impressive fortresses in the region. Tsar Peter never thought at first he could get Reval, much less Riga from the Swedes. But Narva was certainly a possibility.

It is telling that the Saint Petersburg Project wasn't started in earnest until 1703, just after Charles XII had handed Peter a crushing defeat in (you guessed it) the Battle of Narva. This made it clear to Peter that it was Saint Petersburg or nothing.

It wasn't until after Charles had thrown away his army in the stupid Polish campaign and the even more stupid Battle of Poltava that gaining the Baltic provinces actually became a possibility for Peter - and it wasn't certain until the Treaty of Nystad in 1721.

But by then the Saint Petersburg Project was in full swing and it was much too late to reconsider. The capital was already moved there in 1912.

So if you wish to change what happened, start with a lot of butterflies at the Battle of Narva and go from there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top