Was there any other city on the Black Sea that could have surpassed Istanbul in greatness?

macon

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
4,019
Slovenia, EU
#21
Oh, absolutely! Few Russians live as far north as St. Petersburg even nowadays:

Also, I think that a Russian capital in Crimea would have to be located in either central Crimea or northern Crimea so that it would actually have a lot of room to expand. Southern Crimea is full of mountains that might make significant urban and suburban expansion difficult:
St. Peterburg is got 4.5 millions of people and is growing, it is a very big population center on it's own.

Russian capital in Crimea demanded a prerequisite condition: an open access to Mediterranean through Bospor meaning a superior fleet in whole eastern Mediterranean. Otherwise it would be too vulnerable. Fleet was never really a Russian top strength, their force was in land army.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,060
SoCal
#22
Yes, but they were also colonizing Siberia in a same time period. Especially south Siberia around Novosibirsk and Krasnoyarsk is a very important region to Russia.
Yep.

I think that US never really settled anything in west besides California and few population islands
Texas is certainly extremely populous and still rapidly growing--if one considers it to be a part of the West.

BTW, when I said "west," I was literally thinking of all US territory west of the Proclamation Line of 1763. In other words, all territory west of the borders of the original 13 Colonies in 1763. Based on some previous very rough calculations that I did, it looks like around 95% of the US's total population lived in the original 13 Colonies in 1790 but only around 35% of the US's total population lived in the original 13 Colonies in 2010.

This map (which I absolutely LOVE!) allows you to see the shifting US population density over time:



and China's main
Main what? Main centers of population?

was much bigger than Manchuria and also their starting population if compared to Russia.
That's true, but please keep in mind that, until the collapse of the Soviet Union, "Greater Russia" had the third-largest population in the world--behind only China and India. The amount of Slavs in "Greater Russia" was comparable to the amount of White people in the US. Plus, without the World Wars, the Russian Civil War, and Communism, Russia would have been in an even stronger position by now.

US got their influx of settlers from Europe,
In large part, Yes, but not completely. AFAIK, the US had relatively few immigrants before 1840 and yet a lot of territories in the interior of the US were still settled by that point in time. Also, most of the Southern US never had large numbers of European immigrants and yet still got settled as a result of a lot of Whites moving to the interior Southern US from the coastal Southern US.

Russia has not. Russians and Ukrainians settled Black sea coasts very well in about a century after Russian annexation of Crimean khanate.
Yep. However, my point is that, if it wasn't for Communism and its demographic devastation during the 20th century, Russia could have kept this momentum going and settled even more territories in the south by the present-day.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,060
SoCal
#23
St. Peterburg is got 4.5 millions of people and is growing, it is a very big population center on it's own.
True, but it only makes up about 1/30th of Russia's total population.

Russian capital in Crimea demanded a prerequisite condition: an open access to Mediterranean through Bospor meaning a superior fleet in whole eastern Mediterranean. Otherwise it would be too vulnerable. Fleet was never really a Russian top strength, their force was in land army.
Did Russia actually have open access to the straits through which the Baltic Sea borders the North Sea, though?
 

macon

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
4,019
Slovenia, EU
#24
Did Russia actually have open access to the straits through which the Baltic Sea borders the North Sea, though?
No, but Danes and Swedes were more easily disposable on sea than Ottomans in 18th century in my opinion. Russians were having bigger means in north than in south. Also Baltic straits are not so narrow as Bospor.
 
Likes: Futurist

macon

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
4,019
Slovenia, EU
#25
Yep.


Yep. However, my point is that, if it wasn't for Communism and its demographic devastation during the 20th century, Russia could have kept this momentum going and settled even more territories in the south by the present-day.
A very nice map. I ment west from Texas, I have Texas in it's own category in my mind. I know that west in USA is everything west from Mississippi. Yes, communists were a disaster to Russia although Russia was having a solid growth after WWII.
 
Likes: Futurist
Apr 2017
1,505
U.S.A.
#26
If they didn't acquire it and only had Rostov-Azov, then it would have been their main southern port.
Agreed. Also, what about a large Russian city slightly west of Kherson--as in, where the Dnieper River touches the Black Sea?[/QUOTE]
Generally, if you want a major port city west of Rostov, Sevastopol would be the ideal location.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,060
SoCal
#27
No, but Danes and Swedes were more easily disposable on sea than Ottomans in 18th century in my opinion. Russians were having bigger means in north than in south. Also Baltic straits are not so narrow as Bospor.
The Danes and Swedes were more easily disposable, but what about the Germans? After all, Germany unified in 1866-1871 and began constructing a large navy in the 1890s.

A very nice map. I ment west from Texas, I have Texas in it's own category in my mind. I know that west in USA is everything west from Mississippi.
Yeah, the western US is relatively sparsely populated compared to California:



Of course, the interior southwest is much more populous than the interior northwest is. The interior northwest is almost a population desert. :(

BTW, here's a map of the Proclamation Line of 1763:



This line is much further east than the Mississippi River is. Also, as I said, there was almost no White settlement west of this line back in 1763--with the possible exception of New Orleans.

Yes, communists were a disaster to Russia although Russia was having a solid growth after WWII.
Solid population growth?