Even many historians neglect the powerful influence that the Central Asian herding societies had on the development of Eurasian agrarian societies. Their existential military threat forced Russia, China and others to grow big and centralized.
One point that I would add is that the highly productive soil of modern-day Ukraine and southern Russia could not be plowed before the invention of the steel plow. This made dense populations centers almost impossible to evolve in the Temperate Forest biome. This gave the Herding societies free rein over the region. The invention of the steel plow opened up some of the world’s most productive agricultural regions, including the American Great Plains, the Russian/Ukranian steppe, and the Argentine Pampas.
A comprehensive overview of why Moscow ended up as the capital. Great explanation of the details that finally come together to allow me to make sense of it.
The Mongols, who created the greatest land mass of territory EVER on earth, were able to conquer not just the Kievan Rus and other major Rus tribes, but also a substantial portion of current day China. It is interesting (perhaps sad) how they have been marginalized in current day Russia.
Power is fleeting. There is never a guarantee that the future will be anything we recognize.
A very interesting article! I always like your geographic insights. A couple of very important things are missing though:
1. St Petersburg has actually been a capital for 215 years since its foundation in 1703 and only ceased to be the one in 1918 after the Soviets took over and moved the capital back to Moscow.
2. Moscow rose to power and managed to unite most of European Russia under the Golden Horde rule (the Mongol Yoke), which can be explained through political means but cannot through geographical. Also Mongols are responsible for the wane of Kiev as a power center. Although I agree that post-1480 geography definitely helped Moscow to remain strong and resist the invasions from nomads
Accurate! First-Gen Golden Horde realpolitik saw Novgorod-Nevsky and Horde alliance, and the Nevsky lineage became grand princes and de-facto rulers eventually ruling out of Moscow, which went from centralized tax collection hub to a political base. This also shifted the entire Rus center of gravity from Kyiv to Moscow.
As always, thank you for this great article, Tomas!
Two questions:
1) Are you sure that the reason Novgorod and Saint Petersburg would be more unable to sustain a large population from farming than Moscow is their more northerly location? Climate-wise there doesn't seem to be a large difference (they are actually milder in winter and similar in summer). Maybe you were hinting more at daylight hours?
2) Why the far east was conquered by Russia and not China, which was closer?
Great, can't wait to read it! By the way, I hope you'll write something about the Balkans soon: I have to be in Athens for a conference in a couple of weeks and I have decided to take the time and drive all the way there from Italy!
An interesting detail from Snyder: the name of the Kievan Rus leader Waldemar has evolved into the Ukrainian Volodymyr (as in Zelenskyy) and to the Russian Vladimir (as in Putin)!
Relative to the Kievan Rus, you might want to read that section in Serhii Plokhy’s book THE GATES OF EUROPE: A History of Ukraine, Serhy Yekelchyk’s BIRTH OF A MODERN NATION pp. 18-25. Also go to THINKING ABOUT, the Substack page of Timothy Snyder. You’ll have to scroll down quite a bit to get to the 1st lecture of his free Yale University course on the History of Ukraine (also available on YouTube). I’m doing the class, readings included, and it is very worthwhile. Even just listening to the classes is interesting. Both of these books are on Snyder's reading list. Plokhy’s is the basic text and it is excellent.
Basically they all stress the Scandinavian roots of the Kievan Rus, who were mostly from what is now Sweden. They traded and explored the river systems to the east and south as far as Kiev. More on this can be found in the book THE RIVER KINGS: A New History of the Vikings from Scandinavia to the Silk Roads by Cat Jarman, a bioarchaeologist.
These are in contrast to books on Russian history (and Russian leaders) that look on the Kievan Rus as the foundation of Russia. Ukrainians consider this the founding of their state. Both the books in my previous comment were written by Ukrainians.
Bioarchaeology’s use of isotopes makes it possible to know exactly where and when an individual lived and if the person was related to others or not. Paleontologists using the isotopes in a cross section of a mammoth’s tusk have traced its movements in Alaska from its neonatal stage till it’s death. As for the language doubts, the Scandinavian and Russian languages belong to the Indo-European family and are related although from different branches. Laura Spinney has just published (2025) PROTO: How One Ancient Language Went Global. The introduction alone is worth the price of the book! Linguists believe that Proto Indo-European developed in the area north of the Black Sea and spread eastward and westward. All the European languages (except Finnish, Hungarian, and Basque) belong to the Indo-European languages.
Excellent article.
Even many historians neglect the powerful influence that the Central Asian herding societies had on the development of Eurasian agrarian societies. Their existential military threat forced Russia, China and others to grow big and centralized.
https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/herding-societies
One point that I would add is that the highly productive soil of modern-day Ukraine and southern Russia could not be plowed before the invention of the steel plow. This made dense populations centers almost impossible to evolve in the Temperate Forest biome. This gave the Herding societies free rein over the region. The invention of the steel plow opened up some of the world’s most productive agricultural regions, including the American Great Plains, the Russian/Ukranian steppe, and the Argentine Pampas.
https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/biomes-have-profoundly-shaped-human
I would also add that the rapid development of firearms and cannon tipped the military balance between Russia and the horse archers of the steppe.
A comprehensive overview of why Moscow ended up as the capital. Great explanation of the details that finally come together to allow me to make sense of it.
The Mongols, who created the greatest land mass of territory EVER on earth, were able to conquer not just the Kievan Rus and other major Rus tribes, but also a substantial portion of current day China. It is interesting (perhaps sad) how they have been marginalized in current day Russia.
Power is fleeting. There is never a guarantee that the future will be anything we recognize.
Excellent work, Tomas! Thank you!
A very interesting article! I always like your geographic insights. A couple of very important things are missing though:
1. St Petersburg has actually been a capital for 215 years since its foundation in 1703 and only ceased to be the one in 1918 after the Soviets took over and moved the capital back to Moscow.
2. Moscow rose to power and managed to unite most of European Russia under the Golden Horde rule (the Mongol Yoke), which can be explained through political means but cannot through geographical. Also Mongols are responsible for the wane of Kiev as a power center. Although I agree that post-1480 geography definitely helped Moscow to remain strong and resist the invasions from nomads
1. Correct!
2. Yes and no!
Will detail both in next week's premium article
Accurate! First-Gen Golden Horde realpolitik saw Novgorod-Nevsky and Horde alliance, and the Nevsky lineage became grand princes and de-facto rulers eventually ruling out of Moscow, which went from centralized tax collection hub to a political base. This also shifted the entire Rus center of gravity from Kyiv to Moscow.
As always, thank you for this great article, Tomas!
Two questions:
1) Are you sure that the reason Novgorod and Saint Petersburg would be more unable to sustain a large population from farming than Moscow is their more northerly location? Climate-wise there doesn't seem to be a large difference (they are actually milder in winter and similar in summer). Maybe you were hinting more at daylight hours?
2) Why the far east was conquered by Russia and not China, which was closer?
Thanks as usual!
You are correct! I'm going to cover both questions in the premium article this week!
Great, can't wait to read it! By the way, I hope you'll write something about the Balkans soon: I have to be in Athens for a conference in a couple of weeks and I have decided to take the time and drive all the way there from Italy!
Great article. Please address “Why does Mongolia exist?”
I will!
An interesting detail from Snyder: the name of the Kievan Rus leader Waldemar has evolved into the Ukrainian Volodymyr (as in Zelenskyy) and to the Russian Vladimir (as in Putin)!
Ha! Interesting!
I really enjoy your geography articles!!!
Relative to the Kievan Rus, you might want to read that section in Serhii Plokhy’s book THE GATES OF EUROPE: A History of Ukraine, Serhy Yekelchyk’s BIRTH OF A MODERN NATION pp. 18-25. Also go to THINKING ABOUT, the Substack page of Timothy Snyder. You’ll have to scroll down quite a bit to get to the 1st lecture of his free Yale University course on the History of Ukraine (also available on YouTube). I’m doing the class, readings included, and it is very worthwhile. Even just listening to the classes is interesting. Both of these books are on Snyder's reading list. Plokhy’s is the basic text and it is excellent.
Thanks! Any short summary of the interesting insights?
Basically they all stress the Scandinavian roots of the Kievan Rus, who were mostly from what is now Sweden. They traded and explored the river systems to the east and south as far as Kiev. More on this can be found in the book THE RIVER KINGS: A New History of the Vikings from Scandinavia to the Silk Roads by Cat Jarman, a bioarchaeologist.
These are in contrast to books on Russian history (and Russian leaders) that look on the Kievan Rus as the foundation of Russia. Ukrainians consider this the founding of their state. Both the books in my previous comment were written by Ukrainians.
Ah yes I agree!
But didn't Putin talk about Rurik as the founder of Rus? Rurik was clearly Varangian.
Also Russian doesn't come from there does it? I wonder how that came to be. The Varangian Princes just adopted the local language?
I also thought the very blond, blue-eyed ppl came from the Urals?
Bioarchaeology’s use of isotopes makes it possible to know exactly where and when an individual lived and if the person was related to others or not. Paleontologists using the isotopes in a cross section of a mammoth’s tusk have traced its movements in Alaska from its neonatal stage till it’s death. As for the language doubts, the Scandinavian and Russian languages belong to the Indo-European family and are related although from different branches. Laura Spinney has just published (2025) PROTO: How One Ancient Language Went Global. The introduction alone is worth the price of the book! Linguists believe that Proto Indo-European developed in the area north of the Black Sea and spread eastward and westward. All the European languages (except Finnish, Hungarian, and Basque) belong to the Indo-European languages.