Timeline for Why did Ivan the Terrible put a Khan to rule Astrakhan in 1554?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 19, 2017 at 9:58 | vote | accept | LamaDelRay | ||
| Dec 19, 2017 at 9:52 | answer | added | Danila Smirnov | timeline score: 5 | |
| Feb 27, 2017 at 8:15 | comment | added | LamaDelRay | @CGCampbell updated the question with the sources! | |
| Feb 27, 2017 at 8:15 | history | edited | LamaDelRay | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Included sources
|
| Feb 25, 2017 at 8:44 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackHistory/status/835410017549451264 | ||
| Feb 24, 2017 at 15:09 | comment | added | JMVanPelt | In addition, I guess a neighbouring nobleman would gain too much power if given additional lands to rule, whereas the puppet Khan would depend on whoever put him in charge to retain his throne. | |
| Feb 24, 2017 at 14:03 | history | edited | JMVanPelt | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Improved writing
|
| Feb 24, 2017 at 9:59 | comment | added | NSNoob | Well, Nobody ever said that a Brutal ruler can't be good at politics. 2 years should have been enough to stabilize the situation which would be pretty volatile immediately after the conquest. If after 2 years it seems that your fears were unfounded and coast was clear for total annexation, Why not go for it? | |
| Feb 24, 2017 at 9:52 | comment | added | LamaDelRay | @NSNoob I'm quite surprised a brutal ruler like Ivan would care actually, and 2 years later he did annex it remorselessly... | |
| Feb 24, 2017 at 9:49 | comment | added | NSNoob | Hazarding a guess here, because a Khan would be more readily acceptable for the local population as it would be seen as continuation of the regime they had grown up with. It's not a sole event, many great powers have done that, installing a puppet in a newly-conquered territory to placate the locals | |
| Feb 24, 2017 at 9:27 | history | asked | LamaDelRay | CC BY-SA 3.0 |