How can one empire be so absolutely gigantic and still be considered

>>1642857
Not all clay is good clay

>>1642857

Most of it was empty, frozen wasteland.

>>1642864

>>1642859
>>1642864
this. and it looks much bigger than it is because map projection.

File: map-soviet-union-population-density[1].jpg (2MB, 2844x1969px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2844x1969px

>>1642859
>Not all clay is good clay

>>1642864
>Most of it was empty, frozen wasteland.

That doesn't explain the whole story. Even if we only look at the inhabited parts (and even only those of modern day Russia, ignoring a large portion of good, fertile land that the Russians no longer control) Russia is about half as large as Europe. This doesn't explain why it never managed to match smaller countries like France (inb4 burning everything in your own country and then pouncing it with literally the rest of Europe combined = stronk) or Germany (until the rise of the Soviet Union, which also ended up collapsing half a century later).

>>1642887
>and even only those of modern day Russia, ignoring a large portion of good, fertile land that the Russians no longer control
Ignore that. Pic related is the Soviet Union. I dun goofed.

I thought it was the fact that they were still full feudal, relying on indentured laborers when Europe was miles ahead in every conceivable way, intellectually or otherwise.

>>1642857
from a geopolitical standpoint its part of the ancestrially european hegemony that took half of asia away from itself. it holds massive keepstakes.

File: gulag gold mine.jpg (96KB, 700x465px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 700x465px

>>1642887

File: Permafrost_All.0210.jpg (1MB, 4000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4000x2000px

>>1642887
also worth noting the world is warming and permafrost will eventually recede.. eventually..

>>1642887
I believe Russia was just slightly more populous than France for much of the early Modern period despite being so vast. And that might just be the problem. Big as it was, the country wasn't all that dense so you didn't get an industrial base as prolific as, say, the Rhine. Plus the size of that land meant internal communication wasn't as swift as they were for Italy or England, so I imagine there was a lot more autonomy for its magnates who apparently didn't care too often about exploiting their land and their serfs to fund their courtly lives

>>1642944
yep and it persist to this day. most of the population are serfs

>>1642857
An inability for power projection I imagine. Most of the other Great Powers could show up with an army anywhere, anytime, and also have a huge navy for support. Russia was mostly trapped by its admittedly large borders, only able to bully its immediate neighbors. And when it did it wasn't always the most powerful or serious bully there since another Great Power like France or England probably beat them there and had gunboats threatening the political and economic heartland of the region being contested.

>>1643002
>projection power
had to choose between asian pacific & europe AND control the steppe AND all of irabia. really good case on the limitations of any one cohesive earthly human units scarcity capcity for russia herself to have not done more and others likewise against it. like the world ran out of steam and it being the last priority is its place in life

>>1642965

theres a lot of methane in the permafrost

a lot

>>1642965
yeah, and by that point the earth will be uninhabitable

>>1642887
>This doesn't explain why it never managed to match smaller countries like France
France had 2nd biggest population in Europe in Napoleonic times. Followed by Russia. Population density dictated by agricultural conditions(large part of Russia is enormously fertile but continental climate makes agriculture a chore) plays a role.

>>1643116
>France had 2nd biggest population in Europe in Napoleonic times. Followed by Russia.
Sorry, Russia was #1, France was #2 and #3 was Austria, I believe.

>>1643049
ull be dead anyway