1453: The Cossacks Rebuild Rome

Seriously speaking, the Ukrainian Cossacks are not a single nation, but a profession, or a special organization of some nature that was formed spontaneously. It is a group-warming organization composed of a group of exiled disadvantaged groups from neighboring ethnic groups. But their fate was to surrender to Poland first and then to Russia, but neither one was considered the motherland in the true sense. The Russians' attitude towards them was just to use and defend them, just like the Oroqen people in the Qing Dynasty who made great military exploits for the Manchus, but today, the population of the Oroqen people is only about 9,000. The same is true for the Cossacks. They are both used and defended by Russia. No one regards them as their true own. This led to the tragedy of their modern separation. And the consequences are there for all to see.

The protagonist can completely replace Russia's ecological niche, become the third Rome, and become the Tsar of the Slavs

As title

This book was very interesting for about 300 chapters, but once I got involved in Burgundy and succeeded the Shinra Emperor, the level plummeted, which really reflects the protagonist's stubborn and arbitrary mentality of an old man in his sixties or seventies. I really want to know if the protagonist can remember what he was fighting for in the first place. He has become a very pure traditional feudal aristocrat.

Can the protagonist Cossacks revive Rome by relying on the economy of the steppes? In the Byzantium 1444 book next door, the protagonist earned a lot of money from maritime trade 😢 to have the national power to conquer the Balkans and Anatolia. The steppes were very poor, and the protagonist probably would not have the money to conquer Anatolia in his lifetime.

According to the evaluation, it is a bit rough. The biggest problem of the whole book is that the narrative is confusing. There is often a stick here and a hammer here and there. Although it can always be connected, the writing is insufficient and it seems very fragmented. As I read, I wonder, where is my protagonist? Where is the protagonist's wife? Where is my brother? What about the character I just met? How come you changed to a new role? Secondly, the identity of the protagonist is really confusing. Is he really the emperor? No matter how powerful a force is, it can step on it. For example, the grandson is under house arrest and the son is imprisoned. After reading this, I thought that finally, the Cossacks are going to go crazy, kill, kill, kill! I wanted to see blood flowing like a river, but after a few days of siege, the people were starving, so they released your son, and then carried out a painless disciplinary war... The king of France, why did the Sultan slaughter the city when he wanted to? Others are afraid when they think of them, but your protagonist and others are indifferent. Is this really a Roman emperor? Really the Cossack leader? Then there are the Cossacks. At the beginning, the author always emphasized that the Cossacks were free people, enemies of the nobility, and wanted to liberate the serfs. Then the protagonist became a co-emperor, and further became the Roman emperor. Okay, no problem, it makes sense, but the protagonist increasingly doesn't want to be a Cossack and relies more and more on Machiavellian tactics. Of course, it's cheap to use Machiavellian tactics to solve the problem, but you have to write it happily. It turns out that the French Machiavellian player is better than you, and you still play with him on the chessboard. Don't ask, asking is about farming, and your son has been assassinated. Hey, dad wants to farm, and there is nothing he can do... No, let's just say that you are the only heir, and you have been married to a wife for more than 200 chapters without showing your face. You are the only son, and even if you were assassinated, you would not even fart like a Roman emperor... Just keep farming 🤔 In the final plot, the writing of the war is very poor. Most of the supporting characters are fooled, fell into the trap, and the supporting characters kneel down... The key is that your own main character is the same. It was written in the 15th century, thinking about the 17th century. Was France that strong? France in the 15th century The Chinese dragoons dismounted and beat the Polish hussars to death. I would never dare to do this. This is the French army from World War I. Are the matchlocks so powerful? Two thousand hussars and even two thousand wild boars can defeat them... Summary, fictional historical article, you can read it if you are interested. Look, if you want to watch the Cossacks kill everyone, you can basically read the free chapter I still want to complain about the protagonist, the father of the Cossacks, the Emperor of Rome, the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, the leader of Eastern Europe, the destroyer of the Ottomans, the conqueror of Russia, and Caesar is still alive. Such an awesome character, how dare you kidnap his son and imprison his grandson. The child's mother didn't even show her face. His mother directly summoned the Cossacks to beat him. I thought it was well written, but it turned out that this person was not found... Barbarians fear power but not virtue. The protagonist has no majesty and moral character that is not admirable. At least the author did not show it.

The stereotype is too great. The chapter about the Ming Dynasty made me even more happy. It's no wonder it's the fourth child. In the comment section, it was said that Zheng He should support Rome, haha.

It's quite curious. In the era of centralized monarchy and dictatorship, many authors thought of a constitutional republic and rebelled against Tiangang. I'm thinking that without enough productivity, you can't even make the bourgeoisie, let alone red. If you build a constitutional republic and give away so many rights, who will take them away in the end? Burghers and peasants? These two classes were not too weak compared to the nobles during this period. In the end, weren't their rights taken away by the nobles? A typical example of doing this in the Internet is Bo Li. If you want to be as brilliant as you want, you will end up on the roadside. I just don't understand it. I can understand your idea of ​​federal enfeoffment, but I really don't understand your lack of centralization and autocratic monarchy. The emergence of absolute monarchy has its own reasons, whether in the East or the West. Autocratic monarchy and centralization of power are an absolute symbol of progress during this period. You are turning against Tiangang to establish a constitutional republic. So how do you achieve centralization? Don't you think about some ideas and things and consider the productivity structure at that time? Don't you think about the difference in power between classes? Many things are destined to come slowly and not in a hurry.

After reading a little bit, the federal constitution is really terrible. How could we do it without centralization of power in that era? It was time-consuming and labor-intensive.

How's it going