The main reasons for the defeat of Russia in the Crimean war. Causes of defeat and consequences
- the aggravation of the "Eastern Question", i.e., the struggle of the leading countries for the division of the "Turkish heritage";
- the growth of the national liberation movement in the Balkans, the acute internal crisis in Turkey and the conviction of Nicholas I of the inevitability of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire;
- the miscalculations of the diplomacy of Nicholas 1, which manifested itself in the hope that Austria, in gratitude for its salvation in 1848-1849, would support Russia, it would be possible to agree with England on the division of Turkey; as well as disbelief in the possibility of an agreement between the eternal enemies - England and France, directed against Russia, "
- the desire of England, France, Austria and Prussia to oust Russia from the East, the desire to prevent its penetration into the Balkans
The reason for the Crimean war of 1853-1856:
The dispute between the Orthodox and Catholic churches for the right to control Christian shrines in Palestine. Russia was behind the Orthodox Church, and France was behind the Catholic Church.
Stages of military operations of the Crimean War:
1. Russo-Turkish War(May - December 1853). After the Turkish sultan rejected the ultimatum on granting the Russian Tsar the right to patronize the Orthodox citizens of the Ottoman Empire, the Russian army occupied Moldavia, Wallachia and up to the Danube. The Caucasian Corps went on the offensive. The Black Sea squadron achieved great success, which in November 1853 under the command of Pavel Nakhimov destroyed the Turkish fleet in the battle of Sinop.
2. The beginning of the war between Russia and a coalition of European countries (spring - summer 1854). the threat of defeat looming over Turkey prompted European countries to take active anti-Russian actions, which led to local war to a European war.
March. England and France took the side of Turkey (Sardinian). Allied squadrons fired on Russian troops; fortification on the Alan Islands in the Baltic, on the Solovki, in the White Sea, on the Kola Peninsula, in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Odessa, Nikolaev, Kerch. Austria, threatening Russia with war, moved troops to the borders of the Danubian principalities, which forced the Russian armies to leave Moldavia and Wallachia.
3. Defense of Sevastopol and the end of the war. In September 1854, the Anglo-French The army landed in the Crimea, which turned into the main "theater" of the war. This is the last stage of the Crimean War of 1853-1856.
The Russian army led by Menshikov was defeated on the river. Alma left Sevastopol defenseless. The defense of the sea fortress, after the flooding of the sailing fleet in the Sevastopol bay, was taken over by sailors led by Admirals Kornilov, Nakhimov Istomin (all died). In the first days of October 1854, the defense of the city began and was taken only on August 27, 1855.
In the Caucasus, successful actions in November 1855, the capture of the fortress of Kars. However, with the fall of Sevastopol, the outcome of the war was predetermined: March 1856. peace talks in Paris.
Terms of the Paris Peace Treaty (1856)
Russia was losing Southern Bessarabia with the mouth of the Danube, and Kars was returning to Turkey in exchange for Sevastopol.
- Russia was deprived of the right to protect the Christians of the Ottoman Empire
- The Black Sea was declared neutral and Russia lost the right to have a navy and fortifications there.
- Established freedom of navigation on the Danube, which opened the Baltic Peninsula for Western powers
Causes of Russia's defeat in the Crimean War.
- Economic and technical backwardness (weapons and transport support of the Russian armies)
- The mediocrity of the Russian high ground command, which achieved ranks and titles through intrigue, flattery
- Diplomatic miscalculations that led Russia to isolation in the war with the coalition of England, France, Turkey, with the hostile attitude of Austria, Prussia.
- The apparent disparity of forces
In this way Crimean War 1853 - 1856,
1) at the beginning of the reign of Nicholas 1, Russia managed to acquire a number of territories in the East and expand its spheres of influence
2) the suppression of the revolutionary movement in the West brought Russia the title of "gendarme of Europe", but did not meet its nat. interests
3) the defeat in the Crimean War revealed the backwardness of Russia; the rottenness of its autocratic-serf system. Revealed errors in foreign policy, the goals of which did not correspond to the capabilities of the country
4) this defeat became a decisive and direct factor in the preparation and implementation of the abolition of serfdom in Russia
5) the heroism and selflessness of Russian soldiers during the Crimean War remained in the memory of the people and influenced the development of the spiritual life of the country.
In total, states occupying 75% of the land participated in this war, the war was fought on the territory of countless seas and oceans. In fact, it can be called a "World" war. Unless without large-scale mobilization.
Oddly enough, the name of the war does not quite reflect its goals or timing. It bears the name of the most bloody and difficult part of this war. IN European history this war is known as the "Eastern" - which also reflects the essence only partially.
Russian emperor Nicholas I saw the weakness of the Ottoman ports, and sought to capture the straits Bosphorus And Dardanelles- this would strengthen the military and economic situation Russian Empire. In addition, the emperor of the Russian Empire, as the bearer of the title, was the "patron" of all Orthodox. Including in Turkey. The whole of 1853 was the time of the triumph of the Russian Empire - victory in the Caucasus and the European front.
Nicholas I
France and Great Britain entered the war, in view of the urgent Eastern Question.
So what is the reason for the defeat of Russia? There are several factors that brought the war to such an outcome. Now we will look at each in detail:
After the Napoleonic Wars, the nature of the war began to change, due to the development of technology, scientific thought and military science. The Russian army was large even by today's standards - 1,365,000 people. Of course, the modernization of such a colossus was a titanic task and required a lot of time and resources. As a result, this played a cruel joke on the Russian soldiers - for example, the firing range of Russian artillery did not exceed the firing range of English muskets. Of course, Russian muskets were absolutely incomparable with English ones in range.
This is how a French soldier describes the state of the Russian army in his letter:
“Our major says that, according to all the rules of military science, it is high time for them (Russians) to capitulate. For each of their cannons, we have five cannons, for each soldier, ten. And you should have seen their guns! Probably, our grandfathers, who stormed the Bastille, even had the best weapon. They don't have ammo. Every morning, their women and children go out into the open field between the fortifications and collect the kernels in bags.
In addition, the war itself is also widely known for the fact that it was the first to use promising developments of that time, revolutionary at that time: water mines, cone-shaped shells for artillery (instead of cannonballs), rifles with rifled barrels , ships made of metal and powered by steam. Also, there was a backlog of Russia in the fleet - the battle near Sinop - the last battle in history between sailing ships, in which Russian ships won over the Turkish fleet. Although there were 3 Russian steamships there, the main force of the Russian fleet was sailing ships. In general, of course, there were modern weapons, and the Allies did not modernize their armies by 100%. However, if the number, for example, of modern guns in the army of the Russian Empire reached only 5-8%, then the French had up to 35%, and the British generally had over 50%. In addition, there was a possibility of capturing St. Petersburg, and all new weapons arrived there in the first place. Accordingly, many of them simply did not reach the Crimea and Sevastopol.
2. Failures in the diplomatic field.
Russia assumed the allied position of Austria and Prussia. In fact, the position was very "cold" on the verge of open confrontation.
Russia had an extremely weak network railways. Everything, absolutely everything, the supply of the Crimean troops was carried out with the help of horse-drawn transport and convoys. Due to the huge distances, load and weather, the supply "caravans" did not reach their destination at all - the cattle died, and a significant part of the supplies was eventually looted. Such interruptions in supply eventually resulted in the fact that the number of non-combat losses in the Russian army Peaceful time reached 3.5%.
4. A little excessive arrogance of Nicholas I.
Nicholas I was a patriot and a very arrogant person. These 2 qualities together gave a sad result - inspired by the success in suppressing the Hungarian uprising in the Austrian Empire in 1849, he sincerely believed that the army of the Russian Empire was the most advanced and strongest. And therefore, the modernization of the army can be given less time and money. Arrogance was also manifested in the very decision of the war with Turkey - the emperor sincerely believed that:
1. Army Russian Empire capable of crushing the army of the Ottoman port to smithereens (here he turned out to be right).
2. Due to superior military power and political power, the UK and France will not be able / unwilling to provide direct military support to Turkey.
3. Even if France and Great Britain go to war with Russia, then her allies, Austria and Prussia, will come to her aid. (in reality, there was not an illusory possibility of the Republic of Ingushetia itself to fight with Austria and Prussia)
5. Much fewer resources.
Contrary to popular stereotype, economic and demographic superiority was by no means on the side of the Russian Empire. Because it is correct to count not only the territories of the “metropolises” (all of Russia is one big metropolis), but also the territories of the colonies and dominions, from which resources were also drawn. And in this case, it turns out that on the side of the alliance were the territories of modern: India, Australia, Canada, most of Africa, France, Great Britain, Turkey, the whole Balkan Peninsula, all Southeast Asia. As a result, it turned out that the Russian Empire was opposed by half the globe. As a result, the coalition had a tangible advantage in all respects.
6. Unfriendly population of Crimea.
Then the bulk of the population of the Crimea was Crimean Tatars. They were very friendly towards the Turks and their allies - they saw the Turks as political and religious patrons. The Tatars assisted the coalition forces in finding forage, water, provided knowledge of the area, and served as scouts.
However, if the Russian Empire did not have strengths, then the defeat would have resulted in severe indemnities and territorial losses. Our country has also suffered more terrible defeats (for example, the defeat in Livonian War, with a similar scenario ).
At peaceful diplomatic negotiations, the Russian Empire took the position of a defeated, but not defeated state. We will now try to highlight several positive factors that negated the possibility of a complete and catastrophic defeat.
1. Features of the territorial location of Russia.
Although Russia had large land areas, its entire territory was unified, while the territory of Great Britain was larger and spread over the entire planet. There were no land routes, which greatly narrowed the number of places for a possible attack and made it possible to prepare a fortified defense. This led, in the end, to the fact that out of the 4 directions of attack of the coalition forces: Far East(Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky), the Crimean Peninsula, Arkhangelsk, the Baltic Sea, only the attack on the Crimea was effective.
2. Diplomatic failures of the coalition and the lack of clear goals.
Although Austria and Prussia did not participate in the war on the side of the Russian Empire, they also did not participate on the side of the coalition. In fact, as you know, the coalition included 4 states - Great Britain, the Ottoman Empire, the French Empire and Sardinia-Piedmont.
3. Weak development of transport infrastructure.
With a large-scale landing in the Crimea, the lack of railways hit the coalition forces hard - they could not afford to move far from the ports through which they received supplies. They also had to use horse-drawn vehicles, which nullified the possibility of strategic strikes deep into the territory of the Russian Empire.
4. Underestimation by the command of the coalition of the forces of the Russian army, overestimation of their own forces and the absence of a directly unified command.
Although the army of the Russian Empire suffered from a lack modern weapons, after all, a small part of the soldiers were armed precisely modern weapons. The Russian "plastuns" became famous. These are fighters moving on their feet, using modern rifles and beating the enemy from afar - the forerunner of the tactics of the Boers and modern snipers. The ingenuity of Russian officers is also underestimated - they quickly adapted to military realities. For example, they did not get involved in a losing battle on sailboats, but simply flooded their fleet near the Sevastopol Bay, thereby eliminating access to it for the enemy fleet. The coalition forces lacked a unified command, the French and British generals often clashed with each other, which made it impossible to create complex tactical plans.
What conclusion can be drawn from the outcome of this war?
Probably a lot, but there is one important one:
The unwillingness to modernize the army can turn into a disastrous result for any country. Of course, technical backwardness to some extent can be covered up by the courage of soldiers. But let there be courage and a good weapon than just courage.
random article
Crimean War. Reasons for the defeat of Russia.
Causes of the war, its beginning and general characteristics
The natural development of the "Eastern Question": more and more real prospects for the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire, the intensification of the struggle of the great powers for its heritage. Nicholas first of all wanted to solve the problem of the straits. England and France, among other things, believed that Russia had grown too strong and wanted to weaken it. Anti-Russian campaign in Europe, incl.
participation in it of the left forces, including Marx (against the "gendarme of Europe").
In the early 50s. Nikolai's incorrect assessment of the international situation, as a result of which increased pressure on Turkey, counting on the support of the great powers as a "reward" for the suppression of revolutions in Europe.
In fact - isolation: England's refusal to seize Egypt and Crete with the help of Russia, hostility and Austria.
The tactless behavior of the tsar's envoy Menshikov in Istanbul. Nikolai demanded that Russia be recognized as the patron of all Orthodox in Turkey, in reinforcement - the introduction of Russian troops into the territory of Moldova and Wallachia.
In response, the English and French squadron entered the Sea of Marmara. October 1853 - Turkey started the war.
During the war, three of its theaters: Transdanubian, Transcaucasian and later Crimean, therefore it is more correct to call (as historians most often do) not Crimean, but Eastern.
Periodization - can be conditionally divided into four periods:
- October 1853 - March 1854: war with Turkey,
- March–September 1854
- joining the war Western countries and their first military operations against Russia,
- September 1854 - August 1855: defense of Sevastopol,
- August 1855 - March 1856: final battles, the capture of Kars and the Peace of Paris.
First stages of the war
October 1853 - the beginning of the war.
The biggest event: November 1853 - the victory of the Russian fleet under the command of Pavel Stepanovich Nakhimov over the Turks in the Sinop Bay - the last major battle of the era of the sailing fleet.
Rebuff to the Turkish invasion of Georgia. Rescuing Turkey from imminent defeat, the Anglo-French squadron entered the Black Sea.
March 1853: England and France declared war, and the Kingdom of Sardinia joined.
The Anglo-French squadron in the Baltic Sea, the blockade of Kronstadt, the heroic defense of the Solovetsky Monastery on the White Sea and Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky.
Defense of Sevastopol and the end of the war
September 1854 - the landing of the allies in the Crimea, the defeat of the Russians at Alma (commander Menshikov).
The beginning of the siege of Sevastopol. Under the leadership of Kornilov, Nakhimov, Istomin and Totleben, a fortress was actually created anew - earthen fortifications. During the first assault in October, Kornilov died (defend Sevastopol!). In October - the battle at Balaklava, the "valley of death". The defeat of the Russians near Inkerman.
After that, the war becomes protracted, which inevitably leads Russia to defeat, because.
limited resources. And this is despite the unprecedented heroism of the Russians (three admirals, sailor Koshka, Dasha Sevastopolskaya, "Sevastopol stories" by L. Tolstoy).
February 1855 - the death of Nikolai, similar to suicide. Before his death, the replacement of Menshikov by Gorchakov. Soon after that - the death of Istomin. In June - the death of Nakhimov ("they shoot quite accurately today"). August - the decisive assault, the capture of Malakhov Kurgan, the abandonment of the southern side of Sevastopol by the Russians.
Thus ended the 349-day defense of Sevastopol.
At the end of 1855: success - the capture of the fortress of Kare in Transcaucasia. Pressure from Austria - a threat to oppose Russia. We went to negotiations.
Results of the war.
Reasons for defeat. Meaning
March 1856 - Paris peace treaty: the relative moderation of the allies after Sevastopol ("the shadow of Nakhimov stood behind the back of the Russian delegation"). Small territorial losses (part of Bessarabia). The most difficult thing is the prohibition to keep the navy in the Black Sea.
Reasons for the defeat
The main thing is backwardness, serfdom:
limited resources, weakness of transport (on oxen), lack of ammunition, even bandages and cotton wool (lint was plucked),
military-technical backwardness: sailing fleet and smooth-bore weapons,
the failure of autocratic rule: Russia's foreign policy isolation, mediocre Menshikov as commander, wild theft.
Meaning
On the one hand, the heroism of the Russian people, important patriotic traditions.
On the other hand - a decisive blow to the Nikolaev regime, the most important impetus for reforms. Herzen: Defeat in the Crimean War "rolled off the stone from the coffin of Russia".
Previous30313233343536373839404142434445Next
VIEW MORE:
Crimean War 1853-1856
The spirit in the troops is beyond description. In the days of ancient Greece, there was not so much heroism. I have not been able to be in business a single time, but I thank God that I have seen these people and live in this glorious time.
Lev Tolstoy
Wars between the Russian and Ottoman empires were commonplace international politics XVIII-XIX centuries.
In 1853, the Russian Empire of Nicholas 1 entered another war, which went down in history as the Crimean War of 1853-1856, and ended with the defeat of Russia. In addition, this war showed the strong resistance of the leading countries Western Europe(France and Great Britain) strengthening the role of Russia in Eastern Europe especially in the Balkans. The lost war also showed Russia itself problems in domestic politics, which led to many problems.
Despite victories at the initial stage of 1853-1854, as well as the capture of the key Turkish fortress of Kars in 1855, Russia lost the most important battles on the territory of the Crimean peninsula. This article describes the causes, course, main results and historical meaning in short story about the Crimean War of 1853-1856.
Causes of the aggravation of the Eastern question
Under the eastern question, historians understand a number of controversial issues in Russian-Turkish relations, which at any moment could lead to conflict.
The main problems of the Eastern question, which became the main one for the future war, are as follows:
- The loss of the Crimea and the northern Black Sea region by the Ottoman Empire at the end of the 18th century constantly stimulated Turkey to start a war in the hope of regaining the territories. Thus began the wars of 1806-1812 and 1828-1829. However, as a result of them, Turkey lost Bessarabia and part of the territory in the Caucasus, which further strengthened the desire for revenge.
- Belonging to the Bosphorus and Dardanelles.
Russia demanded that these straits be opened for the Black Sea Fleet, while the Ottoman Empire (under pressure from the countries of Western Europe) ignored these demands of Russia.
- The presence in the Balkans, as part of the Ottoman Empire, Slavic Christian peoples who fought for their independence. Russia supported them, thereby causing a wave of indignation among the Turks about Russia's interference in the internal affairs of another state.
An additional factor that intensified the conflict was the desire of the countries of Western Europe (Britain, France, and Austria) not to let Russia into the Balkans, and also to close its access to the straits. For the sake of this, the countries were ready to support Turkey in a potential war with Russia.
The reason for the war and its beginning
These troubled moments brewed throughout the late 1840s and early 1850s.
In 1853, the Turkish Sultan transferred the Bethlehem Temple of Jerusalem (then the territory of the Ottoman Empire) to the control of the Catholic Church. This caused a wave of indignation of the highest Orthodox hierarchy.
The main reasons for the defeat of Russia in the Crimean War
Nicholas 1 decided to take advantage of this, using the religious conflict as a pretext for attacking Turkey. Russia demanded that the temple be handed over to the Orthodox Church, and at the same time also open the straits for the Black Sea Fleet.
Turkey refused. In June 1853, Russian troops crossed the border of the Ottoman Empire and entered the territory of the Danubian principalities dependent on it.
Nicholas 1 hoped that France was too weak after the revolution of 1848, and that Britain could be appeased by transferring Cyprus and Egypt to it in the future. However, the plan did not work, European countries called the Ottoman Empire to action, promising her financial and military assistance.
In October 1853, Turkey declared war on Russia. Thus began, to put it briefly, the Crimean War of 1853-1856. In the history of Western Europe, this war is called Eastern.
The course of the war and the main stages
The Crimean War can be divided into 2 stages according to the number of participants in the events of those years. Here are the steps:
- October 1853 - April 1854.
During these six months, the war was between the Ottoman Empire and Russia (without the direct intervention of other states). There were three fronts: Crimean (Black Sea), Danube and Caucasian.
- April 1854 - February 1856. British and French troops enter the war, which expands the theater of operations, as well as a turning point in the course of the war.
The allied troops were superior to the Russian ones from the technical side, which was the reason for the changes in the course of the war.
As for specific battles, the following key battles can be distinguished: for Sinop, for Odessa, for the Danube, for the Caucasus, for Sevastopol.
There were other battles, but those listed above are the main ones. Let's consider them in more detail.
Battle of Sinop (November 1853)
The battle took place in the harbor of the city of Sinop in the Crimea.
The Russian fleet under the command of Nakhimov completely defeated the Turkish fleet of Osman Pasha. This battle was perhaps the last major world battle on sailing ships.
This victory significantly raised morale Russian army and gave hope for an early victory in the war.
Map of the Sinopo naval battle November 18, 1853
Bombing of Odessa (April 1854)
In early April 1854, the Ottoman Empire launched a squadron of the Franco-British fleet through its straits, which swiftly headed for Russian port and shipbuilding cities: Odessa, Ochakov and Nikolaev.
After a rapid and intense bombardment, it was planned to land troops in the northern Black Sea region, which would force the withdrawal of troops from the Danube principalities, as well as weaken the defense of the Crimea. However, the city withstood several days of shelling. Moreover, the defenders of Odessa were able to deliver accurate strikes against the Allied fleet. The plan of the Anglo-French troops failed. The allies were forced to retreat towards the Crimea and begin battles for the peninsula.
Fights on the Danube (1853-1856)
It was with the entry of Russian troops into this region that the Crimean War of 1853-1856 began.
After the success in the Battle of Sinop, another success awaited Russia: the troops completely crossed to the right bank of the Danube, an attack was opened on Silistria and further on Bucharest. However, the entry into the war of England and France complicated the offensive of Russia.
On June 9, 1854, the siege of Silistria was lifted and the Russian troops returned to the left bank of the Danube. By the way, on this front, Austria also entered the war against Russia, which was worried about the rapid advance of the Romanov Empire into Wallachia and Moldavia.
In July 1854, near the city of Varna (modern Bulgaria), a huge landing of the British and French armies landed (according to various sources, from 30 to 50 thousand).
The troops were supposed to enter the territory of Bessarabia, ousting Russia from this region. However, a cholera epidemic broke out in the French army, and the British public demanded that the leadership of the army first strike at the Black Sea fleet in the Crimea.
Fights in the Caucasus (1853-1856)
An important battle took place in July 1854 near the village of Kyuruk-Dara (Western Armenia).
The combined Turkish-British forces were defeated. At this stage, the Crimean War was still successful for Russia.
Another important battle in this region took place in June-November 1855. Russian troops decided to attack the eastern part of the Ottoman Empire, the fortress of Karsu, so that the allies would send part of the troops to this region, thereby slightly weakening the siege of Sevastopol. Russia won the battle of Kars, but this happened after the news of the fall of Sevastopol, so this battle had little effect on the outcome of the war.
Moreover, according to the results of the "peace" signed later, the fortress of Kars returned to the Ottoman Empire. However, as the peace talks showed, the capture of Kars still played a role. But more on that later.
Defense of Sevastopol (1854-1855)
The most heroic and tragic event of the Crimean War is, of course, the battle for Sevastopol. In September 1855, Franco-British troops captured the last point of the city's defense - Malakhov Kurgan.
The city survived 11 months of siege, however, as a result, it was surrendered to the allied forces (among which the Sardinian kingdom appeared). This defeat became a key one and served as an impetus for the end of the war.
From the end of 1855, intensified negotiations began, in which Russia had practically no strong arguments. It was clear that the war was lost.
Other battles in the Crimea (1854-1856)
In addition to the siege of Sevastopol on the territory of Crimea in 1854-1855, several more battles took place, which were aimed at "unblocking" Sevastopol:
- Battle of the Alma (September 1854).
- Battle of Balaklava (October 1854).
- Battle of Inkerman (November 1854).
- An attempt to liberate Evpatoria (February 1855).
- Battle on the Chernaya River (August 1855).
All these battles ended in unsuccessful attempts to lift the siege of Sevastopol.
"Distant" battles
Main fighting wars took place near the Crimean peninsula, which gave the name to the war. There were also battles in the Caucasus, on the territory of modern Moldova, as well as in the Balkans.
However, not many people know that battles between rivals also took place in remote regions of the Russian Empire.
Here are some examples:
- Peter and Paul Defense. The battle that took place on the territory of the Kamchatka Peninsula between the combined Franco-British troops on the one hand and Russian on the other. The battle took place in August 1854. This battle was the result of the victory of Britain over China during the Opium Wars. As a result, Britain wanted to increase its influence in the east of Asia, ousting Russia from here.
In total, the Allied troops made two assaults, both ended in failure for them. Russia withstood the Peter and Paul defense.
- Arctic Company. The operation of the British fleet to attempt to blockade or capture Arkhangelsk, carried out in 1854-1855. The main battles took place in the Barents Sea. The British also undertook the bombardment of the Solovetsky fortress, as well as the robbery of Russian merchant ships in the White and Barents Seas.
Results and historical significance of the war
In February 1855, Nicholas 1 died. The task of the new emperor, Alexander 2, was to end the war, and with minimal damage to Russia. In February 1856, the Paris Congress began its work. Russia was represented by Alexei Orlov and Philip Brunnov.
Since neither side saw the point in continuing the war, already on March 6, 1856, the Paris Peace Treaty was signed, as a result of which the Crimean War was completed.
The main terms of the Treaty of Paris 6 were as follows:
- Russia returned the Karsu fortress to Turkey in exchange for Sevastopol and other captured cities of the Crimean peninsula.
- Russia was forbidden to have a Black Sea fleet.
The Black Sea was declared neutral.
- The Bosporus and Dardanelles were declared closed to the Russian Empire.
- Part of Russian Bessarabia was transferred to the Moldavian principality, the Danube ceased to be border river, so navigation was declared free.
- On the Allada Islands (an archipelago in the Baltic Sea), Russia was forbidden to build military and (or) defensive fortifications.
As for losses, the number of Russian citizens who died in the war is 47.5 thousand people.
Britain lost 2.8 thousand, France - 10.2, the Ottoman Empire - more than 10 thousand. The Sardinian kingdom lost 12 thousand soldiers. Austrian casualties are unknown, possibly because Austria was not officially at war with Russia.
In general, the war showed the backwardness of Russia, compared with the states of Europe, especially in terms of the economy (the completion of the industrial revolution, the construction of railways, the use of steamships).
After this defeat, the reforms of Alexander 2 began. In addition, in Russia long time a desire for revenge was brewing, which resulted in another war with Turkey in 1877-1878. But this is a completely different story, and the Crimean War of 1853-1856 was completed and Russia was defeated in it.
Crimean War (1853-1856)
Causes of the Crimean War.
During the reign of Nicholas I, and this is almost three decades, the Russian state has reached great power, both in economic and political development.
Nicholas began to realize that it would be nice to continue to expand the territorial boundaries of the Russian Empire. As a real military man, Nicholas I could not be content with only what he had. This was the main reason for the Crimean War of 1853-1856..
The emperor's keen eye was directed to the East, in addition to this, his plans included strengthening his influence in the Balkans, the reason for this was the residence of Orthodox people there.
However, the weakening of Turkey did not suit such states as France and England.
Crimean War
And they decide to declare war on Russia in 1854. And before that, in 1853, Turkey declared war on Russia.
The course of the Crimean War: the Crimean peninsula and beyond.
The main part of the fighting was carried out on the Crimean peninsula. But besides this, a bloody war was fought in Kamchatka, and in the Caucasus, and even on the coasts of the Baltic and Barents Seas. At the very beginning of the war, the siege of Sevastopol was carried out by the airborne assault of England and France, during which famous military leaders - Kornilov, Istomin, Nakhimov - died.
The siege lasted exactly one year, after which Sevastopol was irrevocably captured by the Anglo-French troops. Along with the defeats in the Crimea, our troops won a victory in the Caucasus, destroying the Turkish squadron and capturing the fortress of Kars.
This large-scale war required numerous material and human resources from the Russian Empire, which were devastated by 1856.
In addition, Nicholas I was afraid to fight with all of Europe, since Prussia was already on the verge of entering the war. The emperor had to give up his positions and sign a peace treaty.
Some historians argue that after the defeat in the Crimean War, Nikolai committed suicide by taking poison, because the honor and dignity of his uniform were in the first place.
Results of the Crimean War of 1853-1856
After the signing of the peace agreement in Paris, Russia lost power over the Black Sea, patronage over such states as Serbia, Wallachia and Moldova. Russia was forbidden military construction in the Baltic.
However, thanks to domestic diplomacy, after the end of the Crimean War, Russia did not suffer large territorial losses.
Causes of the Crimean War 1853-1856.
- the aggravation of the "Eastern Question", i.e., the struggle of the leading countries for the division of the "Turkish heritage";
- the growth of the national liberation movement in the Balkans, the acute internal crisis in Turkey and the conviction of Nicholas I of the inevitability of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire;
- the miscalculations of the diplomacy of Nicholas 1, which manifested itself in the hope that Austria, in gratitude for its salvation in 1848-1849, would support Russia, it would be possible to agree with England on the division of Turkey; as well as disbelief in the possibility of an agreement between the eternal enemies - England and France, directed against Russia, '
- the desire of England, France, Austria and Prussia to oust Russia from the East, the desire to prevent its penetration into the Balkans
The reason for the Crimean War of 1853-1856:
The dispute between the Orthodox and Catholic churches for the right to control Christian shrines in Palestine.
Russia was behind the Orthodox Church, and France was behind the Catholic Church.
Stages of military operations of the Crimean War:
1. Russian-Turkish war (May-December 1853).
After the Turkish sultan rejected the ultimatum on granting the Russian Tsar the right to patronize the Orthodox citizens of the Ottoman Empire, the Russian army occupied Moldavia, Wallachia and up to the Danube. The Caucasian Corps went on the offensive. The Black Sea squadron achieved great success, which in November 1853 under the command of Pavel Nakhimov destroyed the Turkish fleet in the battle of Sinop.
2. The beginning of the war between Russia and a coalition of European countries (spring - .
summer 1854). the threat of defeat looming over Turkey prompted European countries to take active anti-Russian actions, which led from a local war to a pan-European war.
March. England and France took the side of Turkey (Sardinian). Allied squadrons fired on Russian troops; fortification on the Alan Islands in the Baltic, on the Solovki, in the White Sea, on the Kola Peninsula, in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Odessa, Nikolaev, Kerch.
Austria, threatening Russia with war, moved troops to the borders of the Danubian principalities, which forced the Russian armies to leave Moldavia and Wallachia.
Causes of defeat in the Crimean War
Defense of Sevastopol and the end of the war. In September 1854, the Anglo-French The army landed in the Crimea, which turned into the main "theater" of the war.
This is the last stage of the Crimean War of 1853-1856.
The Russian army led by Menshikov was defeated on the river. Alma left Sevastopol defenseless. The defense of the sea fortress, after the flooding of the sailing fleet in the Sevastopol bay, was taken over by sailors led by Admirals Kornilov, Nakhimov Istomin (all died).
In the Caucasus, successful actions in November 1855, the capture of the fortress of Kars. However, with the fall of Sevastopol, the outcome of the war was predetermined: March 1856. peace talks in Paris.
Terms of the Paris Peace Treaty (1856)
Russia was losing Southern Bessarabia with the mouth of the Danube, and Kars was returning to Turkey in exchange for Sevastopol.
- Russia was deprived of the right to protect the Christians of the Ottoman Empire
- The Black Sea was declared neutral and Russia lost the right to have a navy and fortifications there.
- Established freedom of navigation on the Danube, which opened the Baltic Peninsula for Western powers
Causes of Russia's defeat in the Crimean War.
- Economic and technical backwardness (weapons and transport support of the Russian armies)
- The mediocrity of the Russian high ground command, which achieved ranks and titles through intrigue, flattery
- Diplomatic miscalculations that led Russia to isolation in the war with the coalition of England, France, Turkey, with the hostile attitude of Austria, Prussia.
- The apparent disparity of forces
Thus, the Crimean War of 1853-1856,
1) at the beginning of the reign of Nicholas 1, Russia managed to acquire a number of territories in the East and expand its spheres of influence
2) the suppression of the revolutionary movement in the West brought Russia the title of "gendarme of Europe", but did not meet its nat.
interests
3) the defeat in the Crimean War revealed the backwardness of Russia; the rottenness of its autocratic-serf system.
Revealed errors in foreign policy, the goals of which did not correspond to the capabilities of the country
4) this defeat became a decisive and direct factor in the preparation and implementation of the abolition of serfdom in Russia
5) the heroism and selflessness of Russian soldiers during the Crimean War remained in the memory of the people and influenced the development of the spiritual life of the country.
CRIMEAN WAR
1853-1856
Plan
1. Background of the war
2. Course of hostilities
3. Actions in the Crimea and the defense of Sevastopol
4. Military operations on other fronts
5.Diplomatic efforts
6.Results of the war
Crimean (Eastern) War of 1853-56 was fought between the Russian Empire and a coalition of the Ottoman Empire (Turkey), France, Great Britain and Sardinia for dominance in the Middle East, the Black Sea basin, and the Caucasus.
The Allied Powers did not want to see Russia anymore on the world political stage. The new war served as an excellent opportunity to achieve this goal. Initially, England and France planned to wear Russia out in the fight against Turkey, and then, under the pretext of protecting the latter, they expected to attack Russia. In accordance with this plan, it was planned to deploy military operations on several fronts separated from one another (on the Black and Baltic Seas, in the Caucasus, where they had special hope for the mountain population and for the spiritual leader of the Muslims of Chechnya and Dagestan-Shamil).
PREREQUISITES FOR WAR
The reason for the conflict was a dispute between the Catholic and Orthodox clergy over the possession of Christian shrines in Palestine (in particular, in the issue of control over the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem).
The prelude was the conflict between Nicholas I and Emperor Napoleon III of France. The Russian emperor considered his French "colleague" illegal, because. the Bonaparte dynasty was excluded from the French throne by the Congress of Vienna (a pan-European conference during which the boundaries of the states of Europe were determined after the Napoleonic wars).
Napoleon III, realizing the fragility of his power, wanted to divert the attention of the people with the then popular war against Russia (revenge for the war of 1812) and at the same time satisfy his irritation against Nicholas I.
Having come to power with the support of the Catholic Church, Napoleon also sought to repay his ally by protecting the interests of the Vatican in the international arena, which led to a conflict with the Orthodox Church and directly with Russia. (The French referred to an agreement with the Ottoman Empire on the right to control Christian holy places in Palestine (in the 19th century, the territory of the Ottoman Empire), and Russia referred to the decree of the Sultan, which restored the rights of the Orthodox Church in Palestine and gave Russia the right to protect the interests of Christians in the Ottoman Empire ).France demanded that the keys to the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem be given to the Catholic clergy, and Russia demanded that they remain with the Orthodox community.
Turkey, which was in a state of decline in the middle of the 19th century, did not have the opportunity to refuse either side, and promised to fulfill the demands of both Russia and France. When the typical Turkish diplomatic ploy was discovered, France brought a 90-gun steam battleship under the walls of Istanbul. As a result, the keys to the Church of the Nativity were given to France (i.e. the Catholic Church). In response, Russia began mobilizing the army on the border with Moldavia and Wallachia.
In February 1853
Nicholas I sent Prince A.S. Menshikov as an ambassador to the Turkish Sultan. with an ultimatum to recognize the rights of the Orthodox Church to holy places in Palestine and to provide Russia with protection over Christians in the Ottoman Empire (who accounted for about a third of the total population). The Russian government counted on the support of Austria and Prussia and considered an alliance between Great Britain and France impossible. However, Great Britain, fearing the strengthening of Russia, went to an agreement with France. The British ambassador, Lord Stratford-Redcliffe, persuaded the Turkish sultan to partially satisfy Russia's demands, promising support in case of war.
As a result, the Sultan issued a decree on the inviolability of the rights of the Orthodox Church to the holy places, but refused to conclude an agreement on patronage. Prince Menshikov defiantly behaved at meetings with the Sultan, demanding the full satisfaction of the ultimatum. Feeling supported Western allies, Turkey was in no hurry to respond to Russia's demands. Without waiting for a positive response, Menshikov and the embassy staff left Constantinople. Trying to put pressure on the Turkish government, Nicholas I ordered the troops to occupy the principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia subordinate to the Sultan.
(Initially, the plans of the Russian command were distinguished by courage and decisiveness. It was supposed to conduct a “Bosphorus Expedition”, which provided for the equipment of landing ships to go to the Bosphorus and connect with the rest of the troops. When the Turkish fleet went to sea, it was planned to break it and then go to the Bosphorus.
The breakthrough of the Russian stage in the Bosporus endangered the capital of Turkey, Constantinople. To prevent France from giving support to the Ottoman sultan, the plan called for the occupation of the Dardanelles. Nicholas I accepted the plan, but after listening to the next anti-arguments of Prince Menshikov, he rejected it. Subsequently, other active-offensive plans were also rejected, and the choice of the emperor settled on another faceless plan, refusing to take any active actions.
The troops, under the command of Adjutant General Gorchakov, were instructed to reach the Danube, but to avoid hostilities. The Black Sea Fleet was to remain on its shores and evade battle, allocating only cruisers to monitor enemy fleets.
By such a show of force, the Russian emperor hoped to put pressure on Turkey and accept her own terms.)
This caused a protest by the Porte, which led to the convening of a conference of commissioners from England, France, Prussia and Austria. Its result was the Vienna Note, a compromise on all sides, demanding the withdrawal of Russian troops from the Danubian Principalities, but giving Russia the nominal right to protect the Orthodox in the Ottoman Empire and nominal control over the holy places in Palestine.
The Vienna note was accepted by Nicholas I, but rejected by the Turkish sultan, who succumbed to the promised military support of the British ambassador.
The Porte proposed various changes to the note, which caused the refusal of the Russian side. As a result, France and Britain entered into an alliance with the obligation to protect the territory of Turkey.
Trying to use opportunity"to teach a lesson" to Russia by proxy, the Ottoman Sultan demanded to clear the territory of the Danube principalities within two weeks, and after these conditions were not met, on October 4 (16), 1853
PROGRESS OF MILITARY ACTIONS
The Crimean War can be divided into two stages. The first is the Russian-Turkish company itself (November 1853 - April 1854) and the second (April 1854 - February 1856), when the allies entered the war.
CONDITION ARMED FORCES RUSSIA
As subsequent events showed, Russia was not organizationally and technically ready for war.
The combat strength of the army was far from those listed; the reserve system was unsatisfactory; due to the intervention of Austria, Prussia and Sweden, Russia was forced to keep a significant part of the army on the western border. The technical backwardness of the Russian army and navy has become rampant.
ARMY
In the 1840s and 50s, the European armies were actively replacing obsolete smoothbore guns with rifled ones.
At the beginning of the war, the share of rifled guns in the Russian army was approximately 4-5% of the total; in French-1/3; in English - more than half.
FLEET
FROM early XIX centuries in European fleets, obsolete sailing ships were replaced by modern steam ones.
On the eve of the Crimean War, the Russian fleet occupied the 3rd place in the world in terms of the number of warships (after England and France), but in terms of the number of steam ships it was significantly inferior to the Allied fleets.
START OF HOSTILITIES
In November 1853 on the Danube against 82 thousand.
Crimean War causes and results (p. 3 of 3)
army of General Gorchakov M.D. Turkey has put forward almost 150,000 army of Omar Pasha. But the attacks of the Turks were repulsed, and the Russian artillery destroyed the Danube flotilla of Turkey. The main forces of Omar Pasha (about 40 thousand people) moved to Alexandropol, and their Ardagan detachment (18 thousand people) tried to break through the Borjomi Gorge to Tiflis, but was stopped, and on November 14 (26) defeated near Akhaltsikhe 7 - thousand
detachment of General Andronnikov I.M. November 19 (December 1) the troops of Prince Bebutov V.O. (10 thousand people) near Bashkadyklar defeated the main 36 thousand.
Turkish army.
At sea, initially success also accompanied Russia. In mid-November, the Turkish squadron went to the Sukhumi (Sukhum-Kale) and Poti region for landing, but due to a strong storm, it was forced to take refuge in the Sinop Bay.
Commander became aware of this. Black Sea Fleet Vice Admiral P.S. Nakhimov, and he led his ships to Sinop. On November 18 (30), the Battle of Sinop took place, during which the Russian squadron defeated the Turkish fleet. The battle of Sinop went down in history as the last major battle of the era of the sailing fleet.
The defeat of Turkey hastened the entry into the war of France and England. After Nakhimov's victory at Sinop, the British and French squadrons entered the Black Sea under the pretext of protecting Turkish ships and ports from attacks from the Russian side.
On January 17 (29), 1854, the French emperor issued an ultimatum to Russia: withdraw troops from the Danubian principalities and begin negotiations with Turkey. On February 9 (21), Russia rejected the ultimatum and announced the severance of diplomatic relations with France and England.
March 15 (27), 1854 Great Britain and France declared war on Russia. On March 30 (April 11), Russia responded with a similar statement.
To preempt the enemy in the Balkans, Nicholas I ordered to go on the offensive in this area. In March 1854
the Russian army under the command of Field Marshal Paskevich I.F. invaded Bulgaria. At first, the company developed successfully - the Russian army crossed the Danube at Galati, Izmail and Braila and occupied the fortresses of Machin, Tulcha and Isakcha. But in the future, the Russian command showed indecision, and the siege of Silistria broke only on May 5 (18). However, the fear of entering the war is on the side of the coalition of Austria, which, in alliance with Prussia, has concentrated 50 thousand. army in Galicia and Transylvania, and then, with the permission of Turkey, entered into the possession of the latter on the banks of the Danube, forced the Russian command to lift the siege, and then completely withdraw troops from this area at the end of August.
In total, states occupying 75% of the land participated in this war, the war was fought on the territory of countless seas and oceans. In fact, it can be called a "World" war. Unless without large-scale mobilization.
Oddly enough, the name of the war does not quite reflect its goals or timing. It bears the name of the most bloody and difficult part of this war. In European history, this war is known as the "Eastern" - which also reflects the essence only partially.
Russian emperor Nicholas I saw the weakness of the Ottoman ports, and sought to capture the straits Bosphorus And Dardanelles- this would strengthen the military and economic position of the Russian Empire. In addition, the emperor of the Russian Empire, as the bearer of the title, was the "patron" of all Orthodox. Including in Turkey. The whole of 1853 was the time of the triumph of the Russian Empire - victory in the Caucasus and the European front.
Nicholas I
France and Great Britain entered the war, in view of the urgent Eastern Question.
So what is the reason for the defeat of Russia? There are several factors that brought the war to such an outcome. Now we will look at each in detail:
1. Technical lag of the army.
After the Napoleonic wars, the nature of the war began to change, due to the development of technology, scientific thought and military science. The Russian army was large even by today's standards - 1,365,000 people. Of course, the modernization of such a colossus was a titanic task and required a lot of time and resources. As a result, this played a cruel joke on the Russian soldiers - for example, the firing range of Russian artillery did not exceed the firing range of English muskets. Of course, Russian muskets were absolutely incomparable with English ones in range.
This is how a French soldier describes the state of the Russian army in his letter:
"Our major says that according to all the rules of military science, it is high time for them (Russians) to capitulate. For each of their cannons - we have five cannons, for each soldier - ten. And you should have seen their guns! Probably, our grandfathers who stormed the Bastille "and that was the best weapon. They have no shells. Every morning their women and children go out into the open field between the fortifications and collect cannonballs in bags."
In addition, the war itself is also widely known for the fact that it was the first to use promising developments of that time, revolutionary at that time: water mines, cone-shaped shells for artillery (instead of cannonballs), rifles with rifled barrels , ships made of metal and powered by steam. Also, there was a backlog of Russia in the fleet - the battle near Sinop - the last battle in history between sailing ships, in which Russian ships won over the Turkish fleet. Although there were 3 Russian steamships there, the main force of the Russian fleet was sailing ships. In general, of course, there were modern weapons, and the Allies did not modernize their armies by 100%. However, if the number, for example, of modern guns in the army of the Russian Empire reached only 5-8%, then the French had up to 35%, and the British generally had over 50%. In addition, there was a possibility of capturing St. Petersburg, and all new weapons arrived there in the first place. Accordingly, many of them simply did not reach the Crimea and Sevastopol.
2. Failures in the diplomatic field.
Russia assumed the allied position of Austria and Prussia. In fact, the position was very "cold" on the verge of open confrontation.
3. Weak development of transport infrastructure.
Russia had an extremely weak railway network. Everything, absolutely everything, the supply of the Crimean troops was carried out with the help of horse-drawn transport and convoys. Due to the huge distances, load and weather, the supply "caravans" did not reach their destination at all - the cattle died, and a significant part of the supplies was eventually looted. Such interruptions in supply eventually resulted in the fact that the number of non-combat losses in the Russian army in peacetime reached 3.5%.
4. A little excessive arrogance of Nicholas I.
Nicholas I was a patriot and a very arrogant person. These 2 qualities together gave a sad result - inspired by the success in suppressing the Hungarian uprising in the Austrian Empire in 1849, he sincerely believed that the army of the Russian Empire was the most advanced and strongest. And therefore, the modernization of the army can be given less time and money. Arrogance was also manifested in the very decision of the war with Turkey - the emperor sincerely believed that:
1. The army of the Russian Empire is capable of crushing the army of the Ottoman port to smithereens (here he turned out to be right).
2. Due to superior military power and political power, the UK and France will not be able / unwilling to provide direct military support to Turkey.
3. Even if France and Great Britain go to war with Russia, then her allies, Austria and Prussia, will come to her aid. (in reality, there was not an illusory possibility of the Republic of Ingushetia itself to fight with Austria and Prussia)
5. Much fewer resources.
Contrary to popular stereotype, economic and demographic superiority was by no means on the side of the Russian Empire. Because it is correct to count not only the territories of the “metropolises” (all of Russia is one big metropolis), but also the territories of the colonies and dominions, from which resources were also drawn. And in this case, it turns out that on the side of the alliance were the territories of modern: India, Australia, Canada, most of Africa, France, Great Britain, Turkey, the entire Balkan Peninsula, all of Southeast Asia. As a result, it turned out that the Russian Empire is opposed by half of the globe. As a result, the coalition had a tangible advantage in all respects.
6. Unfriendly population of Crimea.
Then the bulk of the population of Crimea were Crimean Tatars. They were very friendly towards the Turks and their allies - they saw the Turks as political and religious patrons. The Tatars assisted the coalition forces in finding forage, water, provided knowledge of the area, and served as scouts.
However, if the Russian Empire had no strengths, then the defeat would have resulted in severe indemnities and territorial losses. Our country also suffered more terrible defeats (for example, the defeat in the Livonian War, with a similar scenario ).
At peaceful diplomatic negotiations, the Russian Empire took the position of a defeated, but not defeated state. We will now try to highlight several positive factors that negated the possibility of a complete and catastrophic defeat.
1. Features of the territorial location of Russia.
Although Russia had large land areas, its entire territory was unified, while the territory of Great Britain was larger and spread over the entire planet. There were no land routes, which greatly narrowed the number of places for a possible attack and made it possible to prepare a fortified defense. As a result, this led to the fact that out of 4 directions of attack by the coalition forces: the Far East (Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky), the Crimean Peninsula, Arkhangelsk, the Baltic Sea, only the attack on Crimea was effective.
2. Diplomatic failures of the coalition and the lack of clear goals.
Although Austria and Prussia did not participate in the war on the side of the Russian Empire, they also did not participate on the side of the coalition. In fact, as you know, the coalition included 4 states - Great Britain, the Ottoman Empire, the French Empire and Sardinia-Piedmont.
3. Weak development of transport infrastructure.
With a large-scale landing in the Crimea, the lack of railways hit the coalition forces hard - they could not afford to move far from the ports through which they received supplies. They also had to use horse-drawn vehicles, which nullified the possibility of strategic strikes deep into the territory of the Russian Empire.
4. Underestimation by the command of the coalition of the forces of the Russian army, overestimation of their own forces and the absence of a directly unified command.
Although the armies of the Russian Empire suffered from a lack of modern weapons, still a small part of the soldiers were armed with modern weapons. The Russian "plastuns" became famous. These are fighters moving on their feet, using modern rifles and beating the enemy from afar - the forerunner of the tactics of the Boers and modern snipers. The ingenuity of Russian officers is also underestimated - they quickly adapted to military realities. For example, they did not get involved in a losing battle on sailboats, but simply flooded their fleet near the Sevastopol Bay, thereby eliminating access to it for the enemy fleet. The coalition forces lacked a unified command, the French and British generals often clashed with each other, which made it impossible to create complex tactical plans.
What conclusion can be drawn from the outcome of this war?
Probably a lot, but there is one important one:
The unwillingness to modernize the army can turn into a disastrous result for any country. Of course, technical backwardness to some extent can be covered up by the courage of soldiers. But let there be courage and a good weapon than just courage.
In the spring of 1854, Britain and France declared war on the Russian Empire. This was the beginning of a radical turning point in the Crimean War. It was from this moment that the record of the end and decline of the once mighty Russian Empire began.
Reassessment of power
Nicholas I was convinced of the invincibility of the Russian Empire. Successful military operations in the Caucasus, Turkey and Central Asia gave rise to the ambitions of the Russian emperor to separate the Balkan possessions of the Ottoman Empire, as well as faith in the power of Russia and its ability to claim hegemony in Europe. Baron Stockmar, friend and tutor of Prince Albert, husband of Queen Victoria, wrote in 1851: “When I was young, Napoleon ruled over the continent of Europe. Now it looks like the Russian emperor has taken the place of Napoleon, and that for at least a few years he, with other intentions and other means, will also dictate laws to the continent. Nikolai himself thought about the same. The situation was aggravated by the fact that he was always surrounded by flatterers. The historian Tarle wrote that at the beginning of 1854 in the Baltic states in noble circles, a poem in German was distributed in numerous copies, in the first stanza of which the author addressed the king with the words: “You, with whom not a single mortal disputes the right to be called the greatest man that the earth has only seen. The vain Frenchman, the proud Briton, bow before you, blazing with envy - the whole world lies in adoration at your feet. It is not surprising, therefore, that Nicholas I burned with ambition and was eager to carry out his plans, which cost Russia thousands of lives.
Rampant embezzlement
The story about how Karamzin was asked in Europe to tell in a nutshell about the situation in Russia became commonplace, but he didn’t need two words, he answered with one: “They are stealing.” By the middle of the 19th century, the situation had not changed for the better. Embezzlement in Russia has acquired total proportions. Tarle quotes a contemporary of the events of the Crimean War: “In the Russian army, which stood in Estland in 1854-1855 and was not in contact with the enemy, hunger typhus, which appeared among the soldiers, caused great devastation, as the commanders stole and left the rank and file to starve to death.” None European army the situation was not so dire. Nicholas I knew about the scale of this disaster, but he could not do anything about the situation. So, he was stunned by the case of the director of the office of the disabled fund Politkovsky, who stole more than a million rubles from the budget. The scale of corruption during the Crimean War was such that Russia managed to restore the treasury deficit only 14 years after the signing of the Paris Treaty.
The backwardness of the army
One of the fatal factors in the defeat of the Russian Empire in the Crimean War was the backwardness of the weapons of our army. It manifested itself as early as September 8, 1854 during the battle on the Alma River: the Russian infantry was armed with smoothbore guns with a firing range of 120 meters, while the British and French had rifled fittings with a firing range of up to 400 meters. In addition, the Russian army was armed with guns with various calibers: 6-12-pound field guns, 12-24-pound and pood siege unicorns, 6,12,18,24 and 36-pound bomb guns. Such a number of calibers greatly complicated the supply of ammunition to the army. Finally, Russia had practically no steam ships, and the sailing ships had to be sunk at the entrance to the Sevastopol Bay, which was obviously an extreme measure to deter the enemy.
Negative image of Russia
During the reign of Nicholas I, the Russian Empire began to claim the title of "gendarme of Europe." In 1826-1828, the Erivan and Nakhichevan khanates went to Russia, the next year, after the war with Turkey, it was annexed to Russia East Coast Black Sea and the mouth of the Danube. The advance of Russia in Central Asia also continued. By 1853, the Russians came close to the Syr Darya.
Russia also showed serious ambitions in Europe, which could not but irritate the European powers. In April 1848, Russia and Turkey, by the Baltiliman Act, liquidated the autonomy of the Danube Principalities. In June 1849, with the help of a 150,000-strong Russian expeditionary army, the Hungarian revolution in the Austrian Empire was suppressed. Nicholas I believed in his power. His imperial ambitions turned Russia into a bogey for the advanced European powers. The image of an aggressive Russia became one of the reasons for the rallying of Britain and France in the Crimean War. Russia began to claim hegemony in Europe, which could not but rally the European powers. The Crimean War is considered to be "pre-world".
Russia defended itself on several fronts - in the Crimea, Georgia, the Caucasus, Sveaborg, Kronstadt, Solovki and the Kamchatka front. In fact, Russia fought alone, on our side were insignificant Bulgarian forces (3000 soldiers) and the Greek legion (800 people). Having set everyone against herself, showing insatiable ambitions, in fact Russia did not have the power reserve to resist England and France. During the Crimean War in Russia there was still no concept of propaganda, while the British used their propaganda machine with might and main to inject a negative image of the Russian army.
Failure of diplomacy
The Crimean War showed not only the weakness of the Russian army, but also the weakness of diplomacy. The peace treaty was signed on March 30, 1856 in Paris at an international congress with the participation of all the warring powers, as well as Austria and Prussia. The peace conditions were frankly unfavorable for Russia. Under the terms of the agreement, Russia returned Kars to Turkey in exchange for Sevastopol, Balaklava and other cities in the Crimea, captured by the allies; conceded to the Moldavian Principality the mouth of the Danube and part of Southern Bessarabia. The Black Sea was declared neutral, but Russia and Turkey could not keep a navy there. Russia and Turkey could only maintain 6 steam ships of 800 tons each and 4 ships of 200 tons each for guard duty.
The autonomy of Serbia and the Danubian Principalities was confirmed, but the Turkish Sultan's supreme power over them was preserved. The previously adopted provisions of the London Convention of 1841 on the closure of the Bosphorus and Dardanelles for military vessels of all countries except Turkey were confirmed. Russia pledged not to build military fortifications on the Aland Islands and in the Baltic Sea. The patronage of the Turkish Christians was transferred into the hands of the "concern" of all the great powers, that is, England, France, Austria, Prussia and Russia. Finally, the treaty deprived our country of the right to protect the interests of the Orthodox population in the territory of the Ottoman Empire.
Ignorance of Nicholas I
Many historians associate the main reason for the defeat in the Crimean War with the figure of Emperor Nicholas I. Thus, the Russian historian Tarle wrote: “As for his weaknesses as the head of the empire’s foreign policy, one of the main ones was his deep, truly impenetrable, comprehensive, if possible so to speak, ignorance”. The Russian emperor did not know life in Russia at all, he valued cane discipline, and any manifestation of independent thinking was suppressed by him. Fyodor Tyutchev wrote about Nicholas I as follows: “In order to create such a hopeless situation, the monstrous stupidity of this unfortunate man was needed, who during his thirty-year reign, being constantly in the most favorable conditions, did not take advantage of anything and missed everything, managing to start a fight under the most impossible circumstances." Thus, it can be said that the Crimean War, which turned out to be a disaster for Russia, was caused by the personal ambitions of the emperor, who was prone to adventures and seeking to maximize the boundaries of his power.
Shepherd's ambition
One of the main causes of the Crimean War was the conflict between the Orthodox and Catholic churches in resolving the issue of "Palestinian shrines." Here the interests of Russia and France clashed. Nicholas I, who did not recognize Napoleon III as a legitimate emperor, was sure that Russia would have to fight only with a “sick man,” as he called the Ottoman Empire. With England, the Russian emperor hoped to negotiate, and also counted on the support of Austria. These calculations of the "pastor" Nicholas I turned out to be erroneous, and the "crusade" turned into a real disaster for Russia.
The Crimean War, known in the West as the Eastern War (1853-1856), was a military clash between Russia and a coalition of European states that defended Turkey. Little effect on external position Russian Empire, but significantly - on its internal politics. The defeat forced the autocracy to start reforms of everything government controlled which eventually led to the abolition of serfdom and the transformation of Russia into a powerful capitalist powerCauses of the Crimean War
objective
***
The rivalry between European states and Russia in the issue of control over the numerous possessions of the weak, crumbling Ottoman Empire (Turkey)
On January 9, 14, February 20, 21, 1853, at meetings with British Ambassador G. Seymour, Emperor Nicholas I suggested that England should divide the Turkish Empire together with Russia (History of Diplomacy, Volume One, pp. 433 - 437. Edited by V.P. Potemkin)
*** Russia's desire for leadership in managing the system of straits (Bosporus and Dardanelles) from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean
“If England thinks in the near future to settle in Constantinople, then I will not allow this .... For my part, I am equally disposed to accept the obligation not to settle there, of course, as a proprietor; as a temporary guard is another matter ”(from the statement of Nicholas the First to the British Ambassador to Seymour on January 9, 1853)
*** The desire of Russia to include in the sphere of its national interests affairs in the Balkans and among the South Slavs
“Let Moldavia, Wallachia, Serbia, Bulgaria come under the protectorate of Russia. As for Egypt, I fully understand importance this territory for England. Here I can only say that if, in the distribution of the Ottoman inheritance after the fall of the empire, you take possession of Egypt, then I will have no objection to this. I will say the same about Candia (the island of Crete). This island, perhaps, suits you, and I don’t see why it shouldn’t become an English possession ”(Nicholas the First’s conversation with the British Ambassador Seymour on January 9, 1853 at an evening at Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna)
subjective
*** Turkey's weakness
“Turkey is a “sick person”. Nicholas did not change his terminology all his life when he spoke about the Turkish Empire ”((History of Diplomacy, Volume One, pp. 433 - 437)
*** Confidence of Nicholas I in his impunity
“I want to speak with you like a gentleman, if we manage to come to an agreement - me and England - the rest doesn’t matter to me, I don’t care what others do or do” (from a conversation between Nicholas I and British Ambassador Hamilton Seymour on January 9, 1853 at the evening Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna)
***
Nicholas' suggestion that Europe is incapable of presenting a united front
“the tsar was sure that Austria and France would not join England (in a possible confrontation with Russia), and England would not dare to fight him without allies” (History of Diplomacy, Volume One, pp. 433 - 437. OGIZ, Moscow, 1941)
*** Autocracy, the result of which was the wrong relationship between the emperor and his advisers
“... Russian ambassadors in Paris, London, Vienna, Berlin, ... Chancellor Nesselrode ... in their reports distorted the state of affairs before the tsar. They almost always wrote not about what they saw, but about what the king would like to know from them. When one day Andrey Rozen urged Prince Lieven to finally open the eyes of the tsar, Lieven answered literally: “So that I should say this to the emperor ?! But I'm not stupid! If I wanted to tell him the truth, he would have thrown me out the door, and nothing else would have come of it ”(History of Diplomacy, Volume One)
*** The problem of "Palestinian shrines":
It became apparent as early as 1850, continued and intensified in 1851, weakened in the beginning and middle of 1852, and again became unusually aggravated just at the very end of 1852 - the beginning of 1853. Louis Napoleon, while still president, told the Turkish government that he wanted to preserve and renew all the rights and advantages of the Catholic Church confirmed by Turkey back in 1740 in the so-called holy places, i.e. in the temples of Jerusalem and Bethlehem. The Sultan agreed; but on the part of Russian diplomacy in Constantinople, a sharp protest followed, pointing out the advantages of the Orthodox Church over the Catholic Church on the basis of the conditions of the Kuchuk-Kainarji peace. After all, Nicholas I considered himself the patron saint of the Orthodox
*** The desire of France to split the continental union of Austria, England, Prussia and Russia, which arose during the Napoleonic wars n
“Subsequently, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Napoleon III, Drouey-de-Luis, stated quite frankly: “The question of holy places and everything related to it has no real significance for France. This whole Oriental question, which stirs up so much noise, served the imperial government only as a means to upset the continental alliance, which for almost half a century paralyzed France. Finally, the opportunity presented itself to sow discord in a powerful coalition, and Emperor Napoleon seized it with both hands ”(History of Diplomacy)
Events preceding the Crimean War of 1853-1856
During his short stay in London, the Emperor decisively charmed everyone with his chivalrous courtesy and royal grandeur, charmed Queen Victoria, her husband and the most prominent statesmen the then Great Britain, with whom he tried to get closer and enter into an exchange of thoughts.
The aggressive policy of Nicholas in 1853 was also due to the friendly attitude of Victoria towards him and the fact that at the head of the cabinet in England at that moment was the same Lord Aberdeen, who listened to him so affectionately in Windsor in 1844
Menshikov was met with extraordinary honor. The Turkish police did not even dare to disperse the crowd of Greeks, who gave the prince an enthusiastic welcome. Menshikov behaved with defiant arrogance. In Europe, much attention was paid even to Menshikov's purely external provocative antics: they wrote about how he paid a visit to the Grand Vizier without taking off his coat, as he spoke sharply with Sultan Abdul-Majid. From the very first steps taken by Menshikov, it became clear that he would never yield on two central points: firstly, he wanted to achieve recognition for Russia of the right to patronize not only the Orthodox Church, but also the Orthodox subjects of the Sultan; secondly, he demands that Turkey's consent be approved by the Sultan's Sened, and not by a firman, i.e., that it be in the nature of a foreign policy agreement with the king, and not be a simple decree
However, Nicholas issued a manifesto that he, like his ancestors, must protect Orthodox Church in Turkey, and that in order to ensure the fulfillment by the Turks of the previous agreements with Russia, violated by the Sultan, the tsar was forced to occupy the Danubian principalities (Moldavia and Wallachia)
For the occupation of Moldavia and Wallachia, the 4th and 5th infantry corps numbering 81541 people were prepared. On May 24, the 4th Corps advanced from the Podolsk and Volyn provinces to Leovo. The 15th division of the 5th infantry corps approached there in early June and merged with the 4th corps. The command was entrusted to Prince Mikhail Dmitrievich Gorchakov
But Stratford-Redcliffe forced Sultan Abdulmecid to reject the Vienna Note, and even before that he hastened to draw up another note, allegedly on behalf of Turkey, with some reservations against the Vienna Note. The king, in turn, rejected her. At this time, Nikolai received from the ambassador in France news about the impossibility of a joint military action by England and France.
The course of the Crimean War of 1853-1856. Briefly
led by admirals Kornilov, Nakhimov, Istomin, who died during the siege
Peace terms
The return of Turkey to Kars in exchange for Sevastopol, the transformation of the Black Sea into a neutral one: Russia and Turkey are deprived of the opportunity to have a navy and coastal fortifications here, the cession of Bessarabia (cancellation of the exclusive Russian protectorate over Wallachia, Moldavia and Serbia)
Reasons for Russia's defeat in the Crimean War
-
Russia's military-technical lag behind the leading European powers
-
Underdevelopment of communications
-
Embezzlement, corruption in the rear of the army
“By the nature of his activity, Golitsyn had to recognize the war as if from the bottom. Then he will see heroism, holy self-sacrifice, selfless courage and patience of the defenders of Sevastopol, but, hanging around in the rear on the affairs of the militia, at every step he came across the devil knows what: collapse, indifference, cold-blooded mediocrity and monstrous theft. They stole everything that other - higher - thieves did not have time to steal on the way to the Crimea: bread, hay, oats, horses, ammunition. The mechanics of robbery was simple: suppliers gave rot, it was accepted (for a bribe, of course) by the main commissariat in St. Petersburg. Then - also for a bribe - army commissariat, then - regimental, and so on until the last spoke in the chariot. And the soldiers ate rot, wore rot, slept on rot, shot rot. The military units themselves had to buy fodder from the local population with money that was issued by a special financial department. Golitsyn once went there and witnessed such a scene. An officer in a faded, shabby uniform arrived from the front line. The feed has run out, hungry horses are eating sawdust and shavings. An elderly quartermaster with major's epaulettes adjusted his glasses on his nose and said in an everyday voice:
- We'll give you money, eight percent get along.
“For what reason?” the officer was outraged. We shed blood!
"They've sent a novice again," the quartermaster sighed. - Just small children! I remember that Captain Onishchenko came from your brigade. Why wasn't he sent?
Onishchenko died...
- God rest him! The quartermaster crossed himself. - It's a pity. The man was understanding. We respected him and he respected us. We won't ask too much.
The quartermaster was not even shy about the presence of a stranger. Prince Golitsyn went up to him, took him "by the soul", pulled him out from behind the table and lifted him into the air.
"I'll kill you, you bastard!"
“Kill,” the quartermaster croaked, “I won’t give you without interest anyway.”
- Do you think I'm joking? .. - The prince squeezed him with his paw.
“I can’t… the chain will break…” the quartermaster croaked with the last of his strength. “Then it’s all the same for me not to live ... Petersburg will strangle ...
“People are dying there, you son of a bitch!” the prince cried out in tears and disgustedly threw the half-strangled military official away.
He touched his wrinkled throat like a condor's and croaked with unexpected dignity:
“If we were there ... we would have died no worse ... And you, be kind,” he turned to the officer, “meet the rules: for artillerymen - six percent, for all other branches of the military - eight.
The officer pitifully twitched his cold nose, as if he were sobbing:
- Sawdust is eating ... shavings ... to hell with you! .. I can’t return without hay ”
- Poor command and control
“Golitsyn was struck by the commander-in-chief himself, to whom he introduced himself. Gorchakov was not that old, a little over sixty, but he gave the impression of some kind of rottenness, it seemed, poke a finger, and he would crumble like a completely decayed mushroom. Wandering eyes could not focus on anything, and when the old man dismissed Golitsyn with a weak wave of his hand, he heard him humming in French:
I am poor, poor pualu,
And I'm not in a hurry...
— What's that! - said the colonel of the quartermaster service to Golitsyn, when they left the commander-in-chief. - He at least leaves for positions, but Prince Menshikov did not remember at all that war is coming. He just joked everything, and to confess - caustically. He spoke of the Minister of War as follows: "Prince Dolgorukov has a triple relationship with gunpowder - he did not invent it, did not sniff it and does not send it to Sevastopol." About commander Dmitry Erofeevich Osten-Saken: “Erofeich has not become strong. Exhale." Sarcasm anywhere! the Colonel added thoughtfully. - But he gave to put a psalmist over the great Nakhimov. For some reason, Prince Golitsyn was not funny. In general, he was unpleasantly surprised by the tone of cynical mockery that reigned at headquarters. These people seemed to have lost all self-respect, and with it, respect for anything. They didn’t talk about the tragic situation of Sevastopol, but with gusto they ridiculed the commander of the Sevastopol garrison, Count Osten-Saken, who only knows what to do with priests, read akathists and argue about divine scripture. “He has one good quality,” the colonel added. “He doesn’t interfere in anything” (Yu. Nagibin “Stronger than all other decrees”)
Results of the Crimean War
The Crimean War showed