Crimean War

The Crimean War (French: Guerre de Crimée; Russian:

Crimean War
Кры́ мская война́ , translit. Krymskaya voina or Russian:
Восто́ чная война́ , translit. Vostochnaya voina, lit. 'Eastern War';
Part of the Ottoman wars in Europe and the
Russo-Turkish wars
Turkish: Kırım Savaşı; Italian: Guerra di Crimea) was a military
[5] in which the
conflict fought from October 1853 to February 1856
Russian Empire lost to an alliance of the Ottoman Empire, France,
Britain and Sardinia. The immediate cause involved the rights of
Christian minorities in the Holy Land, which was a part of the
Ottoman Empire. The French promoted the rights of Roman
Catholics, while Russia promoted those of the Eastern Orthodox
Church. The longer-term causes involved the decline of the
Ottoman Empire and the unwillingness of Britain and France to
allow Russia to gain territory and power at Ottoman expense. It has
widely been noted that the causes, in one case involving an
argument over a key, have never revealed a "greater confusion of
purpose", yet led to a war noted for its "notoriously incompetent Detail of Franz Roubaud's panoramic painting The
international butchery".[6] Siege of Sevastopol (1904)

Date 16 October 1853 – 30 March 1856

While the churches eventually worked out their differences and
came to an agreement, Nicholas I of Russia and the French Location Crimean Peninsula, Caucasus,
Emperor Napoleon III refused to back down. Nicholas issued an Balkans, Black Sea, Baltic Sea, White
ultimatum that the Orthodox subjects of the Empire be placed Sea, Far East
under his protection. Britain attempted to mediate and arranged a Result Allied victory; Treaty of Paris[1]
compromise that Nicholas agreed to. When the Ottomans
Belligerents
demanded changes, Nicholas refused and prepared for war. Having
Ottoman Empire Russian Empire
obtained promises of support from France and Britain, the
Ottomans declared war on Russia in October 1853. French Empire (from Principality of
1854) Mingrelia (vassal)
The war started in the Balkans in July 1853, when Russian troops
British Empire (from
occupied the Danubian Principalities[5] (part of modern Romania), Kingdom of
1854)
which were under Ottoman suzerainty, then began to cross the Greece (until 1854)
Danube. Led by Omar Pasha, the Ottomans fought a strong Kingdom of Sardinia
(from 1855)
defensive campaign and stopped the advance at Silistra. A separate
action on the fort town of Kars in eastern Anatolia led to a siege,
Caucasian Imamate
and a Turkish attempt to reinforce the garrison was destroyed by a
(until 1855)
Russian fleet at Sinop. Fearing an Ottoman collapse, France and
Britain rushed forces to Gallipoli. They then moved north to Varna Circassia
in June 1854, arriving just in time for the Russians to abandon Abkhazian insurgents
Silistra. Aside from a minor skirmish at Köstence (today (from 1855)
Constanța), there was little for the allies to do. Karl Marx quipped,
Commanders and leaders
"there they are, the French doing nothing and the British helping
them as fast as possible".[7] Abdulmejid I Nicholas I #
Omar Pasha Alexander II
Frustrated by the wasted effort, and with demands for action from
Iskender Pasha Prince Menshikov
their citizens, the allied force decided to attack Russia's main naval
base in the Black Sea at Sevastopol on the Crimean peninsula. Çırpanlı Nadir Pasha Prince Gorchakov
After extended preparations, the forces landed on the peninsula in Ismail Pasha Pavel Nakhimov †
September 1854 and marched their way to a point south of Napoléon III Ivane
Sevastopol after the successful Battle of the Alma. The Russians Andronikashvili
Jacques Leroy de
counterattacked on 25 October in what became the Battle of
Saint Arnaud # Vasily Zavoyko
Balaclava and were repulsed, but at the cost of seriously depleting
the British Army forces. A second counterattack, at Inkerman,
Maréchal Canrobert Nikolay Muravyov
ended in stalemate. The front settled into a siege and led to brutal Aimable Pélissier Yevfimy Putyatin
conditions for troops on both sides. Smaller actions were carried François Achille Vladimir Istomin †
out in the Baltic, the Caucasus, the White Sea and in the North Bazaine Count Tolstoy
Pacific. Patrice de Mac- Ekaterine Dadiani
Mahon
Sevastopol fell after eleven months, and neutral countries began to Grigol Dadiani
join the Allied cause. Isolated and facing a bleak prospect of Queen Victoria
Otto I
invasion from the west if the war continued, Russia sued for peace Earl of Aberdeen
in March 1856. This was welcomed by France and Britain, as their Viscount Palmerston
subjects were beginning to turn against their governments as the
Lord Raglan #
war dragged on. The war was ended by the Treaty of Paris, signed
Lord Lyons
on 30 March 1856. Russia was forbidden from hosting warships in
the Black Sea. The Ottoman vassal states of Wallachia and Sir James Simpson
Moldavia became largely independent. Christians there were Sir William
granted a degree of official equality, and the Orthodox Church Codrington
[8]:415
regained control of the Christian churches in dispute. Victor Emmanuel II

The Crimean War was one of the first conflicts to use modern
Alfonso La Màrmora
technologies such as explosive naval shells, railways and Imam Shamil
telegraphs.[9](Preface ) The war was one of the first to be Magomet-Amin
documented extensively in written reports and photographs. As the Sefer Bey Zanuko
legend of the "Charge of the Light Brigade" demonstrates, the war
Mikhail (Hamud Bey)
quickly became an iconic symbol of logistical, medical and tactical
Chachba
failures and mismanagement. The reaction in the UK was a demand
for professionalisation, most famously achieved by Florence Strength
Nightingale, who gained worldwide attention for pioneering Total: 603,132 Total: 889,000[2]
modern nursing while treating the wounded. 165,000[2]
309,268[2] 888,000 mobilized
324,478 deployed
107,864[2]
1,000 Greek legion
Contents 21,000[2]

The "Eastern Question" Casualties and losses

Weakening of the Ottoman Empire in 1820–1840s
223,513 530,125[2]
Russian expansionism 35,671 killed in action
Ottoman Empire
Immediate causes of the war 37,454 died of wounds
45,400[2]
First hostilities
10,100 killed in action 377,000 died from non-
Battle of Sinop
10,800 died of wounds combat causes
Dardanelles
Peace attempts 24,500 died of disease 80,000 wounded[3][4]

Battles French Empire

Danube campaign 135,485[2]
Black Sea theatre 8,490 killed in action;
Crimean campaign 11,750 died of wounds;
Battle of Balaclava 75,375 died of disease
Winter of 1854–55
 Siege of Sevastopol 39,870 wounded
Azov campaign British Empire
Caucasus theatre 40,462[2]
Baltic theatre
2,755 killed in action
White Sea theatre
1,847 died of wounds
Pacific theatre
17,580 died of disease
Piedmontese involvement
Greece 18,280 wounded
Kiev Cossack revolt and national awakening in
Ukraine Kingdom of Sardinia
2,166[2]
End of the war
British position 28 killed in action
Peace negotiations 2,138 died of disease
Aftermath in Russia
Historical analysis
Documentation
Criticisms and reform
Chronology of major battles of the war
Prominent military commanders
Last veterans
In popular culture
See also
Notes
Further reading
Historiography and memory
Contemporary sources

The "Eastern Question"

As the Ottoman Empiresteadily weakened during the 19th century, Russia stood poised to take advantage by expanding south. In the
1850s, the British and the French, who were allied with the Ottoman Empire, were determined not to allow this to happen.[10] A. J. P.
Taylor argues that the war resulted not from aggressionbut from the interacting fears of the major players:

In some sense the Crimean war was predestined and had deep-seated causes. Neither Nicholas I nor Napoleon III nor
the British government could retreat in the conflict for prestige once it was launched. Nicholas needed a subservient
Turkey for the sake of Russian security; Napoleon needed success for the sake of his domestic position; the British
government needed an independent Turkey for the security of the Eastern Mediterranean ... Mutual fear, not mutual
aggression, caused the Crimean war.[11]

Weakening of the Ottoman Empire in 1820–1840s

In the early 1800s, the Ottoman Empire suffered a number of setbacks which challenged the existence of the country. The Serbian
Revolution in 1804 resulted in the self-liberation of the first Balkan Christian nation under the Ottoman Empire. The Greek War of
Independence, which began in the spring of 1821, provided further evidence of the internal and military weakness of the Ottoman
Empire, and the commission of atrocities by Ottoman military forces (see Chios massacre) also failed to help the Ottomans. The
disbandment of the centuries-old Janissary corps by Sultan Mahmud II on 15 June 1826 (Auspicious Incident) helped the Ottoman
Empire in the longer term, but in the short term it deprived the country of its existing standing army. In 1828, the allied Anglo-
Franco-Russian fleet destroyed almost all the Ottoman naval forces during the Battle of Navarino. In 1830, Greece became an
independent state after 10 years of war and the Russo-Turkish War of 1828–29.
According to the 1829 Treaty of Adrianople, Russian and Western European
commercial ships were authorized to freely pass through the Black Sea straits,
Serbia received autonomy, and the Danubian Principalities (Moldavia and
Wallachia) became territories under Russian protection.

France took the opportunity to

occupy Algeria in 1830. In 1831
Muhammad Ali of Egypt, who was Serbian Uprising against the
the most powerful vassal of the Ottoman Empire
Ottoman Empire, claimed
independence. Ottoman forces were
defeated in a number of battles, and the Egyptians were ready to capture
Constantinople, which forced Sultan Mahmud II to seek Russian military aid. A
Naval Battle of Navarino, 1827
Russian army of 10,000 landed on the Bosphorus shores in 1833 and helped to
prevent the capture of Constantinople. As a result, the Treaty of Unkiar Skelessi was
signed, benefiting Russia greatly. It provided for a military alliance between Russia and the Ottoman Empire, if one of them were to
be attacked, and a secret additional clause allowed the Ottomans to opt out of sending troops but to close the Straits to foreign
warships if Russia was under threat.

In 1838 the situation was similar to 1831. Muhammad Ali of Egypt was not happy about his lack of control and power in Syria, and
he resumed military action. The Ottoman Army lost to the Egyptians at the Battle of Nezib on 24 June 1839. The Ottoman Empire
was saved by Britain, Austria, Prussia and Russia, who signed a convention in London on 15 July 1840 granting Muhammad Ali and
his descendants the right to inherit power in Egypt in exchange for removal of Egyptian armed forces from Syria and Lebanon.
Moreover, Muhammad Ali had to admit a formal dependence to the Ottoman sultan. After Muhammad Ali refused to obey the
requirements of the London convention, the allied Anglo-Austrian fleet blockaded the Nile Delta, bombarded Beirut and captured
Acre. Muhammad Ali accepted the conditions of the London convention in 1840.

On 13 July 1841, after the expiry of the Treaty of Unkiar Skelessi, the London Straits Convention was signed under pressure from
European countries. The new treaty deprived Russia of its right to block warships from passing into the Black Sea in case of war.
Thus the way to the Black Sea was open for British and French warships in case of a possible Russo-Ottoman conflict.

Assistance from Western European powers had twice saved the Ottoman Empire from destruction, but the Ottomans had now lost
their independence in external policy. Britain and France desired more than any other states to preserve the integrity of the Ottoman
Empire because they did not want to see Russia gaining access to theMediterranean Sea. Austria had fears for the same reasons.

Russian expansionism
Russia, as a member of the Holy Alliance, had operated as the "police of Europe", maintaining the balance of power that had been
established in the Treaty of Vienna in 1815. Russia had assisted Austria's efforts in suppressing the Hungarian Revolution of 1848,
and expected gratitude; it wanted a free hand in settling its problems with the Ottoman Empire, the "sick man of Europe". Britain
could not tolerate Russian dominance of Ottoman af [12]
fairs, as that would challenge its domination of the eastern Mediterranean.

Starting with Peter the Great, after centuries of Ottoman northward expansion and Crimean-Nogai raids, Russia had been expanding
southwards across the sparsely populated "Wild Fields" toward the warm water ports of the Black Sea, which did not freeze over like
the handful of ports it controlled in the north. The goal was to promote year-round trade and a year-round navy.[8]:11 Pursuit of this
goal brought the emerging Russian state into conflict with the Ukrainian Cossacks and then with the Tatars of the Crimean
Khanate[13] and Circassians.[14] When Russia conquered these groups and gained possession of their territories, the Ottoman Empire
lost its buffer zone against Russian expansion, and Russia and the Ottoman Empire came into direct conflict. The conflict with the
Ottoman Empire also presented a religious issue of importance, as Russia saw itself as the protector of Orthodox Christians, many of
[8](ch 1)
whom lived under Ottoman control and were treated as second-class citizens.
Britain's immediate fear was Russian expansion at the expense of the Ottoman
Empire, which the UK desired to preserve. The British were also concerned that
Russia might make advances toward India, or move toward Scandinavia or Western
Europe. The Royal Navy also wanted to forestall the threat of a powerful Russian
navy.[15] Taylor says that from the British perspective:

The Crimean war was fought for the sake of Europe rather than for
the Eastern question; it was fought against Russia, not in favour of
Turkey ... The British fought Russia out of resentment and supposed Russian siege of Kars, Russo-
.[16]
that her defeat would strengthen the European Balance of Power Turkish War of 1828–29

Because of "British commercial and strategic interests in the Middle East and
India,"[17] the British joined the French, "cement[ing] an alliance with Britain and... reassert[ing] its military power
."[17]

It is often said that Russia was militarily weak, technologically backward and administratively incompetent. Despite its grand
ambitions toward the south, it had not built its railway network in that direction, and communications were poor. The bureaucracy
was riddled with graft, corruption and inefficiency and was unprepared for war. Its navy was weak and technologically backward; its
army, although very large, suffered from colonels who pocketed their men's pay, poor morale and was out of touch with the latest
technology developed by Britain and France. By the war's end, everyone realised the profound weaknesses of the Russian armed
[18][19]
forces, and the Russian leadership was determined to reform it.

Immediate causes of the war

The immediate chain of events leading to France and Britain declaring war on
Russia on 27 and 28 March 1854 came from the ambition of the French emperor
Napoleon III to restore the grandeur of France. He wanted Catholic support that
would come his way if he attacked Eastern Orthodoxy, as sponsored by
Russia.[8]:103 The Marquis Charles de La Valette was a zealous Catholic and a
leading member of the "clerical party," which demanded French protection of the
Roman Catholic rights to the holy places in Palestine. In May 1851, Napoleon
appointed La Valette as his ambassador to the Porte (the Ottoman Empire).[8]:7–9
The appointment was made with the intent of forcing the Ottomans to recognise
France as the "sovereign authority" over the Christian population.[9]:19 Russia
disputed this attempted change in authority. Pointing to two more treaties, one in
1757 and the 1774 Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca, the Ottomans reversed their earlier
decision, renouncing the French treaty and insisting that Russia was the protector of
the Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire. Two French Zouaves officers and
one private
Napoleon III responded with a show of force, sending the ship of the line
Charlemagne to the Black Sea. This action was a violation of the London Straits
Convention.[8]:104[9]:19 Thus, France's show of force presented a real threat, and when combined with aggressive diplomacy and
money, induced the Ottoman Sultan Abdülmecid I to accept a new treaty, confirming France and the Roman Catholic Church as the
supreme Christian authority with control over the Roman Catholic holy places and possession of the keys to the Church of the
Nativity, previously held by theGreek Orthodox Church.[9]:20

Tsar Nicholas I then deployed his 4th and 5th army corps along the RiverDanube in Wallachia, as a direct threat to the Ottoman lands
south of the river, and had Count Karl Nesselrode, his foreign minister, undertake talks with the Ottomans. Nesselrode confided to Sir
George Hamilton Seymour, the British ambassador in Saint Petersburg:
 [The dispute over the holy places] had assumed a new character—that the acts of injustice towards the Greek church
which it had been desired to prevent had been perpetrated and consequently that now the object must be to find a
remedy for these wrongs. The success of French negotiations at Constantinople was to be ascribed solely to intrigue
and violence—violence which had been supposed to be the ultima ratio of kings, being, it had been seen, the means
[9]:21
which the present ruler of France was in the habit of employing in the first instance.

As conflict emerged over the issue of the holy places, Nicholas I and Nesselrode began a diplomatic offensive, which they hoped
would prevent either British or French interference in any conflict between Russia and the Ottomans, as well as to prevent an anti-
Russian alliance of the two.

Nicholas began courting Britain by means of conversations with the British ambassador, George Hamilton Seymour, in January and
February 1853.[8]:105 Nicholas insisted that he no longer wished to expand Imperial Russia[8]:105 but that he had an obligation to the
Christian communities in the Ottoman Empire.[8]:105 The Tsar next dispatched a highly abrasive diplomat, Prince Menshikov, on a
special mission to the Ottoman Sublime Porte in February 1853. By previous treaties, the sultan was committed "to protect the
(Eastern Orthodox) Christian religion and its churches." Menshikov demanded a Russian protectorate over all 12 million Orthodox
Christians in the Empire, with control of the Orthodox Church's hierarchy. A compromise was reached regarding Orthodox access to
, rejected the more sweeping demands.[20]
the Holy Land, but the Sultan, strongly supported by the British ambassador

The British and French sent in naval task forces to support the Ottomans, as Russia prepared to seize the Danubian
Principalities.[8]:111–15

First hostilities
In February 1853, the British government of Lord Aberdeen, the prime minister, re-appointed
Stratford Canning as British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire.[8]:110 Having resigned the
ambassadorship in January, he had been replaced by Colonel Rose as chargé d'affaires. Lord
Stratford then turned around and sailed back to Constantinople, arriving there on 5 April 1853.
There he convinced the Sultan to reject the Russian treaty proposal, as compromising the
independence of the Turks. The Leader of the Opposition in the British House of Commons,
Benjamin Disraeli, blamed Aberdeen and Stratford's actions for making war inevitable, thus
starting the process which would eventually force the Aberdeen government to resign in
January 1855, over the war.

Shortly after he learned of the failure of Menshikov's diplomacy toward the end of June 1853,
the Tsar sent armies under the commands of Field Marshal Ivan Paskevich and General
Mikhail Gorchakov across the River Pruth into the Ottoman-controlled Danubian
Russo-French skirmish
Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia. Fewer than half of the 80,000 Russian soldiers who
during the Crimean War
crossed the Pruth in 1853 survived. By far, most of the deaths would result from sickness
rather than action,[8]:118–119 for the Russian army still suffered from medical services that
ranged from bad to none.

Russia had obtained recognition from the Ottoman Empire of the Tsar's role as special guardian of the Orthodox Christians in
Moldavia and Wallachia. Now Russia used the Sultan's failure to resolve the issue of the protection of the Christian sites in the Holy
Land as a pretext for Russian occupation of these Danubian provinces. Nicholas believed that the European powers, especially
Austria, would not object strongly to the annexation of a few neighbouring Ottoman provinces, especially considering that Russia had
assisted Austria's efforts in suppressing theHungarian Revolution in 1849.

In July 1853, the Tsar sent his troops into the Danubian Principalities. The United Kingdom, hoping to maintain the Ottoman Empire
as a bulwark against the expansion of Russian power in Asia, sent a fleet to the Dardanelles, where it joined another fleet sent by
France.[21]
Sultan Abdulmecid I declared war on Russia and proceeded to the attack, his armies moving on the Russian Army near the Danube
later that month.[8]:130 Russia and the Ottoman Empire massed forces on two main fronts, the Caucasus and the Danube. Ottoman
leader Omar Pasha managed to achieve some victories on the Danubian front.[22] In the Caucasus, the Ottomans were able to stand
ground with the help ofChechen Muslims led by Imam Shamil.[23]

Battle of Sinop
The European powers continued to pursue diplomatic avenues. The representatives
of the four neutral Great Powers—the United Kingdom, France, Austria and Prussia
—met in Vienna, where they drafted a note that they hoped would be acceptable to
both the Russians and the Ottomans. The peace terms arrived at by the four powers
at the Vienna Conference (1853) were delivered to the Russians by the Austrian
Foreign Minister Count Karl von Buol on 5 December 1853. The note met with the
approval of Nicholas I; however, Abdülmecid I rejected the proposal, feeling that the
document's poor phrasing left it open to many different interpretations. The United
The Russian destruction of the
Kingdom, France and Austria united in proposing amendments to mollify the Sultan,
Turkish fleet at the Battle of Sinop on
but the court of St. Petersburg ignored their suggestions.[8]:143 The UK and France 30 November 1853 sparked the war
then set aside the idea of continuing negotiations, but Austria and Prussia did not (painting by Ivan Aivazovsky).
believe that the rejection of the proposed amendments justified the abandonment of
the diplomatic process.

The Russians sent a fleet to Sinop in northern Anatolia. In the Battle of Sinop on 30 November 1853 they destroyed a patrol squadron
of Ottoman frigates and corvettes while they were anchored in port. Public opinion in the UK and France was outraged and
demanded war. Sinop provided the United Kingdom and France with the casus belli ("cause for war") for declaring war against
Russia. On 28 March 1854, after Russia ignored an Anglo-French ultimatum to withdraw from the Danubian Principalities, the UK
and France declared war.[24][25]

Dardanelles
Britain was concerned about Russian activity and Sir John Burgoyne, senior advisor to Lord Aberdeen, urged that the Dardanelles
should be occupied and works of sufficient strength built to block any Russian move to capture Constantinople and gain access to the
Mediterranean Sea. The Corps of Royal Engineers sent men to the Dardanelles, while Burgoyne went to Paris, meeting the British
Ambassador and the French Emperor. Lord Cowley wrote on 8 February to Burgoyne, "Your visit to Paris has produced a visible
change in the Emperor's views, and he is making every preparation for a land expedition in case the last attempt at negotiation should
break down."[26]:411

Burgoyne and his team of engineers inspected and surveyed the Dardanelles area in February, and were fired on by Russian riflemen
when they went to Varna. A team of sappers arrived in March, and major building works commenced on a seven-mile line of defence
.[26]:412
designed to block the Gallipoli peninsula. French sappers were working on one half of the line, which was finished in May

Peace attempts
Nicholas felt that, because of Russian assistance in suppressing the Hungarian revolution of 1848, Austria would side with him, or at
the very least remain neutral. Austria, however
, felt threatened by the Russian troops in the Balkan
s. On 27 February 1854, the United
Kingdom and France demanded the withdrawal of Russian forces from the principalities. Austria supported them, and, though it did
not declare war on Russia, it refused to guarantee its neutrality. Russia's rejection of the ultimatum proved to be the justification used
by Britain and France to enter the war.

Russia soon withdrew its troops from the Danubian principalities, which were then occupied by Austria for the duration of the
war.[28] This removed the original grounds for war, but the UK and France continued with hostilities. Determined to address the
Eastern Question by putting an end to the Russian threat to the Ottoman Empire, the allies in August 1854 proposed the "Four Points"
for ending the conflict, in addition to the Russian withdrawal:

Russia was to give up its protectorate over the Danubian Principalities;

The Danube was to be opened up to foreign commerce;
The Straits Convention of 1841, which allowed only Ottoman and
Russian warships in the Black Sea, was to be revised;
Russia was to abandon any claim granting it the right to interfere in
Ottoman affairs on behalf of Orthodox Christians.
These points (particularly the third) would require clarification through negotiation,
but Russia refused to negotiate. The allies including Austria therefore agreed that
Britain and France should take further military action to prevent further Russian Valley of the Shadow of Death, by
Roger Fenton, one of the most
aggression against the Ottoman Empire. Britain and France agreed on the invasion
famous pictures of the Crimean
of the Crimean peninsula as the first step.[29]
War[27]

Battles

Map of Crimean War (in Russian)

Черное Море = Black Sea, Российская Империя = Russian Empire (yellow), Австрийская Империя
= Austrian Empire (pink), Османская Империя = Ottoman Empire (dark grey)

Danube campaign
The Danube campaign opened when the Russians occupied the Danubian Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia in May 1853,
bringing their forces to the north bank of the River Danube. In response, the Ottoman Empire also moved its forces up to the river,
establishing strongholds at Vidin in the west and Silistra[8]:172–84 in the east, near the mouth of the Danube. The Ottoman move up
the River Danube was also of concern to the Austrians, who moved forces into Transylvania in response. However, the Austrians had
begun to fear the Russians more than the Turks. Indeed, like the British, the Austrians were now coming to see that an intact Ottoman
Empire was necessary as a bulwark against the Russians. Accordingly, the Austria resisted Russian diplomatic attempts to join the
ar.[30]
war on the Russian side and remained neutral in the Crimean W

Following the Ottoman ultimatum in September 1853, forces under the Ottoman general Omar Pasha crossed the Danube at Vidin
and captured Calafat in October 1853. Simultaneously, in the east, the Ottomans crossed the Danube at Silistra and attacked the
Russians at Oltenița. The resulting Battle of Oltenița was the first engagement following the declaration of war. The Russians
counterattacked, but were beaten back.[31] On 31 December 1853, the Ottoman forces at Calafat moved against the Russian force at
Chetatea or Cetate, a small village nine miles north of Calafat, and engaged them on 6 January 1854. The battle began when the
Russians made a move to recapture Calafat. Most of the heavy fighting, however,
took place in and around Chetatea until the Russians were driven out of the village.
Despite the setback at Chetatea, on 28 January 1854, Russian forces laid siege to
Calafat. The siege would continue until May 1854 when the Russians lifted the
siege. The Ottomans would also later beat the Russians in battle at
Caracal.[8]:130–43

In the spring of 1854 the Russians again advanced, crossing the River Danube into
Mahmudiye (1829) participated in
the Turkish province of Dobruja. By April 1854, the Russians had reached the lines
numerous important naval battles,
of Trajan's Wall where they were finally halted. In the centre, the Russian forces
including the Siege of Sevastopol
crossed the Danube and laid siege to Silistra from 14 April with 60,000 troops, the
defenders with 15,000 had supplies for three months.[26]:415 The siege was lifted on
23 June 1854.[32] The English and French forces at this time were unable to take the field for lack of equipment.
[26]:415

In the west, the Russians were dissuaded from attacking Vidin by the presence of the
Austrian forces, which had swelled to 280,000 men. On 28 May 1854 a protocol of
the Vienna Conference was signed by Austria and Russia. One of the aims of the
Russian advance had been to encourage the Orthodox Christian Serbs and
Bulgarians living under Ottoman rule to rebel. However, when the Russian troops
actually crossed the River Pruth into Moldavia, the Orthodox Christians still showed
no interest in rising up against the Turks.[8]:131, 137 Adding to the worries of
Nicholas I was the concern that Austria would enter the war against the Russians and
French zouaves and Russian
attack his armies on the western flank. Indeed, after attempting to mediate a peaceful
soldiers engaged in hand-to-hand
settlement between Russia and Turkey, the Austrians entered the war on the side of
combat at Malakhov Kurgan
Turkey with an attack against the Russians in the Principalities which threatened to
cut off the Russian supply lines. Accordingly, the Russians were forced to raise the
siege of Silistra on 23 June 1854, and begin abandoning the Principalities.[8]:185 The lifting of the siege reduced the threat of a
Russian advance into Bulgaria.

In June 1854, the Allied expeditionary force landed at Varna, a city on the Black Sea's western coast. They made little advance from
their base there.[8]:175–176 In July 1854, the Turks under Omar Pasha crossed the Danube into Wallachia and on 7 July 1854 engaged
the Russians in the city of Giurgiu and conquered it. The capture of Giurgiu by the Turks immediately threatened Bucharest in
Wallachia with capture by the same Turkish army. On 26 July 1854, Tsar Nicholas I, responding to an Austrian ultimatum, ordered
the withdrawal of Russian troops from the Principalities. Also, in late July 1854, following up on the Russian retreat, the French
[8]:188–190
staged an expedition against the Russian forces still in Dobruja, but this was a failure.

By then, the Russian withdrawal was complete, except for the fortress towns of northern Dobruja, while their place in the
Principalities was taken by the Austrians, as a neutral peacekeeping force.[8]:189 There was little further action on this front after the
autumn of 1854, and in September the allied force boarded ships at aVrna to invade the Crimean Peninsula.[8]:198

Black Sea theatre

The naval operations of the Crimean War commenced with the dispatch, in the summer of 1853, of the French and British fleets to
the Black Sea region, to support the Ottomans and to dissuade the Russians from encroachment. By June 1853, both fleets were
stationed at Besikas Bay, outside the Dardanelles. With the Russian occupation of the Danube Principalities in October, they moved
to the Bosphorus and in November entered the Black Sea.

During this period, the Russian Black Sea Fleet was operating against Ottoman coastal traffic between Constantinople and the
Caucasus ports, while the Ottoman fleet sought to protect this supply line. The clash came on 30 November 1853 when a Russian
fleet attacked an Ottoman force in the harbour at Sinop, and destroyed it at the Battle of Sinop. The battle outraged opinion in UK,
which called for war.[33] There was little additional naval action until March 1854 when on the declaration of war the British frigate
HMS Furious was fired on outside Odessa Harbour. In response an Anglo-French
fleet bombarded the port, causing much damage to the town. To show support for
Turkey after the battle of Sinop, on 22 December 1853, the Anglo-French squadron
entered the Black Sea and the steamship HMS Retribution approached the Port of
Sevastopol, the commander of which received an ultimatum not to allow any ships
in the Black Sea.

In June, the fleets transported the Allied expeditionary forces to Varna, in support of
the Ottoman operations on the Danube; in September they again transported the
armies, this time to the Crimea. The Russian fleet during this time declined to Turkish troops stormingFort Shefketil
engage the allies, preferring to maintain a "fleet in being"; this strategy failed when
Sevastopol, the main port and where most of the Black Sea fleet was based, came
under siege. The Russians were reduced to scuttling their warships as blockships, after stripping them of their guns and men to
reinforce batteries on shore. During the siege, the Russians lost four 110- or 120-gun, three-decker ships of the line, twelve 84-gun
two-deckers and four 60-gun frigates in the Black Sea, plus a large number of smaller vessels. During the rest of the campaign the
allied fleets remained in control of the Black Sea, ensuring the various fronts were kept supplied.

In May 1855, the allies successfully invaded Kerch and operated against Taganrog in the Sea of Azov. In September they moved
against Russian installations in theDnieper estuary, attacking Kinburn in the first use of ironclad ships in naval warfare.

Crimean campaign
The Russians evacuated Wallachia and Moldavia in late July 1854. With the evacuation of the
Danubian Principalities, the immediate cause of war was withdrawn and the war might have
ended at this time.[8]:192 However, war fever among the public in both the UK and France had
been whipped up by the press in both countries to the degree that politicians found it
untenable to propose ending the war at this point. Indeed, the coalition government of George
Hamilton-Gordon, 4th Earl of Aberdeen fell on 30 January 1855 on a no-confidence vote as
.[8]:311
Parliament voted to appoint a committee to investigate mismanagement of the war

French and British officers and engineers were sent on 20 July on HMS Fury, a wooden
Bulldog-class paddle sloop, to survey the harbour of Sevastopol and the coast near it,
managing to get close to the harbour mouth to inspect the formidable batteries. Returning,
they reported that they believed there were 15,000–20,000 troops encamped.[26]:421 Ships
were prepared to transport horses and siege equipment was both manufactured and
imported.[26]:422

The Crimean campaign opened in September 1854. Three hundred and sixty ships sailed in
seven columns, each steamer towing two sailing ships.[26]:422 Anchoring on 13 September in
the bay of Eupatoria, the town surrendered and 500 marines landed to occupy it. This town Russo-British skirmish
and bay would provide a fall back position in case of disaster.[8]:201 The ships then sailed east during the Crimean War

to make the landing of the allied expeditionary force on the sandy beaches of Calamita Bay on
the south west coast of the Crimean Peninsula. The landing surprised the Russians, as they
had been expecting a landing at Katcha; the last minute change proving that Russia had known the original battle plan. There was no
sign of the enemy and the men were all landed on 14 September. It took another four days to land all the stores, equipment, horses
and artillery.

The landing was north of Sevastopol, so the Russians had arrayed their army in expectation of a direct attack. The allies advanced
and on the morning of 20 September came up to the River Alma and engaged the Russian army. The position was strong, but after
three hours,[26]:424 the frontal attack had driven the Russians out of their dug-in positions with losses of 6,000 men. The Battle of the
 Alma had 3,300 Allied losses. Failing to pursue the retreating forces was one of
many strategic errors made during the war, and the Russians themselves noted that
had the Allies pressed south that day they would have easily captured Sevastopol.

Believing the northern approaches to the city too well defended, especially due to
the presence of a large star fort and because Sevastopol was on the south side of the
inlet from the sea that made the harbour, Sir John Burgoyne, the engineer advisor,
recommended that the allies attack Sevastopol from the south. This was agreed by
the joint commanders, Raglan and St Arnaud.[26]:426 On 25 September the whole
army began to march southeast and eventually encircled the city from the south,
93rd Sutherland Highlandersat the
after establishing port facilities at Balaclava for the British and Kamiesch for the
Battle of Alma
French. The Russians retreated into the city.[34][35]

The Allied army moved without problems to the south and the heavy artillery was
brought ashore with batteries and connecting trenches built so that by 10 October some batteries were ready and by 17 October—
when the bombardment commenced—126 guns were firing, 53 of them French.[26]:430 The fleet at the same time engaged the shore
batteries. The British bombardment worked better than the French, who had smaller calibre guns. The fleet suffered high casualties
during the day. The British wanted to attack that afternoon, but the French wanted to defer the attack. A postponement was agreed,
but on the next day the French were still not ready. By 19 October the Russians had transferred some heavy guns to the southern
defences and outgunned the allies.[26]:431

Reinforcements for the Russians gave them the courage to send out probing attacks. The Allied lines, beginning to suffer from
cholera as early as September, were stretched. The French, on the west had less to do than the British on the east with their siege lines
and the large nine mile open wing back to their supply base on the south coast.

Battle of Balaclava
A large Russian assault on the allied supply base to the southeast at Balaclava was
rebuffed on 25 October 1854.:521–527 The Battle of Balaclava is remembered in the
UK for the actions of two British units. At the start of the battle, a large body of
Russian cavalry charged the 93rd Highlanders, who were posted north of the village
of Kadikoi. Commanding them was Sir Colin Campbell. Rather than 'form square',
the traditional method of repelling cavalry, Campbell took the risky decision to have
his Highlanders form a single line, two men deep. Campbell had seen the
effectiveness of the newMinie rifles, with which his troops were armed, at the Battle
British cavalry charging against
of Alma a month before, and he was confident his men could beat back the Russians. Russian forces at Balaclava
His tactics succeeded.[36] From up on the ridge to the west, Times correspondent
William Howard Russell saw the Highlanders as a 'thin red streak topped with steel',
a phrase which soon became the 'Thin Red Line.'[37]

Soon after, a Russian cavalry movement was countered by the Heavy Brigade, who charged and fought hand-to-hand until the
Russians retreated. This caused a more widespread Russian retreat, including a number of their artillery units. When the local
commanders failed to take advantage of the retreat, Lord Raglan sent out orders to move up and attack some Russian guns located
across the valley. Raglan could see these guns due to his position on the hill; however, when in the valley, this view was obstructed,
leaving the wrong guns in sight. The local commanders ignored the demands, leading to the British aide-de-camp (Captain Nolan)
personally delivering the quickly written and confusing order to attack the artillery. When Lord Lucan questioned which guns the
order referred to, the aide-de-camp pointed to the first Russian battery he could see and allegedly said 'There is your enemy, there are
your guns' – due to his obstructed view, these were the wrong ones. Lucan then passed the order to the Earl of Cardigan, resulting in
the charge of the Light Brigade.

The Chasseurs d'Afrique, led by
General d'Allonville, clearing Russian
artillery from the Fedyukhin Heights
during the Battle of Balaclava
In this charge, Cardigan formed up his unit and charged the length of the Valley of
the Balaclava, under fire from Russian batteries in the hills. The charge of the Light
Brigade caused 278 casualties of the 700-man unit. The Light Brigade was
memorialised in the famous poem by Alfred, Lord Tennyson, "The Charge of the
Light Brigade." Although traditionally the charge of the Light Brigade was looked
upon as a glorious but wasted sacrifice of good men and horses, recent historians say
that the charge of the Light Brigade did succeed in at least some of its objectives.[38]
The aim of any cavalry charge is to scatter the enemy lines and frighten the enemy
off the battlefield. The charge of the Light Brigade so unnerved the Russian cavalry,
which had been routed by theHeavy Brigade, that the Russians were set to full-scale
flight.[8]:252[39]
The shortage of men led to the failure of the British and French to follow up on the
Battle of Balaclava, which led directly to a much bloodier battle—the Battle of
Inkerman. On 5 November 1854, the Russians attempted to raise the siege at
Sevastopol with an attack against the allies, which resulted in another allied
victory.[40]

Winter of 1854–55
Winter and a deteriorating supply of troops andmateriel on both sides led to a halt in
ground operations. Sevastopol remained invested by the allies, while the allied
armies were hemmed in by the Russian Army in the interior. On 14 November a
storm sank thirty allied transport ships,[41] including HMS Prince, which was
carrying a cargo of winter clothing.[26]:435 The storm and heavy traffic caused the
road from the coast to the troops to disintegrate into a quagmire, requiring engineers
to devote most of their time to its repair including quarrying stone. A tramway was
ordered. It arrived in January with a civilian engineering crew; however, it was
March before it was sufficiently advanced to be of any appreciable value.[26]:439 An
Historical map showing the territory
electrical telegraph was also ordered, but the frozen ground delayed its installation
between Balaclava and Sevastopol
until March, when communications from the base port of Balaklava to the British
at the time of the Siege of
HQ was established. The pipe-and-cable-laying plough failed because of the hard Sevastopol
[26]:449
frozen soil, but nevertheless 21 miles of cable were laid.

The troops suffered greatly from cold and sickness, and the shortage of fuel led them to start dismantling their defensive Gabions and
Fascines.[26]:442 In February 1855, the Russians attacked the allied base at Eupatoria, where an Ottoman army had built up and was
threatening Russian supply routes. The Russians were defeated inthe battle,[8]:321–22 leading to a change in their command.

The strain of directing the war had taken its toll on the health of Tsar Nicholas. The Tsar, full of remorse for the disasters he had
caused, caught pneumonia and died on 2 March.[42]:96

Siege of Sevastopol
The Allies had had time to consider the problem, the French being brought around to agree that the key to the defence was the
Malakoff.[26]:441 Emphasis of the siege at Sevastopol shifted to the British left, against the fortifications on Malakoff hill.[8]:339 In
March, there was fighting by the French over a new fort being built by the Russians at Mamelon, located on a hill in front of the
Malakoff. Several weeks of fighting resulted in little change in the front line, and the Mamelon remained in Russian hands.

In April 1855, the allies staged a second all-out bombardment, leading to an artillery duel with the Russian guns, but no ground
assault followed.[8]:340–41
On 24 May 1855, sixty ships containing 7,000 French, 5,000 Turkish and 3,000
British troops set off for a raid on the city of Kerch east of Sevastopol in an attempt
to open another front on the Crimean peninsula and to cut off Russian
supplies.[8]:344 When the allies landed the force at Kerch, the plan was to outflank
the Russian Army. The landings were successful, but the force made little progress
thereafter.

Many more artillery pieces had arrived and had been dug into batteries. In June, a Siege of Sevastopol
third bombardment was followed after two days by a successful attack on the
Mamelon, but a follow-up assault on the
Malakoff failed with heavy losses. During
this time the garrison commander, Admiral
Nakhimov fell on 30 June 1855,[8]:378 and
Raglan died on 28 June.[26]:460 In August,
the Russians again made an attack towards
the base at Balaclava, defended by the
French, newly arrived Sardinian, and
Ottoman troops.[26]:461 The resulting Battle Battle of Malakoff
of the Chernaya was a defeat for the
Battle of the Chernaya, the Russians, who suffered heavy casualties.
forces at the beginning of
the battle and the Russian For months each side had been building forward rifle
advance pits and defensive positions, which resulted in many
skirmishes. Artillery fire aimed to gain superiority over
the enemy guns.[26]:450–462 The final assault was
made on 5 September, when another French bombardment (the sixth) was followed by an
assault by the French Army on 8 September resulting in the capture of the Malakoff by the
French. The Russians failed to retake it and their defences collapsed. Meanwhile, the British
captured the Great Redan, just south of the city of Sevastopol. The Russians retreated to the
north, blowing up their magazines, and the city fell on 9 September 1855 after a 337-day-long
siege.[42]:106[43]

At this point, both sides were exhausted, and no further military operations were launched in
the Crimea before the onset of winter. The main objective of the siege, the destruction of the
Russian fleet and docks, took place over winter. On 28 February, multiple mines blew up the
The French captured
five docks, the canal, and three locks.[26]:471 Sevastopol after a nearly
year-long siege.

Azov campaign
In spring 1855, the allied Anglo-French commanders decided to send an Anglo-
French naval squadron into theAzov Sea to undermine Russian communications and
supplies to besieged Sevastopol. On 12 May 1855, Anglo-French warships entered
the Kerch Strait and destroyed the coast battery of the Kamishevaya Bay. Once
through the Kerch Strait, British and French warships struck at every vestige of
Russian power along the coast of the Sea of Azov. Except for Rostov and Azov, no
town, depot, building or fortification was immune from attack and Russian naval
power ceased to exist almost overnight. This Allied campaign led to a significant
Disembarkation of the expedition to
reduction in supplies flowing to the besieged Russian troops at Sevastopol.
Kerch
On 21 May 1855, the gunboats and armed steamers attacked the seaport of
Taganrog, the most important hub near Rostov on Don. The vast amounts of food,
especially bread, wheat, barley and rye that were amassed in the city after the
outbreak of war were prevented from being exported.

The Governor of Taganrog, Yegor Tolstoy, and lieutenant-general Ivan Krasnov

refused an allied ultimatum, responding that "Russians never surrender their cities".
The Anglo–French squadron bombarded Taganrog for 6½ hours and landed 300
troops near the Old Stairway in the centre of Taganrog, but they were thrown back
Bombardment of Taganrog from a
by Don Cossacks and a volunteer corps.
British raft during the first siege
attempt
In July 1855, the allied squadron tried to go past Taganrog to Rostov on Don,
entering the River Don through the Mius River. On 12 July 1855 HMS Jasper
grounded near Taganrog thanks to a fisherman who moved buoys into shallow water. The Cossacks captured the gunboat with all of
its guns and blew it up. The third siege attempt was made 19–31 August 1855, but the city was already fortified and the squadron
could not approach close enough for landing operations. The allied fleet left the Gulf of Taganrog on 2 September 1855, with minor
military operations along the Azov Sea coast continuing until late autumn 1855.

Caucasus theatre
As in the previous wars the Caucasus front was secondary
to what was happening in the west. Perhaps because of
better communications western events sometimes
influenced the east. The main events were the second
capture of Kars and a landing on the Georgian coast.
Several commanders on both sides were either incompetent
or unlucky and few fought aggressively.[44]

1853: There were four main events. 1. In the north the

Turks captured the border fort of Saint Nicholas in a
surprise night attack (27/28 October). They then pushed
Caucasus front during the Crimean War
about 20,000 troops across the River Cholok border. Being
outnumbered the Russians abandoned Poti and Redut Kale
and drew back to Marani. Both sides remained immobile for the next seven
Circassians
months. 2. In the centre the Turks moved north from Ardahan to within Vladikazkaz
SukhumAb
cannon-shot of Akhaltsike and awaited reinforcements (13 November). The Kale Ab Ingur River
Russians routed them. The claimed losses were 4,000 Turks and 400 Russians. Anaklia
RedutKale TskhenisDzqali
Poti Marani
3. In the south about 30,000 Turks slowly moved east to the main Russian FortStNicholas Cholok River Tiflis
Batum
concentration at Gyumri or Alexandropol (November). They crossed the Akaltsike
border and set up artillery south of town. Prince Orbeliani tried to drive them
off and found himself trapped. The Turks failed to press their advantage; the Georgian coast:
remaining Russians rescued Orbeliani and the Turks retired west. Orbeliani Ab= Abkhazia; Red=Turkish,
Blue=Russian
lost about 1,000 men out of 5,000. The Russians now decided to advance. The
Turks took up a strong position on the Kars road and attacked. They were
defeated in the Battle of Başgedikler, losing 6,000 men, half their artillery and all their supply train. The Russians lost 1,300,
including Prince Orbeliani. This was Prince Ellico Orbeliani whose wife was later kidnapped by
Imam Shamil at Tsinandali. 4. At sea
the Turks sent a fleet east which was destroyed by Admiral Nakhimov atSinope.

1854: The British and French declared war on 3 January. That spring the Anglo-French fleet appeared in the Black Sea and the
Russians abandoned the Black Sea Defensive Line from Anapa south. N. A. Read, who replaced Vorontsov, fearing an Anglo-French
landing in conjunction with Shamyl and the Persians, recommended withdrawal north of the Caucasus. For this he was replaced by
Baryatinsky. When the allies chose a land attack on Sebastopol any plan for a landing in the east was abandoned.

In the north Eristov pushed southwest, fought two battles, forced the Turks back to Batum, retired behind the Cholok River and
suspended action for the rest of the year (June). In the far south Wrangel pushed west, fought a battle and occupied Bayazit. In the
centre the main forces stood at Kars and Gyumri. Both slowly approached along the Kars-Gyumri road and faced each other, neither
side choosing to fight (June–July). On 4 August Russian scouts saw a movement which they thought was the start of a withdrawal,
the Russians advanced and the Turks attacked first. They were defeated, losing 8,000 men to the Russian 3,000. 10,000 irregulars
deserted to their villages. Both sides withdrew to their former positions. About this time the Persians made a semi-secret agreement to
remain neutral in exchange for the cancellation of the indemnity from the previous war
.

1855: Kars: In the year up to May 1855 Turkish forces in the east were reduced
from 120,000 to 75,000, mostly by disease. The local Armenian population kept
Muravyev well-informed about the Turks at Kars and he judged they had about five
months of supplies. He therefore decided to control the surrounding area with
cavalry and starve them out. He started in May and by June was south and west of
the town. A relieving force fell back and there was a possibility of taking Erzerum,
but Muravyev chose not to. In late September he learned of the fall of Sevastopol
and a Turkish landing at Batum. This led him to reverse policy and try a direct
attack. It failed, the Russians losing 8,000 men and the Turks 1,500 (29 September). General Bebutashvili defeated the
The blockade continued and Kars surrendered on 8 November
. Turks at the Battle of Kurekdere

1855: Georgian coast: Omar Pasha, the Turkish commander at Crimea had long
wanted to land in Georgia, but the western powers vetoed it. When they relented in August most of the campaigning season was lost.
In September 8,000 Turks landed at Batum, but the main concentration was at Sukhum Kale. This required a 100-mile march south
through a country with poor roads. The Russians planned to hold the line of the Ingur River which separates Abkhazia from Georgia
proper. Omar crossed the Ingur on 7 November and then wasted a great deal of time, the Russians doing little. By 2 December he had
reached the Tskhenis-dzqali, the rainy season had started, his camps were submerged in mud and there was no bread. Learning of the
fall of Kars he withdrew to the Ingur. The Russians did nothing and he evacuated to Batum in February of the following year
.

Baltic theatre
The Baltic was a forgotten theatre of the Crimean War.[45] Popularisation of events elsewhere overshadowed the significance of this
theatre, which was close to Saint Petersburg, the Russian capital. In April 1854 an Anglo-French fleet entered the Baltic to attack the
Russian naval base of Kronstadt and the Russian fleet stationed there.[46] In August 1854 the combined British and French fleet
returned to Kronstadt for another attempt. The outnumbered Russian Baltic Fleet confined its movements to the areas around its
fortifications. At the same time, the British and French commandersSir Charles Napier and Alexandre Ferdinand Parseval-Deschenes
—although they led the largest fleet assembled since the Napoleonic Wars—considered the Sveaborg fortress too well-defended to
engage. Thus, shelling of the Russian batteries was limited to two attempts in the summers of 1854 and 1855, and initially, the
attacking fleets limited their actions to blockading Russian trade in the Gulf of Finland.[47] Naval attacks on other ports, such as the
ones in the island of Hogland in the Gulf of Finland, proved more successful. Additionally, allies conducted raids on less fortified
sections of the Finnish coast.[48] These battles are known inFinland as the Åland War.

Russia depended on imports – both for her domestic economy and for the supply of her military forces: the blockade forced Russia to
rely on more expensive overland shipments from Prussia. The blockade seriously undermined the Russian export economy and
helped shorten the war.[49]

The burning of tar warehouses and ships led to international criticism, and in London the MP
Thomas Gibson demanded in the House
of Commons that the First Lord of the Admiralty explain "a system which carried on a great war by plundering and destroying the
property of defenceless villagers".[50]
 In August 1854 a Franco-British naval force captured and destroyed the Russian
Bomarsund fortress on Åland Islands. In the same month, the Western Allied Baltic
Fleet tried to destroy heavily defended Russian dockyards at Sveaborg outside
Helsinki. More than 1,000 enemy guns tested the strength of the fortress for two
days. Despite the shelling, the sailors of the 120-gun ship Rossiya, led by Captain
Viktor Poplonsky, defended the entrance to the harbour. The Allies fired over 20,000
shells but failed to defeat the Russian batteries. A massive new fleet of more than
350 gunboats and mortar vessels was prepared, but before the attack was launched,
Bombardment of Bomarsundduring the war ended.
the Crimean War, after William
Simpson Part of the Russian resistance was credited to the deployment of newly invented
blockade mines. Perhaps the most influential contributor to the development of naval
mining was a Swede resident in Russia, the inventor and civil engineer Immanuel
Nobel (the father of Alfred Nobel). Immanuel Nobel helped the Russian war effort by applying his knowledge of industrial
explosives, such as nitroglycerin and gunpowder. One account dates modern naval mining from the Crimean War: "Torpedo mines, if
I may use this name given by Fulton to self-acting mines underwater, were among the novelties attempted by the Russians in their
ficer put it in 1860.[51]
defences about Cronstadt and Sevastopol", as one American of

White Sea theatre

In autumn 1854, a squadron of three British warships led by HMS Miranda left the
Baltic for the White Sea, where they shelled Kola (which was utterly destroyed) and
the Solovki. Their attempt to stormArkhangelsk proved unsuccessful.

Pacific theatre
Minor naval skirmishes also occurred in the Far East, where at Petropavlovsk on the
Kamchatka Peninsula a British and French Allied squadron including HMS Pique
"Bombardment of the Solovetsky
under Rear Admiral David Price and a French force under Counter-Admiral Auguste
Monastery in the White Sea by the
Febvrier Despointes besieged a smaller Russian force under Rear Admiral Yevfimy Royal Navy", a lubok (popular print)
Putyatin. In September 1854, an Allied landing force was beaten back with heavy from 1868
casualties, and the Allies withdrew. The Russians escaped under the cover of snow
in early 1855 after Allied reinforcements arrived in the region.

The Anglo-French forces in theFar East also made several small landings onSakhalin and Urup, one of the Kuril Islands.[52]

Piedmontese involvement
Camillo di Cavour, under orders of Victor Emmanuel II of Piedmont-Sardinia, sent an expeditionary corps of 15,000 soldiers,
commanded by General Alfonso La Marmora, to side with French and British forces during the war.[53]:111–12 This was an attempt
at gaining the favour of the French, especially when the issue of uniting Italy would become an important matter. The deployment of
Italian troops to the Crimea, and the gallantry shown by them in the Battle of the Chernaya (16 August 1855) and in the siege of
Sevastopol, allowed the Kingdom of Sardinia to be among the participants at the peace conference at the end of the war, where it
could address the issue of theRisorgimento to other European powers.

Greece
Greece played a peripheral role in the war. When Russia attacked the Ottoman Empire in 1853, King Otto of Greece saw an
opportunity to expand north and south into Ottoman areas that had large Greek Christian majorities. However, Greece did not
coordinate its plans with Russia, did not declare war, and received no outside military or financial support. Greece, an Orthodox
nation, had considerable support in Russia, but the Russian government decided it
was too dangerous to help Greece expand its holdings.[8]:32–40 When the Russians
invaded the Principalities, the Ottoman forces were tied down so Greece invaded
Thessaly and Epirus. To block further Greek moves, the British and French occupied
the main Greek port atPiraeus from April 1854 to February 1857,[54] and effectively
neutralized the Greek army. Greeks, gambling on a Russian victory, incited the
large-scale Epirus Revolt of 1854 as well as uprisings in Crete. The insurrections
were failures that were easily crushed by the Ottoman army. Greece was not invited
A Greek battalion fought for Russia
to the peace conference and made no gains out of the war.[8]:139[55] The frustrated
at Sevastopol
Greek leadership blamed the King for failing to take advantage of the situation; his
popularity plunged and he was later forced to abdicate.

Kiev Cossack revolt and national awakening in Ukraine

A Kiev cossack revolt that began in the Vasylkiv county of Kiev Governorate (province) in February 1855 spread across the whole
Kiev and Chernigov governorates.[56] Led by peasants, the revolt found great support among the Ukrainian landowners who opposed
the war.[57] The events were contemporary with the popular movement of Chłopomania that laid the foundations of the Ukrainian
national awakening[58] and the creation of theKiev Hromada (Kiev Community).[59]

End of the war

British position
Dissatisfaction with the conduct of the war was growing with the public in the UK
and in other countries, aggravated by reports of fiascos, especially the devastating
losses of the heroic Charge of the Light Brigade at the Battle of Balaclava. On
Sunday, 21 January 1855, a "snowball riot" occurred in Trafalgar Square near St
Martin-in-the-Fields in which 1,500 people gathered to protest against the war by
pelting buses, cabs and pedestrians with snow balls.[60] When the police intervened,
the snowballs were directed at the officers. The riot was finally put down by troops
and police acting with truncheons.[60] In Parliament, Tories demanded an accounting
One of three 17th-century church
of all soldiers, cavalry and sailors sent to the Crimea and accurate figures as to the bells in Arundel Castle, England.
number of casualties that had been sustained by all British armed forces in the These were taken fromSevastopol
Crimea; they were especially concerned with the Battle of Balaclava. When as trophies at the end of the Crimean
Parliament passed a bill to investigate by the vote of 305 to 148, Aberdeen said he War.
had lost a vote of no confidence and resigned as prime minister on 30 January
1855.[61] The veteran former Foreign Secretary Lord Palmerston became prime
minister.[62] Palmerston took a hard line; he wanted to expand the war, foment unrest inside the Russian Empire, and permanently
reduce the Russian threat to Europe. Sweden and Prussia were willing to join the UK and France, and Russia was
isolated.[8]:400–402, 406–408

Peace negotiations
France, which had sent far more soldiers to the war than Britain had, and suffered far more casualties, wanted the war to end, as did
Austria.[8]:402–405

Peace negotiations at the Congress of Paris resulted in the signing of the Treaty of Paris on 30 March 1856.[63] In compliance with
article III, Russia restored to the Ottoman Empire the city and citadel of Kars in common with "all other parts of the Ottoman
territory of which the Russian troop were in possession". Russia returned the Budjak, in Bessarabia, back to Moldavia.[64][65] By
article IV Britain, France, Sardinia and Turkey restored to Russia "the towns and ports of Sevastopol, Balaklava, Kamish, Eupatoria,
Kerch, Jenikale, Kinburn as well as all other territories occupied by the allied troops". In conformity with article XI and XIII, the
sarT
and the Sultan agreed not to establish any naval or military arsenal on the Black Sea coast. The Black Sea clauses weakened Russia,
and it no longer posed a naval threat to the Ottomans. The principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia were nominally returned to the
Ottoman Empire; in practice they became independent. The Great Powers pledged to respect the independence and territorial
integrity of the Ottoman Empire.[8]:432–33

Aftermath in Russia
Some members of the Russian intelligentsia saw defeat as a pressure to modernise their society. Grand Duke Constantine (son of the
Tsar) remarked that,[66]

“ We cannot deceive ourselves any longer; we must say that we are both weaker and
poorer than the first-class powers, and furthermore poorer not only in material terms
but in mental resources, especially in matters of administration. ”
Historical analysis
The Treaty of Paris stood until 1871, when France was defeated by Prussia in the
Franco-Prussian War of 1870–71. While Prussia and several other German states
united to form a powerfulGerman Empire, the Emperor of the French, Napoleon III,
was deposed to permit the formation of a Third French Republic. During his reign,
Napoleon III, eager for the support of the United Kingdom, had opposed Russia over
the Eastern Question. Russian interference in the Ottoman Empire, however, did not
in any significant manner threaten the interests of France. Thus, France abandoned
its opposition to Russia after the establishment of a republic. Encouraged by the Treaty of Paris (1856)
decision of the French, and supported by the German minister Otto von Bismarck,
Russia renounced the Black Sea clauses of the treaty agreed to in 1856. As the
United Kingdom alone could not enforce the clauses, Russia once again established
a fleet in the Black Sea.

Although it was Russia that was punished by the Paris Treaty, in the long run it was
Austria that lost the most from the Crimean War despite having barely taken part in
it.[8]:433 Having abandoned its alliance with Russia, Austria was diplomatically
isolated following the war,[8]:433 which contributed to its disastrous defeats in the
1859 Franco-Austrian War that resulted in the cession of Lombardy to the Kingdom
of Sardinia, and later in the loss of the Habsburg rule of Tuscany and Modena, which
meant the end of Austrian influence in Italy. Furthermore, Russia did not do
anything to assist its former ally, Austria, in the 1866 Austro-Prussian War[8]:433
with its loss of Venetia and more important than that, its influence in most German-
speaking lands. The status of Austria as a great power, with the unifications of
Germany and Italy, was now severely questioned. It had to compromise with
Hungary; the two countries shared the Danubian Empire and Austria slowly became
Crimean War Memorial at Waterloo
little more than a German satellite. With France now hostile to Germany, allied with Place, St James's, London
Russia and Russia competing with the newly renamed Austro-Hungarian Empire for
an increased role in the Balkans at the expense of the Ottoman Empire, the
foundations were in place for creating the diplomatic alliances that would lead to the
First World War.

Notwithstanding the guarantees to preserve Ottoman territories specified in thereaty

T of Paris, Russia, exploiting nationalist unrest in
the Ottoman states in the Balkans and seeking to regain lost prestige, once again declared war on the Ottoman Empire on 24 April
1877. In this later Russo-Turkish War the states of Romania, Serbia, Montenegro gained international recognition of their
independence and Bulgaria achieved its autonomy from direct Ottoman rule.

The Crimean War marked the ascendancy of France to the position of pre-eminent
power on the Continent,[8]:411 the continued decline of the Ottoman Empire, and the
beginning of a decline for Tsarist Russia. As Fuller notes, "Russia had been beaten
on the Crimean peninsula, and the military feared that it would inevitably be beaten
again unless steps were taken to surmount its military weakness."[67] The Crimean
War marks the demise of the Concert of Europe, the balance of power that had
dominated Europe since the Congress of Vienna in 1815, and which had included
France, Russia, Austria and the United Kingdom.
Monument to Sevastopol, Halifax,
Nova Scotia—the only Crimean War
According to historian Shepard Clough, the war:
Monument in North America

was not the result of a calculated plan, nor even of hasty last-minute
decisions made under stress. It was the consequence of more than
two years of fatal blundering in slow-motion by inept statesmen who
had months to reflect upon the actions they took. It arose from
Napoleon's search for prestige; Nicholas's quest for control over the
Straits; his naive miscalculation of the probable reactions of the
European powers; the failure of those powers to make their positions
clear; and the pressure of public opinion in Britain and
Constantinople at crucial moments.[68]

This view of 'diplomatic drift' as the cause of the war was first popularised by A. W. Kinglake, who portrayed the British as victims
of newspaper sensationalism and duplicitous French and Ottoman diplomacy. More recently, the historians Andrew Lambert and
Winfried Baumgart have argued that, first, Britain was following a geopolitical strategy in aiming to destroy a fledgling Russian
Navy which might challenge the Royal Navy for control of the seas, and second, that the war was a joint European response to a
[24][65]
century of Russian expansion not just southwards but also into western Europe.

Russia feared losing Russian America without compensation in some future conflict, especially to the British. While Alaska attracted
little interest at the time, the population of nearby British Columbia started to increase rapidly a few years after hostilities ended.
Therefore, the Russian emperor, Alexander II, decided to sell Alaska. In 1859 the Russians offered to sell the territory to the United
[69]
States, hoping that its presence in the region would offset the plans of Russia's greatest regional rival, the United Kingdom.

Documentation
Notable documentation of the war was provided by William Howard Russell (writing for The Times newspaper) and the photographs
of Roger Fenton.[8]:306–309 News from war correspondents reached all nations involved in the war and kept the public citizenry of
those nations better informed of the day-to-day events of the war than had been the case in any other war to that date. The British
public was very well informed regarding the day-to-day realities of the war in the Crimea. After the French extended the telegraph to
the coast of the Black Sea during the winter of 1854, the news reached London in two days. When the British laid an underwater
cable to the Crimean peninsula in April 1855, news reached London in a few hours. The daily news reports energised public opinion,
of as prime minister.[8]:304–11
which brought down the Aberdeen government and carried Lord Palmerston into fice

Criticisms and reform

Historian R.B. McCallum points out the war was enthusiastically supported by the British populace as it was happening, but the
mood changed very dramatically afterwards. Pacifists and critics were unpopular but:
 in the end they won. Cobden and Bright were true to their principles
of foreign policy, which laid down the absolute minimum of
intervention in European affairs and a deep moral reprobation of
war ... When the first enthusiasm was passed, when the dead were
mourned, the sufferings revealed, and the cost counted, when in
1870 Russia was able calmly to secure the revocation of the Treaty,
which disarmed her in the Black Sea, the view became general of the
war was stupid and unnecessary, and effected nothing ... The
Crimean war remained as a classic example ... of how governments
may plunge into war, how strong ambassadors may mislead weak
prime ministers, how the public may be worked up into a facile fury,
and how the achievements of the war may crumble to nothing. The
Bright-Cobden criticism of the war was remembered and to a large
extent accepted [especially by the Liberal Party]. Isolation from
[71][72]
European entanglements seemed more than ever desirable.
During the Crimean War, Florence
Nightingale and her team of nurses
As the memory of the "Charge of the Light Brigade" demonstrates, the war became cleaned up the military hospitals and
an iconic symbol of logistical, medical and tactical failures and mismanagement. set up the first training school for
Public opinion in the UK was outraged at the logistical and command failures of the nurses in the United Kingdom.[70]

war; the newspapers demanded drastic reforms, and parliamentary investigations

demonstrated the multiple failures of the Army.[73] However, the reform campaign
was not well organised, and the traditional aristocratic leadership of the Army pulled itself together, and blocked all serious reforms.
No one was punished. The outbreak of the Sepoy Mutiny in 1857 shifted attention to the heroic defence of British interest by the
army, and further talk of reform went nowhere.[74] The demand for professionalisation was, however, achieved by Florence
[8]:469–71
Nightingale, who gained worldwide attention for pioneering and publicising modern nursing while treating the wounded.

A tinted lithograph by William
Simpson illustrating conditions of the
sick and injured in Balaklava
increased the range and the damage caused by the allied weapons.
The Crimean War also saw the first tactical use of railways and other modern
inventions, such as the electric telegraph, with the first "live" war reporting to The
Times by William Howard Russell. Some credit Russell with prompting the
resignation of the sitting British government through his reporting of the lacklustre
condition of British forces deployed in Crimea. Additionally, the telegraph reduced
the independence of British overseas possessions from their commanders in London
due to such rapid communications. Newspaper readership informed public opinion
in the United Kingdom and France as never before.[75] It was the first European war
to be photographed. The Russians installed telegraph links to Moscow and St
Petersburg during the war, and expanded their rail network south of Moscow after
the peace treaty.
The war also employed modern military tactics, such as trenches and blind artillery
fire. The use of the Minié ball for shot, coupled with the rifling of barrels, greatly

The British Army system of sale of commissions came under great scrutiny during the war, especially in connection with theBattle of
Balaclava, which saw the ill-fated Charge of the Light Brigade. This scrutiny eventually led to the abolition of the sale of
commissions.

The Crimean War was a contributing factor in the Russian abolition of serfdom in 1861: Tsar Alexander II (Nicholas I's son and
successor) saw the military defeat of the Russian serf-army by free troops from Britain and France as proof of the need for
emancipation.[76] The Crimean War also led to the eventual realisation by the Russian government of its technological inferiority, in
military practices as well as weapons.[77]
Meanwhile, Russian military medicine saw dramatic progress: N. I. Pirogov, known as the father of Russian field surgery, developed
the use of anaesthetics, plaster casts, enhancedamputation methods, and five-stagetriage in Crimea, among other things.

The war also led to the establishment of the Victoria Cross in 1856 (backdated to 1854), the British Army's first universal award for
valour. 111 medals were awarded.

The British issued the Crimea Medal with 5 clasps, and the Baltic Medal, as well as Valour medals, including the newly created
Distinguished Conduct Medal, the Turkish the Turkish Crimea Medal, the French did not issue a campaign medal, issuing Médaille
militaire and Legion of Honour for bravery, Sardinia also issued a medal. Russia issued a Defence of Sevastopol, and a Crimean War
medal.

Chronology of major battles of the war

Battle of Sinop, 30 November 1853
Siege of Silistra, 5 April - 25 June 1854
First Battle of Bomarsund, 21 June 1854
Second Battle of Bomarsund, 15 August 1854
Siege of Petropavlovsk, 30–31 August 1854, on the Pacific coast
Battle of Alma, 20 September 1854
Siege of Sevastopol, 25 September 1854 to 8 September 1855
Battle of Balaclava, 25 October 1854 (see also Charge of the Light Brigadeand the Thin Red Line)
Battle of Inkerman, 5 November 1854
Battle of Eupatoria, 17 February 1855
Battle of the Chernaya (aka "Traktir Bridge"), 16 August 1855
Sea of Azoff naval campaign, May to November 1855
Siege of Kars, June to 28 November 1855

Prominent military commanders

Russian commanders

Prince Mikhail Dmitriyevich Gorchakov

Count and Namestnik Ivan Feodorovich Paskevich
Admiral Pavel Stepanovich Nakhimov
vice admiral Vladimir Kornilov
General Eduard Ivanovich Totleben
Prince Aleksandr Sergeyevich Menshikov
French commanders

Marshal Jacques Leroy de Saint Arnaud

Marshal François Certain Canrobert
Marshal Aimable Pélissier
Marshal Pierre Bosquet FitzRoy Somerset, Omar
Marshal Patrice de MacMahon Pasha and Marshal Pélissier

Ottoman commanders

General Abdülkerim Nadir Pasha

General Omar Pasha
General Iskender Pasha
General Ismail Pasha[78]
General Władysław Stanisław Zamoyski
British commanders

James Brudenell, 7th Earl of Cardigan

FitzRoy Somerset, 1st Baron Raglan
Sir Edmund Lyons (later 1st Baron Lyons)
 George Charles Bingham, 3rd Earl of Lucan
Admiral Charles John Napier
Colin Campbell, 1st Baron Clyde
Kingdom of Sardinia commander

General Alfonso Ferrero La Marmora

General Giovanni Durando
General Alessandro La Marmora

Last veterans
Edwin Bezar (1838-1936). Last British soldier. Also last British Army
veteran (and possibly last combatant) of theNew Zealand Wars.
Yves Prigent (1833–1938). French sailor.[79]
Charles Nathan (1834–1934). Last French soldier , also saw action in
Italy, Syria, Mexico and the Franco-PrussianWar.[79]
Edwin Hughes (1830–1927). Last survivor of theCharge of the Light
Brigade.[80]
Luigi Palma di Cesnola(1832–1904). An Italian soldier who served with
the British Army in the Crimean War as the aide-de-camp to General
Enrico Fardella. Also served in theAmerican Civil War, on the Union
Side.[81][82] A British naval mascot,Timothy
Timothy the Tortoise (1839–2004). The naval mascot ofHMS Queen.[83] (1839–2004) was the last "veteran"
of the Crimean War

In popular culture
"The Charge of the Light Brigade" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson depicted a brave but disastrouscavalry charge during
the Battle of Balaclava.
Leo Tolstoy wrote a few short sketches on theSiege of Sevastopol, collected in The Sebastopol Sketches. The
stories detail the lives of the Russian soldiers and citizens in Sevastopol during the siege. Because of this work,
Tolstoy has been called the world's firstwar correspondent.
In James Joyce's Finnegans Wake II.3, the Crimean War, especially the Battle of Balaclava, figures prominently. One
of the focuses of that dense chapter is a radio program in which Butt &aff T retell an idiosyncratic anecdote from that
battle, in which an Irishman named Buckley shot a Russian general.
Jack Archer: A Tale of the Crimea by G. A. Henty, 1883, a historical novel, details the adventures of two British
midshipmen in the Crimean War.
The events of the Crimean War are depicted in the 1973 novel Flashman at the Chargein which the eponymous
antihero participates in the battles of Sevastopol and Balaclava.
Franz Roubaud. Panorama Siege of Sevastopol (1854–1855)
Charge of the Light Brigade– 1936 film starring Errol Flynn
In the Little Rascals episode Two Too Young, from 1936, Alfalfa recites the Lord T ennyson poem.
The Charge of the Light Brigade– 1968 film starring John Gielgud and Trevor Howard
The Eyre Affair by Jasper Fforde is an alternative history novel where the Crimean War has been raging for over 130
years and is still ongoing, albeit at a stalemate at the time of the novel.
A different alternative history treatment of the Crimean War is S. M. Stirling's story "The Charge of Lee's Brigade".[84]
"The Trooper", song by Iron Maiden included in their 1983 albumPiece of Mind, inspired by Lord Tennyson's poem,
describes the charge from the point of view of a British soldier.
The music video for theKasabian song "Empire" is set in the Crimean War and depicts the band's members as
soldiers of the 11th Hussars Regiment.
The Great Train Robbery by Michael Crichton was set on the English homefront during the Crimean W ar. The plot
revolved around stealing gold intended for the British troops from a moving steam train. It was later made into The
First Great Train Robbery (known as The Great Train Robbery in the U.S.), starring Sean Connery. The novel was
based on the Great Gold Robbery of 1855.
Boris Akunin, under his Anatoly Brusnikin pen name, published the historical novelBellona (Беллона) (2012),
centring on the Crimean War from the Russian side.
Jasper Kent's novel The Third Section takes Crimean War as a background event o f r its horror theme. Other
novelists taking the war as background include Garry Kilworth, A L Berridge and Paul Fraser Collard.
See also
British Crimea Medal and Turkish Crimea Medal
Crimean War Research Society
Grand Crimean Central Railway
Foreign policy of the Russian Empire
International relations (1814–1919)
List of Crimean War Victoria Cross recipients
List of British recipients of the Légion d'Honneur for the Crimean W
ar
Peace Concluded (painting)

Notes
1. "The Crimean War (1853-1856)" (https://www.historyguy.com/crimean_war.htm). historyguy.com. Retrieved
28 September 2017.
2. Clodfelter 2017, p. 180.
3. Mara Kozelsky, "The Crimean War, 1853–56." Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History13.4 (2012):
903–917 online (http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/kritika/v013/13.4.kozelsky
.html).
4. Zayonchkovski, Andrei Medardovich(2002) [original year unspecified].Восточная Война 1853–1856(http://militer
a.lib.ru/h/zayonchkovsky_am02/index.html)[Eastern War 1853–1856] (in Russian). Volume II part 2. (Russian
author: Андре́ й Меда́ рдович Зайончко́ вский). Saint Petersburg, Russia: Полигон [Polygon]. ISBN 5-89173-158-
4. OCLC 701418742 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/701418742). Retrieved 2015-01-25.
5. Crimean War (https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/143040) at Encyclopædia Britannica
6. Troubetzkoy 2006, p. 208.
7. Troubetzkoy 2006, p. 192.
8. Figes, Orlando (2010).Crimea: The Last Crusade. London: Allen Lane. ISBN 978-0-7139-9704-0.
9. Royle, Trevor (2000). Crimea: The Great Crimean War, 1854–1856. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 1-4039-6416-5.
10. Matthew Smith Anderson,The Eastern Question, 1774–1923: A Study in International Relations(1966).
11. A.J.P. Taylor, The Struggle for Mastery in Europe: 1848–1918(1954) pp. 60–61
12. Seton-Watson, Hugh (1988). The Russian Empire 1801–1917. Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. 280–319.ISBN 0-19-
822152-5.
13. Lincoln, W. Bruce (1981). The Romanovs. New York: Dial Press. pp. 114–116.ISBN 0-385-27187-5.
14. Bell, James Stanislaus (1840)."Journal of a residence in Circassia during the years 1837, 1838, and 1839" (https://a
rchive.org/search.php?query=creator:%22Bell,%20James%20Stanislaus%22) . archive.org. London, UK: Edward
Moxon. OCLC 879553602 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/879553602). Retrieved 25 January 2015.
15. Hew Strachan, Hew (1978). "Soldiers, Strategy and Sebastopol".Historical Journal. 21 (2): 303–325.
doi:10.1017/s0018246x00000558(https://doi.org/10.1017%2Fs0018246x00000558) . JSTOR 2638262 (https://www.j
stor.org/stable/2638262).
16. A.J.P. Taylor, The Struggle for Mastery in Europe: 1848–1918(1954) p 61
17. Cowley, Robert; editors, Geoffrey Parker (2001). The Reader's Companion to Military History(1st Houghton Mifflin
pbk. ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Trade & Reference Publishers.ISBN 0618127429.
18. Barbara Jelavich, St. Petersburg and Moscow: Tsarist and Soviet Foreign Policy, 1814–1974 (1974) p 119
19. William C. Fuller, Strategy and Power in Russia 1600–1914(1998) pp. 252–59
20. Jelavich, Barbara (2004). Russia's Balkan Entanglements, 1806–1914. Cambridge University Press. pp. 118–122.
ISBN 978-0-521-52250-2.
21. Lawrence Sondhaus (2012).Naval Warfare, 1815–1914 (https://books.google.com/books?id=aYcUQ4XRqOoC&pg=
PA1852-IA16). Routledge. pp. 1852–55.
22. Candan Badem (2010).The Ottoman Crimean War: (1853–1856) (https://books.google.com/books?id=DXoYJikZ7yg
C). BRILL. pp. passim.
23. Badem. The Ottoman Crimean War: (1853–1856) (https://books.google.com/books?id=DXoYJikZ7ygC&pg=P
A149).
pp. 149–55.
24. Andrew Lambert (2011).The Crimean War: British Grand Strategy Against Russia, 1853–56 (https://books.google.co
m/books?id=GCVyIZEdc6kC&pg=PA94). Ashgate. pp. 94, 97.
25. Christopher John Bartlett (1993).Defence and Diplomacy: Britain and the Great Powers, 1815–1914(https://books.g
oogle.com/books?id=aXi7AAAAIAAJ&pg=P A51). Manchester UP. pp. 51–52.
26. Porter, Maj Gen Whitworth (1889).History of the Corps of Royal Engineers Vol I. Chatham: The Institution of Royal
Engineers.
27. Figes 2012, p. 307.
28. Guy Arnold (2002). Historical Dictionary of the Crimean War (https://books.google.com/books?id=_UreS--MoD0C&p
g=PA13). Scarecrow Press. p. 13.
29. Small, Hugh (2007). The Crimean War. Tempus Publishing. pp. 23, 31.ISBN 978-0-7524-4388-1.
30. Taylor, A. J. P. (1954). The Struggle for Mastery in Europe: 1848–1918
. pp. 64–81.
31. Candan Badem (2010)."The" Ottoman Crimean War: (1853–1856) (https://books.google.com/books?id=DXoYJikZ7
ygC&pg=PA102). BRILL. pp. 101–109.
32. James J. Reid (2000).Crisis of the Ottoman Empire: Prelude to Collapse 1839–1878(https://books.google.com/book
s?id=Zgg6c_Ndtu4C&pg=PA242). Franz Steiner Verlag. pp. 242–62.
33. Arnold, Guy (2002). Historical Dictionary of the Crimean War (https://books.google.com/books?id=_UreS--MoD0C&p
g=PR95). Scarecrow Press. p. 95.
34. The famous dispatches of a British war correspondent appear in William Howard Russell, The Great War with
Russia: The Invasion of the Crimea; a Personal Retrospect of the Battles of the Alma, Balaclava and Inkerman, and
of the Winter of 1854–55 (Cambridge University Press, 2012)
35. Engels, Frederick (1980) [1853–54]. "The News from the Crimea".Collected Works of Karl Marx and Frederick
Engels. 13. New York: International Publishers. pp. 477–479. ISBN 0-7178-0513-1.
36. Greenwood, ch. 8
37. John Millin Selby, The thin red line of Balaclava(London: Hamilton, 1970)
38. John Sweetman, Balaclava 1854: The charge of the light brigade(Osprey Publishing, 1990)excerpt (https://books.g
oogle.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=fr7FjlzvrfwC)
39. Small, Hugh (2007). The Crimean War.
40. Patrick Mercer, Inkerman 1854: The Soldiers' Battle(1998) excerpt and text search(https://www.amazon.com/Inker
man-1854-Soldiers-Battle-Campaign/dp/1855326183/)
41. "Crimean War, 1853–1856" (http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/wars_crimean.html). historyofwar.org. Retrieved
25 January 2015.
42. Radzinsky, Edvard (2005). Alexander II: The Last Great Tsar. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-7432-7332-X.
43. Leo Tolstoy, Sebastopol (2008) ISBN 1-4344-6160-2; Tolstoy wrote three firsthand battlefield observations
"Sebastopol Sketches."
44. This section summarizesWilliam Edward David Allenand Paul Muratoff, Caucasian Battlefields, 1953, Book II
45. Anderson, Edgar (1969). "The Scandinavian Area and the Crimean W ar in the Baltic". Scandinavian Studies. 41 (3):
263–275. JSTOR 40917005 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/40917005).
46. R.F. Colvile, "The Baltic as a Theatre of War: The Campaign of 1854."The RUSI Journal (1941) 86#541 pp. 72–80
online (http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03071844109424963)
47. Colvile, "The Baltic as a Theatre of War: The Campaign of 1854." The RUSI Journal (1941) 86#541 pp. 72–80
48. R. F. Colvile, "The Navy and the Crimean War." The RUSI Journal (1940) 85#537 pp. 73–78.online (http://www.tandf
online.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03071844009427344)
49. Clive Ponting (2011). The Crimean War: The Truth Behind the Myth (https://books.google.com/books?id=C7lo1UBTp
74C&pg=SA2-PA24). Random House. pp. 2–3.
50. The Annual Register of World Events: A Review of the e
Yar (https://books.google.com/books?id=DbYHAAAAIAAJ&p
g=PA93). 1855. p. 93.
51. "Mining in the Crimean War" (https://web.archive.org/web/20030428045336/http://www .exwar.org/Htm/8000PopH2.ht
m). Archived from the original (http://www.exwar.org/Htm/8000PopH2.htm)on 28 April 2003. Retrieved 28 April
2006.
52. Mikhail Vysokov: A Brief History of Sakhalin and the Kurils(http://www.sakhalin.ru/Engl/Region/history.htm) Archived
(https://web.archive.org/web/20100409063243/http://www .sakhalin.ru/Engl/Region/history.htm) 9 April 2010 at the
Wayback Machine.: Late 19th (http://www.sakhalin.ru/Engl/Region/book/late_19th.htm) Archived (https://web.archiv
e.org/web/20090412042134/http://www.sakhalin.ru/Engl/Region/book/late_19th.htm)12 April 2009 at the Wayback
Machine.
53. Arnold, Guy (2002). Historical Dictionary of the Crimean War (https://books.google.com/books?id=_UreS--MoD0C&p
g=PA112). Scarecrow Press.
54. Spencer C. Tucker (2009). A Global Chronology of Conflict(https://books.google.com/books?id=h5_tSnygvbIC&pg=
PA1210). ABC-CLIO. p. 1210.
55. Badem (2010). The Ottoman Crimean War: (1853–1856) (https://books.google.com/books?id=DXoYJikZ7ygC&pg=P
A183). p. 183.
56. Kiev Cossacks (http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CK%5CY%5CKyivCossacks.h
tm) at the Encyclopedia of Ukraine.
57. "Crimean War" (http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CC%5CR%5CCrimeanW
ar.ht
m). encyclopediaofukraine.com. Retrieved 29 January 2017.
58. "Khlopoman" (http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CK%5CH%5CKhlopomanIT
.ht
m). encyclopediaofukraine.com. Retrieved 29 January 2017.
59. Hromada of Kyiv (http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CH%5CR%5CHromadaofKy
iv.htm) at the Encyclopedia of Ukraine.
60. Karl Marx, "The Aims of the Negotiations—Polemic Against Prussia—A Snowball Riot" contained in the
Collected
Works of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: V
olume 13, p. 599.
61. Leonard, Dick (2013). The Great Rivalry: Gladstone and Disraeli(https://books.google.com/books?id=7Kosl75aYP
A
C&pg=PA98). London: I.B. Tauris. p. 98.
62. Ridley, Jasper (1970). Lord Palmerston. New York: Dutton. pp. 431–436.ISBN 0-525-14873-6.
63. W. E. Mosse, "How Russia made peace September 1855 to April 1856."Cambridge Historical Journal(1955) 11#3
pp. 297–316. online
64. Small, Hugh (2007). The Crimean War. Tempus Publishing. pp. 188–190.
65. Baumgart, Winfried (1999).The Crimean War 1853–1856. Arnold. p. 212. ISBN 978-0-340-61465-5.
66. Lieven, Dominic (1993): "Nicholas II: Emperor of all the Russias". London: Pimlico. p.6
67. William C. Fuller (1998).Strategy and Power in Russia 1600–1914(https://books.google.com/books?id=BNF318Pgq
9kC&pg=PA273). p. 273.
68. Clough, Shepard B., ed. (1964).A History of the Western World. p. 917.
69. "Purchase of Alaska, 1867"(https://web.archive.org/web/20080410122537/http://www .state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/gp/1766
2.htm). Archived from the original (https://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/gp/17662.htm) on 2008-04-10..
70. Starry Dog (2003). "Revolution and Industry: The British Empire".Encyclopedia of World History. WS PACIFIC
PUBLICATIONS, INC. p. 172. ISBN 978-1-4454-2576-4.
71. R.B. McCallum in Elie Halevy, The Victorian years: 1841–1895(1951) p 426
72. See also Orlando Figes,The Crimean War (2010) pp 467–80.
73. Hughes, Gavin; Trigg, Jonathan (2008). "Remembering the Charge of the Light Brigade: Its Commemoration, W
ar
Memorials and Memory".Journal of Conflict Archaeology. 4 (1): 39–58. doi:10.1163/157407808X382755(https://doi.
org/10.1163%2F157407808X382755).
74. Peter Burroughs, "An Unreformed Army? 1815–1868," in David Chandler
, ed., The Oxford History of the British Army
(1996), pp. 183–84
75. Hogg, Ian V. (1985). The British Army in the 20th Century. London: Ian Allan. p. 11.ISBN 0-7110-1505-8.
76. Moon, David (2001). The Abolition of Serfdom in Russia, 1762–1907
. Harlow, England: Pearson Education. pp. 49–
55. ISBN 0-582-29486-X.
77. "STMMain" (http://www.russianwarrior.com/STMMain.htm). Russianwarrior.com. Retrieved 29 November 2011.
78. "Crimean War Photographs by Roger Fenton, 1855" (http://www.allworldwars.com/Crimean-War-Photographs-by-Ro
ger-Fenton-1855.html#5). allworldwars.com. Retrieved 29 January 2017.
79. "dernier vétéran de la guerre de crimée et du siège de sébastopole"(http://derniersveterans.free.fr/crimee.html).
Derniersveterans.free.fr. Retrieved 29 November 2011.
80. "Hall of Fame: Balaclava Ned"(http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/northeastwales/hi/people_and_places/history/newsid_817
0000/8170593.stm). BBC News. 27 July 2009. Retrieved 30 April 2010.
81. Maria Luisa Moncassoli Tibone. "Dal Piemonte a Cipro, a New York: un'avventura appassionante".
82. Italian American History(http://www.mypaesano.com/Italian_American_History.htm) Archived (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20110701234703/http://www.mypaesano.com/Italian_American_History.htm) 1 July 2011 at the Wayback
Machine. – MyPaesano.com – Retrieved 16 July 2011.
83. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www
.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-115062480.html)index at the
Wayback Machine.
84. The Stirling story was first published in "Alternate Generals" (Baen, 1998, Harryurtledove
T and Roland J. Green,
eds.), and reprinted in Ice, Iron and Gold (Night Shade Books, 2007).

Further reading
Arnold, Guy. Historical dictionary of the Crimean War (Scarecrow Press, 2002)
Badem, Candan. The Ottoman Crimean War (1853–1856) (Leiden: Brill, 2010). 432 pp.ISBN 90-04-18205-5
Bridge and Bullen, The Great Powers and the European States System 1814–1914
, (Pearson Education: London),
2005
Bamgart, Winfried The Crimean War, 1853–1856 (2002) Arnold PublishersISBN 0-340-61465-X
Clodfelter, M. (2017). Warfare and Armed Conflicts: A Statistical Encyclopedia of Casualty and Other Figures, 1492-
2015 (4th ed.). Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland. ISBN 978-0786474707.
Cox, Michael, and John Lenton.Crimean War Basics: Organisation and Uniforms: Russia and Turkey (1997)
Curtiss, John Shelton.Russia's Crimean War (1979) ISBN 0-8223-0374-4
Figes, Orlando, Crimea: The Last Crusade(2010) Allen Lane. ISBN 978-0-7139-9704-0; the standard scholarly
study; American edition published asThe Crimean War: A History (2010) excerpt and text search
Goldfrank, David M. The Origins of the Crimean War (1993)
Gorizontov, Leonid E (2012). "The Crimean War as a Test of Russia's Imperial Durability".Russian Studies in
History. 51 (1): 65–94. doi:10.2753/rsh1061-1983510103.
Greenwood, Adrian (2015). Victoria's Scottish Lion: The Life of Colin Campbell, Lord Clyde. UK: History Press.
p. 496. ISBN 0-7509-5685-2.
Hoppen, K. Theodore.The Mid-Victorian Generation, 1846–1886(1998) pp. 167–83; summary of British policy
online
Lambert, Andrew (1989). "Preparing for the Russian W
ar: British Strategic Planning, March, 1853 – March 1854".
War & Society. 7 (2): 15–39. doi:10.1179/106980489790305605.
Lambert, Professor Andrew (2013).The Crimean War: British Grand Strategy against Russia, 1853–56. Ashgate
Publishing. argues that the Baltic was the decisive theatre
Pearce, Robert. "The Results of the Crimean W
ar," History Review (2011) #70 pp. 27–33.
Ponting, Clive The Crimean War (2004) Chatto and WindusISBN 0-7011-7390-4
Pottinger Saab, Anne The Origins of the Crimean Alliance(1977) University of Virginia Press ISBN 0-8139-0699-7
Puryear, Vernon J (1931). "New Light on the Origins of the Crimean W
ar". Journal of Modern History. 3 (2): 219–234.
JSTOR 1871715.
Ramm, Agatha, and B. H. Sumner. "The Crimean War." in J.P.T. Bury, ed., The New Cambridge Modern History:
Volume 10: The Zenith of European Power
, 1830–1870 (1960) pp. 468–92, short survey
Rath, Andrew C. The Crimean War in Imperial Context, 1854–1856 (Palgrave Macmillan, 2015).excerpt
Rich, Norman Why the Crimean War: A Cautionary Tale (1985) McGraw-Hill ISBN 0-07-052255-3
Ridley, Jasper. Lord Palmerston (1970) pp. 425–54
Royle, Trevor Crimea: The Great Crimean War, 1854–1856 (2000) Palgrave MacmillanISBN 1-4039-6416-5
Schroeder, Paul W. Austria, Great Britain, and the Crimean War: The Destruction of the European Concert(Cornell
Up, 192) online
Schmitt, Bernadotte E (1919). "The Diplomatic Preliminaries of the Crimean W
ar". American Historical Review. 25
(1): 36–67. doi:10.2307/1836373. JSTOR 1836373.
 Seton-Watson, R. W. Britain in Europe, 1789–1914(1938) pp 301–60.
Small, Hugh. The Crimean War: Queen Victoria's War with the Russian Tsars (Tempus, 2007); diplomacy, pp. 62–82
Strachan, Hew (1978). "Soldiers, Strategy and Sebastopol".Historical Journal. 21 (2): 303–325.
doi:10.1017/s0018246x00000558. JSTOR 2638262.
Taylor, A.J.P. The Struggle for Mastery in Europe: 1848–1918(1954) pp. 62–82
Troubetzkoy, Alexis S. (2006). A Brief History of the Crimean War. London: Constable & Robinson.ISBN 978-1-
84529-420-5.
Wetzel, David The Crimean War: A Diplomatic History(1985) Columbia University PressISBN 0-88033-086-4
Zayonchkovski, Andrei(2002) [1908–1913]. Восточная война 1853–1856 [Eastern War 1853–1856]. Великие
противостояния. Petersburg: Poligon.ISBN 5-89173-157-6.

Historiography and memory

Gooch, Brison D. "A Century of Historiography on the Origins of the Crimean W
ar", American Historical Review62#1
(1956), pp. 33–58 in JSTOR
Edgerton, Robert B. Death or Glory: The Legacy of the Crimean W
ar (1999) online
Kozelsky, Mara. "The Crimean War, 1853–56," Kritika (2012) 13#4 online
Lambert, Albert (2003). "Crimean War 1853–1856," in David Loades, ed".Reader's Guide to British History. 1: 318–
19.
Lambert, Andrew. The Crimean War: British Grand Strategy Against Russia, 1853–56 (2nd ed. Ashgate, 2011) the
2nd edition has a detailed summary of the historiography
, pp. 1–20 excerpt
Markovits, Stefanie. The Crimean War in the British Imagination(Cambridge University Press: 2009) 287 pp.
ISBN 0-521-11237-0
Russell, William Howard,The Crimean War: As Seen by Those Who Reported It (Louisiana State University Press,
2009) ISBN 978-0-8071-3445-0
Small, Hugh. "Sebastopol Besieged,"History Today (2014) 64#4 pp. 20–21.
Young, Peter. "Historiography of the Origins of the Crimean W
ar" International History: Diplomatic and Military
History since the Middle Ages(2012) online

Contemporary sources
John Miller Adye (1860). A Review of the Crimean War to the winter of 1854–5. Hurst and Blackett.
Alexander William Kinglake(1863–87). The Invasion of the Crimea, (nine volumes, London)
. vol1 – vol2 – vol3 –
vol4 – vol5 – vol6 – vol7 – vol8 – vol9
William Howard Russell(1855). The War (volume 1): from the Landing at Gallipoli to the Death of Lord Raglan.
George Routledge & Co.
William Howard Russell (1856).The War (volume 2): from the death of Lord Raglan to the evacuation of the Crimea.
George Routledge & Co.
William Howard Russell (1877).The British expedition to the Crimea. G. Routledge and Sons.
Adolphus Slade (1867). Turkey and the Crimean War: a narrative of historical events. Smith, Elder & Co.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Crimean_W

ar&oldid=836153917"

This page was last edited on 13 April 2018, at 00:06.

Text is available under theCreative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License ; additional terms may apply. By using this
site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of theWikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.