Crimean War.

Causes of the war: in 1850, a conflict began between France, the Ottoman Empire and Russia, the reason for which was disputes between the Catholic and Orthodox clergy regarding the rights to the Holy Places in Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Nicholas I was counting on the support of England and Austria, but he miscalculated.

Progress of the war: in 1853, Russian troops were introduced into Moldova and Wallachia, met with a negative reaction from Austria, which took a position of unfriendly neutrality, demanded the withdrawal of Russian troops and moved its army to the border with Russia. In October 1853 Turkish Sultan declared war on Russia.

The first stage of the war - November 1853 - April 1854: Russian-Turkish campaign. November 1853 – Battle of Sinop. Admiral Nakhimov defeated the Turkish fleet, and in parallel there were Russian actions in the Caucasus. England and France declared war on Russia. The Anglo-French squadron bombarded Russian territories (Kronstadt, Sveaborg, Solovetsky Monastery, Kamchatka).

Second stage: April 1854 - February 1856 Russia against the coalition of European powers. September 1854 - the allies began landing in the Evpatoria area. Battles on the river Alma in September 1854, the Russians lost. Under the command of Menshikov, the Russians approached Bakhchisarai. Sevastopol (Kornilov and Nakhimov) was preparing for defense. October 1854 - the defense of Sevastopol began. The main part of the Russian army undertook diversionary operations (the battle of Inkerman in November 1854, the offensive at Yevpatoriya in February 1855, the battle on the Black River in August 1855), but they were not successful. August 1855: Sevastopol was captured. At the same time, in Transcaucasia, Russian troops managed to take the strong Turkish fortress of Kars. Negotiations began. March 1856 - Paris peace. Part of Bessarabia was torn away from Russia; it lost the right to patronize Serbia, Moldova and Wallachia. The most important thing is the neutralization of the Black Sea: both Russia and Turkey were prohibited from keeping a navy in the Black Sea.

There is an acute internal political crisis in Russia, due to which reforms have begun.

39. Economic, socio-political development of Russia at the turn of the 50-60s. XiX century Peasant reform of 1861, its content and significance.

In the 50s, the need and hardships of the masses noticeably worsened, this happened under the influence of the consequences of the Crimean War, the increasing frequency of natural disasters (epidemics, crop failures and, as a consequence, famine), as well as the increasing oppression from the landowners and the state in the pre-reform period. Recruitment, which reduced the number of workers by 10%, and requisitions of food, horses and fodder had a particularly severe impact on the economy of the Russian village. The situation was aggravated by the arbitrariness of the landowners, who systematically reduced the size of peasant plots, transferred peasants to households (and thus deprived them of land), and resettled serfs to worse lands. These acts assumed such proportions that the government, shortly before the reform, was forced to impose a ban on such actions by special decrees.

The response to the worsening situation of the masses was the peasant movement, which in its intensity, scale and forms was noticeably different from the protests of previous decades and caused great concern in St. Petersburg.

This period was characterized by mass escapes of landowner peasants who wanted to enlist in the militia and thus hoped to gain freedom (1854-1855), unauthorized resettlement to war-ravaged Crimea (1856), a “sober” movement directed against feudal system wine farming (1858-1859), unrest and escapes of workers during the construction of railways (Moscow-Nizhny Novgorod, Volga-Don, 1859-1860). It was also restless on the outskirts of the empire. In 1858, Estonian peasants took up arms in their hands (“Machtra War”). Major peasant unrest broke out in 1857 in Western Georgia.

After the defeat in the Crimean War, in the context of a growing revolutionary upsurge, the crisis at the top intensified, manifested, in particular, in the intensification of the liberal opposition movement among part of the nobility, dissatisfied with military failures, the backwardness of Russia, who understood the need for political and social changes. “Sevastopol hit stagnant minds,” wrote the famous Russian historian V.O. Klyuchevsky about this time. The “censorship terror” introduced by Emperor Nicholas I after his death in February 1855 was virtually swept away by a wave of glasnost, which made it possible to openly discuss the most pressing problems facing the country.

There was no unity in government circles on the issue of the future fate of Russia. Two opposing groups formed here: the old conservative bureaucratic elite (head of the III department V.A. Dolgorukov, Minister of State Property M.N. Muravyov, etc.), which actively opposed the implementation of bourgeois reforms, and supporters of reforms (Minister of Internal Affairs S.S. Lanskoy, Ya.I. Rostovtsev, brothers N.A. and D.A. Milyutin).

The interests of the Russian peasantry were reflected in the ideology of the new generation of revolutionary intelligentsia.

In the 50s, two centers were formed that led the revolutionary democratic movement in the country. The first (emigrant) was headed by A.I. Herzen, who founded the “Free Russian Printing House” in London (1853). Since 1855, he began publishing the non-periodical collection “Polar Star”, and since 1857, together with N.P. Ogarev, the newspaper “Bell”, which enjoyed enormous popularity. Herzen's publications formulated a program of social transformation in Russia, which included the liberation of peasants from serfdom with land and for ransom. Initially, the publishers of Kolokol believed in the liberal intentions of the new Emperor Alexander II (1855-1881) and placed certain hopes on wisely carried out reforms “from above.” However, as projects for the abolition of serfdom were being prepared, illusions dissipated, and a call to fight for land and democracy was heard loudly on the pages of London publications.

The second center arose in St. Petersburg. It was headed by leading employees of the Sovremennik magazine N.G. Chernyshevsky and N.A. Dobrolyubov, around whom like-minded people from the revolutionary democratic camp rallied (M.L. Mikhailov, N.A. Serno-Solovyevich, N.V. Shelgunov and others). The censored articles of N.G. Chernyshevsky were not as frank as the publications of A.I. Herzen, but they were distinguished by their consistency. N.G. Chernyshevsky believed that when the peasants were liberated, the land should be transferred to them without ransom; the liquidation of autocracy in Russia would occur through revolutionary means.

On the eve of the abolition of serfdom, a demarcation emerged between the revolutionary-democratic and liberal camps. Liberals, who recognized the need for reforms “from above,” saw in them, first of all, an opportunity to prevent a revolutionary explosion in the country.

The Crimean War presented the government with a choice: either to preserve the serfdom that existed in the country and, as a consequence of this, ultimately, as a result of a political, financial and economic catastrophe, lose not only the prestige and position of a great power, but also threaten the existence of the autocracy in Russia, or to carry out bourgeois reforms, the primary of which was the abolition of serfdom.

Having chosen the second path, the government of Alexander II in January 1857 created a Secret Committee “to discuss measures to organize the life of the landowner peasants.” Somewhat earlier, in the summer of 1856, in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, comrade (deputy) minister A.I. Levshin developed a government program for peasant reform, which, although it gave serfs civil rights, retained all the land in the ownership of the landowner and provided the latter with patrimonial power on the estate. In this case, the peasants would receive allotment land for use, for which they would have to perform fixed duties. This program was set out in imperial rescripts (instructions), first addressed to the Vilna and St. Petersburg governors-general, and then sent to other provinces. In accordance with the rescripts, special committees began to be created in the provinces to consider the case locally, and the preparation of the reform became public. The Secret Committee was renamed the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs. The Zemstvo Department under the Ministry of Internal Affairs (N.A. Milyutin) began to play a significant role in preparing the reform.

Within the provincial committees there was a struggle between liberals and conservatives over the forms and extent of concessions to the peasantry. Reform projects prepared by K.D. Kavelin, A.I. Koshelev, M.P. Posen. Yu.F. Samarin, A.M. Unkovsky, differed in the political views of the authors and economic conditions. Thus, the landowners of the black earth provinces, who owned expensive land and kept peasants in corvee labor, wanted to retain the maximum possible amount of land and retain workers. In the industrial non-black earth obroch provinces, during the reform, landowners wanted to receive significant funds to rebuild their farms in a bourgeois manner.

The prepared proposals and programs were submitted for discussion to the so-called Editorial Commissions. The struggle over these proposals was carried out both in these commissions, and during the consideration of the project in the Main Committee and in State Council. But, despite the existing differences of opinion, in all these projects it was about carrying out peasant reform in the interests of the landowners by maintaining landownership and political dominance in the hands of the Russian nobility, “Everything that could be done to protect the benefits of the landowners has been done,” - Alexander II stated in the State Council. The final version of the reform project, which had undergone a number of changes, was signed by the emperor on February 19, 1861, and on March 5, the most important documents regulating the implementation of the reform were published: “Manifesto” and “General Provisions on Peasants Emerging from Serfdom.”

In accordance with these documents, peasants received personal freedom and could now freely dispose of their property, engage in commercial and industrial activities, buy and sell real estate, enter the service, receive an education, and conduct their family affairs.

The landowner still owned all the land, but part of it, usually a reduced land plot and the so-called “estate settlement” (a plot with a hut, outbuildings, vegetable gardens, etc.), he was obliged to transfer to the peasants for use. Thus, Russian peasants received liberation with land, but they could use this land for a certain fixed rent or serving corvee. The peasants could not give up these plots for 9 years. For complete liberation, they could buy the estate and, by agreement with the landowner, the allotment, after which they became peasant owners. Until this time, a “temporarily obligated position” was established.

The new sizes of allotments and payments of peasants were recorded in special documents, “statutory charters”. which were compiled for each village over a two-year period. The amounts of these duties and allotment land were determined by “Local Regulations”. Thus, according to the “Great Russian” local situation, the territory of 35 provinces was distributed into 3 stripes: non-chernozem, chernozem and steppe, which were divided into “localities”. In the first two stripes, depending on local conditions, “higher” and “lower” (1/3 of the “highest”) allotment sizes were established, and in the steppe zone - one “decreed” allotment. If the pre-reform size of the allotment exceeded the “highest” one, then pieces of land could be produced, but if the allotment was less than the “lowest” one, then the landowner had to either cut off the land or reduce duties. Cut-offs were also made in some other cases, for example, when the owner, as a result of allocating land to the peasants, had less than 1/3 of the total land of the estate left. Among the cut-off lands there were often the most valuable areas (forest, meadows, arable land); in some cases, landowners could demand that peasant estates be moved to new locations. As a result of the post-reform land management, stripes became characteristic of the Russian village.

Statutory charters were usually concluded with an entire rural society, the “world” (community), which was supposed to ensure mutual responsibility for the payment of duties.

The “temporarily obligated” position of the peasants ceased after the transfer to redemption, which became mandatory only 20 years later (from 1883). The ransom was carried out with the assistance of the government. The basis for calculating redemption payments was not the market price of land, but the assessment of duties that were feudal in nature. When the deal was concluded, the peasants paid 20% of the amount, and the remaining 80% was paid to the landowners by the state. The peasants had to repay the loan provided by the state annually in the form of redemption payments for 49 years, while, of course, accrued interest was taken into account. Redemption payments placed a heavy burden on peasant farms. The cost of the purchased land significantly exceeded its market price. During the redemption operation, the government also tried to get back the huge sums that were provided to landowners in the pre-reform years on the security of land. If the estate was mortgaged, then the amount of the debt was deducted from the amounts provided to the landowner. The landowners received only a small part of the redemption amount in cash; special interest notes were issued for the rest.

It should be borne in mind that in modern historical literature, issues related to the implementation of the reform are not fully developed. There are different points of view about the degree of transformation during the reform of the system of peasant plots and payments (currently these studies are being carried out on a large scale using computers).

The reform of 1861 in the internal provinces was followed by the abolition of serfdom on the outskirts of the empire - in Georgia (1864-1871), Armenia and Azerbaijan (1870-1883), which was often carried out with even less consistency and with greater preservation of feudal remnants. Appanage peasants (owned royal family) received personal freedom based on decrees of 1858 and 1859. “By the Regulations of June 26, 1863.” the land structure and conditions for the transition to redemption in the appanage village were determined, which was carried out during 1863-1865. In 1866, a reform was carried out in the state village. The purchase of land by state peasants was completed only in 1886.

Thus, peasant reforms in Russia were actually canceled serfdom and marked the beginning of the development of the capitalist formation in Russia. However, while maintaining landownership and feudal remnants in the countryside, they were unable to resolve all the contradictions, which ultimately led to a further intensification of the class struggle.

The response of the peasantry to the publication of the “Manifesto” was a massive explosion of discontent in the spring of 1861. The peasants protested against the continuation of the corvee system and the payment of dues and plots of land. The peasant movement acquired a particularly large scale in the Volga region, Ukraine and the central black earth provinces.

Russian society was shocked by the events in the villages of Bezdna (Kazan province) and Kandeevka (Penza province) that took place in April 1863. Peasants outraged by the reform were shot there by military teams. In total, over 1,100 peasant unrest occurred in 1861. Only by drowning the protests in blood did the government manage to reduce the intensity of the struggle. The disunited, spontaneous and devoid of political consciousness protest of the peasants was doomed to failure. Already in 1862-1863. the scope of the movement was significantly reduced. In the following years it declined sharply (in 1864 there were fewer than 100 performances).

In 1861-1863 During the period of intensification of the class struggle in the countryside, the activity of democratic forces in the country intensified. After the suppression of peasant uprisings, the government, feeling more confident, attacked the democratic camp with repression.

Peasant reform of 1861, its content and significance.

The peasant reform of 1861, which abolished serfdom, marked the beginning of the capitalist formation in the country.

Main reason Peasant reform resulted in a crisis of the feudal-serf system. Crimean War 1853–1856 revealed the rottenness and impotence of serf Russia. In the context of peasant unrest, which especially intensified during the war, tsarism moved to abolish serfdom.

In January 1857 A Secret Committee was formed under the chairmanship of Emperor Alexander II “to discuss measures to organize the life of the landowner peasants,” which at the beginning of 1858. was reorganized into the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs. At the same time, provincial committees were formed, which began developing projects for peasant reform, considered by the Editorial Commissions.

February 19, 1861 In St. Petersburg, Alexander II signed the Manifesto on the abolition of serfdom and the “Regulations on peasants emerging from serfdom,” consisting of 17 legislative acts.

The main act - “General Regulations on Peasants Emerging from Serfdom” - contained the main conditions of the peasant reform:

1. peasants received personal freedom and the right to dispose of their property;

2. landowners retained ownership of all the lands they owned, but were obliged to provide the peasants with a “homestead residence” and a field allotment “to ensure their livelihood and to fulfill their duties to the government and the landowner”;

3. For the use of allotment land, peasants had to serve corvee or pay quitrent and did not have the right to refuse it for 9 years. The size of the field allotment and duties should have been recorded in the statutory charters of 1861, which were drawn up by landowners for each estate and verified by the peace intermediaries;

-peasants were given the right to buy out an estate and, by agreement with the landowner, a field allotment; until this was done, they were called temporarily obligated peasants.

The “general situation” determined the structure, rights and responsibilities of peasant public (rural and volost) government bodies and the court.

4 “Local Regulations” determined the size of land plots and the duties of peasants for their use in 44 provinces of European Russia. The first of them is “Great Russian”, for 29 Great Russian, 3 Novorossiysk (Ekaterinoslav, Tauride and Kherson), 2 Belarusian (Mogilev and part of Vitebsk) and part of Kharkov provinces. This entire territory was divided into three stripes (non-chernozem, chernozem and steppe), each of which consisted of “localities”.

In the first two bands, depending on the “locality,” the highest (from 3 to 7 dessiatines; from 2 3/4 to 6 dessiatines) and the lowest (1/3 of the highest) amounts of per capita taxes were established. For the steppe, one “decreed” allotment was determined (in the Great Russian provinces from 6 to 12 dessiatines; in Novorossiysk, from 3 to 6 1/5 dessiatines). The size of the government tithe was determined to be 1.09 hectares.

Allotment land was provided to the “rural community”, i.e. community, according to the number of souls (men only) at the time of drawing up the charter documents who had the right to the allotment.

From the land that was in the use of peasants before February 19, 1861, sections could be made if the peasants' per capita allotments exceeded the highest size established for a given “locality”, or if the landowners, while maintaining the existing peasant allotment, had less than 1/3 of the estate's land left. Allotments could be reduced by special agreements between peasants and landowners, as well as upon receipt of a gift allotment.

If peasants had plots of less than a small size, the landowner was obliged to cut off the missing land or reduce duties. For the highest spiritual allotment, a quitrent was established from 8 to 12 rubles per year or corvee - 40 men's and 30 women's working days per year. If the allotment was less than the highest, then the duties were reduced, but not proportionally.

The rest of the “Local Provisions” basically repeated the “Great Russian Provisions”, but taking into account the specifics of their regions.

The features of the peasant reform for certain categories of peasants and specific areas were determined by 8 “Additional Rules”: “Arrangement of peasants settled on the estates of small-scale owners, and on benefits to these owners”; “People of the Ministry of Finance assigned to private mining plants”; “Peasants and workers serving work at Perm private mining plants and salt mines”; “Peasant peasants serving work in landowner factories”; "The peasants and courtyard people in the Land of the Don Army"; "Peasant peasants and courtyard people in the Stavropol province"; "Peasant peasants and courtyard people in Siberia"; "People who emerged from serfdom in the Bessarabian region."

The Manifesto and “Regulations” were published on March 5 in Moscow and from March 7 to April 2 in St. Petersburg. Fearing the dissatisfaction of the peasants with the conditions of the reform, the government took a number of precautions: it redeployed troops, sent members of the imperial retinue to places, issued an appeal from the Synod, etc. However, the peasants, dissatisfied with the enslaving conditions of the reform, responded to it with mass unrest. The largest of them were the Bezdnensky and Kandeevsky peasant uprisings of 1861.

As of January 1, 1863, peasants refused to sign about 60% of the charters. The purchase price of the land significantly exceeded its market value at that time, in some areas -

2–3 times. In many regions, peasants sought to receive gift plots, thereby reducing allotment land use: in the Saratov province by 42.4%, Samara - 41.3%, Poltava - 37.4%, Ekaterinoslav - by 37.3%, etc. The lands cut off by the landowners were a means of enslaving the peasants, since they were vitally necessary for the peasant economy: watering place, pasture, haymaking, etc.

The peasants' transition to ransom lasted for several decades, on December 28, 1881. a law on compulsory redemption was issued on January 1, 1883, the transfer to which was completed by 1895. In total, by January 1, 1895, 124 thousand redemption transactions were approved, according to which 9,159 thousand souls in areas with communal farming and 110 thousand households in areas with household farming were transferred to redemption. About 80% of buyouts were mandatory.

As a result of the peasant reform (according to 1878), in the provinces of European Russia, 9860 thousand souls of peasants received an allotment of 33728 thousand dessiatines of land (on average 3.4 dessiatines per capita). U115 thousand. landowners were left with 69 million dessiatines (an average of 600 dessiatines per owner).

What did these “average” indicators look like after 3.5 decades? The political and economic power of the tsar rested on the nobles and landowners. According to the 1897 census in Russia there were 1 million 220 thousand hereditary nobles and more than 600 thousand personal nobles, to whom the title of nobility was given, but not inherited. All of them were owners of land plots.

Of these: about 60 thousand were small-scale nobles, each had 100 acres; 25.5 thousand - average landowners, had from 100 to 500 acres; 8 thousand large nobles, who had from 500 to 1000 acres: 6.5 thousand - the largest nobles, who had from 1000 to 5000 acres.

At the same time, there were 102 families in Russia: princes Yusupov, Golitsyn, Dolgorukov, counts Bobrinsky, Orlov, etc., whose holdings amounted to more than 50 thousand dessiatines, that is, about 30% of the landowners' land fund in Russia.

The largest owner in Russia was Tsar Nicholas I. He owned huge tracts of so-called cabinet and appanage lands. Gold, silver, lead, copper, and timber were mined there. He rented out a significant part of the land. The king's property was managed by a special ministry of the imperial court.

When filling out the questionnaire for the census, Nicholas II wrote in the column about profession: “Master of the Russian land.”

As for peasants, the average allotment of a peasant family, according to the census, was 7.5 dessiatines.

The significance of the peasant reform of 1861 was that it abolished feudal ownership of workers and created a market for cheap labor. The peasants were declared personally free, that is, they had the right to buy land, houses, and enter into various transactions in their own name. The reform was based on the principle of gradualism: within two years, statutory charters were to be drawn up, defining the specific conditions for the liberation of peasants, then the peasants were transferred to the position of “temporarily obligated” until the transition to redemption and in the subsequent 49-year period, paying the debt to the state that bought the land for peasants from landowners. Only after this should land plots become the full property of the peasants.

For the liberation of peasants from serfdom, Emperor Alexander II was called the “LIBERER” by the people. Judge for yourself, what was more here - truth or hypocrisy? Note that of the total number of peasant unrest that occurred throughout the country in 1857–1861, 1340 out of 2165 (62%) protests occurred after the announcement of the 1861 reform.

Thus, the peasant reform of 1861 was a bourgeois reform carried out by serf owners. This was a step towards turning Russia into a bourgeois monarchy. However, the peasant reform did not solve the socio-economic contradictions in Russia, preserved landownership and a number of other feudal-serf remnants, led to a further aggravation of the class struggle, and served as one of the main reasons for the social explosion of 1905–1907. XX century.

Causes of the Crimean War

Objective

*** Rivalry between European states and Russia in the matter of control over the numerous possessions of a weak, collapsing Ottoman Empire(Turkey)

On January 9, 14, February 20, 21, 1853, at meetings with the British Ambassador G. Seymour, Emperor Nicholas I proposed that England share the Turkish Empire together with Russia (History of Diplomacy, Volume One pp. 433 - 437. Edited by V. P. Potemkin)

*** Russia's desire for primacy in managing the system of straits (Bosphorus and Dardanelles) from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean

“If England is thinking of settling in Constantinople in the near future, then I will not allow it... For my part, I am equally disposed to accept the obligation not to settle there, of course, as an owner; as a temporary guardian is a different matter" (from the statement of Nicholas the First to the British Ambassador Seymour on January 9, 1853)

*** Russia's desire to include in the sphere of its national interests affairs in the Balkans and among the southern Slavs

“Let Moldova, Wallachia, Serbia, Bulgaria come under Russian protectorate. As for Egypt, I fully understand the importance of this territory for England. Here I can only say that if, during the distribution of the Ottoman inheritance after the fall of the empire, you take possession of Egypt, then I will have no objection to this. I will say the same about Candia (the island of Crete). This island may suit you, and I don’t see why it shouldn’t become an English possession” (conversation between Nicholas the First and British Ambassador Seymour on January 9, 1853 at an evening with Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna)

Subjective

*** Turkey's weakness

“Türkiye is a “sick man”. Nicholas did not change his terminology all his life when he spoke about the Turkish Empire" ((History of Diplomacy, Volume One pp. 433 - 437)

*** Nicholas I's confidence in his impunity

“I want to speak to you as a gentleman, if we manage to come to an agreement - me and England - the rest doesn’t matter to me, I don’t care what others do or will do” (from a conversation between Nicholas the First and British Ambassador Hamilton Seymour on January 9, 1853 at the evening at Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna)

*** Nicholas's suggestion that Europe is unable to present a united front

“the tsar was confident that Austria and France would not join England (in a possible confrontation with Russia), and England would not dare to fight him without allies” (History of Diplomacy, Volume One pp. 433 - 437. OGIZ, Moscow, 1941)

*** Autocracy, the result of which was the wrong relationship between the emperor and his advisers

“... Russian ambassadors in Paris, London, Vienna, Berlin, ... Chancellor Nesselrode ... in their reports distorted the state of affairs before the Tsar. They almost always wrote not about what they saw, but about what the king would like to know from them. When one day Andrei Rosen convinced Prince Lieven to finally open the Tsar’s eyes, Lieven answered literally: “So that I would say this to the Emperor?!” But I'm not a fool! If I wanted to tell him the truth, he would throw me out the door, and nothing else would come of it" (History of Diplomacy, Volume One)

*** The problem of "Palestinian shrines":

It became apparent back in 1850, continued and intensified in 1851, weakened in the beginning and middle of 1852, and again unusually worsened just at the very end of 1852 - beginning of 1853. Louis Napoleon, while still president, told the Turkish government that he wanted to preserve and restore all the rights and benefits confirmed by Turkey back in 1740 catholic church in the so-called holy places, i.e. in the temples of Jerusalem and Bethlehem. The Sultan agreed; but from Russian diplomacy in Constantinople there was a sharp protest pointing out the advantages Orthodox Church before the Catholic one on the basis of the conditions of the Kuchuk-Kainardzhi peace. After all, Nicholas I considered himself the patron saint of the Orthodox

*** France's desire to split the continental union of Austria, England, Prussia and Russia, which arose during the Napoleonic wars n

“Subsequently, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Napoleon III, Drouey de Luis, very frankly stated: “The question of holy places and everything that relates to it has no real significance for France. This whole eastern question, which is causing so much noise, served the imperial government only as a means of disrupting the continental union, which had paralyzed France for almost half a century. Finally, the opportunity presented itself to sow discord in a powerful coalition, and Emperor Napoleon grabbed it with both hands" (History of Diplomacy)

Events preceding the Crimean War of 1853-1856

In the middle of the 19th century, some disagreements arose between Russia on the one hand and the Ottoman Empire, as well as a number of European states on the other, regarding the division of spheres of influence in the Black Sea and the East. This conflict eventually led to an armed confrontation called the Crimean War, the reasons, course of military operations and results of which will be discussed briefly in this article.

Increasing anti-Russian sentiments in Western European countries

IN early XIX centuries, the Ottoman Empire experienced difficult times. It lost some of its territories and was on the verge of complete collapse. Taking advantage of this situation, Russia tried to increase its influence on some countries of the Balkan Peninsula that were under Ottoman control. Fearing that this could lead to a series of independent states, loyal to Russia, as well as the appearance of its ships in the Mediterranean Sea, England and France launched anti-Russian propaganda in their countries. Articles constantly appeared in newspapers citing examples of aggressive military policies Tsarist Russia and its possibilities of conquering Constantinople.

Causes of the Crimean War, briefly about the events of the early 50s of the 19th century

The reason for the start of the military confrontation was disagreements regarding the right of ownership Christian churches in Jerusalem and Bethlehem. The Orthodox Church, supported by the Russian Empire, on the one hand, and the Catholics, under the patronage of France, on the other, have been fighting for a long time for ownership of the so-called keys to the temple. As a result, the Ottoman Empire supported France, giving it the right to own holy places. Nicholas I could not come to terms with this and in the spring of 1853 he sent A.S. Menshikov to Istanbul, who was supposed to negotiate the provision of churches under the management of the Orthodox Church. But as a result, he received a refusal from the Sultan, Russia moved to more decisive actions, as a result of which the Crimean War broke out. We will briefly consider its main stages below.

Start of hostilities

This conflict was one of the largest and most significant confrontations between the strongest states of that time. The main events of the Crimean War took place in the Transcaucasus, the Balkans, in the Black Sea basin and partly in the White and Barents Seas. It all started in June 1853, when several Russian troops entered the territory of Moldavia and Wallachia. The Sultan did not like this, and after several months of negotiations, he declared war on Russia.

From this moment, a three-year military confrontation began, called the Crimean War, the course of which we will briefly try to understand. The entire period of this conflict can be divided into two stages:

1. October 1853 - April 1854 - Russian-Turkish confrontation.
2. April 1854 - February 1856 - entry into the war by England, France and the Sardinian Kingdom on the side of the Ottoman Empire.

Initially, everything turned out favorably for the Russian troops, who won victories both at sea and on land. The most significant event was the battle in Sinop Bay, as a result of which the Turks lost a significant part of their fleet.

Second stage of the war

In the early spring of 1854, England and France joined the Ottoman Empire and also declared war on Russia. New opponents Russian troops inferior both in the training of soldiers and in the quality of weapons, as a result of which they had to retreat when coalition ships entered the waters of the Black Sea. The main task for the Anglo-French formations was the capture of Sevastopol, where the main forces of the Black Sea Fleet were concentrated.

To this end, in September 1854, Allied ground formations landed in the western part of Crimea, and a battle ensued near the Alma River, which ended in defeat for the Russian army. Anglo-French troops captured Sevastopol, and after 11 months of resistance the city was surrendered.

Despite defeats in naval battles and in the Crimea, the Russian army performed well in Transcaucasia, where it was opposed by Ottoman troops. Having successfully repulsed the attacks of the Turks, she launched a rapid offensive and managed to push the enemy back to the Kars fortress.

Treaty of Paris

After three years of fierce fighting, both sides of the conflict did not want to continue the military confrontation and agreed to sit down at the negotiating table. As a result, the results of the Crimean War of 1853-1856. were enshrined in the Paris Peace Treaty, which the parties signed on March 18, 1856. According to it, the Russian Empire was deprived of part of Bessarabia. But a much more serious damage was that the waters of the Black Sea were now considered neutral for the duration of the treaty. This meant that Russia and the Ottoman Empire were prohibited from having their own Black Sea fleets, as well as from building fortresses on its shores. This greatly undermined the country's defensive capabilities, as well as its economy.

Consequences of the Crimean War

As a result of the three-year confrontation between European states and the Ottoman Empire against Russia, the latter was among the losers, which undermined its influence on the world stage and led to economic isolation. This forced the country's government to launch a number of reforms aimed at modernizing the army, as well as improving the lives of the entire population of the country. Thanks to the military reform, conscription was abolished, and military service was introduced instead. New models were adopted into service with the army military equipment. After the uprisings broke out, serfdom was abolished. Changes also affected the education system, finance and courts.

Despite all the efforts made by the Russian Empire, the Crimean War ended in defeat for it; after briefly analyzing the course of its actions, one can judge that the cause of all the failures was poor training of troops and outdated weapons. After its completion, many reforms were introduced aimed at improving the fundamentals of life for the country's citizens. Results of the Crimean War of 1853-1856. Although they were unsatisfactory for Russia, they still gave the tsar the opportunity to realize past mistakes and prevent similar things in the future.

On October 23, 1853, the Turkish Sultan declared war on Russia. By this time, our Danube Army (55 thousand) was concentrated in the vicinity of Bucharest, with forward detachments on the Danube, and the Ottomans had up to 120 - 130 thousand in European Turkey, under the command of Omer Pasha. These troops were located: 30 thousand at Shumla, 30 thousand in Adrianople, and the rest along the Danube from Viddin to the mouth.

Somewhat earlier than the announcement of the Crimean War, the Turks had already begun military operations by seizing the Oltenice quarantine on the left bank of the Danube on the night of October 20. The arriving Russian detachment of General Dannenberg (6 thousand) attacked the Turks on October 23 and, despite their numerical superiority (14 thousand) almost occupied the Turkish fortifications, but was pulled back by General Dannenberg, who considered it impossible to hold Oltenica under the fire of Turkish batteries on the right bank of the Danube . Then Omer Pasha himself returned the Turks to the right bank of the Danube and disturbed our troops only with isolated surprise attacks, to which the Russian troops responded.

At the same time, the Turkish fleet delivered supplies to the Caucasian highlanders, who were acting against Russia at the instigation of the Sultan and England. To prevent this, Admiral Nakhimov, with a squadron of 8 ships, overtook the Turkish squadron, which had taken refuge from bad weather in Sinop Bay. On November 18, 1853, after a three-hour Battle of Sinop, the enemy fleet, including 11 ships, was destroyed. Five Ottoman ships were blown up, the Turks lost up to 4,000 killed and wounded and 1,200 prisoners; The Russians lost 38 officers and 229 lower ranks.

Meanwhile, Omer Pasha, having refused offensive operations from the Oltenitsa side, he gathered up to 40 thousand to Kalafat and decided to defeat the weak advanced Lesser Wallachian detachment of General Anrep (7.5 thousand). On December 25, 1853, 18 thousand Turks attacked the 2.5 thousand detachment of Colonel Baumgarten at Cetati, but arriving reinforcements (1.5 thousand) saved our detachment, which had shot all the cartridges, from final death. Having lost up to 2 thousand people, both of our detachments retreated at night to the village of Motsetsei.

After the battle at Chetati, the Lesser Wallachian detachment, reinforced to 20 thousand, settled in apartments near Kalafat and blocked the Turks’ access to Wallachia; further operations of the Crimean War on European theater in January and February 1854 they were limited to minor clashes.

The Crimean War in the Transcaucasian theater in 1853

Meanwhile, the actions of Russian troops in the Transcaucasian theater were accompanied by complete success. Here the Turks, having assembled a 40,000-strong army long before the declaration of the Crimean War, opened military operations in mid-October. The energetic Prince Bebutov was appointed head of the Russian active corps. Having received information about the movement of the Turks towards Alexandropol (Gyumri), Prince Bebutov sent a detachment of General Orbeliani on November 2, 1853. This detachment unexpectedly came across the main forces of the Turkish army near the village of Bayandura and barely escaped to Alexandropol; The Turks, fearing Russian reinforcements, took a position at Bashkadyklar. Finally, on November 6, a manifesto was received about the beginning of the Crimean War, and on November 14, Prince Bebutov moved to Kars.

Another Turkish detachment (18 thousand) on October 29, 1853 approached the Akhaltsykh fortress, but the head of the Akhaltsykh detachment, Prince Andronnikov, with his 7 thousand. On November 14, he himself attacked the Turks and put them to a disorderly flight; the Turks lost up to 3.5 thousand, while our losses were limited to only 450 people.

Following the victory of the Akhaltsykh detachment, the Alexandropol detachment under the command of Prince Bebutov (10 thousand) defeated the 40 thousand-strong Turkish army on November 19 in a strong Bashkadyklar position and only extreme fatigue of people and horses did not allow development achieved success persecution. However, the Turks lost up to 6 thousand in this battle, and our troops - about 2 thousand.

Both of these victories immediately raised the prestige of Russian power, and the general uprising that was being prepared in Transcaucasia immediately died down.

Crimean War 1853-1856. Map

Balkan theater of the Crimean War in 1854

Meanwhile, on December 22, 1853, the united Anglo-French fleet entered the Black Sea in order to protect Turkey from the sea and help it supply its ports with the necessary supplies. Russian envoys immediately broke off relations with England and France and returned to Russia. Emperor Nicholas turned to Austria and Prussia with a proposal, in the event of a war with England and France, to maintain strict neutrality. But both of these powers avoided any obligations, refusing at the same time to join the allies; To secure their possessions, they concluded a defensive alliance among themselves. Thus, at the beginning of 1854, it became clear that Russia was left without allies in the Crimean War, and therefore the most decisive measures were taken to strengthen our troops.

By the beginning of 1854, up to 150 thousand Russian troops were located along the Danube and the Black Sea to the Bug. With these forces it was planned to move deep into Turkey, raise an uprising of the Balkan Slavs and declare Serbia independent, but the hostile mood of Austria, which was strengthening its troops in Transylvania, forced us to abandon this bold plan and limit ourselves to crossing the Danube to capture only Silistria and Ruschuk.

In the first half of March, Russian troops crossed the Danube at Galati, Brailov and Izmail, and on March 16, 1854 they occupied Girsovo. A non-stop advance towards Silistria would inevitably lead to the occupation of this fortress, the armament of which had not yet been completed. However, the newly appointed commander-in-chief, Prince Paskevich, had not yet personally arrived at the army, stopped it, and only the insistence of the emperor himself forced him to continue the offensive towards Silistria. The commander-in-chief himself, fearing that the Austrians would cut off the retreat route of the Russian army, proposed returning to Russia.

The stop of Russian troops at Girsov gave the Turks time to strengthen both the fortress itself and its garrison (from 12 to 18 thousand). Approaching the fortress on May 4, 1854 with 90 thousand, Prince Paskevich, still fearing for his rear, positioned his army 5 versts from the fortress in a fortified camp to cover the bridge across the Danube. The siege of the fortress was carried out only against its eastern front, and on the western side the Turks, in full view of the Russians, brought supplies to the fortress. In general, our actions near Silistria bore the imprint of the extreme caution of the commander-in-chief himself, who was also embarrassed by incorrect rumors about the alleged union of the allies with the army of Omer Pasha. On May 29, 1854, shell-shocked during a reconnaissance mission, Prince Paskevich left the army, handing it over to Prince Gorchakov, who energetically led the siege and on June 8 decided to storm the Arab and Peschanoye forts. All orders for the assault had already been made, and two hours before the assault an order was received from Prince Paskevich to immediately lift the siege and move to the left bank of the Danube, which was carried out by the evening of June 13. Finally, according to the terms concluded with Austria, which pledged to support our interests in front of the Western courts, on July 15, 1854, the withdrawal of our troops from the Danube principalities, which had been occupied by Austrian troops since August 10, began. The Turks returned to the right bank of the Danube.

During these actions, the Allies launched a series of attacks on our coastal cities in the Black Sea and, incidentally, in Holy Saturday On April 8, 1854 Odessa was brutally bombarded. Then the allied fleet appeared near Sevastopol and headed towards the Caucasus. On land, the allies supported the Ottomans by landing a detachment at Gallipoli to defend Constantinople. These troops were then transported to Varna in early July and moved to Dobruja. Here cholera caused severe devastation in their ranks (from July 21 to August 8, 8 thousand fell ill and 5 thousand of them died).

The Crimean War in the Transcaucasian theater in 1854

Military operations in the spring of 1854 in the Caucasus began on our right flank, where on June 4, Prince Andronnikov, with the Akhaltsykh detachment (11 thousand), defeated the Turks at Cholok. Somewhat later, on the left flank, the Erivan detachment of General Wrangel (5 thousand) attacked 16 thousand Turks on the Chingil Heights on June 17, overthrew them and occupied Bayazet. The main forces of the Caucasian army, i.e. the Alexandropol detachment of Prince Bebutov, moved towards Kars on June 14 and stopped at the village of Kyuryuk-Dara, having the 60-thousand-strong Anatolian army of Zarif Pasha 15 versts ahead of them.

On July 23, 1854, Zarif Pasha went on the offensive, and on the 24th, Russian troops also moved forward, having received false information about the retreat of the Turks. Faced with the Turks, Bebutov lined up his troops in battle formation. A series of energetic infantry and cavalry attacks stopped the Turkish right wing; then Bebutov, after a very stubborn, often hand-to-hand fight, threw back the enemy center, using up almost all his reserves for this. After this, our attacks turned against the Turkish left flank, which had already bypassed our position. The attack was a complete success: the Turks retreated in complete frustration, losing up to 10 thousand; in addition, about 12 thousand bashi-bazouks fled. Our losses amounted to 3 thousand people. Despite the brilliant victory, Russian troops did not dare to begin the siege of Kars without a siege artillery park and in the fall retreated back to Alexandropol (Gyumri).

Defense of Sevastopol during the Crimean War

Panorama of the Defense of Sevastopol (view from Malakhov Kurgan). Artist F. Roubaud, 1901-1904

The Crimean War in the Transcaucasian theater in 1855

In the Transcaucasian theater of war, actions resumed in the second half of May 1855 with our occupation of Ardahan without a fight and an offensive towards Kars. Knowing about the lack of food in Kars, the new commander-in-chief, General Muravyov, was limited to just a blockade, but, having received news in September about the movement of the army of Omer Pasha transported from European Turkey to the rescue of Kars, he decided to take the fortress by storm. The assault on September 17, although carried out on the most important, but at the same time the strongest, western front (Shorakh and Chakhmakh heights), cost us 7,200 people and ended in failure. The army of Omer Pasha could not advance to Kars due to a lack of transportation means, and on November 16 the garrison of Kars surrendered.

British and French attacks on Sveaborg, Solovetsky Monastery and Petropavlovsk

To complete the description of the Crimean War, it is also worth mentioning some minor actions taken against Russia by the Western allies. On June 14, 1854, an allied squadron of 80 ships, under the command of the English admiral Napier, appeared near Kronstadt, then retreated to the Åland Islands, and in October returned to their harbors. On July 6 of the same year, two English ships bombarded the Solovetsky Monastery on the White Sea, unsuccessfully demanding its surrender, and on August 17, an allied squadron also arrived at the port of Petropavlovsky on Kamchatka and, having fired at the city, made a landing, which was soon repulsed. In May 1855, a strong allied squadron was sent to the Baltic Sea for the second time, which, after standing for some time near Kronstadt, went back in the fall; Its combat activities were limited only to the bombing of Sveaborg.

Results of the Crimean War

After the fall of Sevastopol on August 30, military operations in Crimea stopped, and on March 18, 1856, the Parisian world, which ended the long and difficult war of Russia against 4 European states (Turkey, England, France and Sardinia, which joined the allies at the beginning of 1855).

The consequences of the Crimean War were enormous. After it, Russia lost its dominance in Europe, which it had enjoyed since the end of the Napoleonic War of 1812-1815. It has now passed to France for 15 years. The shortcomings and disorganizations revealed by the Crimean War ushered in the era of reforms of Alexander II in Russian history, which renewed all aspects of national life.

The Crimean War, or, as it is called in the West, the Eastern War, was one of the most important and decisive events of the mid-19th century. At this time, the lands of the western Ottoman Empire found themselves at the center of a conflict between the European powers and Russia, with each of the warring parties wanting to expand their territories by annexing foreign lands.

The war of 1853-1856 was called the Crimean War, since the most important and intense fighting took place in Crimea, although military clashes went far beyond the peninsula and covered large areas of the Balkans, the Caucasus, as well as the Far East and Kamchatka. At the same time, Tsarist Russia had to fight not just with the Ottoman Empire, but with a coalition where Turkey was supported by Great Britain, France and the Kingdom of Sardinia.

Causes of the Crimean War

Each of the parties that took part in the military campaign had its own reasons and grievances that prompted them to enter into this conflict. But in general, they were united by one single goal - to take advantage of Turkey’s weakness and establish themselves in the Balkans and the Middle East. It was these colonial interests that led to the outbreak of the Crimean War. But all countries took different paths to achieve this goal.

Russia wanted to destroy the Ottoman Empire, and its territories to be mutually beneficially divided between the claiming countries. Russia would like to see Bulgaria, Moldova, Serbia and Wallachia under its protectorate. And at the same time, she was not against the fact that the territories of Egypt and the island of Crete would go to Great Britain. It was also important for Russia to establish control over the Dardanelles and Bosporus straits, connecting two seas: the Black and Mediterranean.

With the help of this war, Turkey hoped to suppress the national liberation movement that had swept the Balkans, as well as to take away very important Russian territories Crimea and the Caucasus.

England and France did not want to strengthen the position of Russian tsarism in the international arena, and sought to preserve the Ottoman Empire, since they saw it as a constant threat to Russia. Having weakened the enemy, the European powers wanted to separate the territories of Finland, Poland, the Caucasus and Crimea from Russia.

The French emperor pursued his ambitious goals and dreamed of revenge in a new war with Russia. Thus, he wanted to take revenge on his enemy for his defeat in the military campaign of 1812.

If you carefully consider the mutual claims of the parties, then, in essence, the Crimean War was absolutely predatory and aggressive. It’s not for nothing that the poet Fyodor Tyutchev described it as a war of cretins with scoundrels.

Progress of hostilities

The start of the Crimean War was preceded by several important events. In particular, it was the issue of control over the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Bethlehem, which was resolved in favor of the Catholics. This finally convinced Nicholas I of the need to begin military action against Turkey. Therefore, in June 1853, Russian troops invaded the territory of Moldova.

The response from the Turkish side was not long in coming: on October 12, 1853, the Ottoman Empire declared war on Russia.

First period of the Crimean War: October 1853 – April 1854

By the beginning of hostilities, there were about a million people in the Russian army. But as it turned out, its weapons were very outdated and significantly inferior to the equipment of Western European armies: smooth-bore guns against rifled weapons, a sailing fleet against ships with steam engines. But Russia hoped that it would have to fight with approximately equal strength Turkish army, as happened at the very beginning of the war, and could not imagine that it would be opposed by the forces of a united coalition of European countries.

During this period, military operations were carried out with varying degrees of success. And the most important battle of the first Russian-Turkish period of the war was the Battle of Sinop, which took place on November 18, 1853. The Russian flotilla under the command of Vice Admiral Nakhimov, heading to the Turkish coast, discovered large enemy naval forces in Sinop Bay. The commander decided to attack the Turkish fleet. The Russian squadron had an undeniable advantage - 76 guns firing explosive shells. This is what decided the outcome of the 4-hour battle - the Turkish squadron was completely destroyed, and the commander Osman Pasha was captured.

Second period of the Crimean War: April 1854 – February 1856

The victory of the Russian army in the Battle of Sinop greatly worried England and France. And in March 1854, these powers, together with Turkey, formed a coalition to fight a common enemy - the Russian Empire. Now a powerful military force, several times larger than her army, fought against her.

With the beginning of the second stage of the Crimean campaign, the territory of military operations expanded significantly and covered the Caucasus, the Balkans, the Baltic, Far East and Kamchatka. But the main task of the coalition was intervention in Crimea and the capture of Sevastopol.

In the fall of 1854, a combined 60,000-strong corps of coalition forces landed in the Crimea near Evpatoria. And the very first battle on the Alma River Russian army lost, so it was forced to retreat to Bakhchisarai. The garrison of Sevastopol began to prepare for the defense and defense of the city. The valiant defenders were led by the famous admirals Nakhimov, Kornilov and Istomin. Sevastopol was turned into an impregnable fortress, which was defended by 8 bastions on land, and the entrance to the bay was blocked with the help of sunken ships.

The heroic defense of Sevastopol continued for 349 days, and only in September 1855 the enemy captured the Malakhov Kurgan and occupied the entire southern part cities. The Russian garrison moved to the northern part, but Sevastopol never capitulated.

Results of the Crimean War

The military actions of 1855 weakened both the allied coalition and Russia. Therefore, there could no longer be any talk of continuing the war. And in March 1856, the opponents agreed to sign a peace treaty.

According to the Treaty of Paris, Russia, like the Ottoman Empire, was prohibited from having a navy, fortresses and arsenals on the Black Sea, which meant that the country's southern borders were in danger.

As a result of the war, Russia lost a small part of its territories in Bessarabia and the mouth of the Danube, but lost its influence in the Balkans.