The historical past of the Crimean Battle, at the very least from the British perspective, has been written many instances, with full emphasis on the scandalous waste of life in futile cavalry fees towards cannon, in army hospitals that ensured the dying of greater than half their sufferers and within the subject the place troopers have been left to die, if not of wounds, then of chilly, warmth, hunger or exhaustion. It was the primary battle by which an embedded journalist, William Howard Russell, and an authoritative newspaper, The Occasions, have been in a position to report immediately and freely, by telegraph, the incompetence of the authorities and the desperation of the troopers. Gregory Carleton provides to his examine as a parallel Leo Tolstoy’s early Sevastopol Tales, which report equal callousness and even better slaughter among the many Russian defenders. Tolstoy was writing underneath censorship, albeit with pleasant censors. As certainly one of his fellow officers noticed, Tolstoy was much less within the combating than within the reactions of troopers and officers to dying. (Tolstoy’s later work has at its core a distinction between the dying agony of the subtle and the submissive acceptance of dying by the easy peasant or soldier.)
Memoirs by British and Russian authors (the latter writing a long time later when censorship slackened) fill within the gaps left by Russell and Tolstoy. Carleton describes the Crimean Battle as a quagmire, from which all sides emerge with no good points, territorial or political, solely losses in human phrases and in status. He additionally calls it the primary fashionable battle: true, shells and rifles have been twice as lethal as within the Napoleonic wars, however modernity in battle is best outlined by the machine gun and tank, and in the present day by the drone, warfare by which the aggressor dangers far lower than their goal. As for quagmire, it’s true that the Crimean Battle was a hopeless encounter between a supposedly irresistible naval pressure and a supposedly unmovable fortress (Sevastopol), provoked by a trivial dispute over an Orthodox church in Jerusalem, however fuelled by Russia’s want to ‘liberate’ the Christian Balkans from the Turks, and Britain and France’s want to cease the Black Sea being turned from an Ottoman to a Russian lake, which might give the tsar direct entry to the Mediterranean.
In stressing the cruelty of either side, Carleton, for all his cautious analysis, overlooks the range of Russian public opinion (the thinker Alexei Khomiakov, who liked the English because the misplaced Slav tribe of Uglichi, known as on God to punish his corrupt homeland) and ignores the absence of animosity and the chivalry of the Russian authorities. As battle loomed, Russia’s most liberal viceroy, Mikhail Vorontsov, introduced up in London and carefully associated to British aristocrats, had his secretary write, in stunning English, to his nephew Sidney Herbert, Minister of Battle, to argue that Britain’s assist to Turkey can be dwarfed by the harm Russia may trigger. The minister was later compelled to shell his uncle’s palace on the Crimean coast. Through the battle, British and French residents have been free to maneuver about Russian territory. Anne Neilson Giray, the Scottish widow of the nephew of the final Crimean khan, was given safety in Crimea each by Russian defenders and British invaders. Above all, prisoners of battle have been handled extra like friends than enemies. That they had first to endure sluggish journeys by unsprung wagon to cities properly away from the border (to forestall escape) or from Muslim areas (to forestall fraternisation with Ottoman prisoners), however have been then given beneficiant lodging – in resorts, boarding colleges, even palaces – meals rations and even employment. No marvel so many officers surrendered their commissions (a euphemism for desertion) to take pleasure in comforts and life expectancy not out there on the entrance. Even Muslim prisoners have been properly handled: a gaggle of Kurds in Tula have been publicly praised for his or her good manners and onerous work firefighting, avenue cleansing, serving to girls to hold heavy masses, whereas French prisoners have been friends of keen Russian women, and British officers partied all evening in Odesa resorts. Ottoman PoWs who have been Christian, or ready to transform, and had fascinating abilities have been supplied citizenship with freedom from taxation and army service. Some have been entertained by the tsar.
Info on the Ottoman military, the largest contingent in Crimea, who suffered the very best casualties (after the Russian defenders) shouldn’t be straightforward to seek out (Carleton devotes simply two traces to the Ottoman majority within the invading military). The Turks revealed few stories, solely the Egyptian troopers wrote house – however Ibrahim Köremezli’s 2024 article in Belleten Türk Tarih Kurumu (from which Google translate offers a readable English model) makes use of sources from Russia, Europe and Turkey to survey the lifetime of allied PoWs in Russia: it had nothing of a quagmire about it.
The heritage of the Crimean Battle is blended. Each side realised that medical doctors and nurses, not generals and sergeants, have been wanted. In Britain and Russia, there was energetic medical progress: chloroform was now supplied not solely to officers and gents. Sanitation, diet and nursing got the identical priorities as shells and fortifications. In Russia a military-medical academy began coaching 1000’s of medical doctors, together with girls, in order that within the subsequent Balkan battle, 20 years later, Russia may boast of getting girls medical doctors serving on the entrance.
Navy classes have been learnt, too: Alexander II’s generals turned to the conquest of Central Asia and the Far East. Because the world step by step conceded the Russians the liberty of the Black Sea, Alexander, the so-called liberator, started a genocidal deportation of a whole bunch of 1000’s of indigenous Caucasians and Crimean Tatars to Anatolia. The Crimean Battle, nonetheless, did provoke Russia’s most progressive period: serfs have been freed, the humanities flourished, a nationwide well being service was created. In Britain complacent aristocrats akin to Lord Aberdeen yielded to energetic radicals akin to Disraeli and Gladstone. Russians and Britons, however, alas, not the Ottomans, emerged wiser from their quagmire.
-
Crimean Quagmire: Tolstoy, Russell and the Start of Fashionable Warfare
Gregory Carleton
Hurst, 264pp, £27.50
Purchase from bookshop.org (affiliate hyperlink)
Donald Rayfield’s newest e-book is ‘A Seditious and Sinister Tribe’: The Crimean Tatars and Their Khanate (Reaktion, 2024).