The Crimean War - A People's Perspective

Today, we continue our three-part series on the people's perspective of three monumental events in Russian history, this time about the Crimean War.

Transcript

Episode 294 The Crimean War - A People's Perspective

Last time, we covered the people’s perspective of the Russian Civil War. Today, we continue our series about the People's Perspective on three monumental events in Russian history, this time being about the Crimean War. 

In my opinion, the cataclysmic event that was the Russian Civil War began with Russia's humiliating defeat in the Crimean War. After Russia ousted Napoleon from its lands and defeated the French in 1814, Russia was considered one of the world's leading powers. Their defeat in Crimea exposed them as a real paper tiger and still a backward nation. The impending defeat was said to have humiliated Tsar Nicholas I so much that he died heartbroken.

In today's episode, we will again avoid going into the details of why the war started, who was involved, and any description of the battles that ensued. What we are going to focus on is how the people who fought the war felt and what they experienced, as well as how the Russian people reacted to the events and eventual defeat. It would lay the groundwork for the next episode in the series, the Russian Revolution – A People’s Perspective.

Within Russia, there was a feeling of mistreatment by the Western powers of France, Great Britain, and Austria. Through his ministers like Paskevich and Pogodin, Tsar Nicholas I sought to rouse the Russian people into believing it was an us-versus-them situation, much like Vladimir Putin is doing today. He also used a religious argument that Russia had to protect its Orthodox brethren, the Slavs, who were being mistreated by the Ottoman Turks. 

Pogodin wrote a lengthy memorandum stating these points. Here is a brief excerpt from that paper. "By declaring war on us, the Turks have destroyed all the old treaties defining our relations, so we can now demand the liberation of the Slavs and bring this about by war, as they themselves have chosen war. 

If we do not liberate the Slaves and bring them under our protection, then our enemies, the English, and the French… will do so instead. In Serbia, Bulgaria, and Bosnia, they are active everywhere among the Slaves and their Western parties, and if they succeed, where will we be then?"

I bring this up because this became the official position that was put out in front of the Russian people to justify a war. The government further asserted that if they went to war against the Ottomans, the people of Bulgaria, Serbia, and other Slavic people would join the cause. Of course, none of this came to fruition. What it did do, though, was to enrage everyone else, especially the British, who viewed the Russians as a threat to their holdings in India and Afghanistan. 

The people of Western Europe felt hostility towards the Russians, mainly due to their religious beliefs. Catholics had been obviously opposed to Orthodoxy since the schism of 1054. This would help the French convince their people to join a war against Russia. Protestants in England became increasingly sympathetic to the Muslim majority Ottoman people. 

Now, it's time to listen to what the men at the front were saying. Grigory Zubianka wrote this to his wife on March 24, 1854. “We are in Wallachia on the bans of the Danube and face our enemy on the other side… Every day there is shooting across the river, and every hour and every minute we expect to die, but we pray to God that we may be saved, and every day passes, and we are still alive and healthy, we thank the Lord the Maker of all things for that blessing. But we are made to spend all day and night in hunger and the cold because they give us nothing to eat, and we have to live as best we can by fending for ourselves, so help us, God."

Nikofor Burak wrote the following to his family from the front. "We are now a very long way from Russia, the land is not like Russia at all, we are almost in Turkey itself, and every hour we expect to die. To tell the truth, nearly all our regiment was destroyed by the Turks, but by the grace of the highest creator, I am still alive and well… I hope to return home and see you all again, I will show myself to you and talk with you, but now we are in the gravest danger, and I am afraid to die."

Surrounding the Russian army on three sides were the Turks, the British, and the French, and most frightening to the leadership were the Austrians building up their armies to the west. The French and British fleets were beginning to bombard Odessa, bringing even more despair in the Russian flanks. What few people at the time understood was that what was going to happen in the Crimean peninsula was something that would be known as trench warfare. This would reappear about 60 years later during World War I. 

The problem the Russians had was their lack of weapon development since the Napoleonic era. The British and French had vastly superior weaponry, which had far greater ranges. Russian military engineer Edward Totleben wrote this. "Left to themselves to perform the role of sharpshooters, the British troops did not hesitate under fire and did not require orders or supervision. Troops thus armed were full of confidence once they found out the accuracy and immense range of their weapons… Our infantry, with their muskets, could not reach the enemy at greater than 300 paces while they fired on us from 1,200. The enemy, perfectly convinced of the superiority of his small arms, avoided close combat; every time our battalions charged, he retired for some distance and began a murderous fusillade. Our columns, in pressing the attack, only succeeded in suffering terrible losses, and finding it impossible to pass through the hail of bullets which overwhelmed them, were obliged to fall back before reaching the enemy.”

One of the early battles between the Allied forces against the Russians was the Battle of Alma. It was a gruesome affair for both sides. The British, French, and Ottomans lost over 4,000 men, with the Russians losing over 5,000. What was worse was how the injured were treated or the lack of treatment.

As one Russian orderly reported, “Hundreds of wounded had been deserted by their regiments, and these, with heart-rending cries and moans and pleading gestures, begged to be lifted into the carts and carriages. But what could I do for them? We were already packed to overloading. I tried to console them by telling them that their regimental wagons were coming back for them, although of course they did not. One man could hardly drag himself along – he was without arms and his belly was shot through; another had his leg blown off and his jaw smashed, with his tongue torn out and his body covered with wounds – only the expression on his face pleaded for a mouthful of water. But where to get even that?”

While the British and French could clear the battlefield of their wounded within two days, the Russians did no such thing. The allied forces would tend to their wounds after taking them by carting them to hospitals in Scutari, outside Constantinople. As William Russell described the scene, “The sullen, angry scowl of some of these men were fearful. Fanaticism and immortal hate spoke through their angry eyeballs, and he who gazed on them with pity and compassion could at last (unwillingly) understand how these men could in their savage passion kill the wounded, and fire on the conqueror who, in his generous humanity, had aided them as he passed.”

As you can tell, a sense of desperation surrounded the Russian side of the conflict. However, the Allies had lost a considerable amount of men as well. This is one of the reasons why they did not continue on to Sebastopol. As Figes puts it in his book, The Crimean War: A History, “If the allies had pushed on directly from Alma, they could have taken Sevastopol by surprise. In all probability, they would have captured it in a few days, at relatively little cost in human lives compared to the tens of thousands who were to die during the 349-day siege that followed from their errors and delays.”

What followed after the Battle of Alma was a retreating Russian Army. Instead of heading straight for Sebastopol, they began to loot abandoned estates. As one eyewitness wrote, “Finding a house that had been locked up, they would smash the doors, break the windows, and rampage through the rooms, stealing anything they could carry. Assuming that the owners had hidden money, diamonds, and other precious items in the house, the soldiers turned over everything – even pillows and armchairs.”

Had the Allies been aware of the utter confusion and disarray the Russian military was going through, they could have marched straight at them. When the Russians decided to blow up their fleet in the harbor of Sebastopol, it ended any thought by the Allies to march forward quickly. They had no way to ferry troops into the city, so they slowed their advance. 

Sebastopol was primarily a military base with additional support staff. The Russians began to dig in, with many knowing that a siege was about to start and that they were likely to die. This led to a lot of drinking, especially when a considerable supply of vodka was discovered on one of the piers. Three days of drunken mayhem ensued until Admiral Kornilov was able to destroy all of the remaining liquor. 

The Siege of Sebastopol was a murderous event. Both sides committed atrocities. On the Russian side, the priests would claim that the British and the French were fighting on the side of the Devil. One incident that led credence to the claim was the looting of the Church of St. Vladimir at Khersonesos. This was the supposed place where Vladimir the Great was baptized. A French historian by the name of Cesar de Bazancourt confirmed this event.

Before the Siege of Sebastopol, the Battle of Inkerman took place, delivering another loss to the Russians. This, though, came at a great price for the Allies. While the Russian losses were double that of the Allies at 11,500, the British and French lost 1/3rd of their troops. But the worst was yet to come. As Figes put it, here came “Generals January and February.”

The Allies were not prepared for the harsh Russian winters. The British were even less so than their French partners. As Army surgeon George Lawson wrote to his family about the French, "They certainly are the proper clothing for out here." He continued, "I wish our men had something of the sort… Many of them are almost shoeless and shirtless, their greatcoats worn to a thread and torn in all directions, having had not only to live in them during the day but sleep in them by night, covered only by the wet blanket which they have just brought up with them from the trenches."

But this was only the plight of the ordinary soldiers. The British officers had it pretty good. Lieutenant Charles Gordon wrote that Lord Cardigan slept on his private yacht, "As far as comfort is concerned, I assure you, my dear – I could not be more comfortable in England." This was isolated to the British as the French officers typically housed themselves near their men in similar situations. 

Another difference between the two main allied forces was the food. The French fed their men far better than the British, although we can’t say that it was haute cuisine. A young dragoon, Charles Mismer, wrote about their rations that they "were composed of salted meat, lard, and rice, and fresh meat from time to time, along with a supplement of wine, sugar, and coffee; only bread was sometimes lacking, but instead, we had biscuit, as hard as stone, which one had to crush or slice with an ax."

Imagine the cold, the poor housing, and the lousy food, and you have a clear picture of how miserable the life of a soldier was during the Crimean War. It is no wonder that disease, starvation, and other non-combat-related reasons. Here are some numbers to put things into perspective: the Allies suffered 46,000 combat fatalities, while they lost 112,000 to non-combat causes. For the Russians, it was far worse. They lost 73,000 in the battles, with an additional 377,000 to non-combat reasons. Diseases like pneumonia, cholera, typhoid, and typhus ran rampant through the ranks. Generals January and February were some of the leading causes of death and despair.

One of the heroes of the Crimean War was the doctors and nurses who tended to the wounded and dying. Of them, Florence Nightingale is the most famous. She would help revolutionize how men were treated during and after battle. Less known is the Russian equivalent, Nikolai Pirogov. His system of triage, a way to select the which cases demanded the need for a surgeon and those who could safely wait. Pirogov’s methodology would be a system used in the next similar conflict, World War I.

The Crimean War presented the world with a first: the use of photography to show the horrors of war. Along with a large contingent of correspondents reporting on the war, it was the photographs that shocked and opened the eyes of many people who had never left their small hamlets, towns, or cities. As Edmund Gosse remembered, "The declaration of war on Russia brought the first breath of outside life into our Calvinist cloister. My parents took in a daily newspaper, which they had never done before, and events in picturesque places, which my Father and I looked out on the map, were eagerly discussed.”

The British, especially, had a free press, and the correspondents used that freedom to its fullest extent. One of the most popular was William Russell, a reporter for the Times. An Anglo-Irishman, he supported the common soldier, with 1/3rd coming from Ireland. As Henry Clifford described him, "…a vulgar low Irishman, an Apostate Catholic… but he has the gift of the gab and uses his pen as well as his tongue, sings a good song, drinks anyone’s brandy and water, and smokes as many cigars as foolish young officers will let him, and he is looked upon by most in Camp as a ‘Jolly Good Fellow.’ He is just the sort of chap to get information, particularly out of youngsters.”

Lord Raglan, head of British military operations, was furious with Russell's reporting. He went so far as to accuse him of treason, something Henry Newcastle, Secretary of State for War, rejected. Due to public pressure, the pressure on the High Command of the British army was growing by the day. 

In France, the same cannot be said because a measure of censorship prevailed under Napoleon III. He had risen to power through a coup and needed to keep any negative news out of the public's hands. Try as he could, Napoleon knew the rumors of the casualties rising could be catastrophic to his regime. His position was to order that the Siege of Sebastopol be accelerated.

As for the Russians, the censorship was as strict as possible. It took forty-nine days after the fall of Sebastopol before the Russian people got news of it. Still, the details of the enormity of the loss and the panic within the Russian army were kept hidden. 

Within Russian society, high society did not fully support the war effort. They saw it as a threat to the country because they could not believe the war was winnable. As Prince Viazemsky would write, "How will it end? In my modest view… we have no chance of victory. The English allied to the French will always be stronger than us." The secret police under Nicholas I was known as the Third Section. They reported that most of the educated population was against the war and wanted it to come to a negotiated end.

As for the peasantry, there were mixed signals. Rumors abound that any serf who would volunteer for the army would be given freedom. That, of course, would be a falsehood. Whole bands of serfs would show up at military garrisons demanding to be enlisted, sometimes going so far as to attack soldiers and police.

The other rumor was that the English and French would free any serfs who joined their cause. Many started to head south, along with a number of free Cossacks. This was to be part of the start of the revolutionary fervor that would eventually lead to the 1905 and 1917 Russian Revolutions.

Tsar Nicholas was convinced that Generals January and February would weaken the Allies so much that his army could counterattack and win the war. When that did not happen, he became despondent, dying of a broken heart and complications from pneumonia on March 2, 1855.

Pressure mounted on both sides to negotiate a peace. With a new Tsar, Alexander II, there was renewed hope for a settlement. Unfortunately for both sides, the war would rage for another year. Battle after fruitless battle was fought, with men dying in droves. Then, both sides, especially the Russians, began to dig in. This would be yet another preview of what would happen in World War I. 

By springtime, the Allied forces began revitalizing, and supplies began to build up after the winter lull. Here is a meal prepared for the British soldiers. "Put in the boiler 30 quarts of water, add to it 50 pounds of meat, either beef or mutton, add the rations of preserved or fresh vegetables, add ten small tablespoonfuls of salt, simmer for three hours, and serve.”

The attack to end the Siege of Sebastopol began in June 1855. It would be a brutal and horrific sight. As Octave Cullet reported, “Hoisting one another up, we scaled the walls, and overcoming the resistance of the enemy on the parapet, launched a furious avalanche of fire into the crowd defending the redoubt… What happened next I cannot describe. It was a scene of carnage. Fighting like madmen, our soldiers spiked their guns, and the few Russians who were brave enough to fight us were all slaughtered.”

With the fall of Sebastopol, the war was over for all intents and purposes. There would continue to be sporadic fighting, but both sides knew that the end was at hand. Both sides wanted peace as the pressures at home grew more intense by the day. The Russians believed that if they continued fighting, they could get a better deal in negotiations. 

Most Russians supported the Tsar and were willing to continue supporting the war effort, which was not the case in the West. 

What of the Russian people? They were led to believe by their government, headed by Tsar Nicholas, that they were the most powerful and richest in the world. The loss in the Crimean War shattered that myth. Writing about the Tsar, Anna Tiutcheva would say, “With every new setback there are bitter reproaches against his name. They accuse him of pursuing a purely personal policy, which for the sake of his own pride and glory, renounced the historical traditions of Russia, failed our brothers, the Orthodox Slavs, and turned the Gendarme of Europe when he could and should have brought new life to the East and the Church.”

The loss would disrupt Russian society to its core. No longer was the Tsar a vaunted figure. Numerous assassination attempts would be made on Nicholas's successor, Alexander II until they were successful. Over 500 peasant revolts broke out during Alexander's reign. While the serfs were emancipated, it was a hollow event. 

Finally, the Crimean War of 1853-56 would sow the seeds of distrust and dislike of the West. This feeling would continue to fester until this day. The Bolsheviks would use this to come to power, and as we’ve seen in recent years, Vladimir Putin would stoke the flames of discontent with the West.

Well, I hope you enjoyed today’s episode. Join me next time when we bring you my interview with Professor Maya Vincour, author of the book Stalinist Liquids in Russian Labor Culture. We will then complete this series with the people’s perspective of the Russian Revolution.

So, as always, Dasvidania eh Spasiba za Vinyamineya.