What were the causes of the Crimean War? | Reference.com What were the causes of the Crimean War? A: Quick Answer The main causes of the Crimean War were religion, in particular of the Holy sites in Jerusalem — this applied to all major powers, including France, Britain and the Ottoman Empire — and also British foreign policy which was strongly in support of the Ottoman Empire, as the British saw the Turkish lands as a barrier that could halt Russian expansionism. Russia eventually conceded defeat to the alliance of France, Britain, Sardinia and the Ottoman Empire. Full Answer The war began in 1853, when Russia invaded the autonomous regions of Moldavia and Wallachia, which resided in the Ottoman Empire. This was not intended as a direct act of war by Russia. Instead, the Russians hoped to force the Sultan into concessions for Orthodox Christians in the areas, while seeing how the Empire would respond. It was assumed that because other major powers, such as France and Britain, were not on good terms, they would be unlikely to get involved, let alone work together in coming to the aid of Turkey.

Britain, France and Austria-Hungary all regarded the move as either an expansionist threat, or with disdain, with Britain concerned for its merchant activity in the area, and Austria-Hungary fearful of invasion from Russia given that they had crossed the Danube. Crimean War | Eurasian history [1853-1856] | Britannica.com Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston Crimean War, (October 1853–February 1856), war fought mainly on the Crimean Peninsula between the Russians and the British , French , and Ottoman Turkish, with support from January 1855 by the army of Sardinia-Piedmont . The war arose from the conflict of great powers in the Middle East and was more directly caused by Russian demands to exercise protection over the Orthodox subjects of the Ottoman sultan . Another major factor was the dispute between Russia and France over the privileges of the Russian Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches in the holy places in Palestine . Battle sites and key locations in the Crimean War. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. The charge of the Light Brigade at the Battle of Balaklava, Crimean War, Oct.

25, 1854. Time Life Pictures/Mansell/Time Life Pictures/Getty Images Supported by Britain, the Turks took a firm stand against the Russians, who occupied the Danubian principalities (modern Romania ) on the Russo-Turkish border in July 1853. The British fleet was ordered to Constantinople (Istanbul) on September 23. On October 4 the Turks declared war on Russia and in the same month opened an offensive against the Russians in the Danubian principalities. After the Russian Black Sea fleet destroyed a Turkish squadron at Sinope , on the Turkish side of the Black Sea, the British and French fleets entered the Black Sea on January 3, 1854, to protect Turkish transports. On March 28 Britain and France declared war on Russia. To satisfy Austria and avoid having that country also enter the war, Russia evacuated the Danubian principalities. Austria occupied them in August 1854. In September 1854 the allies landed troops in Russian Crimea , on the north shore of the Black Sea, and began a yearlong siege of the Russian fortress of Sevastopol .

Major engagements were fought at the Alma River on September 20, at Balaklava on October 25 (commemorated in “The Charge of the Light Brigade” by English poet Alfred, Lord Tennyson ), and at Inkerman on November 5. On January 26, 1855, Sardinia-Piedmont entered the war and sent 10,000 troops. Finally, on September 11, 1855, three days after a successful French assault on the Malakhov , a major strongpoint in the Russian defenses, the Russians blew up the forts, sank the ships, and evacuated Sevastopol. Secondary operations of the war were conducted in the Caucasus and in the Baltic Sea . British soldiers leaving for the Crimean War, February 1854. Photos.com/Thinkstock Crusades After Austria threatened to join the allies, Russia accepted preliminary peace terms on February 1, 1856. The Congress of Paris worked out the final settlement from February 25 to March 30.

The resulting Treaty of Paris , signed on March 30, 1856, guaranteed the integrity of Ottoman Turkey and obliged Russia to surrender southern Bessarabia , at the mouth of the Danube. The Black Sea was neutralized, and the Danube River was opened to the shipping of all nations. The Crimean War was managed and commanded very poorly on both sides. Disease accounted for a disproportionate number of the approximately 250,000 casualties lost by each side, and, when news of the deplorable conditions at the front reached the British public, nurse Mary Seacole petitioned the War Office for passage to Crimea. When she was refused, Seacole financed the trip to Balaklava herself and established the British Hotel, an officer’s club and convalescent home that she used as a base to treat the sick and wounded on the battlefield. Improvements made to the field hospital at Üsküdar by British nurse Florence Nightingale revolutionized the treatment of wounded soldiers and paved the way for later developments in battlefield medicine .

Florence Nightingale at the Barrack Hospital in Scutari (Üsküdar), writing letters for … © Photos.com/Thinkstock Imperialism as a cause of World War I Imperialism as a cause of World War I A satirical representation of Spanish imperialism in central and South America Imperialism and imperial rivalry provided both a cause and context for World War I. Imperialism is a system where a powerful nation controls and exploits one or more colonies. In most cases the imperial nation, euphemistically referred to as the ‘mother country’, establishes control over its colonies by coercion – for example, through infiltration and annexation, political pressure, war and military conquest. Once conquered, this territory is claimed as a colony. Colonies are governed and administered by either the imperial nation, a puppet government or local collaborators. A military presence is often stationed in the colony, to maintain order, to suppress dissent and uprisings, and to deter imperial rivals. Colonies may have military or geopolitical advantages but their main purpose is economic: they exist chiefly to profit and enrich the imperial power. In most cases this involves the supply of precious metals or other resources, such as timber, rubber, rice or other foodstuffs.

Colonies can also be invaluable sources of cheap labour, agricultural land and trading ports. Prior to World War I the world’s largest, richest and most dominant imperial power was Great Britain. The British Empire famously occupied one quarter of the globe (“the sun never sets on Britain” was a famous slogan of the mid 19th century). British colonial possessions in the late 1800s included Canada, India, Ceylon (Sri Lanka), Burma, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, several Pacific and Caribbean Islands, South Africa, Rhodesia, Egypt and other parts of Africa. Many of these colonies were acquired with little difficulty; others took more time, effort and bloodshed. Britain’s acquisition of South Africa, for example, came after costly wars against the Zulus (native tribes) and Boers (white farmer-settlers of Dutch extraction). British imperialism was focused on maintaining and expanding trade, the importation of raw materials and the sale of manufactured goods. Britain’s imperial power was reinforced by her powerful navy, the world’s largest, and a fleet of mercantile (commercial) vessels. A depiction of British imperialism in Africa, from ‘Cairo to the Cape’ Another significant imperial power was France, Britain’s closest neighbour.

French imperial holdings included Indochina (Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia), some Pacific islands and several colonies in west and north-west Africa. The German Empire included Shandong (a province of China), New Guinea, Samoa and other Pacific islands, and several colonies in central and south-west Africa. The Spanish Empire had once included the Philippines and large parts of South America, though by the early 20th century Spain’s imperial power was dwindling. Empires closer to home included Russia, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman sultanate. Russia ruled over Finland, Poland and several central Asian regions as an imperial power; its disastrous war against Japan in 1904-5 was an attempt to extend Russia’s imperial reach further into Korea and northern China. Despite condemnation of European imperialism in America, the United States also engaged in a degree of empire building, particularly towards the end of the 1800s. Here is a list of the more significant imperial powers of the early 1900s: Global empires in 1914 The British Empire took in India, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Hong Kong, parts of north Africa, islands in the Pacific and Caribbean and concessions in China.

Russia ruled modern-day Poland, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Ukraine, Georgia and several regions in central Asia, such as Kazakhstan. Russia also had colonial interests in east Asia, including a concession in China. France maintained colonies in modern-day Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, areas of West Africa and India, small possessions in South America, and islands in the Pacific and Caribbean. Germany had seized control of modern-day Tanzania, Namibia and the Cameroon in Africa, German New Guinea, some Pacific islands and an important concession in Shandong (China). Austria-Hungary possessed no colonies outside Europe but was an empire nonetheless, ruling over several different regions, ethnic and language groups. Among its regions were Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia, Galicia, Transylvania, the Tyrol and, after 1908, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Spain once possessed a large empire that included Cuba, the Philippines and large areas of South America – but by 1914 the Spanish were left with only tiny colonial territories in the Americas and north-west Africa.

The United States was a relative newcomer to imperialism but by 1914 had gained control of the Philippines, Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico and several islands in the Pacific. Though later absorbed into the United States, both Alaska and the Hawaiian Islands might be considered colonial acquisitions. The Ottoman Empire was once the largest empire in the world, taking in eastern Europe, the Middle East and much of northern Africa. Ottoman territory had shrunk significantly but by 1914 the sultanate retained the heart of its old empire: modern-day Turkey, Egypt, Syria, Palestine, Armenia and Macedonia. Portugal in 1914 was the imperial ruler of modern-day Angola and Mozambique in Africa, Goa (India) and East Timor (Indonesia). Belgium was one of the smallest nations in Europe but still possessed a significant African colony (Belgian Congo), as well as a small concession in China. Holland had several small colonial possessions in South America (Dutch Guyana), Asia (Batavia, or modern-day Indonesia) and the Pacific. Italy by 1914 had moved into northern Africa, annexing modern-day Libya, Somalia and Eritrea. It also held a small concession in China.

The scramble for Africa Imperial rivalry: a British cartoon ridiculing Belgian rule in Africa The second half of the 1800s produced a significant ‘rush for empire’. This desperate push for new colonies was fuelled by rising nationalism, increasing demand for land and dwindling opportunities at home. Two relative newcomers to empire-building were the newly unified nations of Germany and Italy. The man who helped construct the German state in the 1870s, Otto von Bismarck, had showed little interest in gathering colonies – but Bismarck’s view was not shared by other Germans. Organisations like the Colonial League (formed 1882 in Berlin) whipped up support for German imperial expansion. The kaiser and his advisors formulated their own imperial designs, most of them focused on Africa. In 1884 Germany acquired Togoland, the Cameroons and South West Africa (now Namibia). Six years later a sizeable swathe of East Africa was under German control; this territory was renamed Tanganyika (now Tanzania). This African colonisation was well received by the German population – however it caused problems in Britain and France.

Many in London dreamed of a British-owned railway running the length of Africa (“from Cairo to the Cape”) and German colonies in eastern Africa were an obstacle to this vision. The scramble for empire in Africa also sparked several diplomatic incidents. Two significant crises stemmed from events in Morocco in north-west Africa. Though not a French colony, Morocco’s location placed it within France’s sphere of influence. As Paris sought to establish a protectorate in Morocco, the German kaiser intervened. In 1905 Wilhelm II traveled to the Moroccan city of Tangier, where he delivered a speech supporting the idea of Moroccan independence. This antagonised the French government and precipitated a series of angry diplomatic responses and feverish press reports. A second crisis erupted in 1911. As the French were attempting to suppress a rebellion in Morocco, the Germans landed an armed vessel, the Panther, at the Moroccan port of Agadir – a landing made without permission, prior warning or any obvious purpose. This incident triggered an even stronger reaction and brought France and Germany to the brink of war. These acts of German provocation were not designed to encroach into Morocco or expand its empire, rather to drive a wedge between France and Britain.

In fact it had the opposite effect, strengthening the Anglo-French alliance and intensifying criticism of German Weltpolitik and ‘gunboat diplomacy’ in both France and Britain. Imperial instability was another contributor to European tensions. Critical problems in the Ottoman Empire also affected the balance of power in eastern Europe. Described by satirists as the ‘Sick Man of Europe’, the Ottoman sultanate was in rapid political, military and economic decline by the second half of the 1800s. The Ottomans were defeated in several wars including the Crimean War (1853-56), Russo-Turkish War (1877-78) and First Balkans War (1912-13). These defeats, along with rising nationalism and revolutions in Ottoman-controlled regions, resulted in gradual but significant losses of territory. With the Ottoman Empire shrinking and at risk of complete collapse, Europe’s other imperial powers clamoured to secure territory or influence in the region. Austria-Hungary hoped to expand into the Balkans; Russia moved to limit Austrian expansion while securing access to the Black Sea; Germany wanted to ensure the security and completion of its Berlin-to-Baghdad railway.

Britain and France also had colonial and trade interests in the region. The ‘Eastern question’ – the issue of what would happen in eastern Europe as the Ottomans withdrew – was an important talking point of the late 19th century. These developments drew the Great Powers of Europe into the Balkan sphere, creating opportunities for rivalry and increased tensions. 1. Imperialism is when a powerful nation-state seizes territories outside its own borders, transforming and governing them as colonies. 2. Several European nations had empires in the late 19th century, though the British Empire was by far the largest of these. 3. This period saw a race to acquire the last territories open for colonisation. Much of this occurred in Africa, where Britain, France and Germany all competed for new colonial possessions. 4. This ‘scramble for empire’ fuelled rivalry and led to several diplomatic incidents, such as two ‘Moroccan crises’ that were largely precipitated by the German kaiser. 5. The deterioration of another imperial power, the Ottoman Empire, attracted the attention of European powers, who sought territory, influence or access in the Balkans and eastern Europe. © Alpha History 2014.

Content on this page may not be republished or distributed without permission. For more information please refer to our Terms of Use . This page was written by Jennifer Llewellyn, Jim Southey and Steve Thompson. To reference this page, use the following citation: J. Llewellyn et al, “Imperialism as a cause of World War I” at Alpha History, 2014, accessed [date of last access]. Search this site Translate World War I live To mark the centenary of World War I, Alpha History authors live-tweet press reports on the war - as they appeared 100 years ago. The Crimean War: The war that made Britain 'great’ - Telegraph Books The Crimean War: The war that made Britain 'great’ The Crimean campaign was the first modern mass media war and it forged many values we take for granted today, says Orlando Figes. Charge of the Light Brigade Photo: Alamy By Orlando Figes Comments In Linda Colley’s influential book Britons the historian made a case for the idea that warfare has done more than anything to unify the British as a nation.

We think mainly of the wars against Napoleonic France and the two great 20th-century conflicts against Germany in this respect. But what about the war against Russia, the Crimean War of 1854-56, fought when our national identity was really being fixed in the new mass media of the Victorian age? Today the names of Alma, Balaklava, Inkerman, Raglan, Cardigan and Palmerston continue to inhabit our collective memory, mainly through street and pub signs. Like David Cameron, we still name our daughters after Florence Nightingale, the nurse who made her name in the Crimea and became an icon of middle-class Victorian values. But few of us could say what the Crimean War was all about – why it began with a religious dispute in the Holy Lands, or why France and Britain got involved in a conflict that developed in the Balkans between Turkey and Russia?

As in our recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the reason given by the British government for its involvement in the Crimea (the defence of Turkish sovereignty against Russian aggression) was a long way from its real and deeper aims: to reduce the power of Russia as a rival to British imperial interests in the Levant; and to secure a firmer hold on the pro-Western reformist government of the Ottoman Empire, which struggled to control the Islamic nationalisms of the Middle East. Because of this gap there was an important role for those who fixed the public meaning of the war: journalists and pamphleteers, poets, artists and photographers, orators and priests. This was the first “modern” war in the age of mass communications – the first to be photographed, the first to use the telegraph, the first “newspaper war” – and it shaped our national consciousness. Four aspects of the British character emerged during the Crimean War. The first was the concept of the gallant Britons standing up against the Russian Bear to defend liberty – a simple fight of “Right Against Wrong’, as Punch portrayed it in an 1854 cartoon of Britannia wielding the Sword of Justice and with a lion at her side.

This is how we came to see ourselves and our position in the world – as John Bull coming to the rescue of the weak against tyrants and bullies. Many of the same emotive forces were at work when Britain went to war against the Germans in defence of “little Belgium” in 1914 and Poland in 1939. Related Articles Crimea: The Last Crusade by Orlando Figes: review 03 Oct 2010 Here perhaps are the origins of the “moral interventionism” practised by our own liberal governments in the Balkans and the Middle East. Much of this assertiveness goes back to the foreign policy of Lord Palmerston, the main “war party” leader leading up to the Crimean War, when he then took over as prime minister. More than any other politician before, Palmerston understood the need to cultivate the press and appeal in simple terms to the public. His foreign policy captured the imagination of the British as the embodiment of their national character and popular ideals: it was Protestant and freedom-loving, energetic and adventurous, proudly British and contemptuous of foreigners, particularly those of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox religion, who Palmerston associated with the worst vices and excesses of the continent.

The Victorians loved his verbal commitment to liberal interventionism abroad: it reinforced their view that Britain was the greatest country in the world and that the task of government should be to export its way of life and values to those less fortunate who lived beyond its shores. The idea of Britain as a Godly land of “Christian soldiers” fighting righteous wars became integral to this imperial mission. Here was the second aspect of our national consciousness that gained new force. Many of the ideas of this myth were embodied in the cult of “muscular Christianity” – a concept first expressed in Tom’s Brown’s Schooldays, written in the wake of the war, and its sequel, Tom Brown at Oxford, where sport is extolled as a builder of manly character, teamwork, chivalry and moral fortitude – qualities that made Britons good at war. The “playing fields of Eton” and all that. In fact the public school was one of the major casualties of the Crimean War, which did more than any other event during the mid-nineteenth century to advance the middle-class ideal of meritocracy – the third element of our national identity to develop at this time.

As the American writer Nathaniel Hawthorne wrote in his English Notebooks, the year of 1854 had “done the work of 50 ordinary ones” in undermining aristocracy and promoting the professional ideal. It was not just the military blunders by the army’s aristocratic leadership – most famously the Charge of the Light Brigade – but of the almost criminal negligence in failing to provide for the troops. Without sufficient food, warm clothes or shelter to survive the freezing winter, thousands perished from cold, exhaustion and disease. The mismanagement triggered a new assertiveness in the middle classes, which rallied round the principles of professional competence, industry, meritocracy and self-reliance in opposition to the privilege of birth. It was a sign of their triumph that in the decades afterwards, Conservative and Liberal governments alike introduced reforms promoting these ideals (the extension of public schooling, opening of the Civil Service, a new system of merit-based promotion in the armed services, etc). The political scramble for Middle England had begun. Florence Nightingale symbolised the new confidence of the professional classes. The legend of the “Lady with the Lamp” was retold in schoolbooks, histories and biographies.

It contained the basic elements of the middle-class Victorian ideal: a Christian narrative about maternal care, good works and self-sacrifice; a moral one of self-improvement and the salvation of the deserving poor; a domestic tale of cleanliness and good housekeeping; a story about individual determination; and a public narrative of sanitary and hospital reform that would influence the foundation of the NHS. What Nightingale embodied above all was a nationwide concern for the suffering of the ordinary troops who had sacrificed so much for their country. Here was a fourth and final aspect of our national unification. The Crimean War brought about a sea change in Britain’s attitudes towards its fighting men. Previously the military hero was a gentleman, like the Duke of York, the son of George III and commander of his forces against Napoleon, whose column was erected in Waterloo Place in London five years after the duke’s death in 1833. It was paid for by deducting one day’s pay from every soldier in the army. But the heroes who returned from Crimea were the common troops. Their deeds were recognised for the first time in 1857, when Queen Victoria instituted the Victoria Cross, awarded to gallant servicemen regardless of class or rank.

Among the first recipients of Britain’s highest military honour were 16 privates from the army, five gunners, two seamen and three boatswains. In 1861 the collective sacrifice was commemorated with the unveiling of a Guards Memorial. Standing opposite the Duke of York’s column, the three bronze guardsmen cast from Russian cannon captured at Sebastopol, symbolised a fundamental shift in values. Our military heroes were no longer dukes, but the “Private Smiths” or “Tommies” of folklore, who fought courageously and won all Britain’s wars in spite of the blunders of his generals. Here was the basis of our national story from the Crimea to the two world wars and the more recent sacrifices which we honour once a year when we stand in silence at the Cenotaph.

*'Crimea: The Last Crusade’, Orlando Figes ( Penguin Books £30) is available for £26 plus £1.25 post and packing from Telegraph Books, call 0844 871 1515 or visit books.telegraph.co.uk The National Archives | Exhibitions | British Battles The Crimean War In Britain, the Crimean War is principally remembered for three reasons: the Charge of the Light Brigade, maladministration in the British army, and Florence Nightingale. However, this war, fought by an alliance of Britain, France, Turkey and Sardinia against Russia, is far more complex. Many wars have been fought on the grounds of the strategic importance of a region; many wars have been fought over religious differences. The Crimean War was the result of both factors. The causes of war During the years leading up to the Crimean War, France, Russia and Britain were all competing for influence in the Middle East, particularly with Turkey. Religious differences were certainly a catalyst in the Crimean War.

Control of access to religious sites in the Holy Land had been a cause of tension between Catholic France and Orthodox Russia for a number of years and in 1853, the conflict came to a head with rioting in Bethlehem, which was then part of the Ottoman empire ruled by Turkey. A number of Orthodox monks were killed during fighting with French monks. Tsar Nicholas I blamed the Turks for these deaths. 'The sick man of Europe' Tsar Nicholas I demanded that the dispute be resolved in favour of the Orthodox Church and sent his representative Menshikov to Constantinople (now Istanbul) with demands on the Porte (the Turkish court). These demands were not met however and Nicholas took the opportunity to mobilise the Russian army against Turkey, which at this point was beginning to lose its grip on its empire. Nicholas referred to Turkey and its weakening empire as the 'sick man of Europe' and historians have argued that he had ambitions of his own in the eastern Mediterranean. The British and French, for their part, were concerned about Russian expansion in the region and the potential threat to their trade routes.

Russia attacks Turkey Initial Russian operations against the Ottoman empire were conducted in Romania with the Russian army crossing the River Pruth into Moldavia on 2 July 1853. In response Turkey declared war on Russia on 5 October. On 4 November, the Russians destroyed the Turkish fleet at Sinope, on Turkey's Black Sea coast, sinking seven frigates and other shipping. The British and French responded quickly. In March 1854, they declared war on Russia expecting, with their naval supremacy, a quick victory. The allied forces were mustered at Varna in Bulgaria and they prepared for an all-out assault on Russian forces in the Crimea to seize the naval base at Sevastopol. Your guide to the Crimean War: facts about why, where and when it happened | History Extra Dr David Murphy, a lecturer at the National University of Ireland Maynooth, brings you some need-to-know facts on why, when and where the Crimean War happened... Q: What was the Crimean War, and when was it fought? A: It was fought by an alliance of Britain, France, Turkey and Sardinia against Russia.

It broke out in October 1853 – although Britain and France only became involved in 1854 – and ended in February 1856. Q: Why did it break out? A: In short, Russia was expanding into the Danube region – Romania today. This was under Turkish control. Therefore, Turkey and Russia went to war in 1853, and the following year Britain and France – fearful of Russian expansion – became involved. Britain and France did not like to see Russia pushing down into the Danube region. They feared Russia would continue pushing down, and eventually come into British India through Afghanistan. Religious tensions also played a part. Russia made an issue of the fact that the holiest sites in Christianity – Jerusalem, Bethlehem etc – were under Turkish control. Q: Where was the war fought? A: It was fought on the Crimean peninsula, and also on the Black Sea. It was supposed to play out in the Danubian Principalities (Moldavia and Walachia), but successful Turkish military action and political pressure from Britain, France and Austria forced Russia to withdraw.

The new target for France and Britain became the Russian naval base at Sevastopol – they wanted to destroy Russian naval power in the Black Sea. There were three main battles: the battle of the Alma on 20 September 1854, the battle of Balaclava on 24 October, and a major Russian attack at the Inkerman, in November. After the battle of the Alma, the city was besieged by British, French, and later Sardinian troops. The Russians came out in October and November and tried to push the allies back. But these were not decisive, and the siege dragged on until September 1855. This was trench warfare, with British and French troops trying to push into certain Russian positions. There were heavy casualties. More than 200,000 were killed. That is for all armies, including the Russians. Q: How did the war come to an end? A: In September 1855 the Russians evacuated Sevastopol following the storming of the vital Malakhov bastion by French troops. In short, Russia gave in, and there began a move towards peace talks.

The Treaty of Paris was signed on 30 March 1856. Q: What were the outcomes of the war? A: As part of the treaty, the Russian naval base was supposed to have been run down, to reduce Russian power in the Black Sea, but it never happened. Britain and France were soon no longer strong enough to make it happen, and there emerged increasing tensions between them. But not all of the problems went away. Turkey and Russia went to war once again in 1877, but this time Britain and France stayed out. Q: There have been suggestions that the Crimean War was one of the first ‘modern’ wars. Is this true? A: Yes, we can recognise a number of trends. There was a level of international alliance – major powers coming together – that we would recognise today. There was also public hysteria to get involved in the war, as in the First World War. Weapons were also more modern, and it prophesied the trench warfare that would later be seen in the American Civil War. Q: And didn’t Florence Nightingale rise to fame during the war? A: Yes.

This was the first war in which you saw letters being sent home, and many of them were published in newspapers. Florence Nightingale heard about the poor medical conditions in the Crimea region, and went there as a civilian to help. She became a big news story. The Crimean War was arguably the first media-driven war. Dr David Murphy is a lecturer at the National University of Ireland Maynooth, specialising in military history. BBC - History - The Crimean War The Crimean War By Andrew Lambert Last updated 2011-03-29 The Crimean War, famed for the 'Charge of the Light Brigade', would fundamentally alter the balance of power in Europe and set the stage for World War One. On this page Print this page The Vienna Settlement At the end of the Napoleonic wars, the Great Powers assembled in Vienna to restore the European state system – a delicate balance between the various major and minor powers that restrained aggression by the mighty, and upheld the rights of the weak. They hoped to build a permanent peace by suppressing revolutionary republics and upholding stable, orderly monarchies.

Despite the divergent aims and ambitions of Russia, Prussia, Austria, Britain and France, a compromise was created, following the brief interruption of Napoleon’s ‘Hundred Days’ and the Battle of Waterloo. Nicholas decided to settle the ‘sick man of Europe’ by carving up the European part of Turkey. After the Treaty of Vienna the great powers enjoyed three decades of peace, years in which industrial, political, economic, social and nationalist pressures were suppressed or deflected. But eventually the Vienna system broke down. The initial problem was the weakness of the Ottoman-Turkish empire, and the opportunities this provided for European interference in support of the Christian populations. The new president of France, Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte, exploited Turkish weakness to secure concessions for the Catholic church in Palestine, hoping to gain conservative support for his planned coup d’etat. When Tsar Nicholas I of Russia retaliated, sending a mission to recover Greek Orthodox rights, the Turks simply gave way to both parties, and hoped the issue would go away. Having established the Second Empire, (Louis) Napoleon III lost interest, but Nicholas decided to settle the ‘sick man of Europe’ once and for all.

Expecting support from Prussia, Austria and Britain, he planned to carve up the European part of Turkey. He was mistaken, neither Britain nor Austria wanted to see Russia controlling the Dardanelles. Sensing an opening for a useful diplomatic success France joined Britain in support of Turkey, which rejected the Tsar’s outrageous terms. Top Road to war Istanbul at sunset © In July 1853, Russia occupied the Danubian Principalities (Moldavia and Walachia) to pressure Istanbul, but this threatened Austria’s economic lifeline - the Danube. For a ‘sick man’, Turkey proved remarkably dextrous and aggressive. Outwitting Austria, Britain and France, who still favoured a diplomatic settlement, they declared war in October 1853 and attacked the Russians. In late November, the Russian Black Sea fleet annihilated a Turkish squadron at Sinope. Britain, anxious to secure her trade with Turkey and access to India by maintaining the Ottoman regime, saw this as an insult and popular opinion made a vigorous response inevitable. Britain and France demanded that Russia evacuate, setting their ultimatum to expire in late March 1854.

The arriviste French empire, for its part, was desperate for military glory and revenge for its defeat at the hands of Russia in 1812. For them, the Ottoman-Turkish empire was incidental. Britain and France demanded that Russia evacuate the Danubian Principalities, setting their ultimatum to expire in late March 1854 - the timing determined by the break up of the Baltic ice fields off Reval where the British hoped to annihilate part of the Russian Baltic fleet. Britain always saw its main instrument for the coercion of Russia to be naval force in the north. After all, Russia’s capital was on the Baltic littoral, close to her other great security concern, Poland. The ultimatum expired and although the harbour at Reval was empty, the powerful Anglo-French fleet nonetheless took command of the Baltic, destroying the key fortress of Bomarsund in August 1854. Top Outbreak of war British troops are cheered as they set off for the Crimea © At the outbreak of war, an allied army of 60,000 was already in Turkey to defend Istanbul.

Austria then joined French and British demands that Russia evacuate the Danubian Principalities, whereupon Nicholas I actually agreed, thereby calling the allies' bluff. This forced the allied army, which had moved up to Varna on the Bulgarian coast, to change its strategy. By early August Austrian troops had created a neutral buffer between the combatants. With a powerful force in position, but ravaged by a cholera epidemic, the allies adopted a British plan to land in the Crimea, assault the naval base at Sevastopol and destroy the fleet and dockyard. The Russians were so frightened by the cold courage of the British troopers, they never again dared face them in the open field. They expected this would take 12 weeks. In the event in took twelve months, three major land battles and countless actions between two large and well equipped armies deeply entrenched just outside the city. The battle of the Alma on 20 September 1854 was the first in which new rifled muskets were used, although only by the British and French. This advantage, in concert with superior skill, initiative and numbers, enabled the allies to drive the Russians out of a strong position north of Sevastopol.

They failed to follow up the blow by attacking Sevastopol directly, largely to avoid a rupture in allied command system, and marched around the city to begin a regular siege from the south. This allowed the Russians time to fortify the city, and stage two flank attacks from their field army, based in the central Crimea. The first, the Battle of Balaclava on 24 October, ended with the legendary British ‘Charge of the Light Brigade’, which was, although misguided, an astonishingly successful operation of war, with relatively light casualties - only 118 killed out of 620. The Russians were so frightened by the cold courage of the British troopers, they never again dared face them in the open field. On 5 November, a major Russian attack at the Inkerman was beaten back with massive losses by isolated British infantry units. A week later the weather broke, sinking transport ships, ruining vital roads and bringing the campaign to a standstill. Over the winter, the allies were joined by the Italian kingdom of Sardinia, which sent a useful army to secure British and French support for the expulsion of Austria from Italy.

Top Treaty of Paris The 'Valley of the Shadow of Death', near the location of the Charge of the Light Brigade © In the spring of 1855, the allies, heavily reinforced with French troops and employing improved logistics, began to batter their way into Sevastopol, and British gunboats cut Russian supply lines across the Sea of Azov. After a last despairing counter attack in August, the Russians were resigned to defeat and evacuated the city following the storming of the vital Malakhov bastion by French troops on 9 September 1855. With that, the allies settled down to destroy the docks and tinker at the margins of the Russian empire. The Russians, for their part, took the Turkish city of Kars and held off Circassian Shi'ite rebels. The Baltic, where so many key events took place, was ignored, because the casualties were minimal. In the Baltic, the allies had demolished the fortress and arsenal of Sweaborg, outside Helsinki, in August, and threatened Cronstadt and St Petersburg.

With France anxious to end the war and harvest the prestige of victory, Britain needed a strategy to ensure he Russians accepted the demilitarisation of the Black Sea and the European settlement of the Turkish question. The massing of naval forces for an attack on Cronstadt-St Petersburg backed up allied demands, and in early 1856 Russia accepted an Austro-French initiative. Further afield, the allies had also attacked Russia in the White Sea and the Pacific, but it was the heroism and blunders of the Crimea, along with the pioneering nursing work of Florence Nightingale and others, that came to dominate the literature. The Baltic, where so many key events took place, was ignored, because the casualties were minimal. At the Treaty of Paris, signed on March 30, 1856, Russia returned southern Bessarabia and the mouth of the Danube to Turkey; Moldavia, Walachia and Serbia were placed under an international rather than a Russian guarantee; the Sultan promised to respect the rights of his Christian subjects; and the Russians were forbidden to maintain a navy on the Black Sea, or refortify Bomarsund.

Top Human cost The Victoria Cross © In military terms, the war was a midway point between Waterloo and World War One. The armies employed Napoleonic uniforms and tactics, but improved weapons. It emphasised the overriding importance of logistics, entrenchments and firepower, anticipating the experience of the American Civil War (1861-1865). In addition it saw the first military use of many innovations, such as armoured warships, the intercontinental electric telegraph, submarine mines and war photography. American experts were quick to visit the Crimean, and published a full report on ‘The Art of War in Europe’ in 1861, just in time to shape their own conflict. The human aspect of the conflict was recognised in Britain by the introduction of the Victoria Cross. The human cost was immense, 25,000 British, 100,000 French and up to a million Russians died, almost all of disease and neglect. The human aspect of the conflict was recognised in Britain by the introduction of the highest decoration for gallantry. Unlike other medals, the Victoria Cross was awarded to officers and men without distinction.

It has long been believed that all Victoria Crosses are made from a captured Russian bronze gun, seized at Sevastopol, but the cannon in question was in fact Chinese. Top Media coverage Roger Fenton's van and assistant © This was the first media war, typified by Times correspondent William Howard Russell, who sent first-hand dispatches from the front line. His reports, often exaggerated or partial, caught the attention of the public, and played a large part in bringing down the prime minister, Lord Aberdeen’s government in January 1855. Roger Fenton’s photographs brought the Crimean battlefields to life, while the electric telegraph enabled news to travel across the continent in hours, not weeks. War became much more immediate - a massive leap forward on the way to our age of instant global coverage by satellite. William Howard Russell refused to become an 'embedded' journalist. Many officers regretted the presence of reporters, regarding them as a source of security leaks, and tried to control the news. But it was without success. To use the modern parlance, Russell refused to become an 'embedded' journalist.

Reports of the suffering of the sick and wounded - and far more were sick than wounded - inspired a number of organisations and individuals to set out for the war zone to minister to the soldiers. Florence Nightingale became national heroine, although her work was essentially hospital management, while Mary Seacole combined a profitable canteen business in the Crimean with combat nursing. By 1856, Britain cared about the health of its soldiers and Florence Nightingale continued to campaign tirelessly to improve their conditions. Top 'Cold War' The British had waged a limited war, relying on naval power, economic blockade, allies and industrial output to secure their aims. In mid-1855, Prime Minister Lord Palmerston had a choice between a limited war and a 'total war' effort to destroy Russia in the field. Total war, of the kind waged during the world wars, would however require widespread social and political reform. He elected instead to limit the war and preserve the existing system. The Ottoman empire, excluded from the Vienna settlement of 1815, was brought into the European political system. Only Britain had the luxury of such choices.

Even so, this conflict was a major success in the 19th century equivalent of the Cold War - the Anglo-Russian rivalry for global empire and influence. Russia would pose no further threat to British interests for close on 30 years. The Crimean War was also a watershed in Western involvement in the Middle East. The Ottoman empire, excluded from the Vienna settlement of 1815, was brought into the European political system. At the same time, the war continued the process of dismantling the Ottoman’s multi-ethnic, multi-faith Eurasian Empire, developing nationalist ambitions in various Ottoman provinces, from Bulgaria to Arabia – ambitions that would exploited in World War One, when new nations and new boundaries would be drawn. The current conflict in Chechnya is another legacy of the much misunderstood Crimean War. Top A new Europe British soldiers go 'over the top' in World War One © More fundamentally, the Crimean War witnessed the collapse of the Vienna Settlement, the system that had enabled Austria, Britain, France, Prussia and Russia to cooperate and maintain peace for three decades. Russia lost the war and with it the myth of Russian might, the legacy of 1812, was shattered.

The other big loser would be neutral Austria. Within a decade it had been expelled from territory held in Germany and Italy and forced to enter into a dual-monarchy with Hungary, formerly a subject province. Multinational empires were on notice - the 19th century was an age of nations. Britain was unable to balance the new system, and the European Great Powers finally returned to war in 1914. The shock of defeat forced Russia to adopt a programme of sweeping internal reforms and industrialisation under Tsar Alexander II, who came to throne in early 1855. Elsewhere, Russia’s defeat facilitated the unification of Germany under Prussian control. While France became the dominant military land power in Europe, this was a temporary situation and one that Prussia (Germany) overturned in 1870-1871. Sardinian intervention ensured the kingdom a central role in the unification of Italy. The Crimean War laid the foundations for two powerful new nation states - Italy and Germany - states that would be united and secured in short, limited conflicts.

The new six-power European system proved less stable than its predecessor, while the expectation that political and diplomatic aims could be satisfied by war led these states to adopt ever closer alliances. Ultimately, Britain was unable to balance the new system and the European Great Powers finally returned to war in 1914, ninety-nine years after the Vienna Settlement. The Crimean War was a decisive turning point in European history, marking the end of the Vienna settlement, and the beginning of a new system.

The Charge by M Adkin (Leo Cooper, 1996) The Crimean War, 1853-1856 by W Baumgart (Arnold, 1999) Britain and the Crimea, 1855-56: Problems of War and Peace by J B Conacher (St Martin's, 1988) Russia’s Crimean War by J S Curtiss (Duke UP, 1979) The Origins of the Crimean War by David M Goldfrank (Longman, 1994) The Crimean War: British Grand Strategy, 1853-56 by Andrew D Lambert (Manchester University Press, 1990) 'I have done my Duty': Florence Nightingale in the Crimean War, 1854-56 by Florence Nightingale, (Manchester University Press, 1987) The Banner of Battle: the Story of the Crimean War by Alan Palmer (St Martin's Press, 1987) The Origins of the Crimean Alliance by A P Saab (Virginia UP, 1977) .

Austria, Great Britain and the Crimean War: The destruction of the European Concert by P W Schroeder (Cornell UP, 1972) Top About the author Andrew Lambert is Laughton professor of naval history at King's College, London. His three-part television series 'War at Sea' was broadcast on the BBC in 2004. Crimean War 1853-1856 : Crimea Crimean War 1853-1856 Russia against an alliance of European powers The Crimean War took place from October 1853 to February 1856. It was a conflict which involved Russia against an alliance of Britain, France, the Ottoman Empire, Sardinia and the Austrian Empire. The Crimean War was fought mostly in the Crimean Peninsula. It began as Russia pursued an expansionist policy as the Ottoman Empire was in decline. At dispute was the rights of the Ottoman Empire’s Orthodox Christian minority in the Holy Land as negotiated in the Peace Treaty of Kϋϛϋk Kaynarca that ended the Russian-Turkish war of 1768.

According to the treaty Russians were given responsibility to guard the interest of the Orthodox Christian minority in the Ottoman Empire, but France, a Roman Catholic country, claimed that responsibility and sovereign authority over the entire Christian population. In order to assert its power over Russia’s expansionist policy, Napoleon III sent his most technological advanced ship, the Charlemagne, to the Black Sea. Ottoman leaders favored the French. Russia responded by invading the Ottoman controlled Danubian principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia, today these territories are part of Moldova and Romania. Russians destroyed the Turkish squadron in the Battle of Sinope in 1853. Austria threatened to get involved in the war if Russia did not withdraw from the Danubian principalities. Russia withdrew and Austria temporarily occupied them. Russia expected Austria to back them since Tsar Nicholas assisted Austria in suppressing the Hungarian Revolution in 1848 but Austria felt threatened by Russia’s expansion. Catherine the Great had already annexed Crimea in 1784 and Nicholas was following her policy of geopolitical domination. France and Britain, the superpowers of the time, feared Russia’s domination of the Black Sea and declared war on Russia in March 1854.

The Black Sea was an important part of the trade routes to India and Egypt therefore their interest in protecting it. In 1855 the Kingdom of Sardinia-Piedmont, modern day Italy, joined the war contributing 10,000 men. The target for the allies was to destroy the Russian Naval base of Sevastopol, Russia’s stronghold in the Black Sea. Major Battles The three major encounters in the Crimean War were the Battle of Balaklava, the Battle of Inkerman and the Battle of Malakhov. The Battle of Balaklava took place in October 1854. Russians attacked the allied base of Balaklava while two British units, the 93rd Highlanders and the Light Cavalry Brigade, held out against the Russians. The Light Brigade was sent on an almost suicidal mission against the heavily armed Russian forces. Of the 700 men, 278 were killed or wounded. Their purpose was to frighten the Russians and to scatter them. The Light Brigade was memorialized by Alfred Lord Tennyson in the famous poem “Charge of the Light Brigade”.

This failed campaign was followed by another bloody encounter, the Battle of Inkerman in November with the allies coming in victorious. In February 1855 the Russians attacked Eupatoria, an allied base, and were defeated. In the meantime, the allies had surrounded Sevastopol while Russians retreated to the Malakhov bastion. French forces assaulted their base causing the collapse of Russian defenses and forcing them to evacuate Sevastopol. The city of Sevastopol fell on allied hands on September 9, 1855. Other minor encounters took place in the Baltic Sea and the Caucasus. The Treaty of Paris Representatives from Russia, Turkey, France, Britain, Sardinia, Austria and Prussia participated in peace negotiations which resulted in the signing of the Treaty of Paris on March 30, 1856, marking the end of the Crimean War. The Treaty of Paris allowed temporary peace in Europe. One of the terms of the agreement and perhaps the most difficult to accept was the proclamation of neutralization of the Black Sea. Russia and Turkey were not allowed military fleets, forts and arsenals on the coast of the Black Sea. The Black Sea straits were closed for military vessels of all nations.

Russia and Turkey were only allowed a limited number of light military ships for patrolling purposes. Under the treaty Russia returned Kars to Turkey in exchange for Sevastopol, Balaclava and other captured cities. The treaty also established freedom of navigation for international merchant ships along the Danube and in the Black Sea. It opened new markets to French, British and Austrian goods damaging Russian exports to its traditional markets. In 1871 at the London Conference, and after a long diplomatic effort, Russia repealed the clause of the Treaty of Paris referring to the neutralization of the Black Sea. Russia claimed the need to protect its southern border and reestablished its Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol.

Question: Britain, France and which other country were the main opponents of Russia in the Crimean War?
Answer: TURKEY