We all know that there are many examples in History where war has started over, what seem to be, rather silly reasons. For the A Level course I am teaching, The Experience of Warfare 1855-1929; I have been researching the Crimean War (1855-1856), and I must say the short term causes of the war seem to be, to me, borderline ridiculous.
Crimea at the time was part of the Ottoman Empire-the Ottoman Empire had control of the ports that led out to the Mediterranean Sea-favourable for trade. This is something that Russia lacked and was envious of-Tsar Nicholas I even alluded to wanting to carve up the Turkish empire, calling it the 'sick man of Europe'. The Tsar saw the Ottoman Empire as weak and could see huge benefits in taking a large proportion of it.
According to historian Christopher Hibbert the Prime Minister, Lord Aberdeen, and the Foreign Secretary, Lord Clarendon did not want war with Russia. But the more powerful Lord Palmerston, Home Secretary and Russophobe, saw Russia's imperialism as a threat to the British Empire, in particular to India. He saw that the areas around the Med needed to remain in friendly hands, that of the Turks, in order to maintain the route the British took to India and continue lucrative trade.
A quarrel in the Holy Land provided a reason for tensions to escalate not only between Turkey and Britain with Russia, but also with France and Russia. The monks of the Roman Catholic Church, supported by France, and the monks of the Orthodox Church, supported by Russia, were arguing over rights and privileges concerning the Church of the Nativity and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. In 1852 the Turks, being the imperial rulers of the Holy Lands, decided that the Roman Catholic monks should have the keys to these important churches-aligning themselves with France.
In 1853 the Tsar sent Prince Menshikov (left) to maintain the privileges of the Orthodox Christians and to insist on Russia's rights to protect the Ottoman Empire's Orthodox Christian subjects.Arguments over the holy places came to a head when the Roman Catholic monks placed their own silver star over the manger in the Church of the Nativity. The Orthodox monks tried to prevent the Catholic monks from doing this and in the struggle some were killed. The Russians thought that the Turkish authorities had connived in the murder of the monks-within days a Russian army was marching towards the Danube in order to protect the Holy Places from Islam. The Russians demanded that Turkish troops withdraw from Christian Montenegro, where they were suppressing a revolt-this demand was rejected. To 'encourage' Turkish cooperation, the Russian government announced that unless Turkey did what they wanted, Russian troops would occupy Moldavia and Wallachia-countries under joint protectorate of Turkey and Russia as they bordered the boundaries of both the Russian and Turkish empires.
Behind the scenes the British ambassador in Turkey, Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, had been encouraging the Sultan to reject the Russian demands. Learning of the Russian threats, Britain and France decided to intervene. On June 15th 1853, a combined British and French fleet was sent to the Dardanelles to show solidarity with Turkey.
A draft compromise, drawn up by Austria, was rejected by the Sultan-perhaps he was buoyed up by the support of Britain and France? In July the Tsar ordered Russian troops into Moldavia and Wallachia. It was still hoped by many that war would not come. But, on 5th October 1853, hoping Britain and France would support Turkey rather than see the Ottoman Empire collapse, the Sultan declared war on Russia.
Weeks later thousands would be slaughtered as the result of strategic mishaps-young men cut down in their prime. All over keys??
Let me know what you think...
Posts
18 comments:
Siobhan.
I think this war was much mre political than religous and the "keys" were probaly used more as an excuse for the already restless Russia to invade Turkey.
This would probably have resulted in a minor power struggle had it not been for the unhelpful interference of Lord Stratford de Redcliffe resulting in an offer of peace being rejected. As it was, the situation escalated (not helped by the relaxed attitude of the Sultan)and the Crimean War was the conclusion.
Siobhan,
very insightful-your thoughts are very relevant. An excellent and interesting comment!
Malcom :)
Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if the keys were the trigger for the Crimean War!
The Sultan of the Ottoman Empire was being WAY too nonchalant, Britain was pulling strings behind the scenes (the meddling Lord Stradford de Redcliffe) and Russia was just being a bully.
In the long run, i think the keys most likely were the reason, because Russia made them the reason, they just wanted an excuse to basically push Turkey into declaring war, as Russia will have no doubt seen Turkey as no threat as at that time they were in no way fit to fight a war.
In my view, it was the actions of the Sultan, and British/Russian delegates, that culminated in the Crimean War.
Malcom-aka Michael,
your answer is a comprehensive one-very astute! You've successfully posted an interesting comment!
Rachel
A war over keys really does seem too petty. The Sultan sided with the Catholic monks because Russia sided with the Orthodox church but this is just a front. Russia wanted to break up the Ottomen empire and the Sultan, who seems arrogant rather than strategic, knew Britain and France would help the weakened Empire.
In my view, Britain's motives were purely selfish, if it wasn't for the overland route and the threat of Russia potentialy attacking parts of their Empire, Britain would not have risked war.
James.
i believe this war had several under-lying causes which were easily triggered by petty events.
Russia was desperate to invade the Ottoman-Empire and would have used any excuse to do so. They believed invading the Crimea would be an extremely influential move in strengthing their Empire; as they would be able to use the port to trade and transport goods all over the world, from the med, which before had not been possible to them.
Britain however, was not prepared to allow Russia to strengthen their already great Empire by gaining this land, as not only would it cut off the land passage Britain currently used to get through to India for trade, but more importantly, it would mean Russia taking a giant leap closer to part of the British Empire. Which Lord Palmerston (home secretary) saw a great threat.
I believe these reasons to be the under lying reasons on why the war broke out. However, what actually sparked the match to start the fire, is much more petty and pathetic.
As soon as the dispute over which religioius group should own the keys to religiois buildings in the Holy Land, Russia saw their chance of war. And the decision of the Sultan to support the Roman Catholics fitted their plan perfectly. Not only did the Sultan provoke the Russians with this decision; but he also decided to ignore (after influence from Lord Stratford de Redcliffe-Birtish Embassador), the demands of the Russian Tsar: to withdraw from christian Montenegro. Knowing he had the support of the French and the British armies, the Sultan then had no problem in declaring war on Russia.
Overall i believe war was always bound to break out in this region at this time. Due to Russia wanting a bigger Empire and Britain wanting to protect their's. All that was needed for war to begin, was a group of little incidents/bad decisions(in this case both), to start the chain reaction of war.
Rachel,
an informed opinion-you've managed to post an interesting comment too. Well done
James,
a comprehensive view on the outbreak of war-you've taken it all into account and have demonstrated your knowledge very well. Excellent stuff-an interesting post.
Daniel.
My personal view is the the entire war was a result of the Russian Empire looking for an excuse to gain more territories for a greater profit and to do so creating an excuse to gain such territories.
However I am not suggesting that this is the only reason. Other Factors such as blatant ignorance on behalf of the Ottoman Empire and its Sultan, leading to an inability to calm Russia's fears about the Ottoman Empire, this attitude however was created by western delegates (such as Lord Stradford de Redcliffe) pulling strings behind the scenes
Overall the war started over a spat of greed, bravado and ignorance.
Ashley
I have to agree with Soibhan and Dan, I think that the war was inevitable. But there are particular things that contributed to this, tension between Catholic monks and Orthodox church didn't help towards the matter. Because Sultan sided with Catholic and The russian's sided with orthodox church. I also think Sultan Made the situation between this conflict because personal i think that Sultan Milked this situation because they knew that the Ottoman Empire would always help them if they was it trouble.
Also i think that Russia wanted more terrority this is why i said the war was inevitable because they had a very strong army and they thought that English and French wouldn't but up much of a resistance.
So overall i think that the war was over Greed, and being provoked.
Paul,
I think that this war was mainly due to Russia's craving for land and to increase their empire.
I also think the Sultan's attitude towards the situation did not help. The Sultan had a relaxed attitude because he relied on Britain and France to come to Turkey's aid in a time of war.
Dean,
I think that the war was started because of Russia's greed, and the keys were just an exuse to force Turkey into declaring war.
the fact the Sultan was so sure that Brittain and France would intervene if a war started did not help, it just made war seem to be the only option.
Laura,
I think that the war could have been avoided if the Sultan had been less relaxed and less confident that Britain would intervene and come to the rescue. Britain was determined to maintain the overland route to their empire in India but the Sultan should not have been so dependent on this in the defence of his own country. If he had been more focussed on making his own defences strong then he could have stopped the invasion or negotiated better and their would have been no need for Britain to help out, and therefore no Crimean War.
Daniel,
a concise answer-exellent post.
Ashley,
interesting ideas...you may have a couple of details mixed up-where you say about the Sultan being helped by the Ottoman empire-I think you mean the Ottoman empire being helped by European countries, as the Sultan was the head of the Ottoman empire.
Well done.
Paul, Dean and Laura,
Comments all excellent-you see now I am running out of new things to say? Probably the same as you who had to follow so many other comments! Laura, I like your new angle on things when you talk of Turkey building up their own defences. Well done all of you.
Mitchell
I think the war over keys was mainly over Russias greed, it seems like the Russians just wanted more land, the keys were more of an excuse to start the war. The sultan gave the priests the key, he probably would have known it would cause major conteversy. I think he considered this, and went ahead anyway and relyed on Britain and France for help.
I love your blog! As for the keys remark, who knows. Europe and the Middle East was a powder keg back then. Any movement would set off a war. As anonymous said, world leaders look for the littlest of reasons to go to war.
http://historywasneverlikethat.blogspot.com/
Post a Comment