Siege of Port Arthur as a black page in Japanese military history

58
The defeat of the Russian army in the war with Japan in 1904-1905, the shameful world concluded at its end, the first Russian revolution and the anti-patriotic sentiments that reigned in the then Russian society left without attention the war itself, in particular, one of its most important and heroic episodes - the defense of Port Arthur.

All story That distant, now already forgotten war still raises many questions, doubts and disputes among researchers, and just lovers of military history.

From various sources it is known that Port Arthur did not have time to properly prepare for defense, the main reason for the current situation is associated with the lack of necessary state funding, at that time, the Russian army was plagued by the same funding problems as it is now.

Siege of Port Arthur as a black page in Japanese military history


According to the plans of the military department, it was planned to fully complete all construction work and other measures to bring the fortress to full alert only for the 1909 year, but the Tsarist Ministry of Finance began to allocate money for construction work only with the start of the war, only managed to allocate about 4,5 million from 15 Millions of planned, which was approximately less than one third of the required.

As a result, by the beginning of hostilities in the fortress only a little more than half of all the work was done, with the greatest attention being paid to the coastal front, that is, they were going to defend themselves from the enemy mainly from the sea, not from the land area.

Another miscalculation in the construction of Port Arthur is the fact that its defensive line adjoined too closely to the city and harbor, which made it possible for the Japanese to subsequently bombard most of the fortress from almost the very first days of the siege, including the sea harbor itself with warships fleet.

It turned out that in the military engineering respect, Port Arthur simply did not fit in its engineering parameters with the standards of the then modern fortress like Verdun or Brest-Litovsk, the so-called classical fortresses. Port Arthur was not a fortress, but most likely was a complex of various defensive positions and structures. The Russian military command, well aware of all the weak points of the defense of Port Arthur, built the entire system of the main fortifications, relying on the rather favorable relief of the terrain.

Most of the fortifications were mainly built on commanding heights, opposite which to the north of the fortress there was a relatively flat space, which, as it approached the fortifications, turned into open, sloping terrain, the whole of this area was turned by the defenders into a zone of solid artillery and rifle fire . The rear slopes of the heights served as a good cover for people and guns.

With the outbreak of hostilities, the erection of fortifications accelerated, work was carried out day and night. Echelons with troops, artillery, machine guns and ammunition continued to arrive at the fortress until the very last moment. But to fully complete all the engineering and construction work for five months, which were calculated for five years, was not possible.

It is also known from various sources that as early as July 1904 had only 646 artillery guns and 62 machine guns in service with the port-arthur fortress, out of this total number of 514 guns and 47 machine guns, it was installed on the land front.




Shells were available at a rate of about 400 for each weapon. For the carriage of goods, materiel, combat supplies, food, etc. In the fortress there were over 4,5 thousand horses.

By the beginning of the defensive battles, the garrison of Port Arthur was provided with food, including flour and sugar for half a year, meat and canned food for one month only. Then I had to be content with horse meat, there was little green supply, which is why during the siege there were many cases of scurvy in the garrison.

The total strength of the garrison of the fortress consisted of 41 780 soldiers and 665 officers. In addition, there were 6 battleships, 6 cruisers, 2 mine cruisers, 4 gunboats, 19 destroyers and Amur mine vehicles in Port Arthur Bay.

The personnel on the squadron and the Kwantung naval crew numbered up to 8 thousand people, it was a truly well-trained, cadre army consisting of conscripts, whose average age was no older than 30, therefore the fighters from the garrison of Port Arthur, in contrast to the soldiers of the Kuropatkin army, which consisted in the majority of the vaults, they fought professionally, with minimal personal losses, while causing maximum damage to the enemy.

The defense of Port Arthur was headed by General A. M. Stoessel, to which all ground and engineering troops, as well as the serf artillery, were subordinate. However, what was interesting to note was that the fleet, which was based in the bay of the fortress, was subordinate not to Stoessel, but to the commander-in-chief, who was in Manchuria and could not really control them.



Even in the absence of a sufficient number of long-term, well-fortified structures, Port Arthur met the enemy with organized defense and, as subsequent events showed, became a real grave for the Japanese land army.

The Japanese sought to seize Port Arthur, primarily in order to destroy it as the main base of the Russian military fleet, that is, the ground army acted in the interests of the fleet, the events of the war showed that the Japanese fleet fought much better than the ground forces. For the siege and capture of Port Arthur, the Japanese formed a special 3 Army, which consisted of three infantry divisions, two reserve brigades, one field artillery brigade, two naval artillery detachments and a reserve sapper battalion.

At the initial stage of the siege, not counting the special forces, Commander General Nogi had under his command over 50 thousands of bayonets, more than 400 guns, of which 198 barrels of special siege artillery.

Subsequently, the siege group of Japanese troops was constantly growing and soon reached about 100 thousand soldiers, and this is not counting the reserves, with which the Japanese kept Port Arthur to 200 thousand soldiers and officers.

The fighting for Port Arthur began in the first half of May 1904. on the distant approaches to it, from the so-called battle of Panshan. This place was called the Jinzhou Isthmus, which is about 4 km wide (the narrowest point of the Kwantung Peninsula) and defended by the reinforced 5 th East Siberian rifle regiment of the 4 East Siberian rifle division, which only numbered about 3 thousands of 800 people in 65 facilities and XIUMX forces of XIUMX, and only about 10 thousands of 13 people in 2 units and XIUMX forces, which only numbered about 35 thousands of 216 people in 48 units and XIUMX forces, defended them all in total around 8 thousands of XNUMX people in XNUMX units, and XIUMX forces, XIUMX XNUMX thousands of XNUMX people in XNUMX units, XIUMX, XIUMX, XIUMX, XIUMX XIUMX XIUMX XIUMX XIUMX XIUMX XIUMX XIUMX Infantry Division, . During XNUMX hours, the regiment opposed parts of the Japanese XNUMX Army, about XNUMX thousands of people with XNUMX guns and XNUMX machine guns. The Japanese initially acted on the pattern, tried to storm the heights in the forehead, literally walked over the corpses of their dead soldiers, the XNUMX successive attacks were repulsed by the Russians without much difficulty.




In the end, not having received reinforcements, the regiment was forced to retreat from its tactically advantageous and well-fortified position. As a result of the first battle, the forces of Lieutenant General Yasukaty Oka lost 4,5 thousand of 30 thousand people who participated in the battle. The loss of Russian troops amounted to about 1 thousands of people. This was just the beginning, the main victims of the siege were waiting for the Japanese to come.

Next, the storming of the Port-Arthur’s fortifications was carried out by the Japanese in strict order, as if on a schedule, for example
The assault, carried out between 19 and 24 in August, ended in a complete defeat for the Japanese, one of the reasons for which was the excellent accuracy of night artillery of the Russian artillery. The result of the assault - in two weeks of continuous fighting, the Japanese only laid down more than 15 thousands of their soldiers, some units, and even whole units of General Legs, simply ceased to exist or were more than finished, Russian troops also suffered serious losses of about 3 thousand people.

In the period from 15 to 30 in September, General Legs delivered his next massive massive frontal attack, this time successfully. The Japanese even managed to capture some minor positions, but the key point of the entire defense system - the height of 203 - repelled all attacks. The strike columns were swept down again and again until the slopes of the hill were covered with the corpses of Japanese soldiers. In this battle, the Japanese lost 7 thousands of 500 chelochek, Russian - about 1 thousands of 500 people.

Particularly well and effectively in repelling all these Japanese assaults were the units of Russian machine-gunners, queue after queue they mowed countless Japanese chains, sending them dozens, and even hundreds to heaven to their Japanese gods, the trunks red-hot to red and did not have time to cool down from the intense exploitation, machine guns were breaking down, podnoschiki barely had time to bring cartridges with ribbons, there was a roar of battle around, the enemy’s corpses lay in bulk, the Japanese soldiers, like zombies, continued to go forward, and in front of them only died be

In November, the so-called “fifth general” offensive of the Japanese took place, and again it was repulsed by the Russians in all positions and cost the Japanese more than 12 thousands of lives.

And only finally, on November 22 (December 5), did the enemy completely occupy the height of 203 (Mount High). The total losses of the Japanese during the assault on the mountain amounted to about 10 thousand people. Russian troops lost 5tys. soldiers and officers, these were the largest single losses of the Russian troops in the entire defense of Port Arthur.




From the captured mountain, the Japanese began to adjust the fire of heavy siege weapons at Russian ships. Soon most of the ships of the 1 Pacific squadron were sunk in the roads of Port Arthur. The fate of the fortress was sealed. The failure of the constant assaults, as well as the entire siege of the fortress as a whole, dramatically complicated the situation in the siege army of the Japanese. In many formations, the “limit of so-called stability” was surpassed, with the result that the morale of the Japanese forces dropped sharply.

There have been cases of disobedience and even an attempt to revolt, and this is among the always disciplined Japanese, who have their own philosophy of life and death, especially from all nations, who, as experts say, have never been afraid to die for their emperor, everything is not so clear - they were afraid and how feared. Interestingly, the behavior of the Japanese high command itself, which threw tens of thousands of its soldiers directly, as if to slaughter them, can be directly said by the Japanese literally with the corpses of their soldiers deposed defenders of the fortress.

According to various reports, it is known that during the siege of Port Arthur, the Japanese army lost thousands of its soldiers killed, wounded, and died from wounds and diseases from 90 to 110. These were truly terrifying losses. Russian losses amounted to all 15 thousand dead, of which the direct military losses were 7800 soldiers and officers.

December 23 1904 (January 5 1905) was made a surrender, according to which the garrison consisting of 23 thousand people (counting with the sick) surrendered to prisoners of war with all stocks of military equipment.



In those days, knightly traditions still operated and the Japanese allowed the Russian officers to return to their homeland. To those who agreed to give the word of honor that they would not participate in hostilities.

The question still remains controversial: could Port Arthur continue to continue resistance, or were the resistance forces of the garrison really completely exhausted? Who is the head of the garrison, General Stoessel - the criminal who surrendered the fortress to the enemy or hostage to the circumstances. Some researchers argue that further resistance of the defenders of the fortress was unpromising, completely blocked from the sea and land, Port Arthur was doomed, and Stoessel’s actions as commander were justified, they saved the surviving defenders of the fortress. There is another opinion that Stoessel has betrayed, since he surrendered all the artillery to the Japanese, which is no less than 500 units. artillery pieces of various calibers and systems, large stocks of provisions and other material values, which at the time of the surrender remained in the fortress.

Still, Stoessel still appeared before a military tribunal, which sentenced him to death for surrendering a fortress and a port. The court found that during the entire period of defense, Stoessel did not direct the actions of the garrison to defend the fortress, but, on the contrary, consciously prepared it for surrender. However, the sentence was later replaced with a 10-year imprisonment, but in May 1909, he was forgiven by the king. The society of Russia at that time was not at all interested in the details of the war that had been lost, then the students and female students were more interested in bombers and revolutionaries of various stripes, and the heroic defense of Port Arthur, already on the other side of the world, the war with some Japanese was all taken society rather as exotic and nothing more.





58 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    18 September 2012 08: 26
    The Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 is one of the most shameful pages of the military history of Russia. Despite the heroism of soldiers, sailors, the vast majority of officers, the completely idiotic army and navy command managed to lose the war.
    1. Brother Sarych
      -5
      18 September 2012 09: 36
      As for the most infamous page, you definitely got excited ...
      It was impossible to win the war there ...
      1. Redpartyzan
        0
        18 September 2012 10: 17
        The outcome of the campaign was decided by tsushima and only then our command showed itself from the worst side. Again, against the background of the heroism of Russian soldiers. And technical superiority was on the side of the Japanese, their guns were superior to ours in range.
        1. Nubia2
          -2
          18 September 2012 12: 46
          Tsushima was the last touch of an already lost war ..
          she didn’t decide anything.
          And there was no technical superiority on the Japanese side.
        2. 0
          18 September 2012 13: 11
          Quote: Redpartyzan

          Tsushima decided the outcome of the campaign


          You're not right. The fate of the war at sea was decided earlier in the battle of Shantung. And on land ... and on land from the appointment of morons to the posts of commanders.
        3. 0
          30 September 2015 12: 00
          Even before Tsushima, the surrender of Port Arthur determined the outcome of the war. The Tsushima defeat became inevitable in advance.

          The range of the guns were on the same level. But the training of artillerymen was far behind: the Japanese knew how to hit long ranges, but we didn’t, that's the whole reason.
      2. +3
        18 September 2012 11: 00
        Quote: Brother Sarich
        As for the most infamous page, you definitely got excited ...
        It was impossible to win the war there ...


        I do not agree with you.
        With competent leadership, that war could at least not be lost.
        But given what the leadership was .... happened, what happened.
        1. Pashan
          0
          18 September 2012 13: 01
          I agree with Sakhalin!
          Remember to start a couple of battles (I can’t remember yet) when an incompetent command issued an order to retreat
      3. beech
        0
        18 September 2012 14: 53
        if you are so sure of this, then read the book Port Arthur, wrote A. Stepanov !!
        1. 0
          19 September 2012 09: 12
          By the way, gorgeous book, I reread it with pleasure hi
        2. borisst64
          0
          25 September 2012 11: 41
          The book is beautiful, but I think it’s wrong to judge it as a source of historical facts. The same thing about the books of Yan, they form the history of the Tatar-Mongol yoke. First of all, these are works of art.
      4. Director
        0
        18 September 2012 16: 29
        why not possible ???, there was no purpose. Well, it was possible to hold the position.
      5. Brother Sarych
        0
        18 September 2012 17: 25
        And who put the minuses?
        Of course, it is impossible to wage a war with a sufficiently strong adversary in the absence of stable supply lines - or will someone argue with this? Even the railway was not built in the Far East (the existing road was torn at Baikal)! Drive the fleet almost around the world in the absence of intermediate bases along the route ...
        You cannot go far on heroism alone ...
      6. 0
        30 September 2015 11: 58
        Given the balance of power that existed between RI and Japan then, it was VERY difficult for Russia to lose this war - with normal behavior, of course.

        It was necessary to prepare for the war when it became expected, i.e. for several years before her.
        It was necessary to gather strength, and not consider opponents weaklings, fools.
        It was necessary to act actively and wisely, and not be afraid to tear bosses from their seats.

        The tsarist government began (!) To take measures to improve railway communications with the Far East only towards the end (!) Of 1904, when Port Arthur lived out the last days until surrender.

        And then, of course, the remoteness of the theater from the metropolis, aha-aha, is to blame for everything. The British many times conducted successful military operations on the theater of war much more remote from their metropolis, and nothing - but something always hinders a bad dancer.
    2. beech
      +1
      18 September 2012 14: 55
      they lost when the basis of the command was made up by fools, traitors and notebook generals !!! If Kondratenko had all the power in the port of Arthur, then the war would have ended differently !!
      You can draw a parallel from that time !! 40 rounds of ammunition were spent on the soldier’s training, the command was mostly mediocre !! obsolete equipment !!!
      Now at the post of Serdyukov, the woman is somehow incomprehensible and Makarov !!! 3 dibila is power !!
    3. beech
      0
      18 September 2012 15: 24
      The Russian military command was well aware of all the weak points of defense of Port Arthur.
      oh well, if not for R.I.Kondratenko and the Russian soldier !!! everything would end much faster and sadder !!!
    4. +2
      18 September 2012 17: 15
      Sakhalininsk,
      Russia actually fought with the Anglo-Saxons, the hands of the Japanese. Who paid for and built a modern fleet for the Japanese? Who supplied the modern artillery? Whose instructors created the army? Who detained the Rozhdestvensky squadron by all means, and who delivered low-quality shells to the fleet? And who unleashed the "revolution", precisely at the time when the best army units were being prepared for the transfer from the West?
      Of course, there was also mediocre command and heroism. But everything worked for Japan and against Russia. And the betrayal of the prime minister, who "offered" Nicholas II to give Sakhalin to the Japanese ...
      1. 0
        30 September 2015 12: 04
        The revolution of 1905 It was provoked by military failures, and not vice versa. Take a look at the calendar and stop putting the cart before the horse.
        But the Japanese managed to take Sakhalin after Tsushima, fully, and half returned to Russia under the terms of the peace treaty. They wanted to take everything.
  2. 0
    18 September 2012 08: 36
    Caps could not be thrown. Port, the Japanese were more needed.
    1. mongoose
      +8
      18 September 2012 09: 07
      it's not about the hats, the fleet, God bless him, the fate was decided on the shore. the Japanese literally showered our trenches with their corpses and moved forward (the rub of the Russian army is not comparable with the Japanese). But the main reason for the defeat is the beginning of the "marches of millions" about the paid Angian money and other riots of the "socialists". The transib was not finished yet, the logistics suffered, and it is a pity that the "millionaires" were not hung up right away.
      1. +7
        18 September 2012 09: 30
        Quote: mongoose
        But the main reason for the defeat is the beginning "marches of millions"
        Port Arthur was commissioned on December 20, 1904, and the first "marches of millions" began on December 27, 1904.
        The war was lost due to general embezzlement of money, the money did not go to the army, but to stolen officials and oligarchs.
        1. Sokol peruna
          +1
          18 September 2012 12: 20
          mongoose
          the fleet, God be with him, fate was decided on the shore. The Japanese literally cast our trenches with their bodies

          How to cut the other way around. The outcome of the Russo-Japanese was decided at sea. Having blocked the first Pacific squadron in Port Arthur, the Japanese fleet was able to practically freely (except for the individual exits of the cruisers of the Vladivostok detachment) transport troops, weapons and military materials to the mainland in the required quantities. And the final point of the war was not the land battle near Mukden, but Tsushima.
          In general, the defeat in the Russian-Japanese war is only the finale in the mediocre Russian Far Eastern diplomacy. For 10 years, Russia has managed to incite not only the Japanese against itself, but also China, which was, after the Sino-Japanese War, pro-Russian oriented, as well as Korea.
          1. mongoose
            0
            19 September 2012 09: 21
            the war went beyond the islands? or a piece of the mainland?
          2. +2
            4 January 2014 12: 11
            Quote: Sokol Peruna
            in general, the defeat in the Russo-Japanese War is only the finale in the mediocre Russian Far Eastern diplomacy.
            This is really so. With that blissfully disregard for the arrangement of the colony, one can only be surprised that they managed to at least somehow resist. And when the thunder struck, it was too late to be baptized.
        2. mongoose
          +1
          19 September 2012 09: 20
          Arthur surrendered is not the end of the war, the Red Army surrendered half of the European part of the country, and won nothing, the Russian army retreated along the Manzhuria for 500 kilometers without ever being surrounded. so that the situation with the fleet was just a nuisance, the supply line was trans-Siberian, the Japanese needed manzhuria, which could be easily recaptured by infantry, besides, Japan fought on debt, and could not fight for a long time, Russia could, but the main problem was the "socialist" propaganda of defeatists, the atrocities of the SMERSH during the Second World War come from the analysis of the situation in the Russian-Japanese and the Second Patriotic (Great) War
      2. beech
        +1
        18 September 2012 15: 20
        you don’t have to blame everything on the revolution, the peasant, Vasya, Kolya did not pay any England, the people were dissatisfied with life, few taxes were torn off their skin and they lost the war because of deer !! in general, tsarism completely and irrevocably rotted !!
        1. mongoose
          +1
          19 September 2012 09: 22
          the word is what the revolution came up with; it’s just a betrayal of the motherland carried out in the form of a military rebellion.
      3. 0
        18 September 2012 18: 57
        Sir, you are wrong! fool The fleet, and this was the first goal of Japan in that war, they, unlike you, perfectly understood and understand now what it means to switch communications !!! hi
        1. mongoose
          +1
          19 September 2012 09: 23
          and transib do you think is not communication? Or can it be blocked by the Japanese fleet? laughing
          1. klew
            0
            20 September 2012 07: 51
            mongoose,
            There was no transiba at that time, and the fastest way to deliver anything from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok was by sea - 7 months around Europe, Africa, India, China.
            1. GP
              GP
              +1
              21 September 2012 17: 41
              Quote: Klew
              There was no transiba at that time, and the fastest way to deliver anything from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok was by sea - 7 months around Europe, Africa, India, China


              It was the CER. The story of which is quite interesting and entertaining.
            2. +2
              4 January 2014 12: 26
              Quote: Klew
              There was no transiba at that time, and the fastest way to deliver anything from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok was by sea - 7 months around Europe, Africa, India, China.
              And who prevented the construction of railways, as Bismarck taught? Or did Nikolai and his comrades think that England would favorably look at how Russia was slowly gaining points in her ancestral estate? I have not yet met a more shortsighted policy.
  3. +6
    18 September 2012 08: 36
    Very informative! As a child, I read a book about the Russian-Japanese war "Port Arthur" so there the author calls poor funding, inept leadership of some command elements, theft as the reason for the loss !!! And the Russian people again showed themselves from the best heroic side!
  4. +3
    18 September 2012 08: 41
    about the article .. this is not an article. a whole historical study, the presence of rare personnel was pleased .... about the war itself ... the Sakhalin simply got ahead of my thoughts .. when they command .. I won’t continue, and everything is clear
  5. +4
    18 September 2012 08: 59
    Where there is heroism of soldiers, sailors and officers - ordinary Russian soldiers, there can be no talk of the shame of the entire military company. The Russian-Japanese war was lost by the system, not by the warrior.
    1. mongoose
      -5
      18 September 2012 09: 08
      it was the system that turned out to be not ready for the betrayal of some of its people, blinded by hatred of the Way ... to Tsarism and did everything that Russia would lose in that war, and they succeeded, I want to remind you about the sabotage of the "socialists" in Port Arthur, obviously paid from over the hill
      1. Brother Sarych
        +8
        18 September 2012 09: 45
        A bad dancer gets in the way of eggs, “bad government” is “an internal enemy, wands (excuse me, quote!), Sicilists and scubents”, but “good government” does not and cannot have a mass opposition movement ...
        So, no funding of the opposition from outside has yet harmed the "good government" ...
        It was the rotten system of tsarism that gave impetus to the development of the revolutionary movement, otherwise there would have been no mass with any support from abroad!
        1. mongoose
          +1
          19 September 2012 09: 24
          storyteller, but we can’t dispute the fact of Treason to the Homeland; everything else is just an excuse
    2. 0
      30 September 2015 12: 07
      well, the Tsar and Tsarism shamefully lost the REV, and not the Russian soldiers and sailors. Shameful from this loss ceased to be?
  6. +2
    18 September 2012 11: 02
    I recommend reading the books by A. Stepanov "Port Arthur" and "The Zvonarev Family". Fiction, of course, is present, politicized, but the picture of what is happening is drawn truthfully. There is also Daletsky's On the Hills of Manchuria. Read it, you won't regret it.
    1. Simon bolivar
      +2
      18 September 2012 11: 47
      Everyone read, do not worry.
  7. +2
    18 September 2012 12: 26
    books are good but apalitic - they waged the war mainly due to manning the units with officers, according to the principle, God bless us (link) - the soldiers are mostly peasants. The illiterate fortress was understaffed, not trained. At the expense of funding, the author is a little disingenuous - money stood out everything and in time - simply by direct order of Witte, they set about to urgently erect the Dalniy at the expense of the fortress
    1. mongoose
      +1
      19 September 2012 09: 25
      Yeah, but what are the "strikes" at the enterprises producing ammunition during the war called? can you imagine this in the Second World War? and what would be done to the strikers?
  8. +2
    18 September 2012 12: 41
    By the way, Port Arthur presented the first progenitor of the regular Jewish army to the Jewish people, the full St. George cavalier Joseph Trumpeldor, who created the first Jewish personnel in the British Army during the WWII. It’s interesting how fate went to BV after his school of war in the Far East.
  9. Vitmir
    -1
    18 September 2012 12: 42
    Unfortunately, the siege of Port Arthur is a black page in Russian military history.
    1. +4
      18 September 2012 20: 11
      oh oh !!!!!! you think that 10 months to restrain the whole army and navy, inflict losses, and serious is a black page
      1. Vitmir
        0
        19 September 2012 13: 42
        Of course, a black page, because despite real examples of heroism and self-sacrifice of individual Russian officers, soldiers and sailors, the result of the surrender of Port Arthur was the defeat of the country in the war, the loss of a naval base, the death of the Russian Pacific Fleet, which actually sat in the harbor after the death of Makarov (with the exception of the Vladivostok detachment cruisers) - it is not surprising that Russian sailors were called "samotopes".
        Do you think that surrendering the base to the enemy is a victory?
        1. 0
          8 October 2012 16: 33
          Vitmir,
          It is strange that for some reason no one considers the defense of Sevastopol in the Crimean company as shameful, but they consider the defense of Port Arthur ... I never understood. Port Arthur is one of the brightest pages of the valor, courage, stamina and ingenuity of the Russian troops.
          1. 0
            24 March 2015 12: 27
            It is not surprising - in fact, to discredit the government of Russia of that time, a massive company went to the media of that time with the money of subversive anti-Russian organizations, which was then picked up by the Bolsheviks. And the fool understands that behind the army of Japan, the soldier of which was used as cannon fodder, there were two powerful powers Great Britain and the USA and fought with Russia, respectively, with the hands of the Japanese. The Russian Far Eastern army group had little chance against this force, but the Russian army got out of position with dignity and honor, having done much more than any other army in the world could have done!
            1. 0
              30 September 2015 12: 09
              To discredit the tsarist government, for no money it was impossible to do more than the government itself did.
        2. 0
          24 March 2015 11: 12
          Who called? with genetic abnormalities like Lenin? wink
  10. +1
    18 September 2012 13: 34
    If I am not mistaken, instead of good guns for the Russian army, a palace was built for one ball of Yarina.
    And there was also a criminal boss with the French Schneider.
    1. 0
      18 September 2012 20: 09
      there was such an episode! but this, in my opinion, relates to World War I) by the way, amusing, I’ll tell you the story
    2. mongoose
      0
      19 September 2012 09: 26
      n-dya, do you have something against ballet?
  11. +2
    18 September 2012 14: 35
    the history and sons of the fighters of Port Arthur put everyone in their place, and the Japanese, and ..... the Chinese. Now the Japanese are begging for their islands, and the Russians are powerfully and condescendingly allowing them to deeply resent the visit of the first persons of Russia to the Kuril Islands laughing and China is caring for Russian graves in gratitude for the liberation from Yap
  12. SlavakharitonoV
    0
    18 September 2012 15: 09
    Stessel from *** to took and surrendered the fortress. Sorry, but in other words this can’t be described.
  13. d5v5s5
    0
    18 September 2012 16: 10
    If you are interested, I advise you to read Stepanov (I don’t remember the initials) "Port Arthur", a very entertaining book, written after 30 years from these events.
  14. Brother Sarych
    0
    18 September 2012 17: 28
    It seemed that everything here was mainly based only on Stepanov’s book, and many other authors wrote about Russian-Japanese, this is one of the most detailed wars in history ...
  15. Gad
    0
    18 September 2012 18: 51
    Port Arthur cannot be compared to land fortresses; they have different specifics. After the Crimean War, the outstanding engineer Totleben built a naval fortress in Kerch to protect the Kerch Strait. It exists and is still thought out in it - hidden coastal batteries, powerful protection from land, a deep concrete ditch where space is shot by flanking fire, underground passages that allow you to transfer reinforcements from one part of the fortress to another without being exposed to enemy fire. And the most amazing thing is that from the outside it seems that this is just a big hill and only once inside you understand the grandeur of the building. Even the Germans could not destroy it during the Second World War and now they conduct excursions there. By the way, in tsarist Russia it was considered the second most powerful after Kronstadt. But Port Arthur is not a fortress but a breed on it, and he kept himself at the expense of the courage and heroism of Russian soldiers and sailors.
    1. mongoose
      0
      19 September 2012 09: 28
      they simply did not have time to build it,
  16. 0
    18 September 2012 19: 07
    The stupidity of the leadership, starting with the "All-Russian Empire", who was never able to appoint ONE RESPONSIBLE general to lead the Russian troops, intrigues and elbowing of top-level commanders in the Far East led to a shameful defeat. It was not in vain that Lenin wrote about this, and about the rottenness of the autocracy, and about the stupidity of the highest echelons of power, unable to lead. And the heroism of the Russian soldiers and sailors is ABOVE ANYONE. One example: according to the recollections of the Japanese going in December 1941 (!!!) with a squadron to spread Pearl Harbor, the pilots (and these are officers of the descendants of samurai families) sang a ballad to raise their spirits: "About a warrior who sacrifices himself." This ballad was created in memory of those killed in the Russian bayonet counterattacks near Port Arthur. This is what horror it was necessary to bring into the "gentle samurai souls", so that after 36 years they sang about it !!! Then, we really made them horror again after 4 years in 1945, having won back what was given by the tsar's mediocrities, in spite of the heroism of ordinary soldiers and sailors.
    1. mongoose
      0
      19 September 2012 09: 29
      don’t read the Bonch-Bruevich tales, but to divide the Russians into classes, that is, soldiers and sailors, are all heroes, and officers, scoundrels and scoundrels, came up with Jews to eat tasty and sweet sleep
  17. bask
    0
    18 September 2012 19: 15
    In Port Arthur, as always, 100% heroism of soldiers and officers. And the stupidity of the governing bodies of the authorities. The headquarters of the Germans in command posts. They then migrated to the Kaiser army, and some also served as Hitler. The complete lack of intelligence and counterintelligence. The officials are irresponsible. Today’s nothing can be reminded. One Admiral Makarov and several officers could not change the situation. But it was utterly fortunate in the eyes of the soldiers to defeat the Japanese in Port Arthur! In 1945.
    1. Brother Sarych
      0
      18 September 2012 21: 15
      Who transferred to the German Kaiser army? Is it possible in more detail ...
  18. -1
    18 September 2012 20: 03
    In the Second World War, the Japanese did not hesitate to attack the Union, because they understood that there would be no easy victory, and this concept did not come after Halhingol ... but mainly from the experience of the Russo-Japanese War, because it was given to them dearly, and because it was given to them like that in the fight for a land alien to the Russians .......... so maybe this war is for the most part ..... and the defeat for Russia did not end ................. ..
    1. Nubia2
      -1
      19 September 2012 06: 51
      They did not set such goals for themselves.
      And with might and main "worked" in the Pacific Ocean.
    2. mongoose
      0
      19 September 2012 09: 36
      unfortunately, still a defeat, the main defeat is that manzuria is a natural continuation of the Far East, only there is profitable agricultural production and quite rich deposits of natural resources, precisely because of Treason to the Motherland, all possible socialists, the modern Far East is a kind of dead end, where cost-effective to carry food from Siberia. not to mention the European part of Russia.
      Russia generally climbed into Manjuria because of the need for ice-free ports, if they could stay there, they would get huge preferences in the local markets.
    3. 0
      30 September 2015 12: 14
      Where did you get the Japanese opinion? According to paraphrases from newspapers of the Russian Empire? ;-)

      If we take Japanese sources, then the opposite is true. According to the experience of the RJV, the Japanese considered the Russians a weak adversary; sometimes brave, but stupid, inept, nerdy. They were very proud that they defeated a power that was considered great. Until Khalkhin Gol, this conviction was held on.
  19. Zmitcer
    +1
    18 September 2012 20: 05
    defense of Port Arthur, one of many examples of the heroism of a Russian soldier. In this assessment, complete unanimity. Hooray!
  20. +1
    18 September 2012 20: 06
    how much negativity is that !!!!! what are you gentlemen! the author is not talking about the whole war, but only about the defense of Arthur., where, by the way, the Japanese are great bursting. Indeed, during the 4 assaults, the Japanese army lost about 100 soldiers, and the commander wanted to do seppoku, but they didn’t. And now the question, name the battle, except for Tsushima, of course, where our army suffered a complete defeat ??? Honestly, I don’t know such a battle. And about Makarov ...... Sorry! But I will express my opinion, even Makarov did not help, I think. Our fleet, by the way, did nothing when the army of General Feet, which had stormed Arthur, landed for the assault. Like this.
    1. klew
      0
      20 September 2012 08: 04
      wown,
      Rzhev-Vyazemsky offensive operation for example.
      As for the fleet ... it’s hard to disrupt landings when there is nothing combat-capable in submission.
    2. 0
      30 September 2015 12: 22
      Where did you get 100 thousand losses for 4 assaults? Especially when you consider that the entire Japanese Legs group numbered up to 100 thousand people, after all the assaults, she took Port Arthur and continued the successful offensive? ;-)

      And nothing so that the Russian grouping in Port Arthur, including the fleet, was lost ALL, completely, and the total losses on our side came out noticeably more than the Japanese, if you count them by one measure, not "forgetting" the wounded, prisoners and those who died from diseases ?

      "question, name the battle, besides Tsushima, of course, where did our army suffer a complete defeat?"
      And can you name at least one battle in the REV where the Russians would have won? We will not speculate on what is considered a complete defeat, and what is incomplete, but in all the major battles of the REV the Japanese won. IN ALL.

      And if you personally don’t know something, then this is an indicator of your knowledge, and not even that.
  21. 0
    8 October 2012 16: 43
    Speaking about the defense of Port Arthur, I suggest recalling the history of another Far Eastern fortress - Qingdao. This is where the sample order. A single commander, fully completed by the 1914 year (surprisingly, right?) Defense work. Moreover, everything was done taking into account the existing experience of the Russian-Japanese war. Punctuality, characteristic only of the Germans and ... surrender a couple of months after the start of the war, and the Japanese army did not even break through the fortifications, only prepared to break through them ...
    Here, and here they say "shameful company - shameful company." No I do not agree. I cannot name a shameful company in which such massive heroism of ordinary Russian soldiers, sailors and officers was shown. But the surrender of the fortress - I think it was a betrayal, Port Arthur could still hold out for about a month, diverting significant enemy forces to itself. The forces that were released just in time to strike hard at Mukden.
    1. 0
      30 September 2015 12: 25
      Port Arthur held on for a long time, but this time was lost pointlessly. The Russian army did not commit any active actions during all this time, and the fleet was too passive.
    2. 0
      30 September 2015 13: 24
      What is wrong with Qingdao?
      1. The main forces of the fleet (von Spee's squadron) safely left the base and managed to pile on the British, until they were crushed by many times superior forces. Compare with the senseless death of the 1st Pacific squadron.
      2. Qingdao garrison - 4 thousand people, this is much less than the Port Arthur garrison, and was counting on short-term resistance to a not too large expeditionary force, no more.
      3. The ratio of the initial forces was in Qingdao with a much greater margin in favor of the attacking side, and the ratio of losses for the killed / wounded - 3000/700 - more in favor of the defender.
  22. +2
    4 January 2014 16: 49
    Many thanks to the author for a thorough analysis of the defense of Port_Arthur. Special thanks for the pictures.
    The port was still possible and needed to be kept. Thus, the forces of the army and navy would be distracted for a longer period of time. And there, you look, and the situation would change (chur me, satanic obsession - I fall into an alternative story). Most likely, the results of the war would not have changed if not removed (the kingdom was painfully rotten), but they could have mitigated the consequences of the defeat ... Oh, this is the notorious subjunctive mood.

    And to the courage of Russian soldiers and sailors - GLORY!
    1. 0
      24 March 2015 12: 18
      Your senseless and rootless Bolshevik state has rotted, founded by renegades who once deceived the masses of the people.
  23. 0
    14 March 2021 11: 47
    Autocratic Russia has already been defeated by constitutional Japan, and any delay will only intensify and aggravate the defeat. The best part of the Russian fleet has already been exterminated, the position of Port Arthur is hopeless, the squadron coming to its aid has not the slightest chance not only of success, but even of reaching its destination, the main army, led by Kuropatkin, has lost more than 200 000 people, exhausted and helpless before the enemy, who will inevitably crush her after the capture of Port Arthur.
    (c) Vladimir Ulyanov (not yet Lenin). As he looked into the water.