160 years ago fell Sevastopol

57
“Brave comrades! It is sad and hard to leave the enemies of Sevastopol to our enemies, but remember what sacrifice we brought to the altar of the fatherland in 1812, Moscow is Sevastopol! We left her after the immortal battle of Borodin. 349-day defense of Sevastopol is superior to Borodino! ”

From the order of the commander-in-chief, Prince M. Gorchakov.

160 years ago, on August 27 (September 8), 1855, the heroic 349-day Sevastopol defense ended. The Russian troops, having blown up warehouses and fortifications on the South side, crossed partly on ships, partly on the constructed floating bridge to the North side, and then joined the Menshikov army. At the same time as the troops crossed, the remaining ships of the Black Sea were sunk in the bay fleet. The organized withdrawal of the entire Russian army with artillery and rear in one night was a unique case in stories wars

In August 1855, the Allies launched two powerful artillery strikes against Sevastopol. From 5 (17) to 8 (20) in August the Russian sea fortress bombarded 800 shells, which fired 56 500 shells, and the Russian guns answered - 29 400 shells. The next, sixth, most powerful, bombardment of Sevastopol from 807 guns, including 300 mortars, was conducted from 24 to 27 in August (5 — 8 in September). The city was fired up to 150 thousand shells. Malakhov Kurgan, against whom 110 guns operated, of which 40 mortars were subjected to particularly severe blows. This powerful artillery preparation shook and destroyed Russian fortifications, bombarded Russian soldiers and sailors with a hail of bombs, grenade bucks and bullets. In addition to ordinary shells, the Allies launched rockets and threw barrels filled with gunpowder. As a result of the many days of brutal bombardment of the 2 and 3 bastions and the fortifications of Malakhov Kurgan were destroyed. Russian losses amounted to more than 7,5 thousand people killed, 89 guns and 113 machines.

27 August (8 September) at 12 hours of the day 13 divisions and one brigade of the Allied army rushed to the last decisive assault on Sevastopol. The enemy sent the main blow to the 2 bastion and the Malakhov barrow. More than 57 thousand soldiers went to the assault. The whole city was defended by 40 thousand people. After an artillery strike, French troops under the command of General Bosque - about 39 thousand soldiers (they were the main striking force of the Allied army), attacked the ship's side. The assault was carried out simultaneously across the defensive line of Sevastopol.

The 10 thunderbolt from thousands of Frenchmen attacked Malakhov Kurgan, on which were 1900 infantrymen and artillerymen. The battle was fierce. Our troops, despite the fact that the French units were constantly reinforcing, held on. Soon all the commanders fell, but the Russian soldiers, even after losing control, continued to fight. However, the forces were not equal. Under pressure from the far superior enemy forces, the remnants of the Russian garrison of Malakhov Kurgan moved away.

At the same time, the French stormed the bastion number 2. Here, the onslaught of 18, thousands of French, was held back by 7, thousands of Russians. Russian warriors fought off three enemy attacks. But after the fall of Malakhov Kurgan the situation deteriorated sharply, the Allies installed their batteries there and opened fire on the second bastion. The defenders of the bastion retreated. Bastion number 3 tried to take the British. But after the first unsuccessful attack, the British no longer resumed them. Also unsuccessful for the Allies ended subsequent attempts to develop an offensive in other directions.

Thus, the French managed to capture the Malakhov mound and the second bastion. At other points, all attacks of the Allied army were repelled. However, with the loss of the Malakhov Kurgan and the 2 bastion, the defense line of Sevastopol was broken just at the point on which its strength depended on the whole. Malakhov Kurgan was considered a key position on which the defense of the whole of Sevastopol depended.

The commander-in-chief of the Russian troops in the Crimea, Prince Mikhail Gorchakov, having familiarized himself with the situation, made a difficult decision. He decided to abandon further struggle for the city and ordered the withdrawal of troops to the northern side. The Allied forces did not dare to pursue the Russians, considering the city to be mined. Only 30 of August (11 of September) the Allies entered the smoking ruins of Sevastopol.




The main milestones of the defense of Sevastopol

After the Ottoman Empire declared war on Russia 4 (16) on October 1853, active operations were carried out on land and at sea (Sinop battle 18 (30) November 1853 g; Part 2). The Ottomans were defeated, which opened up attractive military-strategic and economic prospects for St. Petersburg. The Black Sea, after gaining control over Constantinople and the Bosphorus and Dardanelles, could become the “Russian Lake”. Russia sharply strengthened its position in the Balkans, in the Mediterranean, in the Caucasus and in Asia Minor, with the possibility of further movement towards the Persian Gulf and India. Russia got the opportunity to become a leading world power.

This greatly disturbed Vienna, Paris and London. And if Austria kept on the verge of entering the war with Russia, then England and France 9 (21) February 1854 declared war on Russia. The leading military and economic powers of the West had ambitious plans for Russia. Russia was planned to be turned into a third-rate country, depriving the Baltic States, Finland, Russian Poland, the Northern Black Sea region, the Crimea and the Caucasus from it. Russia was planning to deprive the gains of the last centuries, to deprive it of its access to the seas. The Russians had to suffer a strategic defeat and retreat deep into the mainland, having lost the opportunity to influence the course of events in Europe and the world.

However, the failure of the Allied naval expeditions in the Baltic, in the White Sea and in the Pacific (Heroic defense of Petropavlovsk; Part 2), the success of the Russian army on the Caucasian front and the heroic defense of Sevastopol thwarted the designs of our geopolitical opponents. They had to be content with little. Russia was defeated in this war (a prototype of the First World War), but its losses were relatively small and the restrictive barriers on the Black Sea quickly fell.

In June-July 1854, the Anglo-French troops landed in Varna, and the superior forces of the Anglo-French-Turkish fleet (34 battleships and 55 frigates, including most of the steam ones) blocked the Russian fleet (14 battleships, 6 frigates and 6 steamboat frigates) in Sevastopol. In late August, the combined fleet of Britain and France, consisting of 89 warships and 300 transports, approached Evpatoria. 1 (13) of September, the Allies freely began the landing of the expeditionary force - about 60 thousand French, British and Turkish (The invasion of the Crimea).

8 (20) September was a battle on the Alma River (The first major land battle in the Crimean War - the battle of Alma; Part 2). The Russian army under the leadership of Prince A.S. Menshikov was defeated, the Allies opened the way to Sevastopol. Menshikov with the army went first to Sevastopol, but then, fearing that the Allied army would cut him off from the central regions of Russia, and also with the aim of freedom of maneuver and the possibility of threatening the enemy’s flank and rear, 12 (24) of September led the troops to Bakhchisarai. Sevastopol lost the support of the ground forces, having a very weak defense on land.

Only the delay of the Allied forces, who were greatly shocked by the resistance of the Russian soldiers on the Alma River and did not dare to go on the assault on Sevastopol, made it possible to prepare the city for defense as soon as possible. Russian soldiers and sailors under the leadership of Kornilov, Nakhimov, Istomin, Totleben and other heroes conducted work worthy of the titans and prepared Sevastopol for the battle. The defenders of Sevastopol, including women and children, worked tirelessly day and night. People worked in three shifts, even at night in the light of lanterns. "... We have done a week more than we did a year," wrote the feat of Sevastopol Kornilov in his diary about this.

11 (23) of September, in order to prevent the breakthrough of the ships of the Allied fleet to the internal Sevastopol raid, it was decided to flood the sailing battleships and the 5 frigate across the entrance to the 2 bay. Other sailing ships, all ships and steamboats and frigates were left for the defense of Sevastopol and set aside for the protection of coastal batteries. The guns were removed from the ships, which strengthened the artillery of the land fortifications, and the ship crews (about 18 thousand people) formed the 22 battalion. All the supplies that could be useful in the battle were brought from the ships. This greatly strengthened the power of the defense of the city. The garrison of Sevastopol at this time was 36,6 thousand people.

The defense of the city was headed by Vice Admiral Vladimir Alekseevich Kornilov, who was officially considered the chief of defense staff. He became the "soul of defense" of Sevastopol. His closest assistants were the squadron commander, Vice Admiral Pavel Stepanovich Nakhimov, appointed head of the South side, and Rear Admiral Vladimir Ivanovich Istomin (head of defense of Malakhov Kurgan). The general management of engineering work was carried out by Colonel-Engineer Eduard I. Totleben.

By the evening of 12 (24) September, the allied army approached the r. Belbek and from here the next day began the flank movement to the south side of the city. On the morning of September 14 (26), the French took up positions on the Fedyukhiny heights, and the British occupied Balaclava. Allied fleet entered Balaklava harbor. 18 (30) September Allied forces (67 thousand people) reached the approaches to Sevastopol from the south.

5 (17) October 1854. The first bombardment of the Sevastopol fortress began. The enemy opened fire on all defensive structures made of 126 heavy guns, and by noon 1340 guns of naval guns joined them. The Allied command hoped to crush the fortifications of Sevastopol with one powerful onslaught and take the city. A participant in the defense of the city of Slavoni wrote: “A terrible battle began to boil: the earth groaned, the surrounding mountains began to tremble, the sea began to roar ... and at the same time hellish fire broke out from our batteries. Enemy ships and steamboats fired volleys at our batteries; bombs, red-hot kernels, grapesheets, brandkugels ... rained down; crashes and explosions were ubiquitous; it all merged into a terrible and wild hum; no shots could be discerned, only wild and terrifying gurgling was heard; the earth seemed to stagger under the weight of the combatants ... And this fierce battle did not stop for a minute, it lasted exactly 12 hours and stopped only when it was completely dusk. ” Russian warriors withstood a terrible onslaught. Among the many who fell on this day was Admiral Kornilov, who died on the Malakhov Kurgan. The defense of the fortress was headed by Nakhimov.

160 years ago fell Sevastopol

Portrait of Admiral V. A. Kornilov. A.F. Permyakov

At night, the defenders of the city did a great job of restoring the fortifications. To the amazement of the enemy, by the morning of October 6 (18), the Sevastopol fortifications were restored and ready for new battles. The allies understood that without a siege, Sevastopol was not to be taken, and they postponed the assault. The bombing of the city lasted a few more days, but without much success. Thanks to the tireless work of the talented Russian engineer Polzikov and Rear Admiral Istomin, who led the defense of Malakhov Kurgan, he was turned into a powerful strong point, until the end of the defense being the main link of the Sevastopol fortress.

Russian sailors in the defense of Sevastopol for the first time in the world used a number of new products in military affairs. For the first time in history, Russian sailors successfully used naval artillery to fire at invisible targets. This was achieved, firstly, by maximizing the elevation angles of the guns, which significantly increased the firing distance. Secondly, new methods of artillery fire adjustment were implemented, which ensured firing at invisible targets. Steamers successfully fired enemy positions, remote on 5 km from the Sevastopol raid. For the first time, Russian sailors began to blind steam-frigates, protecting them from enemy artillery fire. On the steamers, dugouts were organized, protecting the engine rooms and gunpowder cellars. For the first time in history diving works were carried out to seal the holes of steamers. Moreover, the correction of damage took place in combat conditions.


Defense of Sevastopol. Franz Rubo

The Allies systematically prepared for the assault on the city, moving closer to the line of its fortifications. Attempts by the Russian troops under the authority of Menshikov to loosen the siege - the Balaklava battle of 13 (25) in October 1854, the Inkerman battle of 5 in November 1854 and the assault of Evpatoria 5 in February did not lead to success. The defenders of Sevastopol themselves at that time achieved some success. In February, 17, the defenders of the Sevastopol fortress, captured important positions behind the Kilen-beam and built a number of important fortifications in the area - Volynsky, Selenginsky redoubts and Kamchatsky lunette. These fortifications have become a big problem for the Allies. They stormed them for several months. The seizure of these positions, advanced from the main defensive line for more than a kilometer, was of great importance for the active defense of Sevastopol. Having taken positions behind Kilen-beam, Russian troops created a threat to the right flank of the allied army. During an enemy shelling of the Kamchatka lunet 1855 in March 1855, Rear Admiral Vladimir Ivanovich Istomin, one of the most active and bravest participants in the organization of this amazing defense, was killed. “The defense of Sevastopol,” wrote P. S. Nakhimov, “has lost one of its main leaders in it.”


Rear Admiral of the Russian Fleet, Hero of the Sevastopol Defense Vladimir Ivanovich Istomin

Meanwhile, the siege continued, the Allies received new reinforcements, their army near Sevastopol increased to 120 thousand people. In January, 1855, on the side of the anti-Russian coalition, was Sardinia (Italian state). The Sardinian corps arrived in Crimea. 28 March (9 April) 1855, the Allies launched a second intensified bombardment, for which it was supposed to make an assault. For ten days allied artillery bombarded Russian positions, but the hellfire did not bring the expected result. The defenders corrected the damage at night and maintained high morale. The Allied Command postponed the assault again.

Western powers continued to build up the Crimean grouping of troops. The number of the allied army grew first to 170 thousand bayonets, and then 200 thousand people. The ruling circles of England and France, mobilizing enormous resources for waging war, demanded that the pressure on Sevastopol be increased. In the second half of May 1855, the Allied forces carried out the third general bombardment of Sevastopol, during which 100 thousand shells were fired around the city. Allied forces launched an assault on Russian positions in the Killen-Gul area. Against two Russian redoubts and one lunet a group was thrown into five divisions - up to 40 thousand bayonets. On the Volynsky and Selinginskom redoubts, Kamchatka lunette a fierce battle broke out. The enemy’s storming columns were met with grapeshot, then violent melee fights began to boil, in which, on average, one Russian soldier had 10-15 opponents. Careful preparation of the assault and a huge advantage in forces allowed the allies to break into the fortifications.

Encouraged by the seizure of the three Russian fortifications, the French commander-in-chief, General Pelisie, decided to build on the success and take Malakhov's mound. However, under the leadership of Admiral Nakhimov, the defender of Malakhov Kurgan met the enemy with powerful fire. Buckshot continuously beat on the French. The ship artillery of the Black Sea Fleet entered the battle. Strong artillery fire stopped the enemy. Russian troops, having received reinforcements, went to the counter. Sevastopol beat off the Kamchatka lunette, but soon, under the onslaught of two selected French divisions, they were forced to retreat.

Thus, during the assault on 26 in May of 1855, three advanced fortifications fell, but Malakhov Kurgan stopped the enemy offensive. The Allied command was forced to prepare a new powerful assault on Sevastopol, coinciding with it on the forty-year anniversary of the Battle of Waterloo. The command of the allied army decided to concentrate forces on a narrow sector: priority was given to Malakhov's kurgan and three bastions on the ship's side.

5 June 1855. Allied batteries began shelling the city. The enemy brought 587 guns into action, Sevastopol responded with 549 guns, but they had fewer shells and gunpowder. Prepared for a decisive attack, the British and French troops dressed in parade uniform. Counting on the suddenness of the strike, they attacked the city at dawn on 6 June. Against 18, thousands of defenders of the Ship side, a group of 45 thousand bayonets went on the offensive. At the forefront, a bloody hand-to-hand fight began. In the course were stones and axes. Some strong points changed hands several times. The Allied Command constantly brought new forces into battle, so the enemy avalanche did not weaken. The allies fought hard, but our warriors fought even more fiercely. As a result, the Allies were rejected. The French and the British lost more than 8 thousand people killed, wounded and captured. It was a major defeat for the Allied army.

After that, the Allies licked their wounds for two months and prepared for new battles; they did not undertake any assaults or new general bombardments. Rejecting a new decisive assault, the Allied army focused all its attention on the continuation of siege work. The allied command retained the old plan of attack - the concentration of forces in one direction. In June and July, the Allies aggressively advanced their positions to the fortifications of Sevastopol, firing a disturbing fire. During the day, the enemy moved an average of 3-4 meters towards Sevastopol. Two months after the unsuccessful assault, the Allied forces approached Malakhov Kurgan on 120 meters, and bastion No. 2 - on 100 meters.

New batteries were being built, most of which were directed against the Ship side of Sevastopol. The losses of the garrison of Sevastopol from enemy shelling increased. 8 (20) Jun Totleben was seriously injured. 28 June (10 July) fell brave Nakhimov.


Admiral P. S. Nakhimov on the bastion. V.F. Timm

4 (16) August 1855. The Russian army under the command of Gorchakov was defeated on the Black River (The defeat of the Russian army on the Black River). The Allies decided that the time for a decisive assault had come. From 5 to 8 of August (17 — 20 of August) there was the fifth general bombardment of Sevastopol. The 800 fire of guns showered Sevastopol with a continuous hail of lead. The Russian garrison lost daily 900 — 1000 people. Later, from 9 to 24 of August (21 of August - 5 of September), the fire of enemy artillery was somewhat weaker, but, nevertheless, 500 — 700 people were knocked out every day by the garrison. 24 August (4 September) began 6-I intensified bombardment, which lasted until August 27 (8 September). By this time, the fortifications of Sevastopol were severely destroyed and no longer yielded to full restoration. Artillery Malakhov Kurgan and 2-th bastion was suppressed. Siege works were completed, the French were already in 25 meters from Malakhov Kurgan.

At noon on August 27 allied forces rushed to the assault. It took the French less than a minute to overcome the few meters that separated them from the Malakhov Kurgan. At the height of the French flag appeared. The Russian soldiers, pushed aside from the front edge at the first moment, rushed to the counterattack. A brutal hand-to-hand fight began, which lasted until the evening. Enemies had to take every meter of space with a fight. A small group of soldiers and sailors was blocked in the dilapidated tower of Malakhov Kurgan, barricaded themselves and resisted to the last. The French, fearing that there were large stocks of gunpowder in the tower, did not dare to set it on fire. Only after the Russian soldiers had run out of ammunition and they were almost all injured, they left the tower. There were only about 30 people, which caused a great surprise to the French, who believed that a large detachment was sitting in the tower.

In the evening, despite the heavy losses, the destruction of the fortifications and the lack of ammunition, the people of Sevastopol were ready to counterattack and beat off Malakhov Kurgan. But Gorchakov decided to leave the South side, as the garrison daily suffered huge losses. At this rate of fire, the allies could, without assault and open battle, completely destroy the Russian garrison for 15-20 days. Russian troops were relegated to the North side. All remaining fortifications were blown up, and the ships were drowned. The garrison was strengthened on the northern side of Sevastopol, where by this time strong fortifications had been created.

Thus ended the heroic defense of Sevastopol, which lasted 349 days. After the transfer of Russian troops to the North side, the Allied forces did not show a desire to resume fighting. The French commander-in-chief, Pélissier, declared that he "would rather retire than be involved in a maneuverable war." The Allies lost more than 128 thousand people (according to other data 250 thousand people). Russian losses were more than 100 thousand. People.

The defense of Sevastopol was of great importance. The defenders of the city thwarted the plans of England, France and Porta to transform Russia into a second-class country, fettered and bled the Allied army, inflicting huge losses in manpower and resources. Almost all of the major sea and land forces and resources of the Allied powers were shackled by Sevastopol. As a result, Russia was able to withdraw from the war with minimal territorial losses.


Sevastopol. Monument to the scuttled ships. Sculptor A. G. Adamson, architect V. A. Feldman and military engineer F. O. Enberg. 1905
57 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +18
    27 August 2015 06: 56
    Everyone fought. The authorities did not sit behind. Both ordinary soldiers and admirals perished. Eternal glory to them!
    1. 0
      27 August 2015 12: 06
      Obviously you do not know the story well, otherwise you would not have written like that. It sounds patriotic and pathos but does not correspond to the truth! Compare the actions in this war, at least, for example, Admiral Kornilov and Lieutenant General Kiryakov.
  2. Fin
    +9
    27 August 2015 07: 49
    This year was once again on the Malakhov Kurgan (mother-in-law lives 100 meters). Given the Second World War, every meter is watered with Russian blood. At the site of Nakhimov’s mortal wound, there were already goosebumps ...
    1. +2
      27 August 2015 09: 20
      and mother-in-law a gun on the trunk of which the lady was rattled ???
      1. 0
        28 August 2015 14: 14
        souls "!
    2. +2
      27 August 2015 20: 50
      All the same, the blood of the soldiers of the Russian empire. Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Tatars and imagine even Jews. Oh how.
      1. +1
        28 August 2015 14: 16
        "RUSSIAN" is not a nationality but a "philosophy of the soul" ...
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. +1
        29 August 2015 20: 00
        Quote: Aaron Zawi
        All the same, the blood of the soldiers of the Russian empire. Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Tatars and imagine even Jews. Oh how.


        And then there were neither Ukrainians, nor Belarusians, nor Jews. Were subjects of the Russian Empire. and blood, respectively, was Russian.....
  3. +9
    27 August 2015 07: 53
    Didn't fall. The allies never succeeded in taking control of the entire city. If my memory serves me, then the French general told Napoleon III about this, and he said something like: "IS THIS Victory ??".
    1. +8
      27 August 2015 09: 20
      and the whole war ended in a draw
      Allies managed to achieve at least some success in one of five !!! theaters of war, and in the Caucasus, Baltic, White Sea and Pacific Ocean were completely defeated
      1. +3
        27 August 2015 18: 42
        Evgeny Tarle would fundamentally disagree with you. Read his work "The Crimean War". Unfortunately, the war was lost, primarily in political and economic terms, where Russia was hopelessly behind.
        1. +2
          29 August 2015 08: 25
          First of all, politically and economically, where Russia was hopelessly behind.
          As for hopelessness, you rightly got excited. Tarle is certainly a respected historian, but it is necessary to make an important correction, a Soviet historian, and Soviet historians, as you know, had a tendency to denigrate tsarist Russia.
  4. +6
    27 August 2015 07: 55
    I have long been dreaming of being in Sevastopol. And now - even more. Thank you, author!
  5. +3
    27 August 2015 08: 19
    Was this year in Sevastopol. There is even a special air. The panorama is impressive. Were with an excursion what I regretted. Now, if I go, then for a few days. All see in a day is not possible.
  6. +14
    27 August 2015 08: 40
    The South side was left, a new line of defense was built on the North side, the allied forces did not reach the goal of capturing Crimea.
    Let's not forget that Russia in this war fought with all the then superpowers and their satellites, plus the threat of war with Austria. Logistics, too, should not be forgotten, here the enemy had all the components of success.
    The heroism of our people, army and navy once again prevented the enemy from achieving his goals. Behind the heroism and feat of some is the flaw or mistakes of other people, this is where the Security Department would have worked, but it did not grow together.
    Enemies come and go, and the feat of our ancestors lives in our memory and we can only be worthy of their deeds. We Sevastopol proved-worthy.
    1. +4
      27 August 2015 09: 22
      Hero City the city of Russian naval glory!
  7. 0
    27 August 2015 09: 03
    Yes, the meat grinder was noble ..
  8. +13
    27 August 2015 09: 55
    One of the fronts of that war is Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. I live here. We always note the defeat of the Anglo-French. squadrons. Zagordyak.
    1. +10
      27 August 2015 10: 36
      Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky is our Far Eastern Sevastopol. Eternal memory and glory to the defenders of Petropavlovsk!
  9. +6
    27 August 2015 10: 31
    Eternal glory to our Russian ancestors who defended Sevastopol! Motherland keeps your memory.
  10. +2
    27 August 2015 10: 41
    The defense of Sevastopol was held by the garrison and dismounted sailors. The army itself, under the command of Menshikov, did not participate in the defense of the city, but was on the sidelines. This is a historical fact that for some reason they do not like to recall.
    And as always, ordinary people - soldiers, sailors and to loyal officers. They are exactly the heroes!
  11. +4
    27 August 2015 10: 43
    Glory to the Russian heroes - the defenders of Sevastopol - sailors, soldiers, officers and admirals!
  12. 0
    27 August 2015 10: 53
    Quote: strelets
    Everyone fought. The authorities did not sit behind. Both ordinary soldiers and admirals perished. Eternal glory to them!

    Obviously you do not know the story well, otherwise you would not have written like that. It sounds patriotic and pathos but does not correspond to the truth! Compare the actions in this war, at least, for example, Admiral Kornilov and Lieutenant General Kiryakov.
  13. +2
    27 August 2015 11: 29
    It is simply amazing how Russia in general could manage to lose the Crimean War? That passed Sevastopol and everything type !!! But what about relatively recently beaten Napoleon with an even larger army? After all, they first surrendered vast territories and ultimately won despite all the enormous difficulties ... After all, Alexander openly stated that if necessary he would retreat to Chukotka and Nikolai surrendered Sevastopol and all !!! How did a relatively small expeditionary Anglo-French-Turkish army manage to achieve what the Great Army of Napoleon could not achieve?
    It turns out that in 1855 they fought differently than in 1812? If you think about it, then one interesting thought comes - to win it’s not enough to have a number of military leaders, huge armies, a lot of weapons, a large fleet and so on - the most important thing for victory is the WILL to win and FAITH to win - that was in 1812- m and this for some reason was not in 1855 !!!
    1. -1
      27 August 2015 11: 41
      Please note that the Crimean campaign itself was conceived by the allies to block the influence of the Russian Empire in the southern region (more precisely, in the Ottoman Empire) and did not set itself the goal of conquering the territory of Crimea at all. As they would say now in modern language, it was "preventive coercion of a potential aggressor." Politics and nothing personal.
    2. xan
      -5
      27 August 2015 11: 57
      Quote: Selevc
      How did a relatively small expeditionary Anglo-French-Turkish army manage to achieve what the Great Army of Napoleon could not achieve?

      I suggest a couple of questions:
      1. how ragged gangsters Afghans managed to drive out the Soviet Army, after all, it had recently jammed fascist Germany?
      2. How did the Chukh Vietnamese with Kalash deal with the hegemons of the Amers with all their advanced weapons?
      1. +1
        27 August 2015 12: 12
        Quote: xan
        I suggest a couple of questions:
        1. how ragged gangsters Afghans managed to drive out the Soviet Army, after all, it had recently jammed fascist Germany?
        2. How did the Chukh Vietnamese with Kalash deal with the hegemons of the Amers with all their advanced weapons?

        The questions are not entirely correct - both of your examples are not wars in their classical sense - where there is a front line and a rear, these are partisan wars when the enemy can be everywhere and can strike anywhere and anytime ... In the Vietnam and Afghanistan wars there were no clear goals - for example, how there was a completely clear and understandable goal for everyone in the Second World War - Get to Berlin ... Two powerful states did not achieve their goals - because neither the USA nor the USSR really understood who they were fighting, for which they were fighting and when will they fight !!!
        1. xan
          -1
          27 August 2015 15: 41
          Quote: Selevc
          The questions are not entirely correct - both of your examples are not wars in their classical sense - where there is a front line and a rear,

          If you are so literate, then you yourself can draw a conclusion about the differences between the Patriotic War of 1812 and the Crimean War?
          1. +1
            28 August 2015 12: 45
            Quote: xan
            If you are so literate, then you yourself can draw a conclusion about the differences between the Patriotic War of 1812 and the Crimean War?

            There are a lot of differences - but the main difference is that the Patriotic War of 1821 was won strategically - and it was won by the best commander of his time !!! Speaking in chess terms, Russia sacrificed a large figure (Moscow) to win the entire game (defeat of France) !!! Napoleon could not be defeated immediately, therefore they were exhausted and bled in battles and forced to fight in a limited theater of operations ... Which ultimately led to the defeat of France ...

            The Crimean war, however, was strategically lost — that is, it was lost even before the main battles — the Russian weapons were backward at the time the war started, army control was unbearable, army support was worse, command efficiency was low, there was almost no initiative from above ... Therefore, the enemy almost always had the initiative and the Russians had to mainly respond to the attacks of the enemy ... At the same time, note - the war was on its own and not on enemy territory - therefore, difficulties in managing armies and supplying are only wines managers and procurers and nothing more ...
            All this in no way begs the feat of ordinary soldiers and lower and middle level officers - and probably their merit and their feat is that the Crimean War ended in an honorable loss and not a complete failure ...
    3. +4
      27 August 2015 13: 38
      ... so that you won’t be so surprised, my friend, read Academician Tarle, and modern S. Chennyk, 5 volumes about the Crimean War. Everything will become clear, but not easy ...
    4. +3
      27 August 2015 14: 02
      Quote: Selevc
      and Nikolai passed Sevastopol and all!

      Allow, dear, not all!
      Nicholas the First died on February 1855, XNUMX. We read in the article:
      Only on August 30 (September 11) did the Allies enter the smoking ruins of Sevastopol.
      / 1855 /
      You should not incriminate this act to Nikolai Pavlovich!
    5. +6
      27 August 2015 14: 24
      Quote: Selevc
      How did a relatively small expeditionary Anglo-French-Turkish army manage to achieve what the Great Army of Napoleon could not achieve?

      The article states:
      The size of the allied army first grew to 170 thousand bayonets, and then 200 thousand people.

      In the "great army" of Bonaparte there were about 650 thousand. Only more than three times more. And the distance from Paris to Moscow was more than the distance from Ryazan to Moscow. Extended communications opened up freedom of action for the partisans.
      In a little over forty years, the situation was completely different. The Russian army at that time stood on the border with Osterreich (the Austrian Empire in our opinion). The entire mighty Russian army was waiting for the attack of the Austrians and was ready to repel it. Military property was transported to Crimea not by rail, but by oxen (2-3 months). During this time, any English / French steamer could make at least two voyages. The invaders even built a narrow-gauge railway from Balaklava to their positions. Their logistics was excellent. With rifled weapons, they did not allow our shooters to reach a distance from which they could kill from smooth-bore weapons. The Russian troops had rifled weapons with gulkin ..y. L.N. Gumilev gives an interesting case: when the French in one of the battles released to pursue the retreating Russians the units of the colonial units from Algeria, selected from their point of view, they got the opposite effect. Our people looked around and someone shouted: "Guys, these are the Turks!" The Turks were a familiar enemy, beaten many times. The retreat stopped, the Russians turned around and "hit with bayonets." Now the Zouaves have already run back to the protection of their "long-range" troops.
    6. +3
      27 August 2015 15: 04
      Quote: Selevc
      How did a relatively small expeditionary Anglo-French-Turkish army manage to achieve what the Great Army of Napoleon could not achieve?


      The allied forces were comparable to the army of Napoleon — it was a coalition: England, France, Porta, Sardinia, and this was quite bearable. But there was one thing BUT- a knife stabbed in the back of Russia Austria-Hungary, which put forward an ultimatum to Russia threatening an invasion and even invading Wallachia. Also Prussia threatened an invasion in case of rejection of the Austrian ultimatum. Already against these Germans, who stood directly on the borders of Russia, she, remaining completely alone, could not fight.
      1. 0
        28 August 2015 12: 19
        Quote: Aleksander
        The allied forces were comparable with the army of Napoleon — it was a coalition: England, France, Porta, Sardinia, and this was quite bearable. But there was one NO-knife stabbed into the back of Russia by Austria-Hungary, which put forward an ultimatum to Russia threatening an invasion and even invading Wallachia. Prussia also threatened to invade in case of rejection of the Austrian ultimatum

        So it seems that the whole Europe was represented in Napoleon’s Great Army - the same Austria and the same Germans (Prussian, Saxon, Bavarian and others like them) ...
        The situation in 1812 was much more dangerous than in the Crimean War - where the allies fought locally with Russia on a major offensive, the same Prussia or Austria did not dare - despite all the English intrigues and grandmothers !!!

        At the same time, Russia had one trump card that is always on the land defending the side against landing from the sea - this is the moment the enemy landed ... It was always and will be the weakest part of any landing operation ... The moment when the enemy troops landed the most vulnerable position was ineptly profaned by the Russian command !!! And do not forget that the expeditionary army is difficult to supply with everything you need - for example, servicing the same steam fleet was difficult away from large French and English ports !!! So I think that England and France would not have lasted long in this war - they would have held out strongly and they know how to count loot better than others ...

        And the behavior of the Russian elite during the war is especially noteworthy - they did not need this war more than all the other layers of Russian society ... As you know, England and Russia were linked by centuries-old trade on which more than one huge fortune was made ... But war is the ruin of many who are at the helm of the state ... And the elite got used to walking in Paris and London, and here - damn it blocked oxygen !!!
        I think the main reason for Russia's defeat in the Crimean War is that the elites did not want to fight seriously and for a long time !!! Nikolai - it was not Peter at all who raised Russia on its hind legs ... There would have been a larger figure in power - at least the level of Alexander ... And Nikolai from the state created a huge military machine that turned out to be a dilapidated colossus !!! Nikolai's conservatism played a cruel joke with Russia and personally with him - what seemed unshakable turned out to be unshakable, what seemed formidable turned out to be laughable to the chickens, what seemed modern turned out to be hopelessly backward ... Fast, abrupt and deep reforms were needed in the spirit of Peter ( by the way, carried out by Peter just during the war), and Nikolai dropped his hands and I think even his death was partly due to the intolerance of enduring this "Crimean shame and nightmare" or maybe they just trawled ...
    7. 0
      27 August 2015 18: 43
      Already written above. Read our best historian on the subject - E. Tarle. Then all your questions will disappear.
    8. +1
      28 August 2015 14: 31
      In 1812, two technically equal armies fought ... in 1855, a united Europe. Thanks to its technical and economic superiority, it could provide military superiority anywhere in the coast of our country (huge STEAM transport fleet + presence of armadillos ...) but we could not (absence not just railway but just expensive .... and the economy was not comparable worse) now it’s about the same, but at a new round of development ... Perhaps LDNR is the new SEVASTOPOL ...!?
  14. xan
    +6
    27 August 2015 12: 06
    Somehow, before the events of the Russian spring, I read an ukropsky speech in the Internet battles about the fact that all the defenses of Sevastopol were a failure, Russia could not defend Sevastopol, something to be proud of. But it turns out that Sevastopol, because of its failed defense, did not forget about Russia, and as soon as possible, dragged the whole Crimea home.
    Here it is, dill. The most durable cement is spilled blood.
    Sevastopol is a cool city on a solid foundation.
  15. +10
    27 August 2015 13: 29
    Selevc, Aboriginal
    I agree with you. The goals of the coalition war were largely achieved. Russia left the club of great powers and signed a humiliating agreement. This, of course, does not detract from the greatness of the feat of the garrison of Sevastopol.
    The main theater of the war was Crimean. In other areas, raids were carried out.
    What is the reason for the defeat? Their whole complex. This is the technical backwardness of the state and the army (sailing fleet against steam, smoothbore guns against fittings, lack of rail links with the central regions of the country). This is the political isolation of the state thanks to the efforts of Carlosse Nesselrode. This is the lack of will of Nicholas I. This is, to put it mildly, the inadequate tactical and strategic plans of Menshikov, and their implementation. Inadequate military education system.
    Do not find parallels with Port Arthur? Both there and there, the fleet voluntarily clogged itself in the harbor and went to fight for fortifications. Both there and there, the ground army really did nothing to help the besieged garrison. Although only hanging over the rear of the siege army, it made the idea of ​​an assault dangerous. Both there and there, the enemy freely conducted an amphibious operation. Both there and there are heroism and defeat.
    Although, in 160 years it’s easier to be clever than to fight then.
    Russia can be defeated, but not defeated. This was proved by both Sevastopol and Port Arthur.
    1. +7
      27 August 2015 15: 45
      Quote: Army 2
      I agree with you. The goals of the coalition war were largely achieved. Russia left the club of great powers


      Not reached. England wanted to destroy the very potential of Russia to influence the Balkans and their peoples in the Black Sea. This was not achieved, it was preserved, Russia remained a great power, which was proved only after 20 years by a brilliant victory in the Balkan war of 1877-78. Geographically, Russia lost almost nothing, retaining the main thing-Bessarabia (except for Budzhak) - the key to the Balkans. Coastal fortresses, factories of Nikolaev, Taganrog, on the destruction of which England insisted, were preserved and developed. All occupied settlements were liberated. Not only Russia but also Turkey was banned from having a fleet in the Black Sea. France (the main coalition force) received nothing at all. Austria, which wanted Bessarabia, received nothing.
      1. +1
        28 August 2015 13: 13
        And after the Crimean War, the Russian Empire was forbidden to have full-fledged battle ships in the Black Sea and to limit the presence of the army in the Crimea - is this in your opinion not a concession after the defeat? Of course, thanks to Gorchakov, after some time, these restrictions were eliminated, but it will be much later.
        1. 0
          29 August 2015 20: 19
          Quote: Aboriginal
          And after the Crimean War, the Russian Empire was forbidden to have full-fledged battle ships in the Black Sea and to limit the presence of the army in the Crimea - is this in your opinion not a concession after the defeat? Of course, thanks to Gorchakov, after some time, these restrictions were eliminated, but it will be much later.


          And the Russian Empire had on the Black Sea 8 corvettes (800 tons)immediately after this war, and half of it was built in Nikolaev. There were built and launched "transport" ships, which are actually warships. Although, of course, the full-blooded restoration of the fleet began in 1871 by the "popovkami" - "already" after 16 years.
          There were no "restrictions on the armies in the Crimea" for one simple reason - Albion could not control it ...
          Gorchakov, thanks to Pikul, seems like a positive character, but this is far from the case. The Paris treatise collapsed exactly when Russia gained strength to spit on it and no one could object to it-This, however, was the most common practice of those years. BUT Gorchakov criminally contributed to the unification of Germany, which organized TWO terrible world slaughter in the near future, and even today did not become smarter ....
        2. 0
          29 August 2015 20: 19
          Quote: Aboriginal
          And after the Crimean War, the Russian Empire was forbidden to have full-fledged battle ships in the Black Sea and to limit the presence of the army in the Crimea - is this in your opinion not a concession after the defeat? Of course, thanks to Gorchakov, after some time, these restrictions were eliminated, but it will be much later.


          And the Russian Empire had on the Black Sea 8 corvettes (each on 800 tons) immediately after this war, and half of it was built in Nikolaev. There were built and launched "transport" ships, which are actually warships. Although, of course, the full-blooded restoration of the fleet began in 1871 by the "popovkami" - "already" after 16 years.
          There were no "restrictions on the armies in the Crimea" for one simple reason - Albion could not control it.
          Gorchakov, thanks to Pikul, is a positive character. But in fact, the Paris Treaty was canceled only when, in full accordance with the rules of that era, Russia gained strength to spit on it, and opponents could not object .... good
          But Gorchakov blessed the unification of Germany, which organized the 2 massacre in the next century, and this was a gross mistake .....
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. xan
      +5
      27 August 2015 16: 04
      Quote: Army 2
      The goals of the coalition war were largely achieved. Russia left the club of great powers and signed a humiliating agreement.

      Yeah, I left the club of great powers, here is the offense, the title was removed. All the strongest people of that time gathered and attacked Russia in droves, and a year later they took Sevastopol, just a global victory. And then only for one opinion Russia surrendered their victories.
      Until Russia has collapsed, none of the greats will rule it out; it’s the same as expelling a man from a club of men.
  16. 0
    27 August 2015 13: 32
    Eternal memory to the heroes of the First Defense.
    Many thanks to the author for the article.
    I travel to Sevastopol every year for 17 years, every year I discover something new for myself. Awesome city, awesome people. How happy they were when they returned to Russia last year!
    As for defense, for me there are very big questions, firstly, why the Menshikov’s army did not attack the besieging allies, and secondly, what would happen if it did attack. If anyone can recommend research on this topic, I would really appreciate it.
    1. +1
      27 August 2015 13: 42
      ... so to you the work of Academician Tarle. From modern - S. Chennyk. All books are online, better on the CrimeanBook website. I also recommend the site Mlitari Crimea ...
  17. +3
    27 August 2015 13: 43
    ... today I'll get drunk for everyone. I love Crimea and everything connected with it ...
  18. +3
    27 August 2015 16: 32
    I don’t understand why they write so little about the battle for St. Petersburg? But there the mess was very strong! Probably, it is necessary that the city is first plundered, then it will go down in history. But the capital was not handed over to the British just because the defense of the city was organized at the highest level. A very interesting moment when the vaunted owners of the seas met with anti-ship mines.
    1. +1
      27 August 2015 16: 37
      ... well then, it is necessary to tell for the predatory attacks of English sailors on coastal villages and the cities of the Azov and Black Seas. And then, for the defense of Kamchatka, and that the Anglo-Saxons robbed the graves of Nakhimov, Istomin and Kornilov ...
  19. +1
    27 August 2015 17: 03
    Samsonov!
    The monument is called FLOODED ships!
    They were flooded! You don’t blurt out the main thing for Sevastopol’s, otherwise they will take for kakla!
    When writing articles, sometimes open books!
  20. +2
    27 August 2015 18: 55
    Quote: Nikita Gromov
    Glory to the Russian heroes - the defenders of Sevastopol - sailors, soldiers, officers and admirals!


    True patriots and heroes. With honor to the end, they fulfilled military duty, no matter what. The memory of them for centuries.
  21. 0
    27 August 2015 20: 03
    I can’t understand:
    the south side was captured, but the north remained with good fortifications. In addition, the Menshikov army was not defeated.

    can anyone explain why they left the city?
    1. +2
      27 August 2015 21: 24
      The Malakhov Kurgan was lost, and the city and harbor were shot from it. After him I had to leave the city, because the French could simply shoot the city with impunity.
  22. +1
    27 August 2015 23: 53
    Quote: Rastas
    where Russia was hopelessly behind.

    Do not brush your guns with bricks ...
    In the Navy, the gap is relative, in artillery, too, but in infantry weapons, yes. Although we had a fitting, but in insufficient quantities.
  23. +2
    28 August 2015 09: 13
    These gifts were exchanged by the warring parties. In the center are two Kulikovsky bullets for the Littikh fitting, the best in service with the Russian frm.
  24. The comment was deleted.
  25. 0
    28 August 2015 09: 18
    Litihsky fitting of the sample of 1843
    20 thousand were ordered in Belgium.
    Sniper weapons of the time. Very much appreciated by the troops.
  26. +1
    28 August 2015 11: 46
    Quote: Aboriginal
    Please note that the Crimean campaign itself was conceived by the allies to block the influence of the Russian Empire in the southern region (more precisely, in the Ottoman Empire) and did not set itself the goal of conquering the territory of Crimea at all. As they would say now in modern language, it was "preventive coercion of a potential aggressor." Politics and nothing personal.

    I do not understand where the thoughts of the allies are known? Americans are talking about protecting democracy --- the result ..... Always duplicity, the desire to fight with someone else’s hands on English. And amer. POLKANOV !!! I will try to read the 5 volumes! I have a history of the 19 century edited by Tarle.1938.I didn’t read everything --- all of the 8 volumes.
    1. +2
      28 August 2015 13: 28
      The conversation is not about thoughts, but about actions. And the actions are as follows - just after Nicholas decided that the Ottoman Empire was already a colossus on feet of clay and it was time to "divide" it and almost head-on suggested Great Britain to dismember it - it was then that the active work of British diplomacy began to unite the forces of yesterday's enemies (so that it there was a coalition move) and preparations for the Crimean War.
      If you are interested in history in detail, there are a lot of scientific papers on this issue (I recommend, first of all, French sources - they are more neutral in assessing events), and if you are just an amateur, first watch Parfenov's 4-part film "The War in Crimea - everything is in smoke ". These, of course, are not dry facts and there are inaccuracies, but this film is basically quite literate in terms of the presentation of events.
  27. +1
    28 August 2015 14: 26
    Aboriginius, thanks for the answer. You know that ----- I always somehow jarred when they say, decided, thought, fell in love ... about people of another time. Often there is no understanding between contemporaries. He did, said in front of witnesses, issued a decree ---- and what was there thinking --- no one knows
  28. +1
    29 August 2015 07: 59
    Vasily Lebedev-Kumach - Sevastopol

    Rise from the ashes, Sevastopol,
    Hero, glorified forever!
    Your every surviving poplar
    Russian people will take on.

    Those stones where Nakhimov stepped,
    We have become double roads
    When we, having washed our blood,
    Returned to their home country.

    Wounded but stately
    You will enter the annals of centuries -
    The immortal city of our glory
    The shrine of Russian sailors.
  29. +1
    30 August 2015 08: 04
    I found an article about Sevastopol for 2010, I haven’t read it yet. I guess there are some other years too. I also want to read the Archive of previous years, but I’m slowly getting there. I also see who has the posts.