Last Crusade or First Modern War? The Crimean War 1853-1856
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 04. 2023
- Save 36% on a 2 year plan of Nord Pass and get an entire month for free: nordpass.com/realtimehistorypass
The Crimean War between the Ottoman Empire and Russia (and later the UK and France) has been called the last crusade and the first modern war at the same time.
» SUPPORT US
/ realtimehistory
nebula.tv/videos/realtimehist...
» THANK YOU TO OUR CO-PRODUCERS
Murray Godfrey, John Ozment, Stephen Parker, Mavrides, Kristina Colburn, Stefan Jackowski, Cardboard, William Kincade, William Wallace, Daniel L Garza, Chris Daley, Malcolm Swan, Christoph Wolf, Simen Røste, Jim F Barlow, Taylor Allen, Adam Smith, James Giliberto, Albert B. Knapp MD, Tobias Wildenblanck, Richard L Benkin, Marco Kuhnert, Matt Barnes, Ramon Rijkhoek, Jan, Scott Deederly, gsporie, Kekoa, Bruce G. Hearns, Hans Broberg, Fogeltje
» SOURCES
• Badem, Candan: The Ottoman Crimean War - 1853-1856, Brill Verlag, Leiden & Boston, 2010.
• Balci, Ali et al.: When Doves Feed Hawks: Ottoman War Decision and European Powers Towards the Crimean War, in: Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 67-83, SAGE Publications, Istanbul, 2022.
• Baumgart, Winfried: The Crimean War, Bloomsbury Academic Verlag, London [u.a.], 2020.
• Bektas, Yakup: The Crimean War as a Technological Enterprise, in: Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, Vol. 71, No. 3, pp. 233-262, The Royal Society, London, 2017.
• Daniel, Ute: Der Krimkrieg 1853-1856 und die Entstehungskontexte medialer Kriegsberichterstattung, in: Daniel, Ute (Hg.): Augenzeugen - Kriegsberichterstattung vom 18. Zum 21. Jahrhundert, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Verlag, Göttingen, 2006.
• Figes, Orlando: Krimkrieg - der letzte Kreuzzug, Berlin-Verlag, Berlin [u.a], 2012.
• Gouttman, Alain: La guerre de Crimée 1853-1856, Kronos S.P.M., Paris, 1995.
• Gorizontov, Leonid: The Crimean War as a Test of Russia’s Imperial Durability, in: Russian Social Science Review, Vol. 62, pp. 416-442, Taylor & Francis, London, 2021.
• Grosul, Vladislav: Russian Society and the Crimean War, in: Russian Studies in History, vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 35-64, Taylor & Francis, London, 2012,
• Hearder, Harry: Clarendon, Cavour, and the Intervention of Sardinia in the Crimean war, 1853-1855, in: The International History Review, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 819-836, Taylor & Francis, London, 1996.
• Kirimli, Hakan: Emigrations from the Crimea to the Ottoman Empire during the Crimean War, in: Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 44, No. 5, pp. 751-773, Taylor & Francis, 2008.
• Kozelsky, Mara: Crimea in war and transformation, Oxford University Press, New York, 2019.
• Kozelsky, Mara: Casualties of Conflict - Crimean Tatars during the Crimean War, in: Slavic Review, Vol. 67, No. 4, pp. 866-891, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008.
• Lambert, Andrew: Crimean Illusions, in Freedman, Lawrence, ed. War, Oxford UP, 2011.
• Lang, Wilhelm: Cavour und der Krimkrieg, in: Historische Zeitschrift, Vol. 53, No. 1 pp. 1-42, Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag, München, 1885.
• LA SOCIETA DEI REDUCI DALLA CRIMEA (Hg.): Ricordo Pittorico Militare Della Spedizione Sarda, Consiglio Direttivo della Societa dei Reduci dalla Crimea, Turin, 1884.
• Maag, Georg (Hg.): Der Krimkrieg als erster europäischer Medienkrieg, in: Kultur und Technik (Band 14), Lit Verlag, Berlin, 2010.
• Rath, Andrew: The Crimean War in imperial context - 1854-1856, Palgrave Macmillan Verlag, New York [u.a], 2015.
• Stepanov, Valerii: The Crimean War and the Russian Economy, in: Russian Social Science Review, Vol. 62, No. 4-6, pp. 470-493, Taylor & Francis, London, 2021.
• Trager, Robert: Long-Term Consequences of Aggressive Diplomacy - European Relations after Austrian Crimean War Threats, in: Security Studies, Vol. 21, pp. 232-265, Taylor & Francis, London, 2012.
»CREDITS
Presented by: Jesse Alexander
Written by: David Lang, Jesse Alexander
Director: Toni Steller & Florian Wittig
Director of Photography: Toni Steller
Sound: Above Zero
Editing: Toni Steller
Motion Design: Toni Steller
Mixing, Mastering & Sound Design: above-zero.com
Research by: David Lang
Fact checking: Florian Wittig
Channel Design: Simon Buckmaster
Contains licensed material by getty images
Maps: MapTiler/OpenStreetMap Contributors & GEOlayers3
All rights reserved - Real Time History GmbH 2023
Save 36% on a 2 year plan of Nord Pass and get an entire month for free: nordpass.com/realtimehistorypass
Excellent video thanks!! FYI no link in description to Drachnifel as ref'd @ 10:00. Will definitely be watching his vid though.
A link for the war at sea sure would have been very helpful!!!!
It turns out the USS Pennsylvania did all the heavy shooting
Я читал, что вы говорите на французском, немецком и русском языках. Это также три из моих пяти языков. Вы часто показываете свои навыки на первых двух языках на своих видео. Используете ли вы русский язык в своих презентациях?
@@joiedevie3901 Иногда, но редко.
Yes, the Austrian Emperor "Franz Josef" mentioned on the sideline here is the same one as in World War 1
The guy ruled for 68 years...
And on a side note, yes that Leo Tolstoy that wrote those grand literary workd
Longest reigning monarch ever IIRC.
@@PalleRasmussen that'd be Louis XIV at 72 years. Elizabeth II is #2 at 70 years.
@@Wolf_Larsen you are right indeed. That will teach me to trust John Merriman.
Sadly for my Denmark, one of our most incompetent monarchs is also by far the longest ruling.
@@Wolf_Larsen Those are the only ones we've got proper records for😉
I think when the Tsar said "Crimea is not Russia" he meant it more in the sense that defeat in Crimea does not mean Russia is defeated in the same way that in 1812 the fall of Moscow did not mean Russian defeat.
Yup
yes. he was right. Although we won, we lost a lot. As a result, the Crimea remained with the Russians.
@@yclMustafa The united armies of three empires, for a whole year, could not take one Russian city, and when they took it, they returned it back and left the Crimea, and they called all this a victory over Russia and are still celebrating. The British are still casting orders from Russian cannons captured in Sevastopol. 😂
@@user-oi1tu5cu1w I also have to ask this. If we had taken the Crimea without the Allies inflicting too many casualties, could we still be permanent? because it was an alliance that could not get along with itself. and the political balances were not exactly on the side of the Ottomans. There was a Britain that belittled its other allies. Even if we won the Crimean War with fewcasualties, I don't think we would be permanent. Oh man. Don't mention the light cavalry charge. they still tell British children about that absurd attack as a heroic tale. On the contrary, they put us Turks and Scottish cavalry in a very difficult situation there. Of course, they never tell the truth because they belittle the Turks.
@@yclMustafa We don't tell British kids that it is a purely heroic tale though, that hasn't been done for decades. Its framed as heroic men being ordered to do something suicidal but still trying anyway. We tell it as an example of heroism undermined by foolish leadership. Theres a whole historical debate on if that is entirely fair I guess but my point is we dont teach kids "Hey aren't suicide attacks great?".
I mean tbh I'm not sure how many average British kids would even know the story of the Light Brigade nowadays
4 details about the war that I think are worth mentioning:
1) To ensure that Greece would not enter the war on Russia's side, Anglo-French forces occupied the port of Piraeus. The Hellenic government did sponsor revolts among the Greeks in the Ottoman Empire, but these were unsuccessful. Popular dissatisfaction with this failure to exploit a moment of Ottoman weakness would contribute to the overthrow of King Otto in 1862.
2) In the Pacific, Russian ships were saved from destruction at the hands of the British by crossing the narrow Nevelskoy Strait that separates Sakhalin from the Asian mainland. The Russians at this time were the only Europeans to have discovered that Sakhalin was actually an island rather than a peninsula and what looked like a bay was actually a strait.
3) The Treaty of Paris led to the demilitarization of the Ålands, a status they have maintained even to this day, as part of independent Finland.
4) The Treaty of Paris also led to creation of Romania. The Danubian Principalities were placed under the collective protectorate of the belligerent countries plus Austria and Prussia and popular consultations were organized in each principality that eventually led to the same man being elected as prince of both.
Interesting, they repeteated #1 during WW1 with landing in Thessaloniki ensuring that Venizelos prevailed in his struggle against "neutrality" camp in Greece.
What were the Prussians thinking during this war? I think I read there was deep division regarding the Crimean war with most *conservatives* opposing it and sympathising with Russia. Is that true?
@bpeper1365 Prussian conservatives had long been pro-Russian, as Russia was seen as the premiere conservative power in Europe, and this still counted for a lot in the years after the Spring of Nations. Only after Bismarck remade the map of Central Europe did this class start to think of Russia as an enemy.
"A brief history of the Crimea war" was one of the first history books I read in highschool, and alongside Phyrrus of Epirus, the Crimean War was one of the first true history topica I tackled in school. It has a special place in my heart for that so thank you for covering it!!
What a strange leap for your school to cover ancient history and 19th century.
@@abrvalg321 the book i read on my own. but ya i took two classes one which covered ancient the renaissance and the second covered from then till WW1, where we took a Canadian history class years before.
they were super fun :)
@@abrvalg321 Yet his school was teaching him lies like this Video. UK, France and Turkey had lost war Badly. Yet Western created propaganda is still lying and rewriting fake history in their favour, lies!!👎
You and your high school were remarkable. History is perhaps the most neglected subject in USA's high school. My college experience in New York City's Brooklyn College was of a required history course that focussed on how agricultural production was measured in medieval Europe!
@@alvin8391 I ended up going to University for History. i live in Canada and the situation here with regards to history isn't much better, I just got lucky.
whoa! that sounds so cool!
French and British fighting alongside Ottomans against Russians. There are no permanent allies, only permanent interests.
In half a century everything will be the other way around)))
And after that, the Russian Empire will help these Frenchmen in the First World War by sending hundreds of thousands of its military to help France, now France and Great Britain are sending weapons against Russia, from which civilians of Donbass are dying. British high-range missiles caused the destruction of civilian objects and the death of civilians, civilians were killed by French howitzers. It is better not to mess with such allies.
@@vl7297Different leaders and times ? I mean its obvious countries and empires don't stay allied for ever, Britain and France were ennemies for centuries and just before this conflict. Russia changed a lot after world war 1 so France and the rest of europe
People trying to say any of those countries are wrong for changing their sides are hilarious we don't live in a fairy tale. Most countries today are allied for strategic purpose of some sort of agreement on something.
@@vl7297and your comment seems a bit arrogant in my opinion, Russia declared war to help Serbia not France if by any means France helped Russia and Serbia by declaring war on Germany (even though they wanted it to retake territory)
So yeah, its not like Russia saved France or vice versa, both countried got involved and had political interests.
Russia believes in permanent allies. Britain and France were selfish secular nations who justified their wars against other Europeans based on nonsensical idea of balance of power.
Although you cite technological advances, there are several aspects of this war you do not mention that would have significant impact on our own Civl War to begin five years later. Among the Crimean War's foreign observers was the Union's own General McClellan. He observed the siege of Sevastopol and prepared a critical analysis, as well as detailed description of European army organization and deployment. He also wrote a manual on cavalry tactics based on Russian regulations. He observed the advantage that the railroad provided for tactical troop deployment: something that would give the Union distinct advantage over the Confederacy in the near future.
While the U.S. was officially neutral, American support for Russia was reflected by the more than 30 American surgeons who volunteered to serve the Russian military and the presence of American military observers, like McClellan, on the Russian side. Years later that diplomatic amity would manifest in Russian naval support of the Union during the Civil War with its Atlantic fleet in New York Harbor and its Pacific fleet in San Francisco Bay. Six Russian sailors are buried at the Mare Island Military Cemetery north of San Francisco who helped fight the SF fire of 1863. That relationship also laid the foundation for the Alaska purchase.
Finally, the Crimean War was the first major war to have a photographic record. The power of wartime journalism via photography and the telegraph (which you do mention) would change the political relationship between war and the home-front forever. Roger Fenton was among the great early photographers who brought back a sense of the real horror and carnage of the war as well as how people adapted on the fronts and right behind the lines. Our own Civil War would elevate the art and craft of wartime photography with Alex Gardner and Matthew Brady, who learned across an ocean from Fenton's visual accomplishments with the Crimean War and they would set standards here that would be followed for generations.
Luv ya' madly, Jesse! You are a history nerd's best buddy on the worldwide web!
💪🤎🎓
Thanks. Our goal in this episode was not to focus on the Crimean War's connection to the US Civil War (not mine as I am not American) - though I would have mentioned the Union advisors if I had known about that, it is interesting. We did mention photographs in the script and used them extensively in this video.
@@jessealexander2695 Thank you for your reply. Your presentation was outstanding, the items I raised previously notwithstanding. One aspect of your videos that I find compelling is the depth with which you explore the contexts of these events beyond the surface. Also, you do a great job of explaining the underlying complexity and what is often left out of popular narrative. And you make it all fun with your skillful exposition! The linkage to the upcoming US Civil War is not suggested to inject an American perspective as much as it is to illustrate how interconnected world events are even when our textbooks omit those facts. In the mid-19th century, the geopolitics were in play at a global level more than conventional narratives imply.
Congratulations again on your great work.
Thank you very much for this excellent information about McClellan and the American doctors who volunteered to help the Russian Army. BTW, Tsar Alexander II returned the courtesy sending the Russian fleet in support to the Union during the Civil War. Some believe it was a warning to the British who were sympathetic towards the South.
@@arslongavitabrevis5136 You are welcome. Indeed, Alexander II's action was as you described. UK's Lord Palmerston and France's Napoleon III had approached Alexander II to join in pressing Lincoln to end the war and recognize the Confederacy: Britain principally for the cotton needed in its textile industry and France for the same reason in addition to its imperial desires on Mexico, which it felt would be better pursued with a permanently dismembered US. Alexander II refused and instead sent his navies to the harbors of NYC and SF. When you state: "Some believe it was a warning to the British who were sympathetic towards the South," that is not speculation: the American banker Wharton Barker published in The Independent (LVI) of March 24, 1904, about his conversation with Alexander II on August 17, 1879 confirming that the Czar issued an ultimatum to Britain and France specifying that if they intervened on behalf of the Confederacy, they would immediately be at war with Russia. It is conceivable that the First World War was avoided in 1863!
Remember that one of the outcomes of the Crimean war was Alexander II's abolition of serfdom two years ahead of Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. Alexander II revealed years later at the time he did not think that Lincoln's September 22, 1862 Emancipation Proclamation went far enough since it did not abolish slavery across all states, but considered slaves in the belligerent Confederacy having the right under wartime to be free if they escaped or if Union troops occupied their area. Actual abolition came in 1865 with the XIII Amendment. So much rich history that is rarely taught but that always explains our global connection!
@@joiedevie3901 Thank you very much for the added information. I did not know the reasons for France to get involved in the American Civil War, now it all makes sense. Have a nice Sunday!
“The last crusade” fought to prop up the Ottomans 😂
But I suppose it wasn’t as bad as the 4th crusade.
Ahahah you really fail in comprehension. It was the Russian goblin dictatorship that believed they were in a crusade.
The crusade from the guys that stole most of catholic land against an orthodox state? weird title
Great to see CZcams historical sites working together for a more comprehensive in-depth and detailed coverage of the same historical event at the same time! This equals awesomeness for us nerds who love and can’t get enough of this stuff! 🎉❤😊
Thank you!🙏
Agreed
Can you in Real Time History make a video about the Russian-Turkish war 1877-1878? This war is in my opinion one of the forgotten preludes to ww1, and it is somewhat strange that it's not that much information on it in Norway or the west
if there is as much footage as from the crimean war, sure
@@realtimehistory // Romania participated on the side of Russia in the War of 1877-1878. As a result of this war, Romania won its independence from the Ottoman Empire. Although Romania entered the war at the request of Russia, which was in great difficulty on the Balkan front, at the end of the war Russia treated Romania miserably, the situation reaching the point where an armed conflict almost broke out between the former allies. Anyway, the idea is, if you decide to make a documentary about this war, you can find consistent sources of documentation in the works of Romanian historians. Success!
not really strange... western Europeans always downplay and dengrate Russia. we're doing it right now 😆 despite our governments being exposed for cowardly criminality and material military weakness. 🤣🤷🏻♂️ we should be immensely embarrassed by Russia's demonstration of strength and integrity but our media is publishing 24/7 that Russia is weak 😂🤡🤦🏻♂️
@@FamMiron That's very strange. How can anyone "request Romania to enter war" if Romania wasn't an independent country? Just by not fighting for the Ottomans the subjects of sultan are already rebelling against his rule and Romanians were doing much more than just not fighting for the sultan. Heck it's the Russian involvement in the 1877-8 war that came as a result of Russia interfering in the internal conflict/rebellions in Ottoman Empire, not Russia requesting the local people to take part in their war against the Ottoman. In the end Russia gained minimal land gains from the war (less than Austro-Hungary & Britain that didn't even fight in the war), granted independence to a bunch of Balkan states hoping for allies only to see a majority of the new countries join anti-Russian alliances and fight wars against it soon after.
@@haha-ui3fp Roumania had its own army, it was an autonomous principality. The Russians requested the intervention of the Roumanian army after the defeat in the second battle of Plevna. Nothing strange if you have minimal knowledge of history in the Balkan area.
Crimean war should never be forgotten. Thank you for the modern approach in telling it's story compared to the usual snorefest we see on tv making it somewhat neglected.
I don't understand why this war attracts so much attention from foreigners. In our country, it is not even taught in our high school history lessons. Although the defense of Silistra is well known in our country, no one knows Musa Hulisi Pasha, who was given the rank of Marshal before he was martyred. What are the effects of this war on your country today?
@@yclMustafaOne does not need to be directly impacted to learn history.
@@yclMustafa It isn't taught in American Schools much either (any wars around that time are completely overshadowed by the American Civil.War). The Crimean War isn't really seen as a Turkish-involved War, but is instead seen more as an attempt to stop massive Russian aggression and expansion, which absolutely would have happened has Britain and France opted not to get involved, and as much as the Ottomans were disliked in the Balkans overall, they were much, much better than the warmongering Russians who would use any excuse to eventually annex the Balkans.
@@Wasserkaktus His influence on the American civil war is true. but all the other hypotheses you mentioned are wrong and not correct. Britain and France entered the war to break the power of Russia in the Mediterranean. Very interestingly, it was England and France that brought Russia into the Mediterranean.
@@yclMustafa Uh, no I am correct, and everything you just said supports that. Russia was getting far too powerful, and their excuses to defend "Christendom" from the Ottomans were just a ridiculous pretext for them to expand. Britain and France chose to enter and put Russia in check because they saw through this Ruse and what Russia's real goals were.
Few is changed, same wars in same regions in order to protect same interests. Just nowadays, countries are not declaring war directly because of nuclear weapons. History is the greatest teacher if you know how to look.
What a war! A mini world war... Being the first war with photographs is awesome. We can see the attitudes of men who lived and probably died nearly 180 years ago! Great storytelling Jesse. And great maps, too. Happy Easter. Cheers!
same to you Rabih
@@realtimehistory Can you do american presidents documentaries?
Yeah, probably
How was this a world war? Most of it was restricted to the Balkans and Black Sea.
@@Wasserkaktus and it didn't have all the main powers
Such a well structured and sourced video on this fascinating historical issue. Thank you. I love learning this way.
Reading just british accounts you would think they won the entire war basically on their own, when in reality they really got carried by the french.
Это касается всех британских источников. Большинство из них откровенно англоцентричны и не учитывают никакую другую информацию. Особенно если это касается истории России.
@@user-hg7gj7sd1t Russian history is filled with propaganda. It’s literally illegal in Russia to “discredit” the military or Russia’s “glorious” history. The only trustworthy telling of Russian history comes from external western sources and historians which are unbiased
Why are Russians always so jealous of the AngloSaxons
Works both n all ways
@@darrenbishop1619 Not it actually doesnt, the british are well known for doing this. They did it with waterloo at an even bigger stage.
Wellington needed to hold the line until the prussians arrived, Wellingtons army repelled French attack wave after wave until the prussians arrived, if anyone tells you Waterloo was British singular victory, there wrong, but Napoleon was ultimately crushed, and that's a W.
As always, the RTH team delivers!
I do prefer the more relaxed pace of other RTH productions that allow for more details and interesting anecdotes, but I'm sure RTH had their reasons.
That said, it's their usual quality work, and the team delivers a great introduction to an important conflict.
They also get extra points for the final statement that references the current conflict in the same region-do watch to the very end!
Thank you so much for covering this war. It’s not covered enough. I have been waiting for this🎉
Это всё лживая пропаганда, там многие факты и цитаты подтасованны, не верьте этому пропагандискому лжицу.
Он лжец
I absolutely love how this channel and Drachinifel sort of collaborate now
As a history major my senior thesis was arguing that Crimea was the first modern war, so when I saw the title for this video I felt justified! So many of the tactics used here were eventually adapted during the Civil War in America, and then used for years after.
Thank you for a long video on this content. Not enough on youtube. Great work!
It's a small thing but it means a lot to me. This history guru/narrator gets his pronunciation of people and places absolutely spot on perfect. I love the graphics as well. I am an armchair history pervert and this guy never puts a foot wrong! Brilliant series of documentaries. I particularly loved his Franco-Prussian war post..simply riveting.
I couldn't agree more...I've always noticed his accent and pronunciation is always that of the nation he is talking about
I love it too
Excellent video as always guys, really well done!
The British are generally well-liked by the people of the Balkans from the 19th and early 20th century. But the British wanted a weak Ottoman Empire that they could control, and were never interested in creating a new powerful state in the region like expanded Bulgaria, or a reborn Eastern Roman Empire. And the French were not opposing the British in this regard. Only the Russians wanted a powerful neighbor in the Balkans due to common religious and cultural unity. And the Balkan nations like Greece, didn’t take advantage of this situation to pit the great powers against each other.
Actually the great powers made sure that greece wouldn't be able to support russia in this war
British was never well-liked by the people of the Balkans, not from 19th to 20th century not ever.
It was mutual. British never wanted a powerful state to emerge in the Balkans again and Balkans disliked British diplomacy as it wasn't beneficial for them
Im English and don’t like the British
What Bullshit
Excellent as always! Thanks for uploading
Was waiting for this episode!
Thanks for making this video, I knew basically nothing about the Crimean war apart from the siege of Ahvenanmaa/Åland and the accompanying song and it is always interesting to hear and see and learn about the different wars of 1800s
Bone head.
Se Oolannin sota oli kauhia, hurraa hurraa hurraa...
Excellent short history of the war and a great introduction to anyone not very familiar with it. Only one teeny tiny issue for me was that the "thin red streak" was described as the 93rd division. Hardly, they were just one battalion of the 93rd Regiment, not even 1000 men. But that's just me being pernickety.
I’m writing my Senior Project on this conflict and how it relates to a specific countr. This war is SORELY underestimated, people still write books about Nightingale & Light Brigade and how ‘unnecessary’ this war was, yet it was one of the most significant geopolitical events, that heightened the Great Game, created new great powers, and defined Russo-European relations for centuries. Oh and it fed into the time-bomb that led to WW1. It was so much more complex than many English-writers refuse to give it credit it for. Its not some ‘foolish’ war, it was the most significant European conflict between Napoleon and WW1.
1. dünya savaşına 70 yıl var. bu coğrafyada bir günde bile çok şey değişebiliyor
The Crimean war had also a decisive impact for the birth of Italy. Taking part to this war the Sardinian Prime Minister Cavour was admitted to the Paris Congress in 1856 where he got the attention of France and Great Britain for the unification of Italy. 3 years later France and Sardinian Kingdom defeated Austria in the 2nd Italian indipendence war and the following year the British fleet protected Garibaldi's landing on Sicily. Without the Crimean war Sardinian Kingdom would have not been able to create the Italian Kingdom in 1861.
I'd argue that 'The Great Game' started immediately after The Napoleonic Wars, if not earlier. Britain's colonial empire was centred on India and Britain had a paranoia about Russian central power after the Russians and their allies chased Napoleon out of Europe. (It's humorous that the Anglo history says "Britain beat Napoleon")
@@jameslawrie3807 They did ,with their allies .Just like saying septics won world war 2😂
@@jameslawrie3807you’re completely right, idk in my head i always imagine Crimean War as the big betrayal, especially becuz for some reason Tsar Nicholas completely expected the British to support him when he invaded Turkey (the Figes book discusses this naivety from Nicholas literally going to talk to Victoria and trying to appeal to them in friendly christian relations). But yeah the Great Game actually starts way earlier, its only heightened with the Crimean War perhaps, but the Napoleonic War already puts into the Russian Tsar’s mind the idea of attacking India, after all Tsar Paul and Napoleon plan to lead a joint invasion of India, and Paul in his rambling state goes so far as to send troops to Khiva, half of which die in winter as he is killed. Anyways, idk in my mind i get the order mixed up becuz it feels almost like a perfect dramatic scenario that this great betrayal by the British against Russia leads to some cold war
Real Time History - the only CZcams history channel that will not abandon its wounded!
And I'm impressed with your list of sources. This is sirious work)
nothing changed. it is exactly what is happening now as well. British and French as well as germans always wanted to expand eastwards and the only way for them was to strike as in a sort of unity. the unity was very fragile since everyone had own agenda on mind. it is sad to see history repeating itself due to greed, envy and so on. it is the people who were crippled and killed and I do understand every watcher thinks that he/she is the one that orchestrate the war but it is usually the opposite. I love history but I do not see why we have to glorify greedy scumbags who send many to death. it is bizarre.
Did you read Leo Tolstoy's quote? Yes nothing changes, Russia is still a thug army and blocking it is necessary to keep the world civilized.
It's their last attempt if you ask me. Their society's are all being eaten away at the core: crazy money printing, rapid de-industrialisation, catastrophic birth rate, huge migrations etc. And in a large sense this is planned because the oligarchs want to operate outside the national state which they see as 'outdated'.
The best coverage of the Crimean war I'vs seen on CZcams so far.
Thanks for the outstanding quality of your videos
I love this channel. I hope one day you can make a docu that resumes the shift in alliances and diplomacy between the 1700 and 1900.
There is a fine Seven Years War series currently going up on CZcams. There is another one on The War of Spanish Succession already up.
The British army did not cover it self in glory in this war.
The suffering of the soldiers was terrible, thanks to Russell reporting to the Times, matters improved
I think this chap's documentaries are superb in every respect. This was so detailed and fascinating to a history pervert like me. I thought I knew the Crimean War back to front but this guy told me stuff I never knew. I saw his documentary on the Franco - Prussian War and it was amazing
Thank you so much buddy for giving this anourak such delight.
this was a fascinating video.
thanks.
That was an interesting and informative video. I had never heard about the advantage the French and British had in the rifles they were using. I never realised that Raglan died during the campaign.
He gave the wrong order to attack. there was no healthy communication in the army command
He didn't give the wrong order to attack. His orders were incorrectly interpreted.
@@Trebor74 There were serious communication problems between the troops. this caused Raglan's death. More soldiers could have died. This ridiculous attack order put both the Turks and the Scottish cavalry in a difficult position. but it's always been told as a british hero story
@@yclMustafa the brits are a people of liars
The pictures of the battlefields of the Crimean war also were a first. Never before had there been such stark proof of the horrors of battle.
Brilliant video, well researched and put together
Thank you for this upload.
Thank you for this incredible and very informative video!
Can you make one about the wars that occured in Russia after the 1917 revolution? As far as I know there were multiple international armies in Russia until 1922. I would love to see your incredible light shedded into this
Over at the original _The Great War_ channel, they have made 19 part series on the Russian Civil War for over the past 4 years. It goes into just about every detail of it. They have playlist available with all their videos in it.
@@extrahistory8956 holy sheet man. That's exactly what I was thinking. Thank you very much!
If only the Whites defeated the Reds so many less ppl wouldve died. This opened the door for Stalin.
Great video! In Italy there are many roads named after the Battle of Cernaia
Great work!
I would love to see a series from you about this war.
The lost of the Crimean War is one of the factors Russia sold Alaska to the US. Russia didn't want Britain occupying Alaska.
They did not lose here, because the most important thing in the end was that Crimea remained part of the Russian Empire, several countries seized it at the same time with heavy losses, but they failed to keep it. It is interesting here that then the Russians fought to the death for him, and when Khrushchev came to power, he calmly attributes Crimea to Ukraine without any opinion from the people.
@@vl7297 Khrushchev was a moron.
@@vl7297 Back then nobody cared where Crimea is, it was all one country.
"Russia's last crusade"
1877 : Hey
Just fantastic ! What a great channel
This channel is a delight! I love these broad-scale videos on nineteenth century European wars.
I'd love more videos on this conflict!
Thank you for another excellent history documentary. Works like this are rhe best CZcams features for me.
Heard from Drach that this was coming out today! Glad it's here, let's go!
thanks for dropping by. as usual his video about the naval front was super fascinating too
11th December 1917...
British General Edmund Allenby entered Jerusalem triumphantly through the Jaffa gate, and the city became an occupied territory. On this historic occasion, Allenby reportedly declared that “the wars of the crusades are now complete”. Allenby’s statement is a powerful reminder that the British entry into Jerusalem was a continuation of and a “successful” conclusion to the Crusades.
If only they knew the crusade will never end.
When the truly modern Gog and Magog supreme general breakthrough the Holy Land then unleashing its planting birth seed of the apprentice zionist terrorists invaders and illegally settlers for the endlessly tragic oppressions, violences, tears, destitutions and suffering to the innocent, vulnerably and helpless native Palestinians, Lebanese and Syrian.
Britian and France had Jerusalem during Richard the Lionheart.
@@RichardLionheart12 Hello bro :) there is a reason why we have red and blue on the union jack. Red and blue make purple. Purple is the colour of Jewish royalty.
Biblical stories describe prominent figures clothed in garments of purple-a color long associated with royalty.
Excellent work. As usual.
Really helpful that you made the land blue and the water green on the map
I’m glad that at least the Russian/Crimean situation was settled once and for all.
Syke
I mean, Tzar Alexander said it himself, right? "Sevastopol is not Moscow, The Crimea is not Russia."
@@MyUniqueVibe most likely means that just because they lost crimea doesn't mean they lost the war
... but not a single UKRAINIAN General, fighting unit, much less any Ukrainian soldiers in the entire conflict. Hmmmmm!!
KOut
@@MyUniqueVibe it's Russian, today 70% Russia living there. Russians died for it.
Cream of the crop. Jesse is world class. Excellent presentation. Thank you. I enjoyed it immensely.
Im glad to across this an in-depth video on the Crimean war.
Awesome video! Thank you!
This is quality history content 😊
Thanks for another great video.
Drach suggested to check this out and I couldnt agree more! new sub also
Tsar meant "Crimea is not whole Russia", its kinda obvious.
Your channel is great ! Amazing how history repeats itself in one way or another
مشكلة روسيا خيراتها و حدودها
Enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up
Tysm for sharing😍
Fantastic video by Real Time History. Watching the various belligerent reasons for war eerily reminds me of current events.
The more the things change, the more they remain the same. You could place this quote (10:21) in the internet today, and it will absolute not sound out of place.
Well…Russia’s a lot poorer and weaker now, relatively speaking. Even New York City by itself has a larger economy than all of Russia combined
@@tylerclayton6081
Yeah but nukes.
Love it. Keep it up
Awesome, Great details
Definitely not the first modern war and definitely not the Last Crusade considering the last war, the war on terror, was essentially another Crusade.
Great stuff - as always!
Exellent video and very relavant today. You earned a new subscriber.
Welcome aboard!
At 11.00 you talk about troops landing at Varna but "there is nothing to do". I live in Bulgaria, although I am British. There is loads to do in Varna- golf courses, night clubs, horse riding and some excellent bars and restaurants!
Few things, one what of those existed back during crimea war, two would the soldiers even have money to pay for that stuff? Their foreign soldiers mostly they probably only have foreign money. Three they needed to be ready for battle, or sailing at any time, and they had to have most of their own stuff because very few places could easily support thousands of soldiers in their area.
@@damackabet.4611 I do apologise. It was my attempt at humour.
Thanks, RTH, I was a history major in university but didn't take the Crimean War into account. I was mistaken in my understanding that this war had no bearing on US history, so I ignored all but the basics. Britain and France would have liked the US to break up, especially France, which hoped to expand French influence north from French puppet Mexico. My studies usually portrayed British reluctance to intervene in the US Civil War to be due to Lincoln's diplomacy, Britain's working class being anti-slavery and pro-Union and a lingering distrust of the French. This video suggests that the British doubts about French intentions were not entirely unfounded, but it also suggests that war with the Union [US] would be even bloodier than Crimea, that logistics across the Atlantic would be strained, and that loss of all or part of Canada might be the result. In typical European Imperial thinking, joining the anti-US alliance with France would likely make France Stronger and would make the US very hostile and likely to endanger Canada. I wonder if there are any British documents on this.
Well done!
Mükemmel!
great video about this war the background info etc perfect
ı am waiting for 1878 russo turkish war
That quote at 10:32... It's funny how just now in our time we are hearing the same argument. Nothing ever changes really.
Incredible!
thank you a lot for the documentary, i enjoyed it.
Excellent video, thank you. The letters of those involved are especially helpful. I personally would have preferred to see a bit less of the screen devoted to it but my vision is reduced to me wate bing on a phone.
All in all - Excellent.
Crimean War let’s go!
That’s one way of putting it
Love these documentaries!! Some of the best out there!
Главное, вам надо помнить, что это всё ложь.
Этот фильм одна лживая пропаганда
This is the single best video I have watched so far on the Crimean War. Happy to have found this channel via your collaboration with Drachinifel.
welcome to the show
Nice map graphic helps a lot
The numbers of men wasted in these wars never fail to astound no matter how many times I read, watch or listen to historical accounts. 450,000 Russians alone for what was a small war. And, yes, I know that disease was the biggest killer.
Bro, 143 thousand Russians killed, not 450 thousand...
The Crimean War in a simple way is when three powerful empires of their time - British, French and Ottoman - took one Russian small city for a year. Sevastopol was not even the regional capital of Crimea. Most likely, as always, fewer Russians died than the British, Turks and French, but the British always lie about Russia in their history books.
450,000 Russians? Where did you get that number from? It were the westerns and Ottomans invading and dying from sickness and neglect of supplies, we lost many men admittedly some unnecessary but the enemy suffered just as much if not worst
@@AlinaCZcamsVlogs some historians say there were acually 700000 Russians dead.
Outrageous lie of western propaganda
The Franz Joseph mentioned here is the same one as in WW1. This guy ruled for 68 Years. Crazy to think about it
I learned about this war through the poem "Charge of the Light Brigade" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson.
Thank you for this. Very thorough, clear, and well organized. Only the insistence on foreign accents and language weakened this.
Interesting you say that. He does always tend to pronounce foreign words and phrases with what sounds like an authentic accent but, like you, it does tend to throw me off a bit when I hear Sevastopol or Inkerman pronounced so differently to how I am used to hearing them.
"and to support national unification movements of smaller peoples when convenient to French interests. " .... Oh that cracks me up, because its so true, and so emblematic of the 19th century
3600 deaths in three hours, that is more than the attack on Omaha beach. this war was brutal.
Excellent quality documentary! ❤
Great video! Please more
Hearing the numbers from these battles really puts the Somme into a new perspective.
GREAT VIDEO, AS ALWAYS, WILL THERE ALSO BE EPISODES ON ITALY'S UNIFICATION WARS?
Possibly
yeah,crusade with the muslims on fellow christians, really well formulated. europe let the ottomans carry out the extermination of orthodox christians in the balkans, the united kingdom even helped them to fortify the cities and equipped them with modern cannons and weapons in the first baklan war. thank them very much for that.
Russia was the crusading state in this case.
Fascinating; thanks!
Excellent video
Imagine being the Ottomans, so your a Islamic Empire and you got two secterian christians having a beef over something in your territory and your just caught in the middle of it.
Very informative. I was unaware that religious justification played any part in this war.
I don't know English. What is religious justification? what exactly is he talking about
@@yclMustafa Using religion as a reason to do something, in this case, to go to war.
@@morgan97475 What reasons is he talking about in the video?
@@yclMustafa russian emperor using the protection of the orthdox population in the muslim ottoman empire as an excuse to start the war and to motivate his army, hence why it was called "the final crusade".
@@yclMustafa religion=din in turkish