Romania- 60,000 soldiers
190 guns
Bulgaria - 40 000
Serbia - 81 500
Montenegro - 25 000

Turkey- 281,000 soldiers Military casualties - 15,567 killed
56,652 wounded
6,824 died of wounds
81,363 died of disease
3.5 thousand missing
1,713 died from other causes
35 thousand fired into incompetent

Romania- 1,350 killed and wounded
Bulgaria- 15,000 killed and wounded
Serbia- 5,000 killed and wounded
Montenegro- 5,000 killed and wounded

Turkey- 30,000 killed
90,000 died from disease

Russian-Turkish wars
1676−1681 - 1686−1700 - 1710−1713 1735−1739 - 1768−1774 - 1787−1792 1806−1812 - 1828−1829 - 1853−1856 1877−1878 - 1914−1917

Background to the conflict

Oppression of Christians in the Ottoman Empire

The consequence of the uprising in Crete, especially as a result of the brutality with which the Turkish authorities suppressed it, was to draw attention in Europe (in Great Britain in particular) to the issue of the oppressed position of Christians in the Ottoman Empire.

“However little attention was paid by the British to the affairs of the Ottoman Empire, and however imperfect their knowledge of all the details, enough information leaked from time to time to produce a vague but firm belief that the sultans did not fulfill their “firm promises” made to Europe ; that the vices of the Ottoman government were incurable; and that when the time comes for another crisis to arise affecting the "independence" of the Ottoman Empire, it will be absolutely impossible for us to again give the Ottomans the support we gave earlier during the Crimean War.

Changing the balance of power in Europe

Revising the results of the Crimean War has become the main goal of Russian foreign policy. However, it was not so simple - the Paris Peace Treaty of 1856 provided for guarantees of the integrity of the Ottoman Empire from Great Britain and France. The openly hostile stance taken by Austria during the war complicated the situation. Of the great powers, only Prussia maintained friendly relations with Russia.

During the suppression of the Bulgarian uprising, Turkish troops committed massacres of civilians, more than 30 thousand people died; in particular, irregular units, the bashi-bazouks, raged. A propaganda campaign was launched against the pro-Turkish line of the British government, Disraeli, by a number of journalists and publications, accusing the latter of ignoring the cruelties of Turkish irregulars; A special role was played by the materials of the American journalist, married to a Russian citizen, Januarius McGahan (Eng. Januarius A. MacGahan), printed in the opposition Daily News. In July - August 1876, Disraeli was forced to repeatedly defend the government's policy on the Eastern Question in the House of Commons, as well as to justify the false reports of the British ambassador in Constantinople, Henry Elliot ( Sir Henry George Elliot). On August 11 of the same year, during the last debate for him in the lower house (the next day he was elevated to the peerage), he found himself in complete isolation, being subjected to severe criticism from representatives of both parties.

Publications in Daily News caused a wave of public outrage in Europe: Charles Darwin, Oscar Wilde, Victor Hugo and Giuseppe Garibaldi spoke out in support of the Bulgarians.

Victor Hugo, in particular, wrote in August 1876 in a French parliamentary newspaper:

“It is necessary to draw the attention of European governments to one fact, one very small fact that governments do not even notice ... An entire people will be exterminated. Where? in Europe… Will there be an end to the torment of this little heroic people?”

Public opinion in England was finally turned against the "Turkophile" policy of supporting the Ottoman Empire by the publication in early September 1876 of the pamphlet "Bulgarian Horrors and the Eastern Question" by the leader of the opposition Gladstone ( The Bulgarian Horrors and the Question of the East), which was the main factor in the non-intervention of England on the side of Turkey during the declaration of war by Russia that followed the following year. Gladstone's pamphlet, in its positive part, outlined a program for granting autonomy to Bosnia, Herzegovina and Bulgaria.

The events in the Balkans and in Russia during the initial period of the crisis are the subject of a number of works of Russian fiction.

• In Turgenev's poem "Croquet at Windsor" (1876), Queen Victoria was openly accused of condoning the actions of Turkish fanatics;
• Polonsky's poem "Bulgarian Woman" (1876) tells of the humiliation of a Bulgarian woman sent to a Muslim harem and living with a thirst for revenge.

Serbia's defeat and diplomatic maneuvering

• In June, Serbia, followed by Montenegro, declared war on Turkey (see Serbo-Montenegrin-Turkish war). Representatives of Russia and Austria officially warned against this, but the Serbs did not attach much importance to this, since they were sure that Russia would not allow them to be defeated by the Turks.

Ignoring the united will of the European powers by the Turks gave Russia the opportunity to ensure the neutrality of the European powers in the war with Turkey. Invaluable assistance in this was provided by the Turks themselves, who by their actions helped to dismantle the provisions of the Treaty of Paris, which protected them from a one-on-one war with Russia.

Russia's entry into the war

In terms of combat training, the Russian army was superior to the enemy, but inferior to him in terms of weapons (Turkish troops were armed with the latest British and American rifles).

The active support of the Russian army by the peoples of the Balkans and Transcaucasia strengthened the morale of the Russian troops, which included the Bulgarian militia, Armenian and Georgian militia.

The Turkish fleet completely dominated the Black Sea. Russia, having achieved the right to the Black Sea Fleet only in 1871, did not have time to restore it by the beginning of the war.

General situation and plans of the parties

There were two possible theaters of military operations: the Balkans and the Transcaucasus. The Balkans were the key, since it was here that one could count on the support of the local population (for the sake of whose liberation the war was fought). In addition, the successful exit of the Russian army to Constantinople led the Ottoman Empire out of the war.

Two natural barriers stood in the way of the Russian army to Constantinople:

• Danube, the Turkish coast of which was thoroughly fortified by the Ottomans. The fortresses in the famous "quadrangle" of fortresses - Ruschuk - Shumla - Bazardzhik - Silistra - were the most protected in Europe, if not in the whole world. The Danube was a full-flowing river, the Turkish coast of which was thoroughly swampy, which greatly complicated the landing on it. In addition, the Turks had 17 armored monitors on the Danube, which could withstand an artillery duel with coastal artillery, which further complicated the crossing of the river. With competent protection, one could hope to inflict very significant losses on the Russian army.
• Balkan ridge, through which there were several convenient crossings, the main of which was Shipka. The defending side could meet the attackers in well-fortified positions both on the pass itself and at the exit from it. It was possible to get around the Balkan Range along the sea, but then you would have to take the well-fortified Varna by storm.

The Turkish fleet completely dominated the Black Sea, which made it necessary to organize the supply of the Russian army in the Balkans by land.

The war plan was based on the idea of ​​a lightning victory: the army was supposed to cross the Danube in the middle reaches of the river, in the Nikopol-Sistov section, where the Turks had no fortresses, in an area inhabited by Bulgarians friendly to Russia. After the crossing, the army should have been divided into three equal groups: the first - blocks the Turkish fortresses in the lower reaches of the river; the second - acts against Turkish forces in the direction of Viddin; the third - crosses the Balkans and goes to Constantinople.

The Turkish plan provided for an active defensive course of action: by concentrating the main forces (about 100 thousand people) in the “quadrangle” of fortresses - Ruschuk - Shumla - Bazardzhik - Silistria, lure the Russians who had crossed to the Balkans, deep into Bulgaria, and then defeat them, falling on their left flank and communications. At the same time, quite significant forces of Osman Pasha, about 30 thousand people, were concentrated in Western Bulgaria, near Sofia and Vidin, with the task of monitoring Serbia and Romania and preventing the Russian army from joining the Serbs. In addition, small detachments occupied the Balkan passes and fortifications along the Middle Danube.

Operations in the European theater of war

Forcing the Danube

The Russian army, by prior agreement with Romania, passed through its territory and crossed the Danube in several places in June. To ensure the crossing of the Danube, it was necessary to neutralize the Turkish Danube flotilla in the place of possible crossings. This task was accomplished by the installation of minefields on the river, covered by coastal batteries. Light mine boats deployed by rail were also involved.

• On April 29, Russian heavy artillery blew up the flagship Turkish corvette Lutfi-Celil near Brail, who died with the entire crew;
• On May 14, mine boats of lieutenants Shestakov and Dubasov sunk the Khivzi Rahman monitor.

The Turkish river flotilla was upset by the actions of the Russian sailors and could not prevent the crossing of the Russian troops.

• On June 10 (22), the Lower Danube detachment crossed the Danube at Galati and Braila and soon occupied Northern Dobruja.
• On the night of June 15 (27), Russian troops under the command of General M.I. Dragomirov crossed the Danube in the area of ​​Zimnitsa. The troops were dressed in winter black uniforms to remain unnoticed in the dark, but, starting from the second echelon, the crossing took place under fierce fire. Losses amounted to 1100 people killed and wounded.
• On June 21 (July 3), sappers prepared a bridge across the Danube near Zimnitsa. The transfer of the main forces of the Russian army across the Danube began.

The Turkish command did not take active steps to prevent the Russian army from forcing the Danube. The first line on the way to Constantinople was surrendered without serious battles.

Plevna and Shipka

The main body of the army, which crossed the Danube, was not enough for a decisive offensive through the Balkan Range. For this, only the advanced detachment of General I.V. Gurko (12 thousand people) was allocated. To secure the flanks, a 45,000-strong Eastern and 35,000-strong Western detachments were created. The rest of the forces were in Dobruja, on the left bank of the Danube or on the way. On June 25 (July 7), the forward detachment occupied Tarnovo, and on July 2 (14) they crossed the Balkans through the Hainkoy Pass. Soon the Shipka Pass was occupied, where the created Southern Detachment was advanced (20 thousand people, in August - 45 thousand). The way to Constantinople was open, but there were no sufficient forces for an offensive in the Trans-Balkan region. The advance detachment occupied Eski Zagra (Stara Zagora), but soon the Turkish 20,000-strong corps of Suleiman Pasha, transferred from Albania, approached here. After a fierce battle at Eski-Zagra, in which the Bulgarian militias distinguished themselves, the advance detachment withdrew to Shipka.

Successes were followed by failures. From the moment the Danube was crossed, Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich actually lost control of the troops. The Western detachment captured Nikopol, but did not have time to take Plevna (Pleven), where the 15,000th corps of Osman Pasha approached from Vidin. The assaults on Plevna, undertaken on July 8 (20) and July 18 (30), ended in complete failure and fettered the actions of the Russian troops (see Siege of Pleven).

Rebellion in Abkhazia

In May, mountaineers, with the support of Turkish emissaries, raised a rebellion in Abkhazia. After a two-day bombardment by the Turkish squadron and an amphibious landing, Sukhum was abandoned; by June, the entire Black Sea coast from Ochemchira to Adler was occupied by the Turks. June indecisive attempts by the head of the Sukhum department, General P. P. Kravchenko, to recapture the city were not crowned with success. Turkish troops left the city only on August 19, after reinforcements from Russia and units removed from the Primorsky direction approached the Russian troops in Abkhazia.

The temporary occupation of the Black Sea coast by the Turks affected Chechnya and Dagestan, where revolts also broke out. As a result, 2 Russian infantry divisions were forced to linger there.

Actions in the Caucasus

• On April 17, Bayazet was occupied by the Cossacks of the Tergukasov detachment without a fight.
• On June 6, the Bayazet citadel, occupied by a Russian garrison of 1,600 people, was besieged by Faik Pasha's troops (25 thousand people). The siege (called the Bayazet seat) continued until June 28, when it was lifted by the returning detachment of Terkugasov. During the siege, the garrison lost 10 officers and 276 lower ranks killed and wounded. After that, Bayazet was abandoned by the Russian troops.
• The offensive of the Primorsky detachment developed extremely slowly, and after the landing of the Turks near Sukhum, General Oklobzhio was forced to send part of the forces under the command of General Alkhazov to help General Kravchenko, because of this, military operations in the Batumi direction until the end of the war took a protracted positional character.

In July-August, there was a long period of inactivity in Transcaucasia, caused by the fact that both sides were waiting for the arrival of reinforcements.

• September 20, upon the arrival of the 1st Grenadier Division, Russian troops went on the offensive near Kars; by October 3, the army of Mukhtar (25-30 thousand people) that opposed them was defeated and retreated to Kars.
• On October 13, Russian units (Lazarev's detachment) went to Kars and began siege work.
• On October 23, Mukhtar's army was again defeated near Erzerum, and which from the next day was also besieged by Russian troops.
• November 6, after a three-week siege, Kars was taken by Russian troops.

After this important event, the main goal of the actions was Erzurum, where the remnants of the enemy army were hiding. But here the allies of the Turks were the onset of cold and the extreme difficulty of delivering all kinds of supplies along mountain roads. In the troops standing in front of the fortress, disease and mortality reached terrifying proportions. As a result, by January 21, 1878, when a truce was signed, Erzerum could not be taken.

Conclusion of a peace treaty

The borders of the Balkan states and Russia according to the San Stefano peace treaty

Peace negotiations began after the victory at Sheinov, but were greatly delayed due to the intervention of England. Finally, on January 19, preliminary peace conditions were signed in Adrianople, and an armistice was concluded with the definition of demarcation lines for both belligerents. However, the basic terms of peace turned out to be inconsistent with the claims of the Romanians and Serbs, and most importantly, they aroused strong fears in England and Austria. The British government demanded new loans from Parliament to mobilize the army. In addition, on February 1, Admiral Gornby's squadron entered the Dardanelles. In response to this, the Russian commander-in-chief moved troops to the demarcation line the very next day.

The statement of the Russian government that, in view of the actions of England, it is planned to occupy Constantinople, prompted the British to be compliant, and on February 4 an agreement followed, according to which Hornby's squadron was to withdraw 100 km from Constantinople, and the Russians were obliged to return behind their demarcation line.

The borders established as a result of the war remained in force until the Balkan Wars of 1912-1913, with some changes:

• Bulgaria and Eastern Rumelia merged into a single principality;
• Bulgaria declared itself a kingdom independent of Turkey, and Austria-Hungary annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina, which it had previously occupied.

The war marked the gradual withdrawal of Great Britain from confrontation in relations with Russia. After the fall of the Suez Canal to British control in 1875, the British desire to prevent further weakening of Turkey at all costs began to wane. British policy switched to protecting British interests in Egypt, which was occupied by Britain in 1882 and remained a British protectorate until 1922. The British advance in Egypt did not directly affect the interests of Russia, and, accordingly, the tension in relations between the two countries gradually weakened.

The transition to a military alliance became possible after the conclusion of a compromise on Central Asia in 1907, formalized by the Anglo-Russian Treaty of August 31, 1907. From this date, the emergence of the Entente is counted - the Anglo-French-Russian coalition opposing the German-led alliance of the Central Powers. The opposition of these blocks led to the First World War -1918.

Russian-Turkish war 1877-1878 in art

Painting

• Balkan series by Vasily Vereshchagin

Fiction

Author	Name of the book	Description
Valentin Pikul	Bayazet (1960)	Main theme - Bayazet seat
Boris Akunin	Turkish Gambit (1998)	The secret version of the Pleven events
V. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko	Skobelev (1886)	Memories of Skobelev
Boris Vasiliev	Were and Were Not	Liberation of the Balkans

Movie

Monuments of the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878

This war entered Bulgarian history as "Russian-Turkish Liberation War". On the territory of modern Bulgaria, where the main battles of this war took place, there are over 400 monuments to Russians who fought for the freedom of the Bulgarian people.

War between Turkey and Russia in 1877-1878. was unleashed as a result of the political crisis that swept Europe in the early 70s of the 19th century.

The main causes and preconditions of the war

In 1875, an uprising against the Turkish sultan broke out in Bosnia and within a few months spread to the territories of Serbia, Macedonia, Montenegro and Bulgaria. The Turkish army was forced to suppress the Slavic resistance, which brought huge human losses for these states.

The forces of the warring parties were unequal; the small Slavic states did not have either a professional army or a material and technical base. To free from Turkish expansion, the help of other, strong states was required, thus, the Russian Empire was drawn into the conflict.

The Russian government at first acted as an arbiter, trying to try on the sides, however, with the strengthening of the anti-Slavic policy of the Tupetsk Sultan, it was forced to enter into a confrontation with the Ottoman Empire.

Military action in the Turkish war

The Russian emperor tried by all available methods to delay the hostilities: the reformation of the army, which began in the late 60s, had not yet been completed, the military industry was working at a low level and there was an acute shortage of ammunition and weapons.

Despite this, in May 1877, Russia entered into an active military confrontation. The fighting took place in two theaters, the Transcaucasian and the Balkan. Between July and October, the Russian army, together with the military forces of Bulgaria and Romania, won a number of victories on the Balkan front.

At the beginning of 1878, the Allied army was able to overcome the Balkan Mountains and occupy part of southern Bulgaria, where decisive hostilities were unfolding. Under the leadership of the outstanding general M, D. Skoblev, the Russian troops not only held back a large-scale enemy offensive from all fronts, but already in early January 1879 they were able to occupy Adrianople and reach Constantinople.

Significant successes were also achieved on the Transcaucasian front in November 1877, the Russian army stormed the main strategic object of the Ottoman Empire, the Kare fortress. Turkey's defeat in the war became obvious.

Peace treaty and Congress of Berlin

In mid-1878, a peace treaty was concluded between the warring parties in the Constantinopolitan suburb of San Stefano. According to the treaty, the Balkan states received sovereignty and independence from the Ottoman Empire.

The Russian Empire, as a victor, regained Southern Bessarabia, lost during the Crimean War, and also acquired new military bases in the Caucasus Ardagan, Bayazet, Batum and Kara. The possession of these fortresses meant Russia's complete control over the actions of the Turkish government in the Transcaucasian region.

The states of Europe could not come to terms with the fact of strengthening the positions of the Russian Empire on the Balkan Peninsula. In the summer of 1878, a congress was convened in Berlin, in which the sides of the Russian-Turkish war and European countries took part.

Under the political pressure of Austria-Hungary and England, the Balkan states were forced to give up their sovereignty. Bulgaria and Bosnia and Herzegovina actually turned into colonies of European powers. The Ottoman Empire, for the support provided to England, provided the island of Cyprus.

Peace was signed in San Stefano on February 19 (March 3), 1878. Count N.P. Ignatiev even gave up some of the Russian demands in order to end the matter precisely on February 19 and please the tsar with such a telegram: “On the day of the liberation of the peasants, you freed the Christians from the Muslim yoke.”

The San Stefano peace treaty changed the entire political picture of the Balkans in favor of Russian interests. Here are its main terms. /281/

1. Serbia, Romania and Montenegro, previously vassal to Turkey, gained independence.
2. Bulgaria, previously a disenfranchised province, acquired the status of a principality, although vassal in form to Turkey (“paying tribute”), but in fact independent, with its own government and army.
3. Turkey undertook to pay Russia an indemnity of 1,410 million rubles, and on account of this amount it ceded Kapc, Ardagan, Bayazet and Batum in the Caucasus, and even South Bessarabia, torn from Russia after the Crimean War.

Official Russia noisily celebrated the victory. The king generously poured awards, but with a choice, falling mainly into his relatives. Both Grand Dukes - both "Uncle Nizi" and "Uncle Mikhi" - became field marshals.

Meanwhile, England and Austria-Hungary, reassured about Constantinople, launched a campaign to revise the Treaty of San Stefano. Both powers took up arms especially against the creation of the Bulgarian Principality, which they correctly regarded as an outpost of Russia in the Balkans. Thus, Russia, having just with difficulty mastered Turkey, who had a reputation as a "sick man", found herself in the face of a coalition from England and Austria-Hungary, i.e. coalitions of "two big men". For a new war with two opponents at once, each of which was stronger than Turkey, Russia had neither the strength nor the conditions (a new revolutionary situation was already brewing within the country). Tsarism turned to Germany for diplomatic support, but Bismarck declared that he was ready to play only the role of an "honest broker", and proposed to convene an international conference on the Eastern question in Berlin.

On June 13, 1878, the historic Congress of Berlin opened. All his affairs were handled by the "big five": Germany, Russia, England, France and Austria-Hungary. The delegates of another six countries were extras. A member of the Russian delegation, General D.G. Anuchin, wrote in his diary: "The Turks are sitting like chumps."

Bismarck presided over the congress. The British delegation was headed by Prime Minister B. Disraeli (Lord Beaconsfield), a long-term (from 1846 to 1881) leader of the Conservative Party, which still honors Disraeli as one of its founders. France was represented by Foreign Minister W. Waddington (an Englishman by birth, which did not prevent him from being an Anglophobe), Austria-Hungary was represented by Foreign Minister D. Andrassy, ​​once a hero of the Hungarian revolution of 1849, who was sentenced to death by an Austrian court for this , and now the leader of the most reactionary and aggressive forces of Austria-Hungary. The head of the Russian / 282 / delegation was formally considered the 80-year-old Prince Gorchakov, but he was already decrepit and ill. In fact, the delegation was led by the Russian ambassador in London, the former chief of gendarmes, ex-dictator P.A. Shuvalov, who turned out to be a much worse diplomat than a gendarme. Evil tongues assured him that he happened to confuse the Bosphorus with the Dardanelles.

The Congress worked for exactly one month. Its final act was signed on July 1 (13), 1878. During the congress, it became clear that Germany, worried about the excessive strengthening of Russia, did not want to support it. France, which had not yet recovered from the defeat of 1871, gravitated toward Russia, but was so afraid of Germany that it did not dare to actively support Russian demands. Taking advantage of this, England and Austria-Hungary imposed decisions on the Congress that changed the Treaty of San Stefano to the detriment of Russia and the Slavic peoples of the Balkans, and Disraeli did not act like a gentleman: there was a case when he even ordered an emergency train for himself, threatening to leave the Congress and thus disrupt his work.

The territory of the Bulgarian principality was limited to only the northern half, and southern Bulgaria became an autonomous province of the Ottoman Empire under the name "Eastern Rumelia". The independence of Serbia, Montenegro and Romania was confirmed, but the territory of Montenegro was also reduced in comparison with the agreement in San Stefano. Serbia, on the other hand, slaughtered part of Bulgaria in order to quarrel them. Russia returned Bayazet to Turkey, and collected not 1410 million, but only 300 million rubles as an indemnity. Finally, Austria-Hungary negotiated for itself the "right" to occupy Bosnia and Herzegovina. Only England seemed to have received nothing in Berlin. But, firstly, it was England (together with Austria-Hungary) who imposed all the changes in the San Stefano Treaty, which were beneficial only to Turkey and England, which stood behind her back, to Russia and the Balkan peoples, and secondly, the British government a week before the opening The Berlin Congress forced Turkey to cede Cyprus to him (in exchange for the obligation to protect Turkish interests), which the Congress tacitly sanctioned.

The positions of Russia in the Balkans, won in the battles of 1877-1878. at the cost of the lives of more than 100 thousand Russian soldiers, were undermined in the debates of the Berlin Congress in such a way that the Russian-Turkish war turned out to be for Russia, although won, but unsuccessful. Tsarism never managed to reach the straits, and Russia's influence in the Balkans did not become stronger, since the Berlin Congress divided Bulgaria, cut Montenegro, transferred Bosnia and Herzegovina to Austria-Hungary, and even quarreled with Serbia and Bulgaria. The concessions of Russian diplomacy in Berlin testified to the military and political inferiority of tsarism and, paradoxically as it looked after the war won /283/, the weakening of its authority in the international arena. Chancellor Gorchakov, in a note to the tsar on the results of the Congress, admitted: "The Berlin Congress is the blackest page in my official career." The king added: "And in mine too."

The speech of Austria-Hungary against the Treaty of San Stefano and Bismarck's unfriendly brokerage towards Russia worsened the traditionally friendly Russian-Austrian and Russian-German relations. It was at the Berlin Congress that the prospect of a new alignment of forces was outlined, which would eventually lead to the First World War: Germany and Austria-Hungary against Russia and France.

As for the Balkan peoples, they benefited from the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878. much, although less than what would have been received under the Treaty of San Stefano: this is the independence of Serbia, Montenegro, Romania and the beginning of an independent statehood of Bulgaria. The liberation (albeit incomplete) of the “Slav brothers” stimulated the rise of the liberation movement in Russia itself, because now almost none of the Russians wanted to put up with the fact that they, as the well-known liberal I.I. Petrunkevich, "yesterday's slaves were made citizens, and they themselves returned home as slaves."

The war shook the positions of tsarism not only in the international arena, but also within the country, exposing the ulcers of the economic and political backwardness of the autocratic regime as a consequence incompleteness"great" reforms of 1861-1874. In a word, like the Crimean War, the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878. played the role of a political catalyst, accelerating the maturation of a revolutionary situation in Russia.

Historical experience has shown that war (especially if it is ruinous and even more unsuccessful) exacerbates social contradictions in the antagonistic, i.e. ill-ordered society, aggravating the misery of the masses, and hastening the maturation of the revolution. After the Crimean War, the revolutionary situation (the first in Russia) developed three years later; after the Russian-Turkish 1877-1878. - by the next year (not because the second war was more ruinous or shameful, but because the severity of social contradictions by the beginning of the war of 1877-1878 was greater in Russia than before the Crimean War). The next war of tsarism (Russian-Japanese 1904-1905) already entailed a real revolution, since it turned out to be more ruinous and shameful than even the Crimean War, and social antagonisms are much sharper than during not only the first, but also the second revolutionary situations . Under the conditions of the world war that began in 1914, two revolutions broke out in Russia one after the other - first a democratic one, and then a socialist one. /284/

Historiographic reference. War 1877-1878 between Russia and Turkey is a phenomenon of great international significance, because, firstly, it was conducted because of the Eastern question, then almost the most explosive of the issues of world politics, and, secondly, it ended with the European Congress, which redrawn the political map in the region, then perhaps the "hottest", in the "powder magazine" of Europe, as diplomats spoke of it. Therefore, the interest in the war of historians from different countries is natural.

In pre-revolutionary Russian historiography, the war was portrayed as follows: Russia disinterestedly seeks to liberate the "Slav brothers" from the Turkish yoke, and the selfish powers of the West prevent it from doing this, wanting to take away Turkey's territorial inheritance. This concept was developed by S.S. Tatishchev, S.M. Goryainov and especially the authors of the official nine-volume Description of the Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878. on the Balkan Peninsula" (St. Petersburg, 1901-1913).

For the most part, foreign historiography depicts the war as a clash of two barbarities - Turkish and Russian, and the powers of the West - as civilized peacekeepers who have always helped the Balkan peoples to fight against the Turks with intelligent means; and when the war broke out, they stopped Russia from beating Turkey and saved the Balkans from Russian rule. This is how B. Sumner and R. Seton-Watson (England), D. Harris and G. Rapp (USA), G. Freitag-Loringhoven (Germany) interpret this topic.

As for Turkish historiography (Yu. Bayur, 3. Karal, E. Urash, etc.), it is saturated with chauvinism: the yoke of Turkey in the Balkans is passed off as progressive guardianship, the national liberation movement of the Balkan peoples - for the inspiration of European powers, and all wars , which led the Brilliant Porte in the XVIII-XIX centuries. (including the war of 1877-1878), - for self-defense against the aggression of Russia and the West.

More objective than others are the works of A. Debidur (France), A. Taylor (England), A. Springer (Austria), where the aggressive calculations of all the powers participating in the war of 1877-1878 are criticized. and the Berlin Congress.

Soviet historians for a long time did not pay attention to the war of 1877-1878. proper attention. In the 1920s, M.N. wrote about her. Pokrovsky. He sharply and witty denounced the reactionary policy of tsarism, but underestimated the objectively progressive consequences of the war. Then, for more than a quarter of a century, our historians were not interested in that war /285/, and only after the second liberation of Bulgaria by the force of Russian arms in 1944, the study of the events of 1877-1878 resumed in the USSR. In 1950, P.K. Fortunatov "The War of 1877-1878. and the Liberation of Bulgaria” - interesting and bright, the best of all books on this subject, but small (170 pages) - this is only a brief overview of the war. Somewhat more detailed, but less interesting is the monograph by V.I. Vinogradov.

Labor N.I. Belyaev, although great, is emphatically special: a military-historical analysis without due attention not only to socio-economic, but even to diplomatic subjects. The collective monograph “The Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878”, published in 1977 on the 100th anniversary of the war, edited by I.I. Rostunov.

Soviet historians studied the causes of the war in detail, but in covering the course of hostilities, as well as their results, they contradicted themselves, equals sharpening the aggressive goals of tsarism and the liberation mission of the tsarist army. The works of Bulgarian scientists (X. Khristov, G. Georgiev, V. Topalov) on various issues of the topic are distinguished by similar advantages and disadvantages. A generalizing study of the war of 1877-1878, as fundamental as the monograph by E.V. Tarle about the Crimean War, still not.

For details about it, see: Anuchin D.G. Berlin Congress // Russian antiquity. 1912, nos. 1-5.

Cm.: Debidur A. Diplomatic history of Europe from the Vienna to the Berlin Congress (1814-1878). M., 1947. T 2; Taylor A. Struggle for supremacy in Europe (1848-1918). M., 1958; Springer A. Der russisch-tiirkische Krieg 1877-1878 in Europa. Vienna, 1891-1893.

Cm.: Vinogradov V.I. Russian-Turkish war 1877-1878 and the liberation of Bulgaria. M., 1978.

Cm.: Belyaev N.I. Russian-Turkish war 1877-1878 M., 1956.

The leading direction of foreign policy of the second half of the XIX century. remained eastern question. The Crimean War exacerbated the contradictions in the Balkans and in the Mediterranean region. Russia was very concerned about the insecurity of the borders in the Black Sea region and the inability to defend its interests in the eastern Mediterranean, especially in the straits.

As the national liberation war intensified in the Balkans, a mass movement in support of the South Slavs grew in Russia. A new wave of public indignation arose in connection with the brutal suppression of the April uprising in Bulgaria by the Turkish authorities. Outstanding Russian scientists, writers, artists spoke out in defense of the Bulgarian people - D.I. Mendeleev, N.I. Pirogov, L.N. Tolstoy, I.S. Turgenev, F.M. Dostoevsky, I.S. Isakov, I.E. Repin and others.

In July 1876 The governments of Serbia and Montenegro demanded that Turkey stop the massacre in Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, this demand was not satisfied, and on July 30 both Slavic states declared war on Turkey. About 5 thousand Russian soldiers joined the Serbian army. Russian volunteer doctors worked in hospitals in Serbia and Montenegro, among whom were such well-known doctors as N.V. Sklifosovsky, S.P. Botkin.

In an acute international situation, tsarism sought to evade open participation in the conflict that had arisen. Turkey refused to guarantee the rights of the Christian population.

April 12, 1877 Russia declared war Turkey. Events unfolded in the Balkans and Transcaucasia. On the day of the declaration of war, the Russian army crossed the Romanian border and moved to the Danube. On July 7, Russian troops captured the Shipka Pass.

A large military group was thrown against the Russian troops under the command of Suleiman Pasha. One of the heroic episodes of the war began - protection of the Shipka pass.

In extremely difficult conditions, with the multiple superiority of the enemy forces, the Russian troops repelled the attacks of the Turkish troops.

At the same time, the enemy managed to concentrate large forces in the fortress Plevna located at the intersection of major roads. In November 1977, Plevna surrendered, which was the most important event in the course of the war. After the capture of Plevna by the Russian troops, the final period of the war began.

On December 3, a detachment under the command I.V. Gurko in the most difficult conditions of the mountainous terrain with a 25-degree frost, he overcame the Balkans and liberated Sofia.

Another detachment under the command F.F. Radetzky through the Shipka Pass he reached the fortified Turkish camp of Sheinovo. One of the largest battles of the war took place here, during which the enemy was defeated. Russian troops were moving towards Constantinople.

Events also developed successfully in the Transcaucasian theater of operations. In early May 1877, Russian troops successfully captured the fortresses of Ardagan and Kare.

Negotiations on a peace treaty with Turkey ended February 19, 1878 at San Stefano, near Constantinople. According to the contract Serbia, Romania and Montenegro received full independence. Creation was proclaimed Bulgaria- an autonomous principality, in which Russian troops were located for two years. Turkey committed to reforms in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Northern Dobruja was transferred to Romania. Russia was returning Southern Bessarabia rejected by the Paris Treaty. In Asia, cities retreated to Russia Ardagan, Kars, Batum, Bayazet and a large area up to Saganlung populated mainly by Armenians. The Treaty of San Stefano met the aspirations of the Balkan peoples and was of progressive significance for the peoples of Transcaucasia.

The Western powers could not accept the strengthening of Russian positions in the Balkans and the Caucasus. They refused to accept the terms of the San Stefano Treaty and demanded its revision. Russia was forced to give in.

AT July in Berlin The congress opened in which the European states, acting as a united front, changed the San Stefano Treaty. Southern Bulgaria came under Turkish rule. The territories of independent Serbia, Montenegro and Romania were reduced. Austria-Hungary occupied Bosnia and Herzegovina, England - Cyprus.

Foreign policy of Russia at the end of the 19th century.

In the last quarter of the XIX century. growing contradictions between the great powers: Russia, England, France, Germany and Austria-Hungary. Their confrontation determined the situation in the world, affecting the interests of other states. Late XIX - early XX centuries. was marked by the creation of blocs of states.

June 6 1881 was signed by the Austro-Russian-German treaty, which went down in history under the name " Union of the Three Emperors". The treaty fixed the mutual obligations of the parties to remain generally neutral in the event of a war between one of them and a fourth party. In general, this agreement was beneficial to Russia, but was short-lived and easily terminated, which predetermined its weakness.

Despite the conclusion of the treaty, the policy of the Russian government began to acquire more and more anti-German features. In 1887, decrees were issued restricting the flow of German capital into Russia and raising duties on the import of metal, metal products and coal, on products of the chemical industry, etc.

By the end of the 1980s, Russia's contradictions with Austria-Hungary and Germany had become more significant than those with England. In resolving international issues, the Russian government began to look for partners. An important prerequisite for such a step was the serious changes in the entire European situation, caused by the conclusion of 1882 Triple Alliance between Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy. In the early 1990s, there were signs of a rapprochement between the members of the Triple Alliance and England. Under these conditions, the rapprochement between Russia and France began, which had not only a political, but also an economic basis. Since 1887, Russia began to regularly receive French loans. August 27 1891. was concluded Russian-French alliance, and in 1892 - a military convention. In January 1894, the treaty was ratified by Alexander III.

Russian-Turkish war 1877-1878 (briefly)

Russian-Turkish war 1877-1878 (briefly)

As the main reason for the outbreak of hostilities, historians single out an increase in national self-consciousness in the Balkan countries. This kind of sentiment in society was associated with the so-called April Uprising, which took place in Bulgaria. The ruthlessness and cruelty with which this rebellion was suppressed forced the European states (together with the Russian Empire) to show sympathy for the brothers in faith who were in Turkey.

So, on the twenty-fourth of April 1877, Russia declares war on the Port. Archbishop Pavel at a prayer service after the Chisinau solemn parade reads the manifesto of Alexander II, who announced the beginning of the war against the Ottoman Empire. Already in May of the same year, Russian troops entered the Romanian land.

The military reform of Alexander II also affected the preparedness and organization of the troops. The Russian army consisted of almost seven hundred thousand people.

The army's move to Romania was made to eliminate the Danubian fleet, which controlled most of the Danube crossings. A small Turkish river flotilla was unable to fight back, and very soon the Dnieper was forced by Russian troops, which was the first step towards Constantinople. As the next important step, we can single out the siege of Plevna, which capitulated on the tenth of December. After that, the Russian troops, consisting of three hundred thousand people, were preparing for the offensive.

In the same period, Serbia resumes operations against the Porte, and on December 23, 1877, a detachment of General Romeiko-Gurko makes a raid through the Balkans, thanks to which Sofia was taken.

On the twenty-seventh and twenty-eighth of December, an important battle takes place at Sheinovo, the result of which is the defeat of the Turkish army of thirty thousand.

The main tasks of the Asian direction of the Russian-Turkish war were to ensure the security of the borders and the desire to break the concentration of the Turks on the European border.

Historians are accustomed to consider the beginning of the Caucasian campaign the Abkhazian rebellion, which took place in May 1877. In the same period, the city of Sukhum was abandoned by the Russians and it was only possible to return it in August. During the Transcaucasian operations, Russian troops captured many strongholds and fortresses. However, in the second half of the summer of 1877, hostilities "froze" in anticipation of reinforcements.

Beginning in the fall, Russian troops adhered exclusively to siege tactics. For example, they took the city of Kars, the capture of which never took place due to a truce.