Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T15:17:36.115Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

IV. How Russia made peace September 1855 to April 1856

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2011

W. E. Mosse
W. E. Mosse
Affiliation:
Senior Lecturer in East European History in the University of Glasgow
Get access

Extract

In 1854 Russia for the first time was confronted with that doubtful privilege of national greatness, a single-handed war with a coalition of major European powers. When Nicholas I, ignoring the prudent advice of Nesselrode, his Minister of Foreign Affairs, had ordered his troops to occupy once again the Danubian Principalities, Turkey had resisted, England and France after some hesitation had come to her assistance, and Austria had been converted from a close ally into an unfriendly neutral.

Type
Research Article
Information
Cambridge Historical Journal , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , 1955 , pp. 297 - 316
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1955

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Twice before, during the Turkish wars of Catherine II, Russia had been threatened by a hostile coalition, but the first time she had been saved by the expedient of the first partition of Poland, the second time by Charles James Fox and the Opposition in the British House of Commons. During the second crisis, moreover, she had for a time enjoyed the alliance, albeit an inefficient one, of the Austria of Joseph II.

2 Esterhazy to Buol, 3 Mar. 1855, cit. de Guichen, Vicomte, La Guerre de Crimée (1854–56) (Paris, 1936), p. 253Google Scholar. Guichen's system of references is defective. Cf. also [Diplomatic] Study [of the Crimean War], a Russian official publication attributed to Baron A. de Jomini of the Russian Foreign Office and reflecting the views of Alexander Gorchakov (Engl. ed. London, 1882), ii, p. 297, and Tatishchev, S. S., Imperator Aleksandr II (St Petersburg, 1903), I, p. 144Google Scholar.

3 Esterhazy to Buol, 15 Mar. 1855, cit. Guichen, op. cit. p. 255.

4 Study, p. 303.

5 For an account of the Vienna conferences cf. Geffcken, E. Heinrich, Geschichte des orientalischen Krieges 1853–1856 (Berlin, 1881), pp. 178 ffGoogle Scholar.

6 Alexander II to Paskievich, 20 May 1855, cit. Tatishchev, op. cit. pp. 149 f. ‘Na dalneischija ustupki’. Alexander declared emphatically, ‘ja ni pod kakim vidom nje soglaschus’ (ibid.).

7 The same to M. D. Gorchakov, 14 May 1855, ibid.

8 Ibid. p. 151.

9 Ibid. p. 153.

10 He was a cousin of Alexander Gorchakov, the ambassador in Vienna.

11 M. D. Gorchakov to the emperor, 8 June 1855, ibid.

12 Alexander II to M. D. Gorchakov, 16 June 1855, ibid. pp. 153 f.

13 The same to the same, 11 June 1855, ibid. pp. 150 f.

14 Ibid. p. 154.

15 M. D. Gorchakov to the tsar, 27 June 1855, ibid. At the beginning of June he had told the Minister of War that the situation of Sevastopol was hopeless, ibid. p. 153.

16 Ibid. p. 155.

17 Alexander II to M. D. Gorchakov, 25 July and 1 Aug. 1855, ibid. pp. 155 f.

18 Ibid. p. 156.

19 The same to the same, 23 Aug. 1855, ibid. p. 157. The Prince of Prussia, uncle of Alexander, visited St Petersburg towards the middle of August. On his return, he reported that the entire imperial family had shown a peaceful disposition—as had the aged Chancellor. The tsar himself, who felt painfully the growing difficulties of the situation, ‘nevertheless preserved his confidence in the outcome of the war and did not seem disposed to yield’: Guichen, op. cit. pp. 284 f.

20 M. D. Gorchakov to the tsar, 26 Aug. 1855, printed in Tatishchev, op. cit. p. 158.

21 Alexander II to M. D. Gorchakov, 2 Sept. 1855, ibid. pp. 158 f.

22 Buol to Karnicki, 4 Sept. 1855, draft, enclosing copy of Nesselrode to Gorchakov, 10/22 Aug. 1855, H[aus] H[of und] S[taats] A[rchiv Vienna], P[ol]. A[rch] R[ussland], X, fasc. 38, H[enderson] T[ranscripts] in the University Library, Cambridge.

23 Histoire de la Diplomatic, ed. V. Potiemkine (Paris, s.d.), i, p. 449. There is no evidence to support the statement and no references are given.

24 The French representative in Berlin secured a copy of a report which the Prussian military attaché at St Petersburg had sent to a member of the Prussian Court. Geffcken, op. cit. p. 193; Potiemkine, op. cit. i, p. 449.

25 Geffcken, op. cit. p. 193.

26 Ibid. p. 160.

27 Karnicki to Buol, 22/10 Sept. 1855, no. 59 A.-C. H.H.S.A. P.A.R.X. fasc. 37: H. T. Guichen, op. cit. p. 288, wrongly attributes this despatch to Esterhazy. Karnicki considered that public opinion had discounted in advance a blow which had been imminent for some time. Russian pride, moreover, would in any case restrain people from showing any dejection which they might feel, and, in addition, the Russian character contained a large element of insouciance (ibid.).

28 Tatishchev. op. cit. pp. 160 f.

29 Ibid. p. 161.

30 Alexander II to M. D. Gorchakov, 14 Sept. 1855, ibid. Cf. the same to Paskievich, 17 Sept. 1855, ibid. pp. 161 f.

31 Ibid. p. 163.

32 Ibid. pp. 163 f.

33 Alexander II to Paskievich, 17 Sept. 1855, ibid. p. 164.

34 Ibid. p. 165.

35 Karnicki to Buol, 22/10 Sept. 1855, H.H.S.A. P.A.R.X. fasc. 37, H.T.

36 At the end of October the Austrian chargé d'affaires reported to Buol ‘quʼil nʼy a absolument rien de changé dans la situation … Toujours la même stagnation sur le terrain diplomatique et grande activité sur les champs de bataille’: Karnicki to Buol, 23/12 Oct. 1855, no. 65, A–B. H.H.S.A. P.A.R.X. fasc. 37, H.T.

37 After the capture of Sevastopol, Pélissier showed no eagerness to attack. ‘Jʼattaquerai, si vous l'ordonnez’, he replied to remonstrances from Paris, and neither Napoleon nor his Minister of War was willing to order an attack in these conditions (Charles-Roux, F., Alexandre II, Gortchakoff et Napoléon III (Paris, 1913), p. 39Google Scholar. Cowley, the British ambassador in Paris, reported that Pélissier had declared that ‘to attack the Russian position on Mackenzie Heights is more difficult than to take Sevastopol’ (Cowley to Clarendon, pte., 17 Oct. 1855, Clarendon MSS., Bodleian Library, Oxford).

38 Cit. Geffcken, op. cit. p. 196. For a detailed account of Napoleon's various plans for Poland cf. Henderson, G. B., Crimean War Diplomacy (Glasgow, 1947), pp. 15 ffGoogle Scholar. ‘Napoleon zeigte die grösste Beharrlichkeit in Bezug auf Polen, und es verging während des Krieges kaum ein Monat, in dem er sich nicht über diesen Gegenstand aussprach’ (ibid. p. 23).

39 Palmerston to Clarendon, pte., 16 Sept. 1855, Clarendon MSS.

40 Guichen, op. cit. p. 294. Cf. Persigny's despatch of 18 Sept. in A. Stern, Geschichte Europas (Berlin, 1920), II, p. 555.

41 Stockhausen to Lenthe, 13 Sept. 1855, no. 70, Staatsarchiv Hannover 9, Türkei no. 27, H.T.

42 Elliott to Clarendon, 3 Oct. 1855, F.O. 7/458 unnumbered.

43 Cowley to Clarendon, pte., 13 Oct. 1855, Clarendon MSS.

44 Tatishchev, op. cit. p. 177.

45 He was the Saxon Minister in Paris.

46 Nesselrode to Beust, 22 Nov. 1855, ibid.

47 Study, pp. 343 ff.

48 For their history cf. Henderson, op. cit. pp. 98 ff.

49 Memo, signed by Count Buol and M. de Bourqueney. Copy in Clarendon to the Queen, 19 Nov. 1855, Royal Archives, G 40 81. I have to acknowledge the gracious permission of Her Majesty the Queen to use material from the Royal Archives, Windsor Castle.

50 Werther to Manteuffel, tg. 26 Nov. 1855, P[reussisches] G[eheimes] S[taats] A[rchiv], A[usw.] A[mt] I A Bq. Türkei 44 vol. 29, H.T.

51 Cf. Guichen, op. cit. p. 285.

52 Ibid. p. 298.

53 Study, p. 347.

54 Whilst Nesselrode had been negotiating with Paris through Seebach, Gorchakov had started a private correspondence with Morny, one of Napoleon's intimates. The early part of the correspondence has been lost, the rest is printed in [Extrait des Mémoires du Duc de] Morny, [Une Ambassade en Russie] (Paris, 1892), pp. 7 ff. The official Russian publication claims that the initiative came from the French side (Study, p. 345). The correspondence was at first general in terms; not till the end of November did serious discussion begin about the most suitable method for implementing the third point (Morny, op. cit. pp. 26 ff.).

Morny offered to meet Gorchakov in Dresden, but the correspondence had only just become serious when it was terminated on orders from St Petersburg. In view of the concurrent negotiations between Nesselrode and Walewski conducted through Seebach, the episode of the Gorchakov-Morny correspondence is in itself of small importance. It bulks large in the histories of the period on account of Gorchakov's later prominence as Foreign Minister. Gorchakov himself was to see to it that his exchanges with Morny received the fullest publicity (Study, p. 345 f.). The correspondence between Nesselrode and Seebach, on the other hand, has never been published.

55 Alexander II to M. D. Gorchakov, 24 Oct. 1855, Tatishchev, op. cit. pp. 174 f.

56 Ibid.

57 Tatishchev, op. cit. p. 186.

58 Alexander II to M. D. Gorchakov, 18 Oct. 1855, printed ibid. p. 167.

59 Study, p. 347; Karnicki to Buol, tg. 1 Dec. 1855, H.H.S.A. P.A.R.X. fasc. 38, H.T.

60 Study, p. 350.

61 Ibid. p. 351.

62 Ibid. p. 347.

63 Geffcken, op. cit. p. 205.

64 Hatzfeldt to Manteuffel, pte., 20 Dec. 1855, P.G.S.A., A.A. I A Bq. Türkei 44 vol. 29, H.T.

65 Ibid.

66 Geffcken, op. cit. p. 200. For the amendments proposed by the British government cf. ibid. pp. 201 ff.

67 Hatzfeldt to Manteuffel, pte., 20 Dec. 1855, P.G.S.A., A.A. I A Bq. Türkei 44 vol. 29, H.T.; Geffcken, op. cit. p. 206.

68 Study, p. 336.

69 For the text of the treaty see Guichen, op. cit. p. 346.

70 Esterhazy to Buol, 29 Dec. 1855, ibid. pp. 312 f.

71 In fact, the treaty was accompanied by an exchange of notes laying down the conditions in which it was to be converted into an offensive alliance against Russia. A plan of campaign was already under discussion between Marshal Canrobert and the Crown Prince of Sweden (Stern, op. cit. p. 124); Debidour, A., Histoire diplomatique de l'Europe (Paris, 1891), ii, p. 142Google Scholar.

72 Study, p. 338.

73 Printed without date in Geffcken, op. cit. pp. 208 f.

74 Ibid.

75 Alexander II to M. D. Gorchakov, 23 Dec. 1855, Tatishchev, op. cit. p. 179.

76 Geffcken, op. cit. p. 208.

77 Esterhazy to Buol, 29 Dec. 1855 no. 76, Guichen op. cit. pp. 311 ff.

78 Ibid, and the same to the same, tg. 30 Dec. 1855, H.H.S.A. P.A.R.X. fasc. 37, H.T.

79 Guichen, op. cit. p. 313 n. 40.

80 Esterhazy to Buol, t.g. 30 Dec. 1855, H.H.S.A. P.A.R.X. fasc. 37, H.T., and the same to the same, 12 Jan. 1856, no. 2 D ibid, fasc. 39, H.T.

81 A. P. Sablotski-Desjatovski, Graf P. D. Kiselev (St Petersburg, 1883) pp. 3ff.; Tatishchev, op. cit. pp. 182 ff. For the Russian amendments cf. Geffcken, op. cit. pp. 211 f.

82 Alexander II to M. D. Gorchakov, 6 Jan. 1856, Tatishchev, op. cit. p. 184.

83 Esterhazy to Buol. tg. 7 Jan. 1856, H.H.S.A. P.A.R.X. fasc. 39, H.T.

84 The same to the same, t.g., 7 Jan. 1856 and no. 2 D, 12 Jan. 1855, ibid.

85 Nesselrode to Gorchakov, 11/23 Dec. 1855 no. 479 réservée, quoted in Gorchakov to Nesselrode, 22 Dec. 3 Jan. 1855/6 W[ürtembergisches] S[taats] A[rchiv] (Stuttgart), cccxiv, no. 49.

86 Esterhazy to Buol, tg. 3 Jan. 1856, ibid.

87 The same to the same, 12 Jan. 1856, no. 2 A–G, ibid.

88 The same to the same, 29 Jan. 1856, no. 7 A–F, ibid.

89 The same to the same, 12 Jan. 1856, no. 2 A–G, ibid.

90 Ibid.

91 Buol to Esterhazy, tg. 12 Jan. 1856, ibid.

92 This despatch is the same to the same, no. 2 confid., 16 Dec. 1855, ibid, fasc. 38.

93 The same to the same, tg. 12 Jan. 1856 ibid. fasc. 39.

94 Study, op. cit. p. 360.

95 Ibid. Some mystery surrounds the form of Gorchakov's advice; the Study asserts that it was telegraphed; Geffcken op. cit. p. 215 maintains that Gorchakov sent a telegram asking Nesselrode to await the arrival of a despatch due on 17 Jan. before making a decision. It is impossible to establish which is the correct account. It is therefore uncertain whether, before the decisive Council of 15 Jan., Nesselrode had before him Gorchakov's proposals or merely a telegram asking him to await their arrival. Geffcken summarizes the telegram, Jomini the despatch, but since both use a defective system of references, it is impossible to establish the truth. The point is of some importance, since Gorchakov and his partisans later blamed Nesselrode for not having submitted the despatch to the Council and even accused him of having concealed it from the tsar (Study, op. cit. p. 360).

96 Lüttichau to Beust, iii, 13 Jan. 1856, Sächsisches Haupt Staats Archiv, Ausw. Min. Repos. 29, no. 9, Paris 1856, H.T.

97 Napoleon to Victoria, 14 Jan. 1856, Letters of Queen Victoria 1837–1861, ed. A. C. Benson and Viscount Esher (London, 1908), iii, pp. 162 f.

98 Victoria to Napoleon, 15 Jan. 1856, ibid. p. 164.

99 Esterhazy to Buol, 12 Jan. 1856, no. 4, H.H.S.A. P.A.R.X. fasc. 39, H.T.

100 The same to the same, 29 Jan. 1856, no. 7 A–F, ibid.

101 The same to the same, 12 Jan. 1856, no. 2 E, ibid.

102 Guichen, op. cit. p. 351. It is not possible to establish whether this communication was made to Nesselrode before or after the Council of 15 January 1856.

103 Memo. by Nesselrode, 15 Jan. 1856, Tatishchev, op. cit. 185 f.

104 Tatishchev, whose account (op. cit. pp. 186 f.) is based on the official minutes of the meeting, follows the earlier account of Jomini (Study, pp. 366 ff.). An independent account by Meyendorff, written shortly after the meeting, appears in Peter von Meyendorff, Ein russischer Diplomat an den Höfen von Wien und Berlin, herausg. Otto Hoetzsch (Berlin, 1923), iii, pp. 214 ff. Meyendorff's account suggests that certain statements were excluded from the official minutes and others toned down.

105 Study, pp. 369 f.

106 Werther to Manteuffel, 27 Jan. 1856, Guichen, op. cit. p. 351.

107 Esterhazy to Buol, tg. 16 Jan. 1856, H.H.S.A. P.A.R.X. fasc. 39, H.T.

108 Geffcken. op cit. p. 216.

109 Ibid.

110 Ibid. p. 217.

111 Study, p. 271.

112 Cit. Guichen, op. cit. p. 299.

113 Ibid. p. 303.

114 Cit. Guichen, op. cit. p. 354, from a letter in a private German archive.

115 Pozzo di Borgo once said to a diplomat in Paris: ‘Nous avons aussi notre Constitution et une responsabilité malheureusement non ministérielle, Article unique:—’ and he made the gesture of strangling. (Geffcken, op. cit. p. 211, n. 1.)

116 On 28 Nov. the Turkish fortress of Kars in Asia Minor had fallen into Russian hands.

117 For a detailed study of the Congress cf. H. Temperley, ‘The Treaty of Paris of 1856 and its Execution’, The Journal of Modern History, iv, no. 3, pp. 387 ff.

118 Lettres et Papiers du Chancelier Comte Charles de Nesselrode (Paris, 1904), xi, pp. 108 f.

119 Seymour to Clarendon, pte., 15 Jan. 1856, Clarendon MSS.

120 Esterhazy to Buol, tg. 14 April 1856, H.H.S.A. P.A.R.X. fasc. 39, H.T. Gorchakov told Seymour that he had three times refused the offer of the Ministry ‘but at last it had been offered to him in a manner which made it impossible for him to persist in his refusal’ (Seymour to Clarendon, 11 June 1856, no. 403 secret & confid. F.O. 7/486).

121 Trautmannsdorf to Buol, tg. 19 April 1856, H.H.S.A. P.A.R.X. fasc. 39, H.T.

122 Budberg to Dmitri Nesselrode, 20 April 1856, Nesselrode, op. cit. pp. 132 ff.

123 Cowley to Clarendon, pte., 29 April 1856, Clarendon MSS.

124 Seymour to Clarendon, 11 June 1856, no. 403 secret & confid. F.O. 7/486.

125 Geffcken, op. cit. p. 212.

126 Immediatbericht Bismarcks, 27 April 1859, Die politiscken Berichte des Fürsten Bismarck aus Petersburg und Paris, herausg. L. v. Raschdau (Berlin, 1920), pp. 30 f.

127 Memo, by Nesselrode 11/23 Feb. 1865, Nesselrode op.cit, pp. 112 ff.

128 Memorandum approved by the tsar, 17/5 April 1856, Tatishchev op. cit. pp. 199 f.

129 Werther to Manteuffel, 27 Jan. 1856, Guichen, op. cit. p. 351.

130 Gorchakov circular, 2 Sept. 1856. Tatishchev, op. cit. pp. 229 f.

131 Cit. Vitzthum von Eckstädt, St. Petersburg and London 1852–1864 (London, 1887), i, p. 190.

132 Meyendorff, op. cit. p. 217.

133 Seymour to Clarendon, 22 June 1856, no. 431 secret F.O. 7/487.

134 Friese, Ch., Russland und Preussen vom Krimkrieg bis zum Polnischen Aufstand (Berlin, 1931), p. 20Google Scholar.

135 Ibid. p. 27.

136 Cf. Nesselrode memo. 11/23 Feb. 1856, Nesselrode, op. cit. pp. 112 ff.

137 Gorchakov to Nesselrode pte., 12/14 Dec. 1855, and no. 479 confid. 22 Dec./3 Jan. 1855/6, W.S.A. ccciv, nos. 48 and 49, copies.