Crimea: The Great Crimean War, 1854-1856 [Paperback]

Trevor Royle (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: February 21, 2004

The Crimean War, one of history's most compelling subjects, encompassed human suffering, woeful leadership and misadministration on a grand scale. It created a heroic myth out of the disastrous Charge of the Light Brigade and, in Florence Nightingale, it produced one of history's great heroes. The war was a watershed in world history and pointed the way to what mass warfare would be like in the twentieth century. New weapons were introduced; trench combat became a fact of daily warfare outside Sebastopol; medical innovation saved countless soldiers' lives that would otherwise have been lost. Ultimately, by failing to solve the Eastern Question, the war paved the way for the greater conflagration which broke out in 1914 and greatly prefigured the current situation in Eastern Europe.

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

The mid-19th-century Crimean War, pitting England, France, and less powerful allies against Russia, was one of the first major international wars in history. In the execution, it was none too inspiring. As Trevor Royle writes in his sweeping study of the conflict, "it encompassed maladministration on a grand scale and human suffering, if not without parallel then at least minutely recorded by the watching war correspondents"--the war being the first as well to have been widely reported. It was, a contemporary British journal put it, a war of "lions led by donkeys," young men commanded by doddering veterans of the Napoleonic campaigns who served in an unlikely alliance. The English officers, Royle writes, could never shake the habit of calling their French comrades "the enemy," and never quite trusted them, either.

The result was carnage: not only the loss of a good portion of the Light Brigade in the most famous--but not the most inept--incident of the war, but also the destruction of whole regiments left to blunder about in the fog and smoke, thanks to their commanders' inadequate intelligence-gathering efforts. Not much changed at war's end. In the eventual peace treaty, France and England and Russia kept their territories more or less intact, and the struggle for power between Russia and the neighboring Ottoman Empire, in whose defense France and England had ostensibly gone to war, stretched out for another generation. It ended with a Russian victory that allowed Russia to assume control of Turkish holdings in the Balkans, which, Royle notes, lay the seeds for still another international conflict, World War I.

Royle does a fine job of negotiating through the many complexities, diplomatic and military, of the Crimean War. His descriptions of battlefield tactics (or the lack thereof) are among the best in the literature. More comprehensive than Robert B. Edgerton's Death or Glory: The Legacy of the Crimean War, Royle's Crimea is likely to stand as an enduring work on this strange, wasteful conflict. --Gregory McNamee --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

From Publishers Weekly

In the century between Napoleon and WWI, only one major international war was fought among the European powers. Faintly understood, the Crimean War--which pitted Britain and France with the Ottoman Empire against Russia--was the war that made Florence Nightingale famous. But although it was arguably the hinge upon which much subsequent history turned, little is known about it, or remembered--except for the charge of the Light Brigade. (Indeed, two of the British commanders who served there--Lords Raglan and Cardigan--are known more for their contributions to fashion than for their military deeds.) In Crimea, Royle (Winds of Change: The End of Empire in Africa) remedies this situation. A writer and journalist specializing in military history, he covers not just the Crimea, but also the entire Black Sea region in his beautifully written study. He describes the diplomatic maneuverings that passed between the belligerents and their potential allies (like the United States), and he thoughtfully considers the causes, conduct and consequences of the war. And although he provides a massive amount of detail, it is a testament to his skill that the details never overwhelm the narrative. Thorough and informative, this scholarly book will interest readers of history and military history alike; for the present, it also stands as the definitive treatment of the Crimean War. Illus. (May)
Copyright 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 528 pages
• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan (February 21, 2004)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1403964165
• ISBN-13: 978-1403964168
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6.4 x 1.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (20 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #179,270 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

33 of 33 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Enjoyable History of the Crimean War, September 17, 2000

By 

Aussie Reader ""Rick"" (Canberra, Australia) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Crimea: The Great Crimean War, 1854-1856 (Hardcover)

I found this new account on the Crimean War by Trevor Royle to be a very enjoyable and easy to read book. The story was well written and the narrative just seemed to flow along, taking the reader on an exciting trip through history. Although, as previously mentioned, the author does not spend a great amount of time on describing the battles of this conflict, he does manage to cover most aspects of this terrible war. I did find out a number of things that I had not previously read in other books and his descriptions of the battles were still well presented. Throughout the book the author utilised personal accounts from a number of the participants and these seemed to fit the narrative quite well.

Trevor Royle has taken the time to give the reader a detailed account of the events leading up to the Crimean War and for once this was as enjoyable to read as the actual details of the conflict. I was fascinated by the story and at no time did I find the book boring which sometimes happens when an author starts talking about politics. I thought that maybe more maps could have been supplied but those featured were detailed enough to follow the story. A number of black and white photographs were also utilised to assist the reader follow the story. However I feel that more photos of the conflict could have been used especially since this was one of the first wars to receive so much media attention, a point mentioned many times by the author.

The book is over 500 pages long and a number of the less known battles and conflicts, both on land and sea, are covered by the author. I found that his defence of Lord Raglan was well presented and deservedly so when consideration is taken of the period and state of society from which Raglan emerged. Overall this is a well-presented and enjoyable account of this terrible conflict and I found it to be as good as Christopher Hibbert's `The Destruction of Lord Raglan' and Alan Palmer's `The Banner of Battle'. I would recommend this book to any person who enjoys a decent history book or just a good read!

21 of 21 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Detailed, thoughtful look at a critical point in history, May 27, 2003

By 

J. N. Mohlman (Barrington, RI USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Crimea: The Great Crimean War, 1854-1856 (Hardcover)

In "Crimea: The Great Crimean War 1854 - 1856" Trevor Royle has produced a work that is impressive not only for its reporting of the facts surrounding a very muddled war, but also for successfully placing The Crimean War within a greater context of European history. While perhaps slightly too focused on the British point of view, Royle is nonetheless supremely evenhanded, and does a superb job of capturing the numerous diplomatic subtleties which surrounded the events in the Crimea.

Like all successful military histories, Royle's begins well before the years that actually encompass the fighting. Instead he examines France's (embodied in Napoleon III), desire to climb out of the hole it was left in after Waterloo. Having been stripped of all influence in Europe, and having lost much of its colonial Empire, France had nonetheless learned valuable lessons in Algeria during the intervening decades. Moreover, what France lacked in industrialization when compared to Britain, it more than made up for with unabashed ambition.

At the same time, Britain was at the peak of a Pax Britannica that would last until 1914. As such, it was primarily concerned with maintaining the status quo, and protecting the crown jewel of the empire: India. Thus it came to pass that when Russia used protestations of religious crimes (which were complete pretexts, in spite of their veracity) as a causus belli for war with Turkey, that Britain and France, longstanding adversaries and frequent enemies, were thrust together to preserve an Ottoman Empire that was too caught up in inertia to save itself. Britain to protect India's fragile northwest frontier, and France to regain some of the luster it had lost

The result, of course, was The Crimean War, a bizarre set of misadventures that seemingly accomplished nothing, and yet set the stage for a host of events to come. Specifically, battlefield necessity saw the invention or adaptation of numerous devices, such as the telegraph, railroad, field hospitals, rifles (as opposed to muskets), sanitation, steam-powered warships etc., many of which are credited to the more famous American Civil War. As such, the Crimean war can rightfully be argued as the first modern war, and it is therefore well worth studying. For example, the difficulties that the fractious British-French-Turkish alliance faced are particularly telling in a world where strategies for global collective action are sorely lacking.

As for the fighting itself, there were precious few of what one might consider battles, the Alma, Inkerman/Balaklava and the siege of Sevastopol being the notable exceptions. For the most part this was a war that presaged World War I, with protracted trench fighting in brutal conditions. Nonetheless, Royle does a good job of setting the stage for the various engagements, including geography, units, commanders and missed opportunities. In particular, he does a superb job of portraying the senior commanders on all sides in an objective manner. However, it is in this area that I must make one of my two complaints: there is a serious lack of both quantity and quality when it comes to the maps. Far too often, I was left referring to other sources in order to follow the battles; most absurdly, there is no map of the Black Sea/Crimean Peninsula until page 375! Moreover, rather than using detailed topographical maps, Royle elected to use the quaint, vaguely hand drawn maps that anyone who studies military history is familiar with (and abhors). What they posses in graphic appeal, they more than lose in lack of useful terrain and coordinate information.

That said, it is the political intrigue that dominates this book and where Royle is truly in his element. He deftly captures the various power plays that come to influence the outcome of events, and at the same time provides an even handed running commentary on the skills/deficits of the various players. Which leads me to my second complaint: the problem is that Royle offers a wealth of information about British decision making, but the step down to France, Russia, Turkey and other associated players is severe. To be fair, this may be a function of the autocratic leadership in these latter countries, which served to compress the decision making cycle and limit correspondence that would shed light on events. Nonetheless, I felt that Turkey in particular could have been better rounded out.

Finally, Royle quite succinctly places The Crimean War within the context of European conflict up through World War I. Just as in its tactics the Crimea foreshadowed the events of 1914-1918, so to did the grand strategy of 1854 rear its head sixty years later. By recognizing this fact, Royle has elevated what might have become a dusty recounting of a largely forgotten war into a superb examination of European (and by extension, world) politics in the ninety-eight years between Waterloo and Franz Ferdinand's assassination. As such, it work successfully as both military history and political science, and is well worth reading by students of both.

Jake Mohlman

25 of 29 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Reasonable, June 27, 2000

By 

Tom Munro "tomfrombrunswick" (Melbourne, Victoria Australia) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Crimea: The Great Crimean War, 1854-1856 (Hardcover)

In the past the Crimean War has been seen as similar to the First World War, a comedy of errors in which uncaring generals sent brave men off to die. Recent literature would suggest that the Crimean War in itself was not so extraordinary but rather it became an important symbol. The reasons for this was that the war took place when England was run by a limited number of aristocrats. In the next few years the franchise would broaden and more people would be allowed into the positions of power in society. The Crimean War was used by those on the outside of political society to ridicule the competence of their social betters. The army at the time was dominated by men who bought commissions rather than being promoted on competence. Some of these leaders such as Lord Cardigan were objectively hopeless. Others had some mild talent.

The war was also one of the first to be photographed and to have war correspondents reporting back home. The war itself had a limited number of battles and these occurred fairly quickly. The operations then settled down to a prolonged siege of the port of Sebastapol. The war correspondents thus did not have a lot to write about. What they did observe was the failure of the British government to adequately supply their men. Newspaper stories about soldiers without tents and no wood to warm themselves during the Russian winter started to be written.

The provision of medical services was appalling and one of he heroes of the war was Florence Nightingale. She later was to be known as the lady of the lamp although in reality her strengths were not as a nurse but as an organizer and bureaucrat.

The book is a rather strange one. It is quite long but it deals with most of the major battles of the war quite quickly. It also fails to look at the political context of the war and why it became a potent symbol for those who would change British Society. Still the book is easy to read and it covers the other military actions in the war outside the campaign in the Crimea.

The overall impression however is that the conduct of the war although lamentable was perhaps not quite the disaster that has been presented in previous works.