Could Russia win a war against britain in 1878?

Yes, but I was specifically talking about the siege of Sebastopol in 1854, where the British are instigators in the siege and part of a coalition. Here they are, despite as you say being better at rapid mobilisation and deployment, essentially johnny-come-latelys into an ongoing conflict where, if they have taken or are directly threatening Istanbul, the Russians are already in place in significant force. I'm not talking about long-term military comparison here, rather those first stages of British intervention that will be alone (apart from the Ottomans) and hastily assembled.

But in Crimea it was precisely those first stages of mobilisation that worked against the British even as they were landing troops against the Russians in long prepared positions nearer their bases of supply.

I think people tend to think of wars as proceeding a lot more quickly than they do. It is as likely, as Saphroneth tried to indicate, that the British deploy into Constantinople while it is still held by Ottoman troops as the Russians had found in the 1878 war breaking down the Turks in defensive positions is hard work.

Also remember significant force does not just mean the number of hungry soldiers with bayonets, you need to be able to get adequate supplies of ammunition up to them. The Russians are again on the end of long supply lines, worse once the RN become involved those will become landlines and the capacity of land transport is woefully below that of sea transport.

Edit:damn dyslexic typos
 
But in Crimea it was precisely those first stages of mobilisation that worked against the British even as they were landing troops against the Russians in long prepared positions nearer their bases of supply.

I think people tend to think of wars as proceeding a lot more quickly than they do. It is as likely, as Saphroneth tired to indicate, that the British deploy into Constantinople while it is still held by Ottoman troops as the Russians had found in the 1878 war breaking down the Turks in defensive positions is hard work.

Also remember significant force does not just mean the number of hungry soldiers with bayonets, you need to be able to get adequate supplies of ammunition up to them. The Russians are again on the end of long supply lines, worse once the RN become involved those will become landlines and the capacity of land transport is woefully below that of sea transport.

To be fair, I did cover all of these points in my first post in the thread. I'm well aware of how long wars can take and the logistical trains involved in supporting armies.

The only reason I've been imagining a Russian-held Istanbul in this scenario is because the OP half-hinted at that in his post, that this war would be a British reaction to the taking of the city by the Russians. But looking back at it, other scenarios are available as you point out.
 
To be fair, I did cover all of these points in my first post in the thread. I'm well aware of how long wars can take and the logistical trains involved in supporting armies.

The only reason I've been imagining a Russian-held Istanbul in this scenario is because the OP half-hinted at that in his post, that this war would be a British reaction to the taking of the city by the Russians. But looking back at it, other scenarios are available as you point out.

I think there is a novel, okay I checked and there is, that deals with this....The Turkish Gambit

There the idea is it was a conspiracy to get the Russians to attack in order to provoke the British battleships already there to open fire....even if the Russians can get to Constantinople faster than OTL they are likely to find British warships in position and of course the faster they go the more belligerent the attitude of the British officers upon those ships.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
of course the faster they go the more belligerent the attitude of the British officers upon those ships.
What was that quote from the period which describes an attitude belligerent for war... oh, yes:


We don't want to fight but by Jingo if we do,
We've got the ships, we've got the men, we've got the money too,
We've fought the Bear before, and while we're Britons true,
The Russians shall not have Constantinople.

(Yes. This is where "Jingoism" came from.)
 
Last edited:
From the House of Commons debate 4th February 1878 on whether to vote funds for such an intervention (decided that this was not needed as Russians had already backed down):

"In an innocent sense, I do not in the least object to the Government using its good offices in favour of leniency to Turkey. But, then, when I speak of leniency to Turkey, I mean leniency as between Turkey and the other Powers; and by leniency to Turkey I do not mean cruelty to the subjects of Turkey."
Prime Minister William Gladstone (Liberal)

"It may seem to some to be a small thing that an Empire should be broken up, and there are many persons I know who would care but little to see the Turkish Empire broken up. Everyone has a right to his own opinions on this subject; but the question is, whether a great uprooting of that character may not interfere with other Empires. It may weaken the strength of the greatest nations. It may work mischief to the Austrian Empire, to the Italian Kingdom, or even to the French Republic. You may wish that the Turkish Empire should crumble into dust, but you must not lose sight of the consequences which may follow its fall."
Gathorne-Hardy, MP for Oxford University. (Conservative - Opposition)

"He thought that the moving of the Fleet up the Dardanelles was a great mistake. He believed hon. Gentlemen opposite had been educated by the Prime Minister, who was a man of steadfast purpose, and who seemed always determined to have his own way. He hoped that the House would watch the Government and see that they did not prevent the Christian subjects of Turkey obtaining their fair share of liberty."
Joseph Pease, MP for Durham (its reported in third person, but this is Pease's voice essentially). (Liberal - backbencher)

Its worth bearing in mind that British opinions on the subject were complicated, cross-party, and shifting. Two years ago Gladstone, as leader of the opposition, had denounced the Turks as monstrous barbarians for their actions in Bulgaria. There would have been as much skepticism and distaste for such a war as support for it.
 
What was that quote from the period which describes an attitude belligerent for war... oh, yes:


We don't want to fight but by Jingo if we do,
We've got the ships, we've got the men, we've got the money too,
We've fought the Bear before, and while we're Britons true,
The Russians shall not have Constantinople.

(Yes. This is where "Jingoism" came from.)

The (much better) parody of it is;

We don't want to fight;
But, by Jingo, if we do,
We won't go to the front ourselves,
But we'll send the mild Hindoo."
 

Saphroneth

Banned
The (much better) parody of it is;

We don't want to fight;
But, by Jingo, if we do,
We won't go to the front ourselves,
But we'll send the mild Hindoo."
The funny thing is, that's not really supported by evidence. Certainly Indian troops were moved to the Med to be ready to take action against Russia, but most of the local reserve in Britain (as deployed in 1882) was British (English/Scots/Welsh/Irish) troops.
 
The funny thing is, that's not really supported by evidence. Certainly Indian troops were moved to the Med to be ready to take action against Russia, but most of the local reserve in Britain (as deployed in 1882) was British (English/Scots/Welsh/Irish) troops.

I'm sure the music-hall people who came up with it were deeply concerned that their significantly more witty version of the song might not have matched precise numbers of British troop deployments during the period, and they'll immediately make alterations to the song to match such updates…
 
In 1855 Russia had some 570 miles of track - by 1880, just after we're talking about, that was 14k+. Russia IS going to be able to move troops and supplies into the area more easily by rail and by fleet.

Which leads me to the second point - in this scenario Russia essentially controls the Black Sea doesn't it?


Iirc Russia had no Black Sea Fleet in 1878.

She had denounced the Black Sea Clauses of the Treaty of Paris in 1870, but lacked the funds to follow-up on that. I don't think they got round to building a fleet there until some time in the 1890s.
 
Iirc Russia had no Black Sea Fleet in 1878.

She had denounced the Black Sea Clauses of the Treaty of Paris in 1870, but lacked the funds to follow-up on that. I don't think they got round to building a fleet there until some time in the 1890s.

I don't know - you may be right. Partly, though, I was talking about supply ships that could run the Sebastopol (or other Black Sea ports) to Istanbul route in the event of a Russian occupation. These need not be navy, they could be commandeered merchantmen. But obviously the lack of a Black Sea fleet would make them vulnerable.
 
Silly question- are the Japanese at the point they could take advantage of the situation and attack in the east? Not saying coordinate or be allied to Britain, just take a predatory advantage
 
Iirc Russia had no Black Sea Fleet in 1878.
I don't know - you may be right.
Russia had two ironclads for coastal defence and four screw corvettes, plus a number of armed merchantmen. However, the Ottomans had more ironclads even without the Mediterranean Fleet.

EDIT: Two OOBs for the Turkish fleet from the Nafziger collection: 1, 2
Biography of the British commander of the Mediterranean squadron at the time, with his plans for intervention:

'To the Right Hon. W. H. Smith, M.P.; Besika Bay, Feb. 8, 1878.

'Mr Layard's private letter of the 6th, showing that the lines of Buyak Tchermedge were to be evacuated, and Constantinople therefore left at the mercy of the Russians, was startling to me, and as his telegrams of the 5th were two days in reaching me, I thought it best to telegraph the news to you immediately. I added that I still thought the Bulair lines might be saved. In saying this I assumed — 1st, That these lines were not included in the neutral zone, or at least that the Turkish troops will not be obliged to evacuate the peninsula; 2d, That the Turks would accept our assistance to defend the lines; 3d, That the Turkish general is not a traitor.

'Given these premises, I think the position might be saved; and, as it is the only one left in Roumelia which we could hold, it may be important to consider the matter. The Russians are said to have 3000 men at Rodosto, sixty miles from Bulair; a force — amount unknown — at Kissen, thirty miles off; and the roads from the north, through Malgara, and generally, are bad. I think, therefore, they could not approach the place under three days, or have a large force there in less than six days.

'In twenty-four hours we could land at Gallipoli a naval brigade of 500 men, and flank the approaches to a certain extent in the ships. This would give the Turks the encouragement and assurance they require, after their recent defeats, to hold the ground for a few days. If orders were sent to the Governor of Malta to co-operate with me, I should send Agincourt, Achilles, and Raleigh to Malta, and they should return in eight days to Gallipoli with 3000 troops. (Distance to Malta, 690 miles; return to Gallipoli, 730 miles.) Steamers should be chartered at Malta, and despatched forty-eight hours after receipt of the telegram, bringing guns, ammunition, biscuit, rum, and cocoa for the troops, and 2000 tons of coals for this squadron. With 3500 English, the ships, and the Turks, I believe we should hold the place for a fortnight against anything the Russians could do.

'By that time — that is, twenty- two days from the receipt of your telegram — you ought to be able to send us the 8000 or 10,000 men that would make this place safe for ever. The first steps will be the most important, and of course the orders must be prompt and decided from home. Troops, ships, and Ambassador would then co-operate. Transport animals and temporary shelter for the troops will be the greatest difficulty, but I believe we can meet them. You may depend I will feed and shelter my own men, and I have great confidence in our contractor, who is an Englishman. I mention this only that you may not suppose such matters have not been considered.'

The fleet ordered to be sent up to Constantinople was Alexandra, Temeraire, Swiftsure, Achilles, Ruby, and Salamis.
 
Last edited:
Silly question- are the Japanese at the point they could take advantage of the situation and attack in the east? Not saying coordinate or be allied to Britain, just take a predatory advantage
IIRC, the Japanese were able to send expeditions to Taiwan and Korea in the mid-1870's. Also, they appear to have been in the midst of modernizing their military at that time. Could they send forces in the direction of Russia? Possibly, but I am not sure how successful they would be at that point, especially without coordination or an alliance with the British. The British helped with the development of the Imperial Japanese Navy, if my sources are correct.
 
This thread does bring up the question about closing the Strait. Consensus seems to be that existing fortifications and artillery would have been insufficient to keep the British ironclads away, so what size would be sufficient to close the Strait? And assuming they get them, if the Russians move quickly enough would they be able to close it before the British moved into the Black Sea? Does anybody know what the Ottoman and British navies in the Black Sea were like?
 
IIRC, the Japanese were able to send expeditions to Taiwan and Korea in the mid-1870's. Also, they appear to have been in the midst of modernizing their military at that time. Could they send forces in the direction of Russia? Possibly, but I am not sure how successful they would be at that point, especially without coordination or an alliance with the British. The British helped with the development of the Imperial Japanese Navy, if my sources are correct.
I was thinking about an earlier Japanese kicking the Russians out of "China". At this point Vladivostok and area was considered Manchuria. Possibly same goals as OTL Russo-Japanese War. This may give Japan an earlier "we are here to liberate China from big bad Europeans" slogan for interference and a slower more gradual development of China into a Japanese sphere and protectorate.
 
Wasn't the Ottoman Navy the third largest in the world behind only the British and French Navies if true the Russians are unlikely to have navel supremacy to resupply Istanbul if the Russian can even take it in the first place. However I am not to sure of the truth on the matter to say with any degree of certainly.
 
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/ot-navy-1870s.htm

This should help with some numbers in respect to the Ottomans. The issue that they had was that their economy was starting to decline. The maintenance of such a large fleet and trying to keep up with everyone else in regard to naval technology costs quite a bit of money.
I was thinking about an earlier Japanese kicking the Russians out of "China". At this point Vladivostok and area was considered Manchuria. Possibly same goals as OTL Russo-Japanese War. This may give Japan an earlier "we are here to liberate China from big bad Europeans" slogan for interference and a slower more gradual development of China into a Japanese sphere and protectorate.
Unfortunately, I don't have my book with me on the Russian military of the time ((OOC: at work)). What kind of numbers are we looking at for the Pacific Fleet and land forces in the Far East?
 
Last edited:

Saphroneth

Banned
This thread does bring up the question about closing the Strait. Consensus seems to be that existing fortifications and artillery would have been insufficient to keep the British ironclads away, so what size would be sufficient to close the Strait? And assuming they get them, if the Russians move quickly enough would they be able to close it before the British moved into the Black Sea? Does anybody know what the Ottoman and British navies in the Black Sea were like?
Britain didn't have a Black Sea Navy, but the Ottomans did -and since it's their strait, they can move their whole fleet there.

Britain did have a Mediterranean navy. Note that the Russians were warned off from Constantinople OTL by a large British fleet full of battleships!
 
If the Japanese do anything it'll be pressing the claim that they own all of Sakhalin, I doubt they'd do much more.

The British might try and force Russia to repudiate the Amur acquisition in the Far East depending on how the war goes.
 
Top