Move Fast, Move On - Crimean War WI

[Saphroneth]

What If...


...Raglan had managed to get his way after the Alma, and move on (and storm) Sevastopol immediately? Instead of waiting for long enough for a defence to be put together.

From most accounts I've read, that would have precluded any particularly well organized resistance and meant a much quicker Allied victory.

 

[EnglishCanuck]

It's certainly possible the allies might have mounted a more vigorous attack in the aftermath of the Alma, but that would have taken foresight the allies seemed to have lacked throughout the conflict. The French for instance, purposefully left their packs at the beachhead in order to go into battle.

If there had been some general consensus on what should happen in the aftermath then the allies might have been able to push on and put their siege lines in place early on, probably cutting off Menshikov's field army from the garrison in the process. However, I sincerely doubt the ailing Saint-Arnaud would be willing to mount an assault without the navy, and the navy had been unwilling to go for it since the Russians had scuttled ships in the harbor.

The most you might get IMO, considering the veritable legion of logistics and command and control problems present in the allied armies, might be a swifter advance on Sevastopol which cuts it off from the field army and prevents them from reinforcing the garrison.

So while I think you can get a situation where you shorten the siege, I don't think there was enough coordination between the allied army and the navy to mount an all out assault on the city immediately post Alma.

 

[Alt History Buff]

I can't decide what the true outcome of the war would be. Would the allies be easier on Russia in the peace if they won a quick and easy victory?

Would Britain and the other powers realized how obsolete their tactics and supply chain logistics/medical care/etc were if the war ended after one campaign season and worked to upgrade their weapons and procedures?

I know that Russia realized that they fell behind and worked to modernize after the war regardless of duration but I wonder if the allies would do the same.

That may have some butterflies for the impending wars with Prussia and potential Franco-British involvement in the US civil war.

 

[Saphroneth]

Indeed, it's an interesting one because a quicker campaign may or may not result in better outcomes for the French and British down the line.

It's also worth noting that the British originally planned to just bounce around storming places and hitting them until the Russians had enough. Perhaps they'd have hit Odessa, for example.

 

[Klausenburgischer]

If the crimean war is lost fast, perhaps Russia does not get into so much debt as tp sell Alaska ... so Alaska might still be Russian today (with interesting implications to the Cold War etc.)

Also, Russia might have rebounded faster and succeeded in attacking the Ottomans before 1877-78 again. Or perhaps later. Either way it would have changed the dynamics of the Balkans and implicitly also WW1.

 

[Saphroneth]

There might not be a WW1 with a PoD this far back. It might mean that - say - the British feel more confident in littoral warfare. (Though that could then jerk them up sharp the next time they try...)

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

The fact that the only famous British generals from that war are a) infamous, and b) more known for sweaters (Raglan and Cardigan) than military strategy says something about the competence of the British leadership in that war.

I'd suggest that a better PoD might be competent leadership.

 

[Saphroneth]

The fact that the only famous British generals from that war are a) infamous, and b) more known for sweaters (Raglan and Cardigan) than military strategy says something about the competence of the British leadership in that war.

I'd suggest that a better PoD might be competent leadership.

Well, Raglan was the one who wanted to push forwards. I dislike stereotyping someone as just "Incompetent" without further examination, especially since the British Army in the Crimea as a whole is largely famous for the Charge of the Light Brigade.
(When there's also some ridiculously skilled long range musketry in the Crimea which deserves notice.)

 

[vizzer]

especially since the British Army in the Crimea as a whole is largely famous for the Charge of the Light Brigade.

Now if the poem had been about 'The Charge of the Heavy Brigade' instead - uphill, against superior numbers and drove the enemy from the field

 

[Saphroneth]

Now if the poem had been about 'The Charge of the Heavy Brigade' instead - uphill, against superior numbers and drove the enemy from the field

I wonder if there's a Russian poem about the Battle of Balaclava. If so it would largely consist of commanding officers being sniped within minutes of taking up their new rank until nobody actually wanted to take command any more.

 

[Fabius Maximus]

Now if the poem had been about 'The Charge of the Heavy Brigade' instead - uphill, against superior numbers and drove the enemy from the field

I seem to recall he did write about the Heavy Brigade as well, but apparently it wasn't as memorable.

(Though I do agree that the Charge of the Heavy Brigade really ought to be remembered more -- both for reasons of historical accuracy [because focusing excessively on the Light Brigade gives an overly skewed impression of the British army during the war], and because it was a great military feat in its own right.)