Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T22:08:03.117Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Crimean War in the Far East

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

John J. Stephan
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Crimean War (1854—56), as its name suggests, was fought mainly on and around a peninsula jutting out from the northern shores of the Black Sea. Names such as the Alma River, Balaclava, and Inkerman are generally conjured up at the mention of this costly conflict. Strategic planning and operations on both sides, however, were not confined to the Crimea and the Caucasus. Far from Sebastopol, hostilities between Russia and the allied powers of Britain and France erupted in the seas of Japan and Okhotsk, and in the North Pacific Ocean. Accorded relatively little attention at the time, almost forgotten today, this Far Eastern1 theatre of the war offers insights into the growing role of Europe in East Asia. Whereas in the Crimea, the Allies achieved a victory of sorts while making immense human sacrifices, in the Far East they failed in many of their objectives but without incurring a great loss of life. The tragi-comic nature of tactical operations in the Far East should not obscure the war's broader implications: (1) the advance of Russia into the Amur River basin and Maritime Provinces then part of the Chinese Empire; (2) the intensification of British anxieties regarding Russian penetration into Manchuria and Korea; (3) the growing role of Japan in international relations; and (4) the progress of cartographical knowledge through surveys conducted in response to the demands of war.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , May 1969, pp. 257 - 277
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1969

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 In this article ‘Far Eastern’ includes the north-eastern shores of the Asian continent (Eastern Siberia and Kamachatka).Google Scholar

2 citation id="ref002" citation-type="other">Foreign Office, General Correspondence, China F.O. 17 (hereafter cited as F.O. China Corres.) Vol. 221, Admiralty, to Foreign Office, 9 June 1854. Admiralty Secretary's Department, Out-Letters (Adm. 2) Adm. to David Price, Vol. 1612, 21 March 1854.

3 Admiralty, Secretary's Office, In-Letters (Adm. 1), Vol. 5629, Stirling to Adm., No. 28, 30 April 1854.Google Scholar

4 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5629, Pellew to Adm., No. 101, 15 April 1854. Pellew's informer was the British consul in Manila.Google Scholar

5 Lensen, George A., Russia's Japan Expedition of 1852–1855, Gainesville, 1955;Google Scholar and, The Russian Push Toward Japan: Russo-Japanese Relations, 1697–1875, Princeton, 1959, pp. 329–32.Google Scholar

6 Ravenstein, E. G., The Russians on the Amur, London, 1861, p. 117.Google ScholarVladimir, , Russia on the Pacific and the Siberian Railway, London, 1899, p. 202.Google Scholar

7 Ravenstein, p. 122. Vladimir, p. 204.

8 Vladimir, p. 211. Lensen, The Russian Push Toward Japan, p. 330. Vend, Vera, L'Amiral Nevelskoi et la Conquête définitive du Fleuve Amour, Paris, 1894, p. 209.Google Scholar

9 For a detailed study of Stirling's mission to Japan in 1854–5,Google Scholar see Beasley, W. G., Great Britain and the Opening of Japan, London, 1951, pp. 113–44.Google Scholar

10 The Annual Register, 1854, London, 1855, x.Google Scholar

11 Admiralty, Admirals Journals (Adm. 50: Vol. 260, hereafter cited as Price Journal), 28 March 1854. Admiralty, Ships Logs (Adm. 53), Vol. 5743 (hereafter cited as President's Log), 28 March 1854.Google Scholar

12 Price Journal, 8 April 1854.Google Scholar

13 Ibid., 15 April 1854. President's Log, 15 April 1854. The Admiralty warned Price about the Aurora's approach from Rio but much too late. Adm. Out-Letters, Vol. III, 6 Adm. to Price, No. 55, 17 May 1854.Google Scholar

14 Price Journal, 17 May 1854. President's Log, 17 May 1854.Google Scholar

15 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5630, Price to Adm., No. 95, 25 July 1854.Google Scholar

16 Dispatch released by the Admiralty published in The Times, 24 October 1854.Google Scholar

17 Price Journal, 14 August 1854.Google Scholar

18 For a detailed account of the Petropavlovsk battle from the Allied side, see President's Log, 29 August–5 September 1854; E. Du Hailly, ‘L'Expedition de Petropavlovsk’, Revue des Deux Mondes, 1 August 1858, pp. 686–718;Google ScholarLaird Clowes, W., The Royal Navy, VI, London, 1901, pp. 430–1;Google ScholarThe Times, 23 November, 6 December 1854. The Russian version can be found in Vladimir, Russia on the Pacific and the Siberian Railway, pp. 218–31; The Times, 23 December 1854.Google Scholar

19 Price Journal, 30 August 1854. Price left no clue in the last lines of his journal, written at noon, about his state of mind.Google Scholar

20 Clowes, VI, 430–2; Du Hailly, pp. 705–10; Vladimir, pp. 219–25; Ravenstein, pp. 123–4; The Times, 23 November 1854.Google Scholar

21 Clowes, VI, p. 430; Ravenstein, p. 123. Okudaira, Takeo, ‘Kurimiya sensō to kyokutō’, Kokusaihō gaikō zasshi, XXXV, 1936, 317.Google Scholar

22 Du Hailly, pp. 705–6.Google Scholar

23 Price joined the Navy in 1801 and won a reputation for bravery after participating in attacks against the French and Danes. He captured part of a French convoy (1811), was twice captured by the Danes, served under Sir Samuel Hood in the attack on Baltimore, and was severely wounded in the Battle of New Orleans (1815). He became Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific squadron in August 1853, an appointment generally agreed to have been made on merit alone. The Times, 25 November 1854;Google ScholarDictionary of National Biography, XLVI, London, 1896, 326.Google Scholar

24 Dictionary of National Biography, XLVI, 326Google Scholar

25 Letter published in The Times, 26 December 1854.Google Scholar

26 President's Log, 30 August 1854.Google Scholar

27 F.O. China Corres. Vol. 226, No. 35. Enclosure No. 1 in Bowring to Foreign Office, 19 January 1855. The quotation is from Polynesian Office, 13 November 1854, forwarded by the English Consul-General in Honolulu to Bowring.Google Scholar

28 The Times, 26 December 1854.Google Scholar

29 For details of the Russian and British negotiations with Japanese authorities in 1854–1955, see Beasley, Great Britain and the Opening of Japan, pp. 113–44; Lensen, Russia's Japan Expedition.Google Scholar

30 Vladimir, p. 225.Google Scholar

31 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5656, Bruce to Adm. No. 47, 12 June 1855.Google ScholarO'Byrnes Naval Biography, London, 1860, pp. 135–6. The Times, 12 September 1855.Google Scholar

32 Tronson, J. M., A Voyage to Japan, Kamtschatka, Siberia, Tartary, and Various Parts of Coast of China, in HMS Barracouta, London, 1859, p. 86.Google ScholarAdm. In-Letters, Vol. 5672, Stirling to Adm. No. 101, II December 1855.Google Scholar

33 Tronson, p. 89.Google Scholar

34 Lensen, Russia's Japan Expedition, pp. 135–6.Google Scholar

35 Letter released by the Admiralty, published in The Times 12 September 1855. Bruce exaggerated. The Allies found two Americans and their French cook living in the town. Tronson, p. 94; The Times, 10 September 1855; Ravenstein, p. 128; Du Hailly, p. 182 Clowes, VI, p. 432.Google Scholar

36 The Times, 10 September 1855.Google Scholar

37 A Japanese explorer, Mamiya Rinzō, journeyed to the north of Sakhalin and up the Amur River in 1809 to discover the passage forty years before Nevelskoi. His maps were brought back to Europe by the German physician, Philipp Franz von Siebold, in 1832 but were not published until 1851.Google ScholarTomio, Hora, Mamiya Rinzō, Tokyo, 1960, pp. 265–74.Google Scholar

38 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5657, Stirling to Adm., No. 74, 1 October 1855.Google Scholar

39 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5657, Elliot to Stirling, No. 55, Enclosure No. 1, 19 May 1855. An engineer with Elliot on the Sybille wrote an account of these operations.Google ScholarWhittingham, Bernard, Notes on the Expedition against the Russian Settlements in Eastern Siberia etc., London, 1856, pp. 81–116.Google Scholar

40 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5657, Elliot to Stirling, No. 55, Enclosure No. 2, 23 May 1855; Admiralty, Ship's Logs (Adm. 53), Sybille's Log, Vol. 5743, 20 May 1855; and Whittingham, p. 84.Google Scholar

41 For Zavoika's account see The Times, 30 October 1855; Vladimir, pp. 231–2;Google Scholar and Henry, Arthur Tilley, Japan, the Amoor, and the Pacific, London, 1861, p. 206.Google Scholar

42 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5657, Elliot to Stirling, No. 55, Enclosure No. 2, 23 May 1855. Sybille's Log, 20 May 1855.Google Scholar

43 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5657, Elliot to Stirling, No. 55, Enclosure No. 2, 23 May 1855.Google Scholar

44 Ibid., Enclosure No. 3, 7 July 1855.Google Scholar

45 Vladimir, p. 234. The Times, 30 October 1855.Google Scholar

46 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5657, Stirling to Adm., No., 2 July 1855.Google Scholar

47 Except for the chartered Brig Greta captured off Sakhalin on I August 1855 while bringing part of the Diana crew from Shimoda to Nikolaevsk. Tronson, p. 139.Google Scholar

48 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5657, Elliot to Stirling, No. 23, 28 August 1855.Google Scholar

49 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5672, Elliot to Sitirling, No. 101, Enclosure No. I, 25 November 1855.Google Scholar

50 For a first-hand report of the Uruppu occupation, Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5657, Nicolson to Stirling, No. 74, Enclosure No. 6, 29 September 1855.Google Scholar

51 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5657, No. 55 Enclosure No. 10, Stirling to Elliot, 12 June 1855.Google Scholar

52 Ibid., No. 55, Stirling to Adm., 2 July 1855.Google Scholar

53 Ibid., No. 74, Stirling to Adm., 1 October 1855.Google Scholar

54 Ibid., Vol. 5672, No. 101, Stirling to Adm., 11 December 1855.Google Scholar

55 Adm. in letters Vol. 5672, No. II, Enclosure No. I, Draft of Adm. to Stirling, 8 December 1855. This letter is not to be found in Adm. Out-Letters and presumably was destroyed.Google Scholar

56 Ibid., No. II, Stirling to Adm., 13 February 1856.Google Scholar

57 Ibid., No. II, Adm. to Stirling (draft), 2 April 1856.Google Scholar

58 The Times, 25 October 1855.Google Scholar

59 Hansard, , Parliamentary Debates, 3rd Series, CXL, London, 1856, 453–61.Google Scholar

60 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5657 No. 74, Stirling to Adm., 1 October 1855. Stirling's letter can also be found in F.O. China Corres., Vol. 234, Bowring to Foreign Office No. 326, 12 October 1855, Enclosure No. 1, Stirling to Bowring.Google Scholar

61 Okudaira, ‘Kurimiya sensō to kyokutō’, p. 335.Google Scholar

62 Eckel, Paul E., ‘The Crimean War and Japan’, Far Eastern Quarterly, 3, 1944, p. 109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

63 Beasley, Great Britain and the Opening of Japan, p. 113.Google Scholar

64 Okudaira, ‘Kurimiya sensō to kyokutō, pp. 341–2. Ōkuma, Shigenobu, Kaikoku taisei shi, Tokyo, 1913, pp. 853–4.Google Scholar

65 F.O. China Corres., Vol. 255, No. 78, Enclosure No. I, Stirling to Bowring, 8 November 1855.Google Scholar

66 Golder, F. A., Russian Expansion on the Pacific, 1641–1850, Cleveland, 1914, p. 264 n,Google Scholar citing Barsukov, Ivan, Graf Nikolai Nikolaevich Murav'ev-Amurskii, Moscow, 1891.Google Scholar

67 F.O. China Corres., Vol. 215, Bowring to Clarendon, No. 122, 25 08 1854.Google Scholar

68 F.O. China Corres., Vol. 226,Google ScholarMiller to Bowring, 8 November 1854, enclosure in Bowring to Clarendon, No. 35, 19 January 1855.Google Scholar

69 Adm. In-Letters, Vol. 5672, Elliot to Stirling, No. 101, Enclosure No. 1, 25 November 1855. Vol 5672, Nicolson to Seymour, No. 55, Enclosure No. 1, 12 August 1856; Tilley, Japan, the Amoor, and the Pacific, p. 218; Whittingham, Notes on the Expedition against the Russian Settlements in Eastern Siberia, p. 298;Google ScholarFuret, L., Lettres à M. Leon de Roany sur L'Archipel Japonais et la Tartarie Orientale, London, 1857, pp. 10–11;Google Scholar and Perry, McDonough Collins, A Voyage Down the Amoor, London, 1860, pp. 243–4.Google Scholar