Russian Turkish war 1876 1878. Russian-Turkish war

The Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878 was a war between the Russian Empire and Ottoman Turkey. It was caused by the rise of the national liberation movement in the Balkans and the aggravation of international contradictions in connection with this.

The uprisings against the Turkish yoke in Bosnia and Herzegovina (1875-1878) and Bulgaria (1876) caused a social movement in Russia in support of the fraternal Slavic peoples. Responding to these sentiments, the Russian government came out in support of the rebels, hoping, if they were successful, to increase their influence in the Balkans. Britain sought to pit Russia against Turkey and take advantage of the weakening of both countries.

In June 1876, the Serbo-Turkish War began, in which Serbia was defeated. To save her from death, Russia in October 1876 turned to the Turkish Sultan with a proposal to conclude a truce with Serbia.

In December 1876, the Constantinople Conference of the Great Powers was convened, which tried to resolve the conflict through diplomacy, but the Porte rejected their proposals. During secret negotiations, Russia managed to obtain guarantees of non-interference from Austria-Hungary in exchange for the occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina by the Austrians. In April 1877, an agreement was concluded with Romania on the passage of Russian troops through its territory.

After the Sultan rejected a new reform project for the Balkan Slavs, developed at the initiative of Russia, on April 24 (April 12, old style), 1877, Russia officially declared war on Turkey.

In the European theater of operations, Russia had 185 thousand soldiers, together with the Balkan allies, the number of the group reached 300 thousand people. In the Caucasus, Russia had about 100,000 soldiers. In turn, the Turks in the European theater had a 186,000-strong group, and in the Caucasus they had about 90,000 soldiers. The Turkish fleet almost completely dominated the Black Sea, in addition, the Port had the Danube Flotilla.

In the context of the restructuring of the entire internal life of the country, the Russian government was unable to prepare for a long war, the financial situation remained difficult. The forces allocated to the Balkan theater of operations were insufficient, but the morale of the Russian army was very high.

According to the plan, the Russian command intended to cross the Danube, cross the Balkans with a swift offensive and move on the Turkish capital - Constantinople. Relying on their fortresses, the Turks hoped to prevent the Russian troops from crossing the Danube. However, these calculations of the Turkish command were frustrated.

In the summer of 1877, the Russian army successfully crossed the Danube. The advance detachment under the command of General Iosif Gurko quickly occupied the ancient capital of Bulgaria, the city of Tarnovo, and then captured an important passage through the Balkans - the Shipka Pass. Further advance was suspended due to lack of forces.

In the Caucasus, Russian troops captured the fortresses of Bayazet and Ardagan, during the Avliyar-Aladzhin battle of 1877 they defeated the Anatolian Turkish army, and then in November 1877 captured the fortress of Kars.

The actions of the Russian troops near Plevna (now Pleven) on the western flank of the army unfolded unsuccessfully. Due to the gross mistakes of the tsarist command, the Turks managed to detain large forces of Russian (and somewhat later Romanian) troops here. Three times Russian troops stormed Plevna, while suffering huge losses, and each time unsuccessfully.

In December, the 40,000-strong garrison of Plevna capitulated.

The fall of Plevna caused the rise of the liberation movement of the Slavs. Serbia entered the war again. Bulgarian volunteers fought heroically in the ranks of the Russian army.

By 1878 the balance of power in the Balkans had shifted in favor of Russia. The Danube army, with the assistance of the Bulgarian population and the Serbian army, defeated the Turks when crossing the Balkans in the winter of 1877-1878, in the battle of Sheinovo, Philippopolis (now Plovdiv) and Adrianople, and in February 1878 reached the Bosphorus and Constantinople.

In the Caucasus, the Russian army captured Batum and blockaded Erzurum.

The ruling circles of Russia faced the specter of a big war with the European powers, for which Russia was not ready. The army suffered heavy losses, experienced difficulties in supply. The command stopped the troops in the town of San Stefano (near Constantinople), and on March 3 (February 19, old style), 1878, a peace treaty was signed here.

According to him, Kars, Ardagan, Batum and Bayazet, as well as South Bessarabia, departed from Russia. Bulgaria and Bosnia and Herzegovina received wide autonomy, and Serbia, Montenegro and Romania - independence. In addition, Türkiye pledged to pay an indemnity of 310 million rubles.

The terms of the agreement provoked a negative reaction from the Western European states, who feared Russia's enormously increased influence in the Balkans. Fearing the threat of a new war, for which Russia was not ready, the Russian government was forced to revise the treaty at the international congress in Berlin (June-July 1878), where the Treaty of San Stefano was replaced by the Treaty of Berlin, which was unfavorable for Russia and the Balkan countries.

The material was prepared on the basis of information from open sources

The most famous foreign policy event under Emperor Alexander II was the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878, which ended successfully for our country.
The so-called eastern question remained open - the struggle of the Slavic peoples of the Ottoman Empire for independence. At the end of the Crimean War, the foreign policy climate on the Balkan Peninsula worsened. Russia was concerned about the weak protection of the southern borders near the Black Sea, and the inability to protect its political interests in Turkey.

Causes of the war

On the eve of the Russian-Turkish campaign, most of the Balkan peoples began to express dissatisfaction, as they were in almost five hundred years of oppression over the Turkish sultan. This oppression was expressed in economic and political discrimination, the imposition of foreign ideology and the widespread Islamization of Orthodox Christians. Russia, being an Orthodox state, in every possible way supported such a national upsurge of the Bulgarians, Serbs and Romanians. This became one of the main factors that predetermined the beginning of the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878. Also, the situation in Western Europe became the basis for the clash between the two sides. Germany (Austria-Hungary), as a new strong state, began to claim dominance in the straits of the Black Sea, and tried in every possible way to weaken the power of England, France and Turkey. This coincided with the interests of Russia, so Germany became its leading ally.

Occasion

The conflict between the South Slavic population and the Turkish authorities in 1875-1876 served as a stumbling block between the Russian Empire and the Turkish state. More precisely, these were anti-Turkish uprisings in Serbia, Bosnia, and, later, Montenegro joined. The Islamic country suppressed these protests with the most cruel methods. The Russian Empire, acting as the patron of all Slavic ethnic groups, could not ignore these events, and in the spring of 1877 declared war on Turkey. It was with these actions that the conflict between the Russian and Ottoman empires began.

Events

In April 1877, the Russian army crossed the Danube River and went to the side of Bulgaria, which at the time of the action still belonged to the Ottoman Empire. By the beginning of July, the Shipka Pass was occupied practically without much resistance. The response of the Turkish side was the transfer of the army led by Suleiman Pasha to take these territories. It is here that the most bloody events of the Russian-Turkish war unfold. The fact is that the Shipka Pass was of great military importance, control over it provided free advance of the Russians to the north of Bulgaria. The enemy significantly outnumbered the forces of the Russian army both in armament and in human resources. On the Russian side, General N. Stoletov was appointed commander-in-chief. By the end of 1877, the Shipka Pass was taken by Russian soldiers.
But, despite heavy defeats, the Turks were in no hurry to surrender. They concentrated the main forces in the Plevna fortress. The siege of Plevna turned out to be a turning point in the course of all armed battles of the Russian-Turkish war. Here luck was on the side of the Russian soldiers. Also, Bulgarian troops successfully fought on the side of the Russian Empire. The commanders-in-chief were: M.D. Skobelev, Prince Nikolai Nikolaevich and the Romanian King Carol I.
Also at this stage of the Russian-Turkish war, the fortresses of Ardagan, Kare, Batum, Erzurum were taken; fortified area of ​​the Turks Sheinovo.
At the beginning of 1878, Russian soldiers approached the capital of Turkey, Constantinople. The formerly mighty and warlike Ottoman Empire was unable to resist the Russian army and in February of that year requested peace negotiations.

Results

The final stage of the Russian-Turkish conflict was the adoption of the San Stefano peace treaty on February 19, 1878. Under its terms, the northern part of Bulgaria received independence (an autonomous principality), and the independence of Serbia, Montenegro, and Romania was confirmed. Russia received the southern part of Bessarabia with the fortresses of Ardagan, Kars and Batum. Türkiye also pledged to pay indemnities to the Russian Empire in the amount of 1.410 billion rubles.

Only Russia was satisfied with the result of this peace treaty, while it categorically did not suit everyone else, in particular, Western European countries (England, Austria-Hungary, etc.). Therefore, in 1878, the Congress of Berlin was organized, at which all the conditions of the previous peace treaty were revised. The Macedonian Republic and the eastern region of Romania were returned to the Turks; England, which did not take part in the war, received Cyprus; Germany got part of the land that belonged to Montenegro under the San Stefano Treaty; Montenegro was also completely deprived of its own navy; some Russian acquisitions passed to the Ottoman Empire.

The Berlin Congress (tract) significantly changed the initial alignment of forces. But, despite some territorial concessions to Russia, the result for our country was victory.

Peace was signed in San Stefano on February 19 (March 3), 1878. Count N.P. Ignatiev even gave up some of the Russian demands in order to end the matter precisely on February 19 and please the tsar with the following telegram: "On the day of the liberation of the peasants, you freed the Christians from the Muslim yoke."

The San Stefano peace treaty changed the entire political picture of the Balkans in favor of Russian interests. Here are its main terms. /281/

1. Serbia, Romania and Montenegro, previously vassal to Turkey, gained independence.
2. Bulgaria, previously a province without rights, acquired the status of a principality, although vassal in form to Turkey (“paying tribute”), but in fact independent, with its own government and army.
3. Turkey undertook to pay Russia an indemnity of 1,410 million rubles, and on account of this amount it ceded Kapc, Ardagan, Bayazet and Batum in the Caucasus, and even South Bessarabia, torn from Russia after the Crimean War.

Official Russia noisily celebrated the victory. The king generously poured awards, but with a choice, falling mainly into his relatives. Both Grand Dukes - both "Uncle Nizi" and "Uncle Mikhi" - became field marshals.

Meanwhile, England and Austria-Hungary, reassured about Constantinople, launched a campaign to revise the Treaty of San Stefano. Both powers took up arms especially against the creation of the Bulgarian Principality, which they correctly regarded as an outpost of Russia in the Balkans. Thus, Russia, having just with difficulty mastered Turkey, who had a reputation as a "sick man", found herself in the face of a coalition from England and Austria-Hungary, i.e. coalitions of "two big men". For a new war with two opponents at once, each of which was stronger than Turkey, Russia had neither the strength nor the conditions (a new revolutionary situation was already brewing within the country). Tsarism turned to Germany for diplomatic support, but Bismarck declared that he was ready to play only the role of an "honest broker", and proposed to convene an international conference on the Eastern question in Berlin.

On June 13, 1878, the historic Congress of Berlin opened. All his affairs were handled by the "big five": Germany, Russia, England, France and Austria-Hungary. The delegates of another six countries were extras. A member of the Russian delegation, General D.G. Anuchin, wrote in his diary: "The Turks are sitting like chumps."

Bismarck presided over the congress. The British delegation was headed by Prime Minister B. Disraeli (Lord Beaconsfield), a long-term (from 1846 to 1881) leader of the Conservative Party, which still honors Disraeli as one of its founders. France was represented by Minister of Foreign Affairs W. Waddington (an Englishman by birth, which did not prevent him from being an Anglophobe), Austria-Hungary was represented by Minister of Foreign Affairs D. Andrassy, ​​once a hero of the Hungarian revolution of 1849, sentenced to death by an Austrian court for this , and now the leader of the most reactionary and aggressive forces of Austria-Hungary. The head of the Russian / 282 / delegation was formally considered the 80-year-old Prince Gorchakov, but he was already decrepit and ill. In fact, the delegation was led by the Russian ambassador in London, the former chief of gendarmes, ex-dictator P.A. Shuvalov, who turned out to be a much worse diplomat than a gendarme. Evil tongues assured him that he happened to confuse the Bosporus with the Dardanelles.

The Congress worked for exactly one month. Its final act was signed on July 1 (13), 1878. During the congress, it became clear that Germany, worried about the excessive strengthening of Russia, did not want to support it. France, which had not yet recovered from the defeat of 1871, gravitated toward Russia, but was so afraid of Germany that it did not dare to actively support Russian demands. Taking advantage of this, England and Austria-Hungary imposed decisions on the Congress that changed the Treaty of San Stefano to the detriment of Russia and the Slavic peoples of the Balkans, and Disraeli did not act like a gentleman: there was a case when he even ordered an emergency train for himself, threatening to leave the Congress and thus disrupt his work.

The territory of the Bulgarian principality was limited to only the northern half, and southern Bulgaria became an autonomous province of the Ottoman Empire under the name "Eastern Rumelia". The independence of Serbia, Montenegro and Romania was confirmed, but the territory of Montenegro was also reduced in comparison with the agreement in San Stefano. Serbia, on the other hand, slaughtered part of Bulgaria in order to quarrel them. Russia returned Bayazet to Turkey, and collected not 1410 million, but only 300 million rubles as an indemnity. Finally, Austria-Hungary negotiated for itself the "right" to occupy Bosnia and Herzegovina. Only England seemed to have received nothing in Berlin. But, firstly, it was England (together with Austria-Hungary) who imposed all the changes in the San Stefano Treaty, which were beneficial only to Turkey and England, which stood behind her back, to Russia and the Balkan peoples, and secondly, the British government a week before the opening The Berlin Congress forced Turkey to cede Cyprus to him (in exchange for the obligation to protect Turkish interests), which the Congress tacitly sanctioned.

The positions of Russia in the Balkans, won in the battles of 1877-1878. at the cost of the lives of more than 100,000 Russian soldiers, were undermined in the debates of the Berlin Congress in such a way that the Russian-Turkish war turned out to be for Russia, although won, but unsuccessful. Tsarism never managed to reach the straits, and Russia's influence in the Balkans did not become stronger, since the Berlin Congress divided Bulgaria, cut Montenegro, transferred Bosnia and Herzegovina to Austria-Hungary, and even quarreled with Serbia and Bulgaria. The concessions of Russian diplomacy in Berlin testified to the military and political inferiority of tsarism and, paradoxically as it looked after the war won /283/, the weakening of its authority in the international arena. Chancellor Gorchakov, in a note to the tsar on the results of the Congress, admitted: "The Berlin Congress is the blackest page in my official career." The king added: "And in mine too."

The speech of Austria-Hungary against the Treaty of San Stefano and Bismarck's unfriendly brokerage towards Russia worsened the traditionally friendly Russian-Austrian and Russian-German relations. It was at the Berlin Congress that the prospect of a new alignment of forces was outlined, which would eventually lead to the First World War: Germany and Austria-Hungary against Russia and France.

As for the Balkan peoples, they benefited from the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878. much, although less than what would have been received under the Treaty of San Stefano: this is the independence of Serbia, Montenegro, Romania and the beginning of an independent statehood of Bulgaria. The liberation (albeit incomplete) of the “Slav brothers” stimulated the rise of the liberation movement in Russia itself, because now almost none of the Russians wanted to put up with the fact that they, as the well-known liberal I.I. Petrunkevich, "yesterday's slaves were made citizens, and they themselves returned home as slaves."

The war shook the positions of tsarism not only in the international arena, but also within the country, exposing the ulcers of the economic and political backwardness of the autocratic regime as a consequence incompleteness"great" reforms of 1861-1874. In a word, like the Crimean War, the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878. played the role of a political catalyst, accelerating the maturation of a revolutionary situation in Russia.

Historical experience has shown that war (especially if it is ruinous and even more unsuccessful) exacerbates social contradictions in the antagonistic, i.e. ill-ordered society, aggravating the misery of the masses, and hastening the maturation of the revolution. After the Crimean War, the revolutionary situation (the first in Russia) developed three years later; after the Russian-Turkish 1877-1878. - by the next year (not because the second war was more ruinous or shameful, but because the sharpness of social contradictions by the beginning of the war of 1877-1878 was greater in Russia than before the Crimean War). The next war of tsarism (Russian-Japanese 1904-1905) already led to a real revolution, since it turned out to be more ruinous and shameful than even the Crimean War, and social antagonisms are much sharper than during not only the first, but also the second revolutionary situations . Under the conditions of the world war that began in 1914, two revolutions broke out in Russia one after the other - first a democratic one, and then a socialist one. /284/

Historiographic reference. War 1877-1878 between Russia and Turkey is a phenomenon of great international importance, because, firstly, it was conducted because of the Eastern question, then almost the most explosive of the issues of world politics, and, secondly, it ended with the European Congress, which redrawn the political map in the region, then perhaps the "hottest", in the "powder magazine" of Europe, as diplomats spoke of it. Therefore, the interest in the war of historians from different countries is natural.

In pre-revolutionary Russian historiography, the war was portrayed as follows: Russia unselfishly seeks to liberate the "Slav brothers" from the Turkish yoke, and the selfish powers of the West prevent it from doing this, wanting to take away Turkey's territorial inheritance. This concept was developed by S.S. Tatishchev, S.M. Goryainov and especially the authors of the official nine-volume Description of the Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878. on the Balkan Peninsula" (St. Petersburg, 1901-1913).

For the most part, foreign historiography depicts the war as a clash of two barbarities - Turkish and Russian, and the powers of the West - as civilized peacekeepers who have always helped the Balkan peoples to fight against the Turks with intelligent means; and when the war broke out, they stopped Russia from beating Turkey and saved the Balkans from Russian rule. This is how B. Sumner and R. Seton-Watson (England), D. Harris and G. Rapp (USA), G. Freitag-Loringhoven (Germany) interpret this topic.

As for Turkish historiography (Yu. Bayur, Z. Karal, E. Urash, etc.), it is imbued with chauvinism: the yoke of Turkey in the Balkans is presented as progressive guardianship, the national liberation movement of the Balkan peoples is for the inspiration of European powers, and all wars , which led the Brilliant Porte in the XVIII-XIX centuries. (including the war of 1877-1878), - for self-defense against the aggression of Russia and the West.

More objective than others are the works of A. Debidur (France), A. Taylor (England), A. Springer (Austria), where the aggressive calculations of all the powers participating in the war of 1877-1878 are criticized. and the Berlin Congress.

Soviet historians for a long time did not pay attention to the war of 1877-1878. proper attention. In the 1920s, M.N. wrote about her. Pokrovsky. He sharply and witty denounced the reactionary policy of tsarism, but underestimated the objectively progressive consequences of the war. Then, for more than a quarter of a century, our historians were not interested in that war /285/, and only after the second liberation of Bulgaria by the force of Russian arms in 1944, the study of the events of 1877-1878 resumed in the USSR. In 1950, P.K. Fortunatov "The War of 1877-1878. and the Liberation of Bulgaria” - interesting and bright, the best of all books on this subject, but small (170 pages) - this is only a brief overview of the war. Somewhat more detailed, but less interesting is the monograph by V.I. Vinogradov.

Labor N.I. Belyaev, although great, is emphatically special: a military-historical analysis without due attention not only to socio-economic, but even to diplomatic subjects. The collective monograph “The Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878”, published in 1977 on the 100th anniversary of the war, edited by I.I. Rostunov.

Soviet historians studied the causes of the war in detail, but in covering the course of hostilities, as well as their results, they contradicted themselves, equals sharpening the aggressive goals of tsarism and the liberation mission of the tsarist army. The works of Bulgarian scientists (X. Khristov, G. Georgiev, V. Topalov) on various issues of the topic are distinguished by similar advantages and disadvantages. A generalizing study of the war of 1877-1878, as fundamental as the monograph by E.V. Tarle about the Crimean War, still not.

For details about it, see: Anuchin D.G. Berlin Congress // Russian antiquity. 1912, nos. 1-5.

Cm.: Debidur A. Diplomatic history of Europe from the Vienna to the Berlin Congress (1814-1878). M., 1947. T 2; Taylor A. Struggle for supremacy in Europe (1848-1918). M., 1958; Springer A. Der russisch-tiirkische Krieg 1877-1878 in Europa. Vienna, 1891-1893.

Cm.: Vinogradov V.I. Russian-Turkish war 1877-1878 and the liberation of Bulgaria. M., 1978.

Cm.: Belyaev N.I. Russian-Turkish war 1877-1878 M., 1956.

Question 1. What were the reasons for the Russian-Turkish war?

Answer. Causes:

1) an uprising brutally suppressed by the Turks in Bulgaria (irregular formations of bashi-bazouks were especially outrageous);

2) entry into the war in defense of the Bulgarians of Serbia and Montenegro;

3) the traditional role of Russia as a defender of Orthodoxy (Bulgarians, Serbs, and Montenegrins were Orthodox);

4) great indignation at the inaction of the government in Russian society (despite the ban, a huge number of Russian volunteers, many officers, made their way to the Balkans to join the Serbian and Montenegrin army, even the hero of the defense of Sevastopol, the former military governor of the Turkestan region, M.G. . Chernyaev), because of which there was public pressure on Alexander II;

5) indignation at the actions of the Turks in society throughout Europe, including England (which gave hope that despite the pro-Turkish position on this issue of the government of Benjamin Disraeli, Great Britain would not use the right given to it and Austria under the Paris Treaty of 1856 in the event of a war between Russia and Turkey for any reason to intervene on the side of the latter);

6) the Reichstadt Agreement, according to which Russia agreed to the occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina by Austria, and Austria promised not to use the right given to her and Great Britain under the Paris Treaty of 1856 in the event of a war between Russia and Turkey, for any reason, to intervene on the side of the latter;

7) strengthening as a result of the reform of the Russian army;

8) The Ottoman Empire continued to weaken throughout the 19th century and was not a serious opponent in the 1870s;

9) the intractability of Turkey, which Russia has long tried to put pressure on without declaring war.

Question 2. What do you see as the features of this war?

Answer. Peculiarities:

1) the war showed that the military reform in Russia was generally successful, the Russian army was superior to the Turkish one;

2) the war showed an even greater aggravation of the Eastern Question, and therefore there was a huge interest of the European powers in the fate of Turkey.

Question 3. Using the map, tell us about the main battles of this war.

Answer. The main battles of this war took place in the Balkans (although hostilities also took place in the Caucasus), these are the defense of Shipka and the capture of Plevna.

The most convenient overland route to Istanbul ran through the Shipka Pass in Bulgaria. Russian troops attacked it on July 5 and 6, 1877, but could not take it. However, on the night after the assault, the frightened Turks left the pass themselves, then it was vital for the Russians to hold this position, which they did, repulsing the periodic attempts of the Turks to return the pass. But the main battle had to be fought not with the army of the enemy, but with nature. In the fall, cold weather set in early, to which was added the piercing wind of the highlands (the height of the Shipka Pass is 1185 meters above sea level), and the Russian troops did not have winter clothes. During the period from September 5 to December 24, only about 700 people were killed and wounded by enemy bullets, and the cold claimed up to 9.5 thousand lives. At the end of 1877, a new attack threw the Turks back from the pass, the need to keep the garrison in its highest part disappeared.

During their rapid advance at the beginning of the war, the Russian troops did not have time to take Plevna, where a large group of Osman Pasha strengthened. It would be dangerous to leave this grouping in the rear, because the Russians could not advance further without taking Plevna. The Russian and Romanian troops that besieged the city several times outnumbered the garrison in terms of the number of fighters and guns. Nevertheless, the siege was very difficult. The first assault took place on 10 July. Two more followed later. The total losses of the Russian and Romanian troops amounted to 35 thousand killed and wounded. As a result, only a blockade could force the Turks to surrender the city. The starving Turkish army and the Muslims of the city tried to break through the encirclement, but were defeated. The city fell only on December 10. In the future, the Russian troops advanced with great ease, therefore it can be assumed that if it were not for the protracted siege of Plevna, they would have been in the vicinity of Istanbul until the end of the summer of 1877.

Question 4. How did the major European powers react to the successes of the Russian troops?

Answer. The major European powers were worried about Russia's success. They agreed to expand its zone of influence in the Balkans, and then with certain reservations, but not in the entire Ottoman Empire. The Eastern Question remained relevant: Turkish territories were too vast to allow them to fall into the zone of influence of one country, especially Russia. Europe was preparing to form a new coalition in defense of Istanbul against St. Petersburg.

Question 5. What were the results of the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878?

Answer. The peace treaty was originally signed in Istanbul's western suburb of San Stefano. But at the Berlin International Conference, it was revised and the European powers forced all parties to the conflict to sign this redacted treaty. His results were as follows:

1) Russia returned the southern part of Bessarabia, lost after the Crimean War;

2) Russia annexed the Kars region, inhabited by Armenians and Georgians;

3) Russia occupied the strategically important Batumi region;

4) Bulgaria was divided into three parts: a vassal principality from the Danube to the Balkans with a center in Sofia; Bulgarian lands south of the Balkans formed an autonomous province of the Turkish Empire - Eastern Rumelia; Macedonia returned to Turkey;

5) Bulgaria with the center in Sofia was declared an autonomous principality, the elected head of which was approved by the sultan with the consent of the great powers;

6) Bulgaria, with its center in Sofia, was obliged to pay an annual tribute to Turkey;

7) Türkiye received the right to protect the borders of Eastern Rumelia with the forces of only regular troops;

8) Thrace and Albania remained with Turkey;

9) the independence of Montenegro, Serbia and the Romanian Principality was recognized;

10) The Romanian Principality received the Bulgarian Northern Dobruja and the Danube Delta;

11) Austria-Hungary won the right to occupy Bosnia and Herzegovina and place garrisons between Serbia and Montenegro;

12) Guaranteed freedom of navigation along the Danube from the Black Sea to the Iron Gates;

13) Turkey renounced in favor of Persia the rights to the disputed border town of Khotur;

14) Great Britain occupied Cyprus, in return for which she pledged to protect Turkey from further Russian advances in the Transcaucasus.

Causes of the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878 very varied. If you look into historiography, many historians express different points of view on determining the causes of the war. This war is very interesting to study. It should be noted that this war was the last victorious for Russia. Then the question arises, why then a series of defeats began, why the Russian Empire no longer won wars.

The main battles remained in the memory of the descendants as symbols of this particular Russian-Turkish war:

• Shipka;
• Plevna;
• Adrianople.

You can also note the uniqueness of this war. For the first time in the history of diplomatic relations, a national question became the reason for the outbreak of hostilities. Also for Russia, this war was the first in which the Institute of War Correspondents worked. Thus, all military operations were described on the pages of Russian and European newspapers. In addition, this is the first war where the Red Cross operates, which was created back in 1864.

But, despite the uniqueness of this war, below we will try to understand only the reasons for its start and partly in the prerequisites.

Causes and background of the Russo-Turkish war

It is interesting that there are very few works about this war in pre-revolutionary historiography. Few people have studied the causes and preconditions of this war. Later, however, historians began to pay more and more attention to this conflict. Not studying this Russian-Turkish war, most likely, is due to the fact that representatives of the Romanov dynasty were in command during its period. And to delve into their mistakes seems to be not accepted. Apparently this was the reason for the inattention to its origins. It can be concluded that the timely failure to study the successes and failures of the war later led to the consequences in the following wars that the Russian Empire had further.

In 1875, events took place on the Balkan Peninsula, which led to confusion and anxiety throughout Europe. In this territory, that is, the territory of the Ottoman Empire, there were uprisings of the Slavic states that were part of it. These were the uprisings.

1. Serb uprising;
2. Bosnian uprising;
3. Revolt in Bulgaria (1876).

These events led to the fact that European states had thoughts about how to start a military conflict with Turkey. That is, many historians and political scientists represent these uprisings of the Slavic peoples as the first cause of the Russian-Turkish war.

This Russian-Turkish war was one of the first wars where rifled weapons were used, and the soldiers used them very actively. For the army, this military conflict has generally become unique in terms of innovation. This applies to weapons, and diplomacy, and cultural aspects. All this makes the military clash very attractive for the study of historians.

Causes of the war 1877-1878 with the Ottoman Empire

After the uprisings, the national question arises. In Europe, this caused a great resonance. After these events, it was necessary to reconsider the status of the Balkan peoples in the Ottoman Empire, that is, Turkey. Foreign media almost daily printed telegrams and reports on events in the Balkan Peninsula.

Russia, as an Orthodox state, considered itself the patron of all Orthodox Slavic fraternal peoples. In addition, Russia is an empire that sought to strengthen its position on the Black Sea. I also did not forget about the lost one, this also left its mark. That is why it could not remain aloof from these events. In addition, the educated intelligent part of Russian society constantly talked about these unrest in the Balkans, the question arose "What to do?" and "How to proceed?". That is, Russia had reasons to start this Turkish war.

• Russia is an Orthodox state that considered itself the patroness and protector of the Orthodox Slavs;
• Russia sought to strengthen its position in the Black Sea;
• Russia wanted to take revenge for the loss in.