Treaty of Paris (1856)

Last updated
Treaty of Paris
Edouard Dubufe Congres de Paris.jpg
Edouard Louis Dubufe, Congrès de Paris, 1856, Palace of Versailles.
TypeMultilateral Treaty
Signed30 March 1856 (1856-03-30)
Location Paris, France
Original
signatories
RatifiersFrance, United Kingdom, Ottoman Empire, Sardinia, Prussia, Austria, Russian Empire
LanguageFrench

The Treaty of Paris of 1856 brought an end to the Crimean War between the Russian Empire and an alliance of the Ottoman Empire, the United Kingdom, the Second French Empire and the Kingdom of Sardinia. [1] [2]

Contents

The treaty, signed on 30 March 1856 at the Congress of Paris, made the Black Sea neutral territory, closing it to all warships and prohibiting fortifications and the presence of armaments on its shores.

The treaty diminished Russian influence in the region. Conditions for the return of Sevastopol and other towns and cities in the south of Crimea to Russia were severe since no naval or military arsenal could be established by Russia on the coast of the Black Sea.

Summary

Epinal print of the sovereigns of Europe during the Congress of Paris, 1856 Congres de Paris, 1856.jpg
Épinal print of the sovereigns of Europe during the Congress of Paris, 1856

The Treaty of Paris was signed on 30 March 1856 at the Congress of Paris with Russia on one side of the negotiating table and France, Britain, the Ottoman Empire and the Kingdom of Sardinia on the other side. The treaty came about to resolve the Crimean War, which had begun on 23 October 1853, when the Ottoman Empire formally declared war on Russia after Russian troops occupied the Danubian Principalities. [3]

The Treaty of Paris was seen as an achievement of the Tanzimat policy of reform. The Western European alliance powers pledged to maintain the integrity of the Ottoman Empire and restored the respective territories of the Russian and the Ottoman Empires to their pre-war boundaries. They also demilitarised the Black Sea to improve trade, which greatly weakened Russia's influence in the region. Moldavia and Wallachia were recognized as quasi-independent states under Ottoman suzerainty. They gained the left bank of the mouth of the Danube and part of Bessarabia from Russia as a result of the treaty. [4]

Negotiations

Participants of the Congress of Paris, 1856 Traite de Paris (1856).jpg
Participants of the Congress of Paris, 1856

As the Crimean War ended, all sides of the war wanted to come to a lasting resolution due to the casualties and attrition suffered. However, competing ideas of war resolution inhibited the drafting of lasting and definitive peace treaty. Even amongst the allies, disagreements between nations concerning the nature of the treaty created an uncertain peace, resulting in further diplomatic issues involving the Ottoman Empire, especially in terms of its relations with the Russian Empire and the Concert of Europe. Also, mistrust between the French and British allies during the war effort compounded problems in formulating a comprehensive peace. [5] Thus, the terms of the treaty made future relations between the major powers uncertain. [6] [7]

Peace aims

Russian aims

Despite losing the war, the Russians wanted to ensure attain the best possible outcome for the empire at the Congress of Paris. When Alexander II took the crown of Russia in 1855, he inherited a potential crisis that threatened the collapse of the empire.[ citation needed ] There were problems throughout the empire, stretching from parts of Finland to Poland and Crimea and many tribal conflicts, and the Russian economy was on the brink of collapse.[ citation needed ] Russia knew that within a few months, a total defeat in the war was imminent, which would mean the complete humiliation of Russia on an international scale, and further loss of territory.

Alexander II pursued peace talks with Britain and France in Paris in 1856, seeking to keep some imperial possessions, to stop the deaths of thousands of its army reserves, and to prevent an economic crisis. [5] Similarly, Russia wanted to maintain at least a pretence of military power, which had posed a formidable threat to the west European allies. It attempted "to turn defeat into victory ... through ... peacetime [internal] reforms and diplomatic initiatives." [8]

Britain and France

Cover of the English version of the Treaty of Paris, 1856 Treatyofparis1856originalenglishedition.jpg
Cover of the English version of the Treaty of Paris, 1856

During the war Britain and France resumed their latent rivalry, largely derived from the Napoleonic Wars. The French blamed many of the defeats of the alliance on the fact that Britain had marched into war without a clear plan. Defeats including the Charge of the Light Brigade during the Battle of Balaclava highlighted the logistical and tactical failures of Britain, and spurred calls for increased army professionalism. [9] The British were increasingly wary throughout the war that the French might capitalise on a weakened Russia and focus their attention on seeking revenge on the British for French military defeats at Trafalgar and Waterloo. [10]

Although there was a call for the end of the war in Britain, including riots in London, there was support for its continuation, and expansion to punish Russia's imperial ambition, particularly from the incumbent prime minister Lord Palmerston. [9] [11]

Britain and France desired to ensure that the Ottoman Empire were made stronger by the Treaty of Paris, ensuring a stable balance of power in Europe. They hoped that peace and restricting Russian access to key areas, such as the Black Sea, would allow the Ottoman Empire to focus on internal issues including rising nationalism in many nations under the empire's authority. Without the Ottomans being in full control of their empire, the great powers feared that it could lose much of its territory in future wars with the Russian Empire and the Austrian Empire, eventually strengthening these nations and posing a significant threat to the French and British. [12] Thus, the full removal of Russian presence in the Danubian principalities and the Black Sea served both to protect British dominance and to inhibit the Russian Empire from expanding its influence readily.

Russian losses

The Ottoman, British and French governments desired a more crushing defeat for Russia, which was still crippled in many key areas. The Russian Empire had lost over 500,000 troops [13] and knew that pressing further militarily with their largely unprofessional army would have resulted in higher casualties and attrition.[ citation needed ]

Russia was forced to withdraw from the Danubian Principalities, where it had started a period of common tutelage for the Ottomans and the Congress of Great Powers. [14]

Russia had to return to Moldavia part of its territory it had annexed in 1812 (to the mouth of the Danube, in southern Bessarabia). The Danubian principalities and the Principality of Serbia, were given greater self-government, resulting in the Russian Empire having a diminished influence over them.

Russia was forced to abandon its claim to protect Christians in the Ottoman Empire, which initially served as part of the pretext for the Crimean War.[ citation needed ]

Russian warships were banned from sailing the Black Sea, which greatly decreased Russian influence over the Black Sea trade.

The defeat accentuated the impediments of the Russian Empire, contributing to future reform including the emancipation of the serfs and the spread of revolutionary ideas.[ citation needed ]

Short-term consequences

From Auguste Blanchard's copper-plate engraving, based on Edouard Dubufe's picture Congress of Paris 1856.jpg
From Auguste Blanchard's copper-plate engraving, based on Édouard Dubufe's picture

The treaty reopened the Black Sea for international trade to be safe and effectual after both the naval warfare of the Crimean War and the presence of Russian warships had made trade difficult, including many trade disputes. [14]

The Treaty of Paris was influenced by the general public in France and Britain because the Crimean War, was one of the first wars in which the general public received relatively prompt media coverage of the events. The British prime minister, Lord Aberdeen, who was viewed as being incompetent to lead the war effort, lost a vote in parliament and resigned in favour of Lord Palmerston, who was seen as having a clearer plan for victory. [5] Peace was accelerated in part because the general population of the western allies had greater access to and understanding of political intrigue and foreign policy, and therefore demanded an end to the war.

Long-term consequences

Treaty of Paris participants Treaty of Paris 1856 - 2.jpg
Treaty of Paris participants

Nationalism was bolstered in many ways by the Crimean War, and very little could be done at a systemic level to stem the tides of growing nationalist sentiment in many nations. The Ottoman Empire, for the next few decades until World War I, had to face a number of patriotic uprisings in many of its provinces. No longer capable of withstanding the internal forces tearing it apart, the empire was splintering, as many ethnic groups cried out for more rights, most notably self-rule. Britain and France may have allowed the situation in Europe to stabilise briefly, but the Peace of Paris did little to create lasting stability in the Concert of Europe. The Ottomans joined the Concert of Europe after the Peace was signed, but most European nations looked to the crumbling empire with either hungry or worried eyes.

The war revealed to the world just how important solving the "Eastern Question" was to the stability of Europe; however, the Peace of Paris provided no clear answer or guidance. [7]

The importance of the Ottoman Empire to Britain and France in maintaining the balance of power in the Black and the Mediterranean Seas made many view the signing of the Treaty of Paris to be the entrance of the Ottoman Empire to the European international theatre. Greater penetration of European influence into Ottoman international law and a decline in emphasis of Islamic practices in their legal system illustrate more of an inclusion of the Ottoman Empire into European politics and disputes, leading to its major role in the First World War. [15]

Austria and Germany were affected by nationalism as a result of the signing of the Peace of Paris. Austria was normally an ally of Russia but was neutral during the war, mobilized troops against Russia and sent at least an ultimatum asking the withdrawal of Russian armies from the Balkans.

After the Russian defeat, relations between the two nations, the most conservative in Europe, remained very strained. Russia, the gendarme of conservatism and the saviour of Austria during the Hungarian Revolution of 1848, angrily resented the failure of Austria to help or assist its former ally, which contributed to Russia's non-intervention in the 1859 Franco-Austrian War, ending Austrian influence in Italy; in the 1866 Austro-Prussian War, with the loss of its influence over the German Confederation; and in the Ausgleich (compromise) with Hungary of 1867, which meant the sharing of the power in the empire with the Magyars. The status of Austria as a great power, after the unifications of Germany, Italy was now severely diminished. Austria slowly became little more than a German satellite state.

A unified and strengthened Germany was not a pleasant thought for many in Britain and France [16] since it would pose a threat to both French borders and British political and economic interest in the East.

Essentially, the war that sought to stabilise power relations in Europe brought about by a temporary peace. The great powers only strengthened nationalist aspirations of ethnic groups, under the control of the victorious Ottomans and of the German states. By 1877, the Russians and the Ottomans would once again be at war. [7]

Provisions

The Carpatho-Danubian-Pontic Space in 1856 AD, after the Treaty of Paris, which further weakened Ottoman influence and established conditions for unification. 1856PRINCIPATE.png
The Carpatho-Danubian-Pontic Space in 1856 AD, after the Treaty of Paris, which further weakened Ottoman influence and established conditions for unification.

The treaty admitted the Ottoman Empire to the European concert, and the Powers promised to respect its independence and territorial integrity. Russia gave up some and relinquished its claim to a protectorate over the Christians in the Ottoman domains. The Black Sea was demilitarised, and an international commission was set up to guarantee freedom of commerce and navigation on the Danube River.

Moldavia and Wallachia would stay under nominal Ottoman rule but be granted independent constitutions and national assemblies, which were to be monitored by the victorious powers. A project of a referendum was to be set in place to monitor the will of the peoples on unification, which eventually happened on 1859. Moldavia recovered part of Bessarabia (including part of Budjak), which it had held prior to 1812, creating a buffer between the Ottoman Empire and Russia in the west. The United Principalities of Romania, which would later be formed from the two territories, would remain an Ottoman vassal state until 1877.

New rules of wartime commerce were set out in the Declaration of Paris: (1) privateering was illegal; (2) a neutral flag covered enemy goods except contraband; (3) neutral goods, except contraband, were not liable to capture under an enemy flag; (4) a blockade, to be legal, had to be effective. [17]

The treaty also demilitarised the Åland Islands in the Baltic Sea, which belonged to the autonomous Russian Grand Duchy of Finland. The fortress Bomarsund had been destroyed by British and French forces in 1854, and the alliance wanted to prevent its future use as a Russian military base.

Signing parties

Legacy

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Crimean War</span> 1853–1856 war between the Russian Empire and their allies, and the Ottoman Empire and their allies

The Crimean War was fought from October 1853 to February 1856 between the Russian Empire and an ultimately victorious alliance of the Ottoman Empire, France, the United Kingdom, and Sardinia-Piedmont.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Concert of Europe</span> European balance of power in the 19th century

The Concert of Europe was a general agreement among the great powers of 19th-century Europe to maintain the European balance of power, political boundaries, and spheres of influence. Never a perfect unity and subject to disputes and jockeying for position and influence, the Concert was an extended period of relative peace and stability in Europe following the Wars of the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars which had consumed the continent since the 1790s. There is considerable scholarly dispute over the exact nature and duration of the Concert. Some scholars argue that it fell apart nearly as soon as it began in the 1820s when the great powers disagreed over the handling of liberal revolts in Italy, while others argue that it lasted until the outbreak of World War I and others for points in between. For those arguing for a longer duration, there is generally agreement that the period after the Revolutions of 1848 and the Crimean War (1853–1856) represented a different phase with different dynamics than the earlier period.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Treaty of Berlin (1878)</span> Settlement by the Congress of Berlin following the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–78

The Treaty of Berlin was signed on 13 July 1878. In the aftermath of the Russian victory against the Ottoman Empire in the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–1878, the major powers restructured the map of the Balkan region. They reversed some of the extreme gains claimed by Russia in the preliminary Treaty of San Stefano, but the Ottomans lost their major holdings in Europe. It was one of three major peace agreements in the period after the 1815 Congress of Vienna. It was the final act of the Congress of Berlin and included Great Britain and Ireland, Austria-Hungary, France, Germany, Italy, Russia and the Ottoman Empire. Chancellor of Germany Otto von Bismarck was the chairman and dominant personality.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Russo-Turkish War (1768–1774)</span> 1768–1774 conflict fought between the Ottoman Empire and the Russian Empire

The Russo-Turkish War of 1768–1774 was a major armed conflict that saw Russian arms largely victorious against the Ottoman Empire. Russia's victory brought the Yedisan between the rivers Bug and Dnieper, and Crimea into the Russian sphere of influence. Through a series of victories accrued by the Russian Empire led to substantial territorial conquests, including direct conquest over much of the Pontic–Caspian steppe, less Ottoman territory was directly annexed than might otherwise be expected due to a complex struggle within the European diplomatic system to maintain a balance of power that was acceptable to other European states and avoided direct Russian hegemony over Eastern Europe.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Congress of Berlin</span> 1878 meeting of representatives of the major European powers

The Congress of Berlin was a diplomatic conference to reorganise the states in the Balkan Peninsula after the Russo-Turkish War (1877–1878), which had been won by Russia against the Ottoman Empire. Represented at the meeting were Europe's then six great powers: Russia, Great Britain, France, Austria-Hungary, Italy, and Germany; the Ottomans; and four Balkan states: Greece, Serbia, Romania and Montenegro. The congress concluded with the signing of the Treaty of Berlin, replacing the preliminary Treaty of San Stefano that had been signed three months earlier.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Treaty of San Stefano</span> 1878 peace ending the Russo-Turkish War

The 1878 Preliminary Treaty of San Stefano was a treaty between the Russian and Ottoman empires at the conclusion of the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–1878. It was signed at San Stefano, then a village west of Constantinople, on 3 March [O.S. 19 February] 1878 by Count Nicholas Pavlovich Ignatiev and Aleksandr Nelidov on behalf of the Russian Empire and by Foreign Minister Saffet Pasha and Ambassador to Germany Sadullah Bey on behalf of the Ottoman Empire.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Paris Declaration Respecting Maritime Law</span> 1856 international treaty with legal novelty that nations could accede afterwards

The Paris Declaration respecting Maritime Law of 16 April 1856 was an international multilateral treaty agreed to by the warring parties in the Crimean War gathered at the Congress at Paris after the peace treaty of Paris had been signed in March 1856. As an important juridical novelty in international law the treaty for the first time created the possibility for nations that were not involved in the establishment of the agreement and did not sign, to become a party by acceding the declaration afterwards. So did altogether 55 nations, which otherwise would have been impossible in such a short period. This represented a large step in the globalisation of international law.

In diplomatic history, the Eastern question was the issue of the political and economic instability in the Ottoman Empire from the late 18th to early 20th centuries and the subsequent strategic competition and political considerations of the European great powers in light of this. Characterized as the "sick man of Europe", the relative weakening of the empire's military strength in the second half of the eighteenth century threatened to undermine the fragile balance of power system largely shaped by the Concert of Europe. The Eastern question encompassed myriad interrelated elements: Ottoman military defeats, Ottoman institutional insolvency, the ongoing Ottoman political and economic modernization programme, the rise of ethno-religious nationalism in its provinces, and Great Power rivalries. In an attempt to triangulate between these various concerns, the historian Leslie Rogne Schumacher has proposed the following definition of the Eastern Question:

The "Eastern Question" refers to the events and the complex set of dynamics related to Europe's experience of and stake in the decline in political, military and economic power and regional significance of the Ottoman Empire from the latter half of the eighteenth century to the formation of modern Turkey in 1923.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Danubian Principalities</span> Historical term for the eastern Balkan states of Moldavia and Wallachia

The Danubian Principalities was a conventional name given to the Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia, which emerged in the early 14th century. The term was coined in the Habsburg monarchy after the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca (1774) in order to designate an area on the lower Danube with a common geopolitical situation. The term was largely used then by foreign political circles and public opinion until the union of the two principalities in 1859. Alongside Transylvania, the United Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia became the basis for the Kingdom of Romania, and by extension the modern nation-state of Romania.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Congress of Paris (1856)</span> Series of diplomatic meetings, 1856, to negotiate peace in the Crimean War

The Congress of Paris is the name for a series of diplomatic meetings held in 1856 in Paris, France, to negotiate peace between the warring powers in the Crimean War that had started almost three years earlier.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of the Russo-Turkish wars</span>

Russo-Turkish wars or Russo-Ottoman wars were a series of twelve wars fought between the Russian Empire and the Ottoman Empire between the 16th and 20th centuries. It was one of the longest series of military conflicts in European history. Except for the war of 1710–11, as well as the Crimean War which is often treated as a separate event, the conflicts ended disastrously for the Ottoman Empire, which was undergoing a long period of stagnation and decline; conversely, they showcased the ascendancy of Russia as a European power after the modernization efforts of Peter the Great in the early 18th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Foreign relations of the Ottoman Empire</span> Overview of the foreign relations of the Ottoman Empire

The foreign relations of the Ottoman Empire were characterized by competition with the Persian Empire to the east, Russia to the north, and Austria to the west. The control over European minorities began to collapse after 1800, with Greece being the first to break free, followed by Serbia. Egypt was lost in 1798–1805. In the early 20th century Austria-Hungary annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Bulgarian Declaration of Independence soon followed. The Ottomans lost nearly all their European territory in the First Balkan War (1912–1913). The Ottoman Empire allied itself with the Central Powers in the First World War, and lost. The British successfully mobilized Arab nationalism. The Ottoman Empire thereby lost its Arab possessions, and itself soon collapsed in the early 1920s. For the period after 1923 see Foreign relations of Turkey.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nicolae Vogoride</span>

Prince Nicolae Vogoride, was a caimacam who ruled Moldavia between 1857–1858, following the Crimean War.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Romania–Russia relations</span> Bilateral relations

Romania–Russia relations are the foreign relations between Romania and Russia. Romania has an embassy in Moscow and consulates-general in Rostov-on-Don and Saint Petersburg. Russia has an embassy in Bucharest and a consulate-general in Constanţa. Historical relations have oscillated among grudging cooperation, neutrality, open hatred and hostility.

The territorial evolution of the Ottoman Empire spans seven centuries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia</span> 1859–1881 personal union and early form of the modern Romanian state

The United Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia, commonly called United Principalities or Wallachia and Moldavia, was the personal union of the Principality of Moldavia and the Principality of Wallachia. The union was formed 5 February [O.S. 24 January] 1859 when Alexandru Ioan Cuza was elected as the Domnitor of both principalities. Their separate autonomous vassalage in the Ottoman Empire continued with the unification of both principalities. On 3 February [O.S. 22 January] 1862, Moldavia and Wallachia formally united to create the Romanian United Principalities, the core of the Romanian nation state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Internationalization of the Danube River</span> Diplomatic process in 19th-century Europe

The Danube River has been a trade waterway for centuries, but with the rise of international borders and the jealousies of national states, commerce and shipping has often been hampered for reasons of conflict and parochialism rather than cooperation between various powers in control of parts of the river. In addition, natural features of the river, most notably the sanding of the delta, has often hampered international trade. For these reasons, diplomats over the decades have worked to internationalize the Danube River in an attempt to allow commerce to flow as smoothly as possible.

The Commissions of the Danube River were authorized by the Treaty of Paris (1856) after the close of the Crimean War. One of these international commissions, the most successful, was the European Commission of the Danube, or, in French, Commission Européenne du Danube, the CED, which had authority over the three mouths of the river — the Chilia in the north, the Sulina in the middle, and the St. George in the south and which was originally designed to last for only two years. Instead, it lasted eighty-two years. A separate commission, the International Danube Commission, or IDC, was authorized to control commerce and improvements upriver beyond the Danube Delta and was supposed to be permanent, but it was not formally organized until after 1918.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Territorial evolution of Romania</span>

The territorial evolution of Romania includes all the changes in the country's borders from its formation to the present day. The precedents of Romania as an independent state can be traced back to the 14th century, when the principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia were founded. Wallachia during its history lost several portions of its territory, either to the Ottomans or the Habsburgs. However, this land would be later essentially recovered in its entirety. Moldavia, on the other hand, suffered great territorial losses. In 1774, the Habsburgs invaded Bukovina and annexed it one year later, and in 1812, the Russian Empire took control of Bessarabia. Both territories were later exposed to powerful colonization policies. The principalities declared unification in 1859 as the Principality of Romania. This new state sought independence from the Ottoman Empire's vassalage, and in 1878, it fought a war against it alongside Russia. However, the latter would annex Southern Bessarabia, which was recovered decades before. Romania received Northern Dobruja as compensation, and would wage a war for the southern part against Bulgaria in 1913.

References

  1. 1 2 Hertslet, Edward (1875). "General treaty between Great Britain, Austria, France, Prussia, Russia, Sardinia and Turkey, signed at Paris on 30th March 1856". The Map of Europe by Treaty showing the various political and territorial changes which have taken place since the general peace of 1814, with numerous maps and notes. Vol. 2. London: Butterworth. pp. 1250–1265.
  2. 1 2 Albin, Pierre (1912). "Acte General Du Congres de Paris, 30 Mars 1856". Les Grands Traités Politiques: Recueil des Principaux Textes Diplomatiques Depuis 1815 Jusqu'à nos Jours avec des Notices Historiques et des Notes. Paris: Librairie Félix Alcan. pp. 170–180.
  3. C. D. Hazen et al., Three Peace Congresses of the Nineteenth Century (1917).
  4. Winfried Baumgart, and Ann Pottinger Saab, Peace of Paris, 1856: Studies in War, Diplomacy & Peacemaking (1981).
  5. 1 2 3 James, Brian. ALLIES IN DISARRAY: The Messy End of the Crimean War.History Today, 58, no. 3, 2008, pp. 24–31.
  6. Temperley, Harold. The Treaty of Paris of 1856 and Its Execution. The Journal of Modern History, 4, no. 3, 1932, pp. 387–414.
  7. 1 2 3 Pearce, Robert. The Results of the Crimean War. History Review, 70, 2011, pp. 27–33
  8. Gorizontoy, Leonid. The Crimean War as a Test of Russia's Imperial Durability.Russian Studies in History, 51, no.1, 2012, pp. 65–94
  9. 1 2 Figes, Orlando (2010). Crimea: The Last Crusade. London: Allen Lane. pp. 400–02, 406–08, 469–471. ISBN   978-0-7139-9704-0. OCLC   640080436.
  10. James, Brian. "Allies in Disarray: The Messy End of the Crimean War", History Today, 58, no. 3, 2008, pp. 24–31.
  11. Karl Marx, "The Aims of the Negotiations – Polemic Against Prussia – A Snowball Riot" contained in the Collected Works of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: Volume 13, p. 599.
  12. Pearce, Robert. "The Results of the Crimean War". History Review 70, 2011, pp. 27–33
  13. Clodfelter, Micheal (2017). Warfare and Armed Conflicts: A Statistical Encyclopedia of Casualty and Other Figures, 1492-2015 (4th ed.). Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company. p. 180. ISBN   978-1-4766-2585-0. OCLC   984342511.
  14. 1 2 Benn, David Wedgwood (2012). "The Crimean War and its lessons for today". International Affairs. 88 (2): 387–391. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2346.2012.01078.x. ISSN   0020-5850 via Oxford Academic.
  15. Palabiyik, Mustafa Serdar, The Emergence of the Idea of ‘International Law’ in the Ottoman Empire before the Treaty of Paris (1856), Middle Eastern Studies, 50:2, 2014, 233-251.
  16. Trager, Robert. Long-Term Consequences of Aggressive Diplomacy: European Relations after Austrian Crimean War Threats. Security Studies, 21, no. 2, 2012, pp. 232–265.
  17. A.W. Ward; G. P. Gooch (1970). The Cambridge History of British Foreign Policy 1783–1919 . Cambridge U.P,. pp.  390–91.

Sources and further reading