Crimean War Alaska

The Gadsden Purchase of 1853 is one of the most monumental land purchases in United States history. In basic terms, the Gadsden Purchase was an area of land that was acquired by the United States from Mexico in order to build a railway for the transportation of goods in the South from East to West in order to fulfill Manifest Destiny. Throughout this paper, I hope to accurately navigate through the events prior to the Gadsden Purchase as well as the early life of James Gadsden. Although many topics relate to the purchase itself, I will offer a historical view into Gadsden’s life before, after, and during the purchase as well as a more in depth look into the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. I shall also touch base on why the land was so

2.) America’s Library. “Purchase of Alaska: March 30, 1867” America’s Stories. 9 July 2004. Web 16 Sept. 2010. http://www.americaslibrary.gov/jb/recon/jb_recon_alaska_1.html

Crimean war: is a war that occurred between 1853 and 1856 , between Russia against a union of Great Britain, Sardinia, France, and Turkey. The attack of Russia against Turkey launched the war, bu this later made alliances with the above indicated countries and destroyed the naval power of Russia in the Black sea (1854), which enabled them to capture the castle city of Sebastopol that was sieged for long time in 1855.

Russia emerged as a significant power during the 1500s through war. It fought its neighbors and expanded its territory aimlessly. Ivan the Terrible’s expansion brought him into contact with both Western Europe and the Ottoman Empire. Aiming to gain a port and outlet to the Baltic,

Between the years of 1845 and 1848 America was on a mission to expand farther west. This was mission was not something that was completed over night, but instead too many years to reach the goal. There were multiple disagreements and even some wars erected from this operation. In this paper I am going to discuss the how the Oregon Territory was one of the best claims we have owned and how the California and Texas Territory was one of the worst claims we have owned.

Seward had his eye on this piece of property. Seward saw Alaska’s strategic value for trade -- or in the event of war. He also pictured potential in Alaska’s resources – especially timber and furs. Seward was so eager to secure Alaska, he entered into negotiations with the Russian envoy, the Baron Eduard de Stoeckl, without the go-ahead of the President or Congress.

1. Judging from these two opposing accounts, what is it possible to discern regarding the attitude of Philadelphia sailors and shipbuilders toward the Jay Treaty?

The purchase of Alaska was look upon with massive amounts of skepticism, but was still sought after by many Americans. Many people of the U.S. very simply thought the whole idea was foolish and that America could have no use for the land. For example, as far as Russia themselves knew, the land was barren and snowy, void of any known important natural resources, and almost inhabitable at the time. In fact, “Russian settlers in Alaska never numbered more than four hundred” (WB2). But most importantly, it was viewed as a waste of money, priced at 7.2 million dollars. People even began to name the purchase “Seward’s Folly” which became a famous term as time progressed, which was a source of much ridicule for Seward for many years to follow(WB4).

Secretary Seward - Settle down, Victor. What he means is, are you sure? I don't think you're making the right decision. Alaska could benefit greatly from this offer, as well.

Through the works of Anne Hyde, Andrew Isenberg, and Richard White, an accurate depiction of the transformation that occurred in the West is given with details from various perspectives. These three sources illustrate a journey tracking back to the fur trade in the early 1800s all the way to the end of the gold rush in the late nineteenth century, introducing the readers into what shaped the West. In order to understand the West, the history must be evaluated and the events must be studied that led to the development of the other half of the United States. Creating a stable settlement West of the Mississippi was crucial for the U.S. in regards to the expansion of its territory along with a greater perceived authority. Each of the authors, mentioned

The colonization of the new world and the subsequent missionary efforts to the native people in Southeast Alaska is not unlike that of the greater mainland of modern day America. Their way of life, like that of all other native peoples, forever shifted; means of income, cultural norms, sociopolitical structures, religious practices etc. However, what makes the state of Alaska unique is that it was under Russian occupancy prior to the purchase of Alaska in 1867 by the United States. In primarily focusing on the Tlingit people in the Sitka area, it will be shown that these “primitive” people were primed prior to the purchase of Alaska by the Russian occupancy. The combined factors of Russian culture and influence, as well as the efforts of Russian Orthodox missionaries, such as Saint Innocent (Father Venaminov) and St. Herman, unknowingly contributed to a level of preservation for the Tlingit people.

This essay will look at all the factors and then ascertain the effect each had on the outcome of the Crimean war. To make this easier I have categorised the factors in to leadership and organisation, battlefield tactics, strategy and technology. The allied leadership in the Crimean war was weak and held surprisingly little commanding power over many aspects of the war. Lord Raglan, an old, inexperienced and cautious man, was the commander of the British troops.

Although the Crimean war caused death and great suffering, the war was essential so that Turkey’s could gain independence, and Great Britain could gain territory it had lost in the Middle East. The Crimean war commenced in view of the fact

The Crimean War (1853-1856) was fought on the Crimean peninsula where Russia lost to the alliance of Britain, France, Sardinia and the Ottoman Empire. Despite being victorious, the war revealed that the all-powerful British Army was disorganised and did not modernise with the rest of British Society. This disorganisation caused horrific loss of life and ultimately, made the Crimean war a lot harder for the British then it had to be. However, this incompetence was amplified and highlighted by the new media. The Crimean War heralded the start of the new era of Industrial Warfare, and due to the British army’s attitude of a colonial power, they suffered terribly and the media publicised it.

The Crimean War was the war between Great Britain, French, and along with some other countries against Russia. While Russia led by Nicholas I, entered to the Crimean War to defend Orthodox Christian within the autocrat empire; French entered this war because they promoted the Catholics Christian; Great Britain wanted to maintain the autocrat empire and maintain power (Aksakov and Danielevsky, 378-389). It was an absolute humiliating when Russia defeated the war. The Russian military was outplayed because the British had much more sophisticated weapons, technology, and supply line (Riasanovsky and Steinberg, 366). Many liberal, conservative, and Russian people believed that the defeat of Russia in the Crimean War was evidence of Russia 's economy and material backwardness and fallen behind many European nations (lecture, 10/19). This led to the “forces of modernization”.