The Truth About Port ArthurNozhin, E. K. (Evgenii Konstantinovich)
History
The Truth About Port Arthur
Nozhin, E. K. (Evgenii Konstantinovich)
Lüshun (China) -- History -- Siege, 1904-1905
Meanwhile, on land, the enemy were, generally speaking, quiet. The
reconnoitring patrols of both sides frequently came into contact, and
each tried to snatch surprises and ambush the other. But the results
were small. They shelled our defences, and we in turn did our best
to foil them and delay their siege-works. On the 17th I accompanied
Smirnoff on a visit to Colonel Yolshin, who had been wounded, and a
good deal was said about the inactivity of our engineers.
If we had only had good men here, in six years what might we not have
done, seeing what had been accomplished in four months? Our senior as
well as junior engineers entirely forgot that enormous progress has
been made of late years in ballistics, and apparently had no knowledge
of modern artillery. They quietly pursued the prehistoric dogmas of
ancient manuals.
In a fortress with a stony soil like Arthur--soil which cannot be
touched with entrenching tools--all the mobilization defence works,
especially those of heavy profile, should have, to guard against
such assaults as we had experienced, been prepared beforehand. The
mobilization works in Arthur were only begun on the arrival of the new
Commandant on March 17, up till which time they had not been touched.
The whole attention had been directed to the central wall, and on the
forts and intermediate works.
There was no mobilization scheme in the Fortress. Perhaps General
Bazilevsky knew of one, as he had seen the gradual development of the
Fortress works, which had gone on for over ten years. Unfortunately,
all records of these matters had been despatched to Harbin, and no
one in Arthur, not even the Commandant, knew anything of them. It
may be asked why the new Commandant was not entrusted with the plan
of mobilization works? Why did General Bazilevsky--if he had such a
plan--not give it to Stössel? Why did Kuropatkin when he went round the
Fortress not ask for the plan of its works, even though only roughly
drawn out? Because in all probability one never existed. As to General
Stössel, it is quite possible that he did not know that a fortress
ought to have a mobilization scheme, or did not even appreciate what
a mobilization scheme was. He knew nothing about the works of the
Fortress; they had been entirely under the control of Bazilevsky,
who worked absolutely independently, and was subordinate only to the
Viceroy. For him, it was a sufficiently important duty to dismiss and
abuse the cab-drivers on the streets, to order private soldiers who
were improperly dressed back to barracks, and to order men walking
about in the streets to keep step. To march out of step he considered
such a crime that he thought it necessary even to make a special report
on this subject to the Viceroy. He was therefore very busy, and of
course could not trouble himself about a defence scheme.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account