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
'"No steps were taken or could be taken by me, as the fort was
abandoned by my order."
'It would have meant I was to take steps against myself--cunning
question indeed. I am satisfied with the defence of that fort; nay,
proud of what constitutes one of the most brilliant pages of the
defence, and will be quoted as an example. By it one principle was
taught, namely, that no soldier will leave his post without orders,
and that the officer in supreme command will never sacrifice lives
needlessly.
'I wrote this in February or March, before any of us had seen the
translations of the books by English authors on the siege of Port
Arthur.
'My description of the fighting does not in the least agree with that
of either Norregaard or James,[48] and no wonder, as I wrote of what
happened under my eyes, and they only wrote what they heard from
survivors of the horrors of that day. I was not credited, because
with us every one wished, and still wishes, only to believe what will
besmirch the fair name of Arthur. This was why only generals were
examined by the Commission.'
He was insulted by the question put to him by the Commission, and in
his reply stated that in defending that fort he had inculcated the
principle that 'no soldier will leave his post without orders, and that
the officer in supreme command will never sacrifice lives needlessly'!
To teach this principle in field warfare is right and proper. But in
fortress warfare, when the enemy are pressing on the line of defences,
when they are storming the forts, when the fall of one fort may bring
on the fall of others, and so lead to greater complications, when there
is nowhere to retire to (we had the third line made by Smirnoff, but it
was ignored by Fock), a fort must indeed 'die and not surrender.' Thus
alone can the spirit and strength of the men in the other forts be kept
up.
'But I will return once more to the discussion of General Smirnoff's
principle. This dogma could only be instilled into the fresh minds of
children, and could not be suddenly introduced during war, for, after
one fight the bravest troops in the world would refuse to believe in
it. The more experienced and braver a man is, the dearer he wants to
sell his life.
'But General Smirnoff called the troops "wasters" and "runaways"
because they did not remain in the wrecked lodgements upon an order
issued by him from his snug room, but ran into others that were
whole, and continued fighting. That commanding officer who inspires
confidence that he will allow no one to perish needlessly will alone
be loved by his officers and men, and may God spare them from feeling
that any General is sacrificing their lives for such a principle as
that for which I was called to answer.
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