The article raises the question of the correctness of the choice of the Russian Naval Department when accepting the 1898 Program of battleships with a turret arrangement of medium-caliber artillery. Evolutionarily, the guns trace their lineage back to the sailing fleet, when the guns of the lower gun decks were put in casemate, and the open-standing deck guns of the upper deck were transformed into turret guns. It is briefly analyzed such terminology as what are the casemates and towers at the time of the adoption of the Program in 1898. The state of affairs in the Russian Imperial Navy is characterized. The advantages and disadvantages of both systems of placement of medium-caliber guns are compared. A brief overview of the placement of medium-caliber artillery in the leading naval powers of that time is made. Mostly the states that planned to fight from the defense near their ports and bases experimented with medium-caliber turret artillery. The British had interests all over the world, and did not risk putting medium-caliber turrets on their numerous battleships. They worked out the type of medium-caliber turrets on their serial armored cruisers. A brief description of the fate of the Russian turret battleships of the 1898 Program is given. In the clash of purely casemated Japanese battleships and armored cruisers, the score was far from in favor of the Russians. The conclusion is that in the realities of the late XIX century, the best option for placing medium-caliber artillery on Russian squadron battleships was armored casemates, like the “Victory” and “Retvizan”. The French project of a purely turret battleship “Tsesarevich” (the third ship in the Program) was supposed to be a single, introductory one. In the series, it was necessary to launch technological and easy-to-build, operate and repair casemate battleships.