16 December 1872 was born Russian military leader, General Anton Ivanovich Denikin

16 December 1872 was born Russian military leader, General Anton Ivanovich Denikin The whole biography of Anton Ivanovich Denikin is a track record of a courageous and talented commander. Denikin was born 4 (16) December 1872 of the year in the village of Shpetal Dolny, a suburb of Wloclawek, the county town of the Warsaw province of the Russian state. His father, Ivan Efimovich Denikin, was of peasant origin, but after 22 years of military service he was able to become an officer and ended his career as a major in the border guard. Mother - Elizaveta Fedorovna (Franciskovna) Vrzhesinskaya was from a family of impoverished small landowners, a seamstress by profession, and a Polish girl by nationality.

The family lived very modestly, retired father. Anton, having entered the Vlotslavskoe real school, quickly showed good abilities and already in the second grade at the age of 13 he worked as a tutor. Then he studied at the Lovichesky real school. Since childhood, Anton dreamed of following in his father's footsteps and after graduating from college, in 1890, he entered the Freedom Regiment in the 1. In the same year he entered the Kiev Infantry Engineering Cadet School. After completing the two-year course of study, he was promoted to second lieutenant and assigned to the 2 th field artillery brigade deployed in the county town of Bela in the Sedletskaya province. After several years of preparation, in the summer of 1895, I was able to pass a competitive exam and entered the Academy of the General Staff. At the end of the first year of study, he was expelled from the Academy without passing an exam in stories military art, but after three months, Denikin passed the exam and was again enrolled in the first year. In the spring of 1899, he was promoted to captain, but on the eve of his graduation, the new head of the Academy, General Nikolai Sukhotin, arbitrarily changed the list of graduates who were counted among the General Staff, as a result of which the provincial officer did not make it to their number. Denikin, filed a complaint with the name of the emperor against Sukhotin. The commission assembled recognized the actions of the general illegal, but decided not to "raise the dust." Denikin was offered to pick up the complaint, promising to enlist in the officers of the General Staff. But the officer showed "character" by refusing to do so. As a result, his complaint was rejected. During these years, Denikin showed the talent of the writer, was published under the pseudonym Ivan Nochin, and wrote mainly on the subject of military life.

He began to serve again in the 2 artillery brigade. In 1902, Denikin wrote a letter to the military minister Kuropatkin, asking him to look into the situation. During an audience with Tsar Nikolai, Kuropatkin "expressed regret that he had acted unfairly and asked for orders" to assign Anton Denikin an officer of the General Staff, which happened in the summer of the year 1902. He was enlisted in the headquarters of the 2 Infantry Division located in Brest-Litovsk, where he commanded a company of the 183 Pultus regiment in Warsaw for a year. In 1903, he was transferred to the 2 Cavalry Corps, where he served until 1904. Long before the revolution, Denikin burned himself into "liberalism" in his company. He not only brought assault, but also canceled disciplinary measures, relying on the "consciousness" of the soldiers. He inspired subordinates that they should take care of themselves. The result was sad. The company got loose, discipline fell.

When the Russian-Japanese war began, he obtained personal permission to be seconded to the army, since his unit was not sent to the front. He served as chief of staff of the 3 th brigade of the Zaamur district of a separate corps of the border guard, which fought with the gangs. He distinguished himself as the chief of staff of the Trans-Baikal Cossack Division, General Rennenkampf and the famous Ural-Trans-Baikal Division, General Mishchenko, who carried out deep raids to the rear of the enemy. He was awarded the rank of Colonel and the Order of St. Stanislav 3 degree with swords and bows and St. Anne 2 degree with swords. In 1905, he gained his first experience in dealing with revolutionary chaos - several anarchist "republics" blocked the road from Manchuria to the European part of Russia. Denikin and a group of officers gathered a detachment of reliable fighters and made their way through rebellious Siberia in a train.

He returned to service in the 2nd Cavalry Corps, then received the battalion of the 228th Khvalynsky Infantry Reserve Regiment at the beginning. In 1906, he visited a number of European countries as a tourist. At the beginning of 1907, he assumed the post of chief of staff of the 57th Infantry Reserve Brigade, which was located in Saratov, where he served until January 1910. Denikin continued to write, criticizing the commander of his brigade and the head of the Kazan military district, General Alexander Sandetsky. In general, the colonel criticized bureaucracy, the suppression of the independence of officers, and a rude attitude to the lower ranks. He advocated improving the training of command personnel, wrote about the need for the rapid development of vehicles, military aviation. He drew attention to the growth of the German and Austrian threats, the need for speedy military reform. In 1910, he proposed convening a congress of officers of the General Staff to discuss army problems and work out ways to solve them. Denikin did not belong to any political parties, but according to his views he referred to himself as liberals. He believed that in Russia it is necessary to establish a constitutional monarchy, to carry out radical reforms, peacefully modernizing the country.

In the summer of 1910, he assumed command of the 17 Infantry Regiment of Archangelgorod, which was based in Zhytomyr. In it, Denikin established the Museum of the History of the Regiment, which became one of the first museums of military units in the Russian Imperial Army. In the spring of 1914, he was assigned to perform the duties of a general for assignments under the Commander of the Kiev Military District. Denikin moved to Kiev. On the eve of the First World War, he was promoted to the rank of Major General and was appointed Quartermaster General of the 8 Army commanded by General Alexey Brusilov.

When the war began, he asked for the commanders of the line unit. Brusilov appointed him commander of the 4 th Infantry Brigade. Much later, Brusilov wrote that Denikin "showed great talents of a combat general in the field of battle." The brigade, later deployed to the division, rightfully received the honorary name - "Iron". The glory of this compound resounded throughout the empire, and its commander for military skill and personal courage was twice awarded St. George weaponsOrders of St. George 4-th and 3-th degree. In the fall of 1915, he received the rank of lieutenant general. 27 August (9 September) 1916 was appointed commander of the 8 Corps and was sent along with him to the Romanian front, where he actually led the Romanian troops. He was awarded the highest Romanian award - the Order of Mihai the Brave 3.

After the February Revolution, he was appointed chief of staff at the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, General Mikhail Alekseev. Together with Alekseev, he left Stavka after Kerensky signed the "Declaration of Soldier's Rights." He commanded the Western and then the Southwestern Fronts. He sharply criticized the actions of the Provisional Government to "democratize" the army. For expressing moral support for General Kornilov, Berdichev was imprisoned. This period was very dangerous, because on any day it could be torn to pieces by “revolutionary” soldiers. In the fall of 1917, he was transferred to Bykhov, where the "Kornilov group" was kept. During transportation, he and other officers almost fell victim to the mob of a soldier mob. They were saved by Victor Betling, who served under Denikin. Later, already during the Civil War, he became the commander of the Special Officer Company at the Headquarters of the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Southern Russia.

Shortly after the fall of the Provisional Government, Supreme Commander Nikolai Dukhonin freed the generals from Bykhov's prison. Denikin arrived at Don, where he took part in the creation of the Volunteer Army under the command of Alekseev and Kornilov. In fact, Denikin, as one of the main and most energetic organizers of the volunteer units, was often perceived at this stage as the commander of the White Army. In addition, he performed the tasks of the commander in the periods of absence of Kornilov. Officially, he was originally the commander of the 1 Infantry Division, and led the army after the death of Kornilov.

During the First Kuban campaign (or the Ice campaign), which lasted 80 days (of which 44 fought) and the whites passed 1100 km, the Volunteer army under Denikin's command broke away from the enemy and went to the borders of the Don and Stavropol region. Ice campaign became a kind of baptism of the White Army, its legend. White heroes and white traditions were born in it.

In the summer of 1918, the Volunteer Army will make the Second Kuban campaign, which will end with the defeat of the Kuban group of red troops and the capture of the capital of the Kuban Cossacks, Yekaterinodar. After the death of General Alekseev on September 25 (October 8), 1918, Denikin will take the post of Commander-in-Chief of the Volunteer Army. During the second half of 1918, the White troops under his command will defeat the forces of the North Caucasian Soviet Republic and occupy the entire western part of the North Caucasus.

At the beginning of 1919, Denikin will lead the Armed Forces of the South of Russia (VSYUR), subjugating the Don Army and removing the ataman Krasnov from power. The Caucasian (Kuban) army and the white Black Sea fleet will also be included in the All-Soviet Union. The general will show at this time his best military organizational qualities, a great strategic and operational-tactical thinking. White forces in the late spring and early summer campaign of 1919 will seize the Carboniferous region - the fuel and metallurgical base of southern Russia, enter the territory of Ukraine, and also occupy vast areas of the North Caucasus. In the summer campaign 1919 of the year, VSYUR will achieve maximum success by taking Kharkov, Yekaterinoslav, Tsaritsyn. 3 (16) July 1919, the white forces were given the task of taking Moscow. At the same time, White achieved great success in Ukraine: the cities of Poltava, Nikolaev, Kherson, Odessa and Kiev are busy. Petliura and Galician troops were defeated (Denikin did not recognize the independence of Ukraine). With the Galicians peace and military alliance was signed, the Galician army became part of the All-Soviet Union. September 30 (October 13) Denikin’s 1919 took Orel and planned to take Tula. However, this was the peak of the victories of the Vyvir, for several reasons the march on Moscow failed and the whites retreated to the south.

By the beginning of 1920, the remnants of the White Army retreated to the Cossack regions, where Denikin, already possessing the title of Supreme Governor of Russia, received from Admiral Kolchak, tried to form the South Russian model of statehood, which was based on the unification of state principles of volunteer, Don and Kuban authorities. The South Russian government was established. However, the counteroffensive attempt undertaken in the winter - spring 1920 of the year failed. The remains of the troops were evacuated from Novorossiysk to the Crimea (the so-called Novorossiysk disaster). Under pressure from disgruntled generals, Denikin 4 (17) on April 1920, appointed Lieutenant General Peter Wrangel Commander-in-Chief of the All-Russian Union of Military Personnel, and left for Constantinople together with the former chief of staff and the closest associate Romanovsky on the British ship, leaving for Constantinople, and then leaving England for good, and then leaving England.

In England, Denikin was well received, he began to engage in literary activities. However, in protest against London’s desire to make peace with Soviet Russia, the general 1920 moved to Belgium in August, where he settled with his family in Brussels and began work on a thorough documentary study on the Civil War - “Sketches of the Russian Troubles”. Denikin almost completely withdrew from politics, devoting himself to literature and research work. In 1922, he moved to Hungary, returned to Belgium in 1925, and in 1926, he moved to France.

When the National Socialists came to power in Germany, Denikin condemned the policy of Adolf Hitler. Unlike a number of white men who planned to take part in hostilities against the Soviet Union on the side of Germany and its allies, Denikin advocated the need to support the USSR and the Red Army in the struggle against any external aggressor. He believed that such a war could lead to the awakening of the Russian spirit in the ranks of the Red Army and the rebirth of the USSR.

After the invasion of German troops in France, he tried to go to Spain, but was arrested. The Germans offered Denikin cooperation and assistance in literary activities, but he refused. He was released and settled under the control of the German commandant's office and the Gestapo in the vicinity of Bordeaux. In 1942, the German authorities offered to Denikin to move to Berlin and lead the anti-Bolshevik forces from among the Russian emigrants, but he refused. During the Second World War, Denikin urged Russian émigrants not to support the Reich, calling all representatives of the White emigration cooperating with the Germans “obscurantists” and “defeatists”.

In 1945, Denikin moved to the United States, continuing to engage in literary activities. 7 August 1947, Denikin died of a heart attack at the University of Michigan hospital in Ann Arbor and was buried in the Detroit cemetery. The Americans buried him as commander-in-chief of the allied army with military honors due to him. October 3 2005, the ashes of General Anton Denikin, were transported to Moscow for burial in the St. Donskoy Monastery.
She and her Denikin (Russia, Art. "Sov. Secret") 2012 year

It is a story about the great Russian general Anton Ivanovich Denikin. The story told by his daughter, famous French journalist Marina Gray. Unknown facts from the biography of Denikin.

What was the fate of the general and his family in Europe, what was the relationship between father and daughter, and why did Denikin not agree to cooperate with European politicians and fight with the Bolsheviks abroad?

Denikin was criticized among the part of the white emigration and the subsequent waves of the Russian emigration. Denikin was most closely and systematically criticized by his successor as head of the White forces in southern Russia, Lieutenant-General Peter Wrangel.

During the Second World War, Denikin supported the Red Army, and when the Germans proposed to move to Berlin and continue agitation on the side of the Russian collaborators, he decisively refused.

Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

61 comment
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Lech e-mine
    15 December 2012 11: 25
    Despite his rejection of Bolshevism, this man did not slide into hatred for RUSSIA.
    In a difficult moment for our country, he supported her.
    For this, he deserves respect and memory from his fellow citizens of RUSSIA.
    1. Kaa
      15 December 2012 18: 23
      Quote: Leha e-mine
      In a difficult moment for our country, he supported her

      Perhaps, having understood what he had done in 1917 with the rest of the generals, he had been accused to the tune, had his sins been replicated before his death?
      "" The connection between the Duma and the officers, - writes General Denikin, - existed for a long time. The work of the State Defense Commission during the reconstruction of the fleet and the reorganization of the army after the Japanese War proceeded with the active secret participation of officer youth. A.I. Guchkov formed a circle, which included Savich, Krupensky, Count Bobrinsky and officers, led by General Gurko. Apparently, General Polivanov also joined the circle, who subsequently played such a large role in the collapse of the army. ” General Alekseev and a number of General Headquarters were actively involved in political intrigues at the beginning of 1916, when they began to be processed by liberal public circles. One of the main reasons the generals so easily sided with the conspirators was their common Masonic ties. N.N. Berberova, in her book People and Lodges, speaks of Alekseev’s Masonic roots and part of the generals as one of the reasons for their participation in the Lvov-Guchkov conspiracy: “We now know,” she writes, “that generals Alekseev, Ruzsky, Krymov, Teplov and maybe others, with the help of Guchkov, were consecrated into Freemasons. They immediately joined his "conspiratorial plans." It is striking that detailed awareness of the conspiracy, which showed General Denikin himself: “The formed circles included some members of the right and liberal circles of the State Duma, the progressive bloc, members of the Imperial family and officers. The vigorous actions should have been preceded by the last appeal to the Sovereign of one of the great princes ... In case of failure, in the first half of March it was supposed to stop the Imperial train by force while following it from Stavka to Petrograd. This was followed by an offer to the Emperor to abdicate, and in case of disagreement, his physical removal. The heir was supposed to be the legal successor to Alexei and regent Mikhail Alexandrovich ”{446}. Pay attention with what amazing awareness Denikin describes the upcoming coup d'etat and with what ease he speaks of the murder of his Tsar, to whom he swore an oath on the Gospel! General Krymov was assigned a decisive role in this conspiracy, he was appointed to the governor general of Petrograd to decisively suppress the resistance from the loyal subjects of the Tsar. “Where is the rag? Where is the icicle? Where is the weak-willed nonentity? In the terrified crowd of defenders of the throne, we see only one loyal person - Nicholas himself. There is no doubt that the only person who tried to persevere in maintaining the monarchical regime was the monarch himself. One Tsar saved, defended the king. He did not destroy, they destroyed him ”}.
      Only after the Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich and all front commanders: generals Alekseev, Brusilov, Evert, Sakharov, Ruzsky, Admiral Kolchak they sent him telegrams or handed them verbally “with tearful” requests to renounce, he understood: everything - the circle was closed. http://militera.lib.ru/
      1. +6
        15 December 2012 19: 34
        Such a king happened in Russian Iperia which
        Quote: Kaa
        Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolayevich and all the commanders of the fronts: Generals Alekseev, Brusilov, Evert, Sakharov, Ruzsky, Admiral Kolchak sent him telegrams or transmitted them verbally “with tearful” requests to renounce

        Of course, "it is not true to hang all the dogs on Nicholas II. Not only is he guilty of the tragedy of Russia, but what is, that is.
        And Gen. Denikin, a truly Russian patriot and officer, did everything he could, but not fate. The masses of the Russian people made their tragic choice, condemning themselves to many millions of victims.
        1. 0
          15 December 2012 21: 25
          And what did "the truly Russian patriot Denikin do, except that he flogged, hung and shot prisoners and the local population"?
          Can you list?
          And by the way, can you read Denikin's "program" that he wanted to bring the people on his bayonets.
          1. Kaa
            15 December 2012 22: 03
            Quote: Polar
            maybe read Denikin's program

            "Provisions for Defense.
            1. The external function of the army at all times is represented by Denikin in the same way - the army acts as the main defender of the country and people from an external threat. As for the internal function, evolution is traced here. Initially, he perceived the army as a pillar of the state monarchical system, and after 1917 - the "conductor" of power to the people. For the period of the Civil War and emigration, the army for Denikin is already an instrument of liquidation of the Soviet regime.
            2. Denikin’s foreign policy position includes the following aspects: at all times, according to Denikin, Germany and Japan are the main opponents of Russia, which threaten the integrity of its territories. The attitude towards European countries is transforming: from a neutral attitude towards friendly allied commitments in the period 1918-1920. and rejection of any ties during the period of emigration. The evolution of views is influenced by our own experience and the international environment.
            3. One of the paradigms in the views of the general is the idea of ​​patriotism. Until 1918, patriotism for Denikin meant to remain faithful to the sovereign and his homeland. During the Civil War, this is a struggle with the Bolsheviks, liberation from the "internal enemy" of Russia, and the establishment of order in the state. In exile - the preservation and protection of National Russia from the "external enemy" - Germany.
            4. Before the Civil War, the methods of transforming the state system should have been, according to Denikin, exclusively peaceful, he supports the evolutionary path of reforming Russia. In the years 1918-1920. A.I. Denikin embarked on the path of radical methods - the armed struggle against Soviet power. In emigration, through the methods of state reorganization, the general, as before, recognizes the armed struggle, but now, together with the remnants of the White Army, the Armed Forces of the Soviet state - the Red Army and the armed Russian people should have participated in it. He sees the World War as an opportunity to arm himself with the Russian people and overthrow Soviet power..
            5. Political views of A.I. Denikin until the fall of 1917 can be described as moderately conservative with a liberal tinge, during the Civil War, his views are a combination of liberal ideas and national-patriotic ideas. In exile, Denikin is opposed to the restoration of the old system, he does not accept the ideology of National Socialism and Bolshevism, does not believe in the evolution of the Soviet regime. The evolution of political views A.I. Denikin is presented in the dissertation as having an explicit liberal vector.
            6. The basis of Denikin’s political views at all stages is the idea of ​​preserving and strengthening the state. General Denikin acts as a statesman, declaring that private, personal interests should be subordinate to the interests of the state, and that he fought not for a certain political regime, but for his country and people. That is, the form of government for Denikin is not the main thing, liberal democratic principles for him were a way, a means of fulfilling the goal - the realization of the idea of ​​building a national state, which arose in the views of A.I. Denikin during the white movement in Russia and which is the basis of his views on emigration.
            . ".ANTONOVA Lyudmila Anatolevna
            Political Views A.I. Denikin in Russia and emigration: formation and evolution. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of historical sciences Rostov-on-Don 2011
          2. yurasumy
            20 December 2012 15: 20
            Quote: Polar
            And what did "the truly Russian patriot Denikin do, except that he flogged, hung and shot prisoners and the local population"?
            Can you list?

            I answer. I just loved my homeland as best I could. As for executions and gallows during the civil war, it is a sign of bad form to hang all the crimes of subordinates on the boss. I don’t remember any orders for executions of “civilians” signed by Denikin. If you have any information, share it (the answer that everyone knows it will not suit me). I would be very grateful. And I will also answer you that Denikin was glorified not by the Civil War, but by WWI. In the Russian army, he was considered the BEST FIELD COMMANDER. General Brusilov himself (who, as you understand, knew something about military affairs) believed that way. And as a remark missed by the author of the article, the fact is indicative that General Denikin did not issue orders and insignia to his subordinates for the Civil War (unlike the Bolsheviks), because he did not consider it a feat to fight against the RUSSIANS. Pain in Russia was his main pain for the rest of his life. Before you just blurt out your tongue, read at least 100 pages from his "Sketches of Russian Troubles". If you see even one word of hatred towards opponents, throw a stone at me. His entire book is a sadness (requiem) for a country that has gone forever. He was sincerely sorry for both the country and the people. And you can assert as much as you like that he was "an executioner and a murderer", but you will not find the facts and will not give them.
            P.S. I do not wish you luck, because I do not believe in it.
          3. 0
            23 December 2012 09: 44
            Quote: Polar
            And what did "the truly Russian patriot Denikin do, except that he flogged, hung and shot prisoners and the local population"?

            I don’t think that the whites would "hang and shoot" more than the red ones. White fought for the country, red for an idea.
            It’s nothing that the idea has remained an ideal, but under it several million (or tens of millions, who thinks) destroyed Russian souls. Just.
            White would have won - the history would have made red like animals that kill everyone and everything how much in vain.
    2. 0
      15 December 2012 21: 58
      Leha e-mine,
      In addition to the above, I want to draw attention to the fact that Anton Ivanovich Denikin is an outstanding Russian commander.
    3. Lacoste
      16 December 2012 08: 05
      Now we have a hero Denikin and respect worthy ... It's no secret that the bulk of the people supported the Bolsheviks (right or wrong in this case is not important). And Denikin fought against the people. Is it possible to say that in the civilian someone fought for their homeland? There the war was for their interests, for a Russia that was beneficial to him.
  2. nnnnnn
    15 December 2012 11: 56
    unfinished contra
    1. +8
      15 December 2012 11: 57
      Quote: nnnnnn

      unfinished contra

      To the mirror, dear, to the mirror hi
    2. Lech e-mine
      15 December 2012 15: 15
      1. +1
        15 December 2012 21: 29
        Yes, this "skin", as if it lived twenty extra years
  3. +1
    15 December 2012 12: 32
    It is always perplexing when the leaders of the white movement are called long-lived generals or military commanders to lose almost all battles with the Red Army, which was commanded mainly by warrant officers and non-commissioners? And to abandon the army, although allegedly under the pressure of some generals, a shame. Did not manage to go, command a company, a battalion, a regiment, of course calmer abroad.
    1. +4
      15 December 2012 17: 08
      dear, in order to judge something, make a habit, first find out what and how it was from third-party sources ... along the way, you will learn a lot for yourself, but this is useful) about the First World War and the participation in it of units and formations under command I will not say anything to A.I. Denikin, read for yourselves, maybe there will be more respect for the Motherland ... now, with regard to the Civil War: Volunteer Army and its commanders, sorry, one and a half years the Red Army won, notice, minuscule compared to the Red Army forces and resources
      1. Mikado
        15 December 2012 18: 28
        Yes, yes, only the Red Army was in the ring of fire of the fronts, fought in the north, south, west, east, suppressed the uprisings inside. Yes, in such a situation, even with the full support of the Entente, the monkey will win.
      2. +1
        15 December 2012 22: 00
        Scanty resources and often with a terrible shortage of ammunition. A plus!
    2. Mikado
      15 December 2012 18: 23
      Where does the information come from that the Red Army was commanded mainly by warrant officers and non-commissioners? Well, maybe they were present at the lowest level of command, which does not contradict their rank, but the highest commanding staff of Red Army, for the most part (up to 80 percent), was occupied by former tsarist officers and by no means ensigns with non-commissioners. In general, 164 tsarist generals sided with the Bolsheviks.
      1. 0
        15 December 2012 23: 25
        In addition, until 1919, discipline in the Red Army was very weak, and commanders, starting from the squad and ending with the regiment, were generally elected at the meetings of the soldiers, and this did not lead to anything good. And when the Bolsheviks understood this by strengthening discipline through the creation of unity of command in the army, then they began to smash the White Guard armies, and besides, having in the army so many military specialists from the tsarist army, which in the end then practically destroyed everyone.
        1. -1
          16 December 2012 22: 14
          The "heroic" defense of Tsaritsin was held by 40000 Red Army soldiers, armored trains, and numerous artillery. Tsaritsyn was stormed by 6000 White Cossack corps and one battery.
          1. 0
            17 December 2012 19: 26
            But what are you talking about defense? first or second? and, again, reinforce your personal opinion with something else ..
            1. 0
              17 December 2012 23: 26
              Read the book of Colonel Shambarov about the Civil War, everything is there in details and with details.
    3. +6
      15 December 2012 20: 04
      Not all tsarist officers and generals chose the gene path. Denikin
      ". Of the 20 persons who held the positions of front commanders during the Civil War, 17 people, or 85%, were career officers of the old army.

      The positions of chiefs of staff of the fronts were occupied by 25 people - all former personnel officers, 22 general staff officers and 3 colonels of the old army.

      Of the 100 army commanders, 82 were military experts, of which 62 were personnel specialists. 5 people were changed by the Soviet government, including three former general staff officers (B. P. Bogoslovsky, N. D. Vsevolodov, F. E. Makhin) and two wartime officers (I.L. Sorokin. A.I. Harchenko)

      There were 93 chiefs of staffs of the armies, including 77 former staff officers (83%), including 49 general staff officers. Five former officers of the General Staff (V.A. Zheltyshev, V.Ya. Lyudenkvist, V.E. Mediokritsky, A.S. Nechvolodov, A.L. Simonov) and two simply staff officers (V.V. Vdoviev- Kabardintsev and D.A. Severin).

      As chiefs of 142 infantry and 33 cavalry divisions in the years 1918-1920. consisted of 485 people, of which 118 did not manage to establish service until October 1917. Of the remaining 367 people, military specialists were 327 people (almost 90%), including 209 staff officers (over 55%), of which 35 were former General Staff officers. There were 40 non-military specialists (former non-commissioned officers, soldiers, sailors, and non-servicemen) (about 10%).

      The position of chief of staff of the division consisted of 524 people, including 78 people who also replaced the positions of chiefs and have already been taken into account above. Of the remaining 140 people, service could not be established until October, 133 people who held the position of nashtad for less than one month were also not considered by the author. The remaining 173 people were all military specialists, of whom 87 were personnel officers, including 5 generals, 45 headquarters and 37 chief officers.

      ... Military experts also prevailed in the positions of middle and senior command staff in the ranks of the regiment commander - battalion commander, especially in the positions of regiment commanders (although here the share of precisely staff officers was already noticeably lower). So, in the 3rd Army of the Eastern Front at the end of 1918, out of 61 officers, from the division commander to the commanders of battalions inclusive, 47 people (up to 80%) were military specialists.

      ... Former generals and officers held the positions of military leaders, as well as the vast majority of other senior posts in local military administration bodies (in seven district, 39 provincial, 395 district and 569 volost commissariats for military affairs), over 90% of the military academies, higher schools, accelerated and short-term team courses.

      A.G. Kavtoradze. Military Specialists in the Service of the Republic of Councils
  4. +8
    15 December 2012 12: 36
    It was a time of troubles, a civil war, it is very difficult to judge who was wholeheartedly for Russia and who acted for personal, selfish gain. Brother against brother, son fought against father. It’s not for us to judge; we were not there. And the Reds and the Whites were good and bad.
    1. vovan1949
      15 December 2012 20: 07
      I agree, Wokl71. But there is a small clarification: Denikins fought for the power of international capital, for the bourgeoisie (the same current democrats). Those generals, or at least a significant portion of them adherent to the king, went over to the side of the Reds. Almost 100% of the command of the Baltic Fleet consisted of admirals and counter-admirals of the Imperial Army.
      I welcome the behavior of Denikin during the WWII, his refusal to cooperate with the Nazis. But during the years of the Civil War - I am for the Reds.
  5. chaban13
    15 December 2012 13: 16
    believed that such a war could lead to the awakening of the Russian spirit in the ranks of the Red Army and the degeneration of the USSR.

    As the General looked into the water
  6. +7
    15 December 2012 13: 37
    Civil war is always bad. With the fact that, on the other hand, the belief that you are right, that your ideology is true. The Reds defeated the USSR, formed. For that time, the idea of ​​the White Movement turned out to be weaker. So, after the collapse of the USSR, I see why there are a lot of publications and films about the civil war in which the White movement’s heroes are heroized. Change of the political system. Of the old heroes they make enemies and vice versa. There is no objectivity. Again attempts to rewrite history. Political order of this troubled time? Probably, yes. The whole world is afraid of one thing: Russia's turn to a socialist model of the economy. If this happens, the entire world economic pyramid will collapse, because the very cornerstone will be pulled out. I apologize for deviating from the topic.
    1. +3
      15 December 2012 17: 15
      Indeed, recently the authorities have been heroizing the leaders of the White Movement, because they are the successors of the White’s cause.
      The current "democrats" are doing everything for which the white generals fought.
      Power was again returned to the rich, factories and plants to the capitalists, land to landowners and private landowners, the people were again in bondage.
      In exchange, as the white ones promised abroad, Russia = the USSR is divided into one and a half dozen semi-vassal states, raw materials appendages of the West and the USA.
      So that everything is logical and logical.
      1. 0
        17 December 2012 10: 46
        Hello, but didn’t Lenin promise the independence of Finland and Poland in exchange for helping the Bolsheviks?
        In what bondage? When the workers owned factories, the land belonged to the peasants, and the power to the Soviets?
        They promised one thing, but did it differently.
    2. +2
      15 December 2012 21: 29
      All right, say it
    3. +1
      15 December 2012 23: 30
      You are not quite right, on TV they also continue to show films of the Soviet period about the Civil War, "The Elusive Avengers" probably only the lazy TV channel did not show.
  7. +4
    15 December 2012 14: 14
    It was a PATRIOT who understood the futility of the struggle with the people, saw the true face of ANTANTA.
    1. DmitriRazumov
      15 December 2012 17: 18
      It is known that all the leaders of the white movement actively used the help, military, political and economic, provided by foreign states (England, France in the south of Russia). The Bolsheviks did not have such an opportunity, but actively engaged in political work with the local population. Therefore, the red ones looked like fighters for a united fatherland, and the white ones, like those who sold this fatherland to foreigners. Most likely, these factors had a decisive influence on the defeat of the white movement and the victory of former non-commissioned officers and ensigns over the generals, although there were also quite a few General Staff officers in the ranks of the Red Army.
      1. +3
        15 December 2012 19: 43
        Interestingly, while the Reds did not use in the Civil War the colossal stocks of military equipment supplied by the Allies to Russia for conducting military operations with Germany?
        Untera, warrant officers ... Advocations of political enlightenment have been borne out? Now there is access to serious historical works, I advise you to ask at your leisure.
        1. DmitriRazumov
          15 December 2012 20: 54
          I will certainly use your advice Mr. Alekseev (1). Unfortunately, it has recently become fashionable to sympathize with the white movement and denigrate the Reds. According to most serious historians, this is wrong. Both worthy people and outright scoundrels took part in the armed struggle on both sides. Who was more right or wrong in that situation is absolutely impossible to determine unequivocally. The revolution of 17 and the ensuing civil war was a terrible tragedy for the state. I don’t think that you think that our "friends abroad" provided "assistance" to Russia, or rather to specific commanders of armed formations on a gratuitous basis. In addition, the armies of England, France, and others actively participated directly in hostilities, or rather in the intervention on the territory of our homeland. Nevertheless, the Reds were victorious. It is also completely impossible to assess the defeat of the Whites and the victory of the Reds on a single scale. Naturally, the white armies were often militarily superior to the enemy's formations. However, the weak point of the generals was the underestimation of political work, therefore, the victory of the Reds is to a large extent associated with a fairly correct formulation of the slogans and goals of the armed struggle. They were simple and understandable for the majority of the population. Although a separate question is about the degree of implementation of these goals in subsequent years. The White movement, despite the availability of qualified military personnel, was more fragmented and each of its parts was focused on specific sponsorship of a particular power. There is a lot of information on this topic from worthy authors. I also advise you to read.
          1. +1
            15 December 2012 21: 32
            Explanatory commentary. Directly in unison with the surname. A plus
          2. Mikado
            16 December 2012 09: 53
            Yes, that's just the war you won’t win by slogans alone, especially if the enemy surpasses you. Our people, it wasn’t so stupid to believe empty words. So there was something else besides empty slogans, why the people went for advice, maybe not empty words.
        2. vovan1949
          16 December 2012 08: 15
          There are two big differences, as the Jews say. It is one thing to use the "colossal" stocks of military equipment imported to fight Germany. This property was used by both reds and whites.
          It is quite another matter to help one side specifically to fight the other.
  8. +3
    15 December 2012 15: 32
    Quote: baltika-18
    the whole world economic pyramid will collapse

    You might think that now all this notorious pyramid rests on our hell-knows which system ...
    On the topic ... Anton Ivanovich is an example of a man of honor and dignity, who did not betray his faith, the Tsar, or the Fatherland, even in the harsh years of emigration. In his "essays .." much is revealed in a different way, I am glad that in modern history textbooks they began to refer to the works of the general.
    1. vovan1949
      15 December 2012 20: 11
      Well, the king - he was not very faithful.
  9. 0
    15 December 2012 15: 43
    The Russian revolt, like the Russian unrest, is always scary, and it’s hard to figure it out! It’s all wrong and someone to figure it out, great minds have rushed from one extreme to the other for a long time. And there can be no winners in a civil war, the so-called victory is a time bomb stop
  10. -9
    15 December 2012 15: 47
    I would also like to say about the fate of Andrei Grigoryevich Shkuro.
    He has a stigma-traitor ... but years go by and it may be time to look at the fate of others like him in a different way.
    His fate is not even an echo, but simply a continuation of the Civil.
    1. +1
      16 December 2012 12: 05
      Quote: Chen
      I would also like to say about the fate of Andrei Grigoryevich Shkuro.
      He has a stigma-traitor ... but years go by and it may be time to look at the fate of others like him in a different way.

      And how do you propose to look at the fate of the traitor. To make a hero out of him? I rarely put cons, but I bet you.
  11. 0
    15 December 2012 16: 57
    It’s difficult to judge such a person as General Anton Denikin, because any government tries to belittle the affairs of its predecessors and raise its small victories to an unattainable level. I think I can’t find any serious information for analysis. All passages were censored in one way or another, not red, so white !
  12. merkel1961
    15 December 2012 17: 33
    It would be possible to reveal to the author this "number of reasons" for the failed campaign against Moscow. I read the book of the same name by Anton Ivanovich a couple of decades ago, and if I am not mistaken, these reasons were the discrepancies between Denikin and the fucking "allies" in the fate of Russia liberated from the Bolsheviks: the interventionists with the marauders, to dismember and take away, as usual, the patriots from the "belyaks" - against a further war for other people's interests.
  13. Mikado
    15 December 2012 18: 13
    Interestingly, the author writes that when the whites were advancing, this was all thanks to the organizational and military abilities of General Denikin, and when they ran back, it was already "for a number of reasons")))
  14. +2
    15 December 2012 19: 28
    White ** GUARDS ** and Red ** ARMY ** By the way, Stalin in 1943 began to widely practice the assignment of GUARDS to especially distinguished army units and formations. The GUARD title says a lot. Many people remember about psychic attacks from movies about the events of 1917-1923 White Guards as part of the officers' companies. And the essence was simple - the White Guards lacked all military property of cartridges, including (which the Reds had after the * nationalization * factories in the central part of Russia for the production of weapons and ammunition And why did the officer companies go to mental attacks, it’s understandable it is probably worth remembering who at the beginning of the hostilities there was a gold reserve of the empire. And how many officers died in the civilian, how many emigrated, how many they later shot during all the purges, and after all, for the most part they were the most educated people in t ** ** HONOR ** like Denikin. And this is the gene pool of the nation, among other things, along with a wealthy peasant and a skilled worker (by the way about the workers, a division of the Ural workers fought in Kappel’s corps and by personal order of Kolchak they were allowed to have a divisional banner of red color and a hymn to Marseillaise)
    1. +1
      16 December 2012 15: 47
      By the way, the idea of ​​introducing shoulder straps, in the manner of the tsarist army, and guards insignia, appeared in the fall of 1941, when Suvorov, Kutuzov, Alexander Nevsky, Nakhimov, Ushakov, etc. were "rehabilitated". But then there was no unequivocal positive reaction from the military precisely because of the associations with the White Guards. By 1943 they were ripe.
      What personally I am very happy.
  15. +2
    15 December 2012 19: 39
    Black sorry, plusanul you by mistake. Shkuro, even by the standards of the civil war, is an odious person. What is his appeal to the Cossacks after one successful campaign? Among the battle trophies he also listed church vestments ... !!! By the way, one of the reasons why the British gave Shkuro Cossacks to the Soviets was not only political agreements but also their "differences" in the fight against the Yugoslav patisans and the local population.
  16. +2
    15 December 2012 20: 19
    Hello dear! Denikin, of course, in his old age "changed his mind" and did not cooperate with the Nazis (at least he did not openly support them), but even so it is not worth idealizing him. But about the real FOLK heroes of the civil - for example, Boris Makeevich Dumenko, I think many would be interested and most importantly useful to learn more
  17. +1
    15 December 2012 21: 36
    For "Essays ..." "Of course, many thanks to him. Even with their subjectivity, the impressions and reflections of an eyewitness and participant in those difficult years mean a lot
  18. Spartakv
    15 December 2012 22: 31
    In civil wars, although there are winners and losers, there are no right or wrong. History, as they say, has no subjunctive moods, so it is not known where the victory of the "whites" would lead Russia? And to argue after almost a century, who is right and who is wrong, the right is not a rewarding thing, and not worthy.
    1. 0
      16 December 2012 15: 38
      Yes, civil war is a tragedy, the greatest tragedy of our people.
      Everyone suffered from it, no one won.
  19. AK-47
    15 December 2012 22: 33
    ... entered the Kiev Infantry Engineering Cadet School. After completing a two-year training course, he was promoted to second lieutenant ...
  20. +3
    16 December 2012 07: 58
    And in my opinion, there are just those who are wrong, because of whose actions a bloody porridge is brewed. And if the wrong had "won" the war would not have ended, but it would have ended with the victory of the Reds. Yesterday I remembered the words of Hugo "There is nothing stronger in this World than an idea whose time has come." I'm not saying that the red polls were white fluffy, but the people then accepted THEIR idea, and not the white movement.
    1. +1
      16 December 2012 15: 36
      Come on, you! He believed that the land belonged to the peasants, factories to the workers, and power to the soviets.
      Neither the one nor the other did not get it.
      For that fought for it and ran.
  21. cgk
    16 December 2012 11: 41
    ha, but what kind of people did you notice? THE BEGGARS AND FAILURES in the bulk, they simply always are more. so nefig say that the people accepted the Reds.
    1. He is
      16 December 2012 15: 17
      Losers because they were born in poor families?
  22. +2
    16 December 2012 15: 33
    Russian general, a man of Honor and Dignity.
    Such people deserve only respect.
    But there is one more point by which one can judge for what Denikin fought in the civil war. The White movement relied on the Cossacks, as you know, the Terek Cossacks were no exception, and the Bolsheviks relied on the Chechens, declaring them, and not only them, an oppressed nation (although, later, they more than once regretted this aspect of Lenin's nationality policy) and, in the end, as we know, the Bolsheviks squeezed out the whites, and the villages of the Terek Cossacks were given to the Highlanders to be torn apart. What was happening there - there is no need to tell, garlands of intestines and unborn babies planted on the fence, only a small fraction of the "deeds" of the allies of Bolshevism.
  23. +2
    16 December 2012 18: 57
    Muggins "played a civil war, when Ivan killed the same Ivan - is this a hero? And the fact that before that he participated in two wars with external enemies, is it like? Not a hero?
  24. +1
    16 December 2012 21: 07
    So what to do, really now we have a peculiar time, at the head of the country a security officer, according to him from the workers, Putin, the son of the former secretary of the district committee of Medvedev, is surrounded by boyar Naryshkin and Count Sheremetyev.
    Moreover, the country is actually a raw-material colony of the West, although it is trying to break out of this state ...
  25. +2
    16 December 2012 21: 18
    The tragic fate of an outstanding, in general, man. It is not for us to judge him, all his actions must be viewed through the prism of the views of people who lived at that time. From my point of view, at least the refusal to cooperate with the Nazis deserves respect. This speaks of him as a person with firm convictions, right or wrong, this is the second thing.
  26. +1
    17 December 2012 05: 02
    Quote: Lacoste
    Now we have a hero and respect worthy of Denikin ... It's no secret that the bulk of the people supported the Bolsheviks (right or wrong, it doesn’t matter in this case).

    For the most part, the people did not forge anyone, but watched who would fill up whom. And the whites were filled up only thanks to England. In the most critical moments for the Reds, England supplied the White with guns without bolts and shells without fuses. At least this was the case with Yudenich (read Kuprin's "Domes of St. Isaac's Cathedral"), so it was with Kolchak. Surely Denikin did not manage to knit Moscow just for this reason.
  27. Bubo
    17 December 2012 06: 25
    Good warrior.
    War is a terrible thing, but there is a little thing and I look like it is a civil war.
    Lord, do not bring us to be in a similar position.
    Even after death, no one can tell who you were "a hero or a villain".

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"