White emigration. Foreign higher military-scientific courses under the guidance of Professor Lieutenant-General N.N. Golovina

22 March 1927 White General Nikolai Nikolaevich Golovin founded and headed the Foreign Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris, which were a kind of successor to the Imperial Academy of the General Staff. In the years that followed, courses were opened in a number of other White emigration centers. These courses formally ceased to exist only after the start of the Second World War. We invite you to familiarize yourself with history these courses. The text is taken from the collection "The Russian army in exile."

Upon leaving the remnants of the White Army abroad, her command began to think about a possible future. Everyone was sure that the Soviet government would not be able to stay in Russia for a long time. Sooner or even later, she will be overthrown. And, as at the end of 1917, anarchy will prevail. Then the Russian Army, returning home, will not only restore order, but also restore the military power of the Russian state. This restoration of military power and the complete reorganization of the Red Army would have been demanded by a large number of officers sufficiently knowledgeable of both the experience of the First World War and the impact it had on military science. In addition, the officers should have had an influence on the upbringing of the new officer corps, since the commanding staff of the Red Army, under the conditions of its recruitment and training, could turn out to be in short supply suitable for this.

After the withdrawal of the army abroad, few officers with higher military education remained at the disposal of General Wrangel. And he was fully aware that in the absence of a trained officer cadre, it would be impossible to either restore order in Russia, much less restore its military power. Therefore, already in the 1921 year, when he began to transfer parts of his army from Gallipoli and from Lemnos to the Slavic countries, General Wrangel intended to open the Russian Academy of the General Staff in Serbia, in Belgrade. Then he turned to General N.N. Golovin with the proposal to organize such an academy and take over the leadership of it.

General Golovin presented to General Wrangel the inconsistency of such an undertaking, indicating that the experience of the past world war has not yet been studied, no conclusions have been drawn from it, no allowances are available to study this experience. In addition, there are no sufficiently trained managers who could be assigned to teach. General Wrangel agreed with these arguments and instructed General Golovin to prepare all that was necessary for the opening of the academy.

Having received a proposal to prepare the opening of the Higher Russian Military School abroad, he wholeheartedly took up the matter. This training went in two directions. First of all, it was necessary to compile the main scientific work, which would describe in detail the combat experience gained by each kind weapons during the First World War, as well as all the changes caused by this experience, both in the organization of the armed forces of the state and in its domestic policy in peacetime. This scientific work entitled “Thoughts on the structure of the future Russian armed forces” was compiled by General Golovin with the direct participation of Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolayevich. Having studied each question, General Golovin submitted to the Grand Duke a draft of each chapter, and the text was read by them twice. During the first reading, the Grand Duke made fundamental changes, while at the second a final wording was established. The Grand Duke wanted this work to be a guidebook for improving the military knowledge of the officers of the Russian Army abroad, as well as for training young people who received a secondary education abroad and who want to join the ranks of the officers of the future Russian Army.

Simultaneously with this work, General Golovin also took up the second task - the preparation for the opening of the Higher Military School. He sought and trained persons who could become both professors and adjutants. Those and others had to ensure the correct scientific life and progress of such a school. Obviously, for this purpose, General Golovin, with the help of General Wrangel, establishes in the centers of settlement of the Russian military emigration military self-education circles, to which individual prints of the heads of his main work were sent as they were printed. Soon these circles were merged into the “Courses of Higher Military Self-Education”. In 1925, the number of such circles reached 52, with more than 550 participants.
In 1925, the Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolayevich became the head of the Russian emigration. He increased the material support of the correspondence military-scientific circles and took an active part in the preparation of the opening of the Higher military-scientific courses in Paris.

About five years of active scientific work of General Golovin was required for the preparation of the main manual - the book “Thoughts on the structure of the future Russian armed force”. In this work, all the influence of the experience of the First World War on military science and on the related experience of the reorganization of military units of all kinds of weapons was clearly presented. Only when General Golovin finished this work did the upper ranks of the Russian military emigration create confidence that the scientific data for studying all the changes in military science and for organizing different kinds of weapons are sufficiently developed and are a good foundation for studying the provisions of the newest military science. As for the number of officers who may wish to complete a course of military science, the extensive participation of officers in the circles of higher military self-education allowed us to think that the number of people wishing to enroll in the Higher Military Scientific Courses will be more than sufficient. The Grand Duke, having received confidence both in sufficient theoretical preparation for the opening of courses, and in that there would be enough listeners, gave his consent to this.

In But General Golovin still decided to verify this in practice. At the beginning of winter 1926 / 27, General Golovin decided to read five public lectures at the Gallipoli meeting in Paris about the First World War. These lectures turned out to be an event in the life of the Russian military emigration. From the very first lecture, the hall of the Gallipoli meeting was overcrowded. Listeners stood not only in the hall aisles, but also filled the hallway in front of the hall. The same thing happened in the next lectures. It was clear that listeners with great interest perceive the material offered to them. This interest has created the confidence that when opening the Higher Military-Scientific Courses in Paris will be enough. After the corresponding “treasure of General Golovin, the Grand Duke gave his consent to the opening of these courses. Giving his consent, the Grand Duke among the main orders made the following three.

1) The provision on courses should be the provision on the former Imperial Nicholas Military Academy, as amended by 1910, and graduates of the courses are given the right to be assigned to the General Staff of the future Russian Army.
2) In order to emphasize how close to his heart was the creation of the Higher Military-Scientific Courses, the Grand Duke decided to include the monogram of the Grand Duke with the Imperial crown in the academic symbol appropriated by successfully completing the courses. Name the courses: "Foreign Higher Military-Scientific Courses of General Golovin."

The purpose of this emigrant military school was to provide Russian officers abroad with the opportunity to receive a higher military education; support the works of the training personnel of the Russian military science at the level of modern requirements and distribute military knowledge among the Russian All-Military Union. Already at the end of the third lecture, General Golovin announced the decision to open in the near future the Higher Military-Scientific Courses in
Paris All officers wishing to enroll in these courses were required to file a report for enrollment in the number of students for a certain period of time. It was necessary to attach to this report information about the service and the recommendation of the unit commander or the senior representative of his unit or association.

At the opening of the courses, all officers who graduated from military schools during the war were enrolled as valid students. Since a fairly large number of reports was filed by officers, pro. General Golovin, harassed for distinguishing himself from the volunteers, immediately established military-school courses for them, the completion of which gave the right to enter the Higher military-scientific courses. Two students of military-technical courses who had a higher civil education were simultaneously admitted to the course of the Higher military-scientific courses as volunteers, so that with the completion of the military-technical courses they are automatically made valid students of the Higher military-scientific courses.

Subsequently, young people who received a secondary education abroad and were in Russian youth organizations entered the military school courses. Many of them, having graduated from military school courses, joined the ranks of students of the Higher military science courses. By order of General Miller, chairman of the Russian All-Military Union, who graduated from military school courses, he was promoted to second lieutenant.

By the spring of 1927, the preparatory work of the organization of the Higher Military Scientific Courses was completed, and 22 in March of 1927, General Golovin solemnly opened them with his opening lecture.

The organization of the Higher Military Scientific Courses was laid, as the Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolayevich pointed out, the organization of the Imperial Nikolaev Military Academy. The entire course was designed for four and a half to five years and was divided into three classes: junior, senior and additional. In the junior class, the theory of combat is studied in the framework of a division. At the same time, tactics of arms delivery and other military disciplines are held, the knowledge of which is necessary for understanding and resolving many issues arising from a detailed study of the combat operations of a division. In the senior class, the use of divisions in the corps and in the army is being studied. Finally, in an additional class, disciplines of a higher order are passed, on a national scale, in other words, strategy and related issues.

While General Golovin was working on a book about the structure of the Russian armed forces, all those scientific information, more precisely, those military scientific disciplines, the knowledge of which is necessary for every officer of the General Staff to solve all sorts of problems in a rapidly changing military situation, were gradually clarified. The extent of the wide range of information that is useful for each General Staff officer, especially for a high post, to know, is shown in the list below of military science disciplines and leaders who were given instruction at various times:

1) Strategy - Professor General Golovin
2) Infantry tactics - Professor Colonel Zaitsov
3) Tactics of cavalry - General Domanevsky160, General Shatilov, General Cheryachukin161
4) Artillery tactics - General Vinogradsky162, Colonel Andreev
5) Air Force tactics - General Baranov
6) Battle Chemistry - Colonel Ivanov163
7) Field military engineering and tactics of technical troops - General Stavitsky164, captain Petrov165
8) General tactics - Professor Colonel Zaytsov
9) Higher Tactics - Professor Colonel Zaytsov
10) Review of classic tactics exercises - General Alekseev166, Professor Colonel Zaytsov
11) Logistics and Logistics Service - General Alekseev
12) General Staff Service - Professor General Golovin, Professor General Ryabikov167
13) Automotive Service - General Secrets168
14) Wireless Service - Colonel Trikoza169
15) Military engineering defense of the state - General Stavitsky
16) Russian military history - Colonel Pyatnitsky170
17) Modern state of naval art - Professor Admiral Bubnov171
18) General History of World War 1914 — 1918 - Professor General Golovin, General Domanevsky, Professor Colonel Zaytsov
19) The history of the newest military art - Professor Colonel Zaitsov
20) Military Psychology - General Krasnov172
21) Military Geography - Colonel Arkhangelsky
22) Device of the Armed Forces of the Major European States - Honored Professor General Gulevich173
23) War and international law - Professor Baron Nolde
24) War and economic life of the country - Professor Bernatsky
25) Mobilization of industry during the Great War and preparation for future mobilization - I.I. Bobarykov174.

The basis for the study of all these disciplines was the idea that knowledge for the military has value only when he knows how to apply it. Therefore, the courses not only try to expand the mental outlook and clarify the knowledge of the listener, but also teach him to apply this knowledge when the appropriate setting is created. Such a skill is achieved by applying the applied method, when students comprehensively study the questions proposed by their leader, offer these or other original solutions, and then listen to criticism of the manager and their colleagues. So, gradually get used to comprehensively cover the issue and quickly find one or the other solution. The completion of training by such a method is a war game in which those participating in the decision of each course of the game show the degree of their training.

General Golovin believed that training the student in all three classes would require up to 800 training hours. Half of these hours, that is, 400, will take listening to compulsory lectures. The rest were intended for conversations, seminars, solving tactical tasks and, finally, a war game. Mandatory open lectures, for which, on a par with the course participants, each member of the All-Military Union was admitted, took place on Tuesdays from 21 to 23 hours. Practical classes, to which only course participants were allowed, took place on the same hours on Thursdays. With this calculation, the use of scheduled training hours should have taken 50 — 52 a month.

In the month of March 1927 of the year, by the time of the opening of the courses, the assistant general manager for the combat and economic part, Lieutenant General M.I. Repyeva175 gathered more than a hundred reports of officers who want to get a higher military education. General Golovin, first of all, selected the reports of officers produced from volunteers. To these officers, he proposed earlier admission to military school courses and already after passing the officer exam - the right to enter the junior class of the Higher military science courses.
The rest of the officers were divided into 6 groups, and each such group was like a separate class. Group A-1 was composed exclusively of regular officers, mostly already in headquarters officer ranks, which for two years already worked under the guidance of General Golovin in extramural military higher education circles. It also included generals who wanted to complete a course in higher military sciences, as well as two volunteers, who had a higher civil education. Groups A-2 and A-3 were made up of regular officers who did not participate in extramural military self-education circles. Groups A-4 and A-5 included officers who graduated from military schools during the Great War, and finally group A-6 consisted of officers who graduated from military schools during the Civil War.

General Golovin believed that gentlemen leaders should take into account the general training of students and accordingly make some differences in the methods of study and in their requirements, but strictly remaining within the framework of teaching. In order to get to know the listeners better, it was recommended to call them up during each session and lead them in such a way as to form an idea how the listener understands the subject and how much it absorbs it. The leaders had to ensure that the students learned this military-scientific discipline not by cramming, but by conscious perception. Finally, managers, examining various issues during practical exercises, should be especially tactful about the opinions and decisions expressed by the listeners, avoid insisting on their decision so that the listeners do not have a kind of mandatory stencil or template for solving a specific kind of questions.

After ten months of classes, the chief executive of 15 December 1927 asked gentlemen heads to submit to him 1 January 1928, an assessment of the success of the participants in the practical exercises of the Higher military science courses. They had to be evaluated in five degrees: 1) outstanding, 2) good, 3) satisfactory, 4) unsatisfactory, and 5) completely unsatisfactory. Each assessment managers had to add a few words, more accurately characterize it. The same leaders who carried out the home tasks should have justified this assessment on the basis of the home task. In making this assessment, the gentlemen leaders had to take into account not only the knowledge acquired by the listener, but also the degree of his general development, interest in military affairs, decisiveness and ability to think.

This assessment provided by gentlemen leaders allowed the main course leader to form a well-known opinion about each student.
From the first day of opening the courses, the classes went on in a normal way. But for many listeners regular attendance of classes turned out to be too much. Indeed, at the same time with scientific studies, it was necessary to roll up for life not only for one’s own life, but - for the family - and for the maintenance of the family. Therefore, the younger class was a kind of filter: all those who could not keep up with their classmates fell away. There were about half of such students in the junior class of each course.

The courses went so well that as early as the fourth month of their existence, the head manager turned to the gentlemen leaders with a proposal to work out the text of the home task within two weeks. This text should have been subdivided into the following headings: a) a general task, b) private tasks for each of the questions asked, c) an indication of what should be decided by each of the questions. Then 2 July 1927, the exact order of how tasks should be distributed to solve at home, when students are required to pass the decision; then the order of individual analysis and, finally, a general analysis. It was stated that individual analyzes should be made as brief as possible, since each group is given only one practical exercise. The leader in individual debriefing plays a passive role, prompting the audience to a short debate, which, by the way, may also indicate known shortcomings in his lectures.

The general analysis takes only one two-hour lecture. It should begin with a reading of the task and the decision that the supervisor himself made with the same details that were required of the listeners, since all the written answers and orders were read and the cards also showed what the listeners had to show on the tracing paper. In the second part of the general analysis, the manager must indicate other solutions to this task. But this must be done so tactfully so that the listeners do not think that a stencil is being imposed on them.

In the third part of the general analysis, the manager dwells on the mistakes he encountered in the decisions. This instruction should be accompanied by an explanation of those questions of the theory, the poor assimilation of which led to these errors. General Golovin almost always checked in detail every tactical task, as well as the task manager’s solution before proposing a solution to the audience.

In the spring of 1928, the transition time from the junior to the senior class began to approach. Among the listeners, the question arose by what tests and testing of knowledge this transition will be conditioned. - The order of the chief course director from February 1 of 27 indicates that these tests will consist of: a) rehearsals, b) a war game and c) a reporting tactical task with her oral explanation.


Nikolay Nikolaevich Golovin
The rehearsals were established at the request of the listeners themselves, who expressed the wish that prior to the war game the knowledge of all courses be tested. Rehearsals should be carried out before a commission chaired by the main course leader or his deputy. The programs of each rehearsal will be divided into 15 - 20 tickets, which are the main questions that the listener will have to answer after thinking about them. Therefore, when drawing up a program, you should pay attention to the fact that the contents of the ticket is a program of the answer that is expected from the listener to the main question set in the ticket.

The purpose of the rehearsal is a test: how consciously the students learned the military-scientific disciplines they learned. The rehearsal order was as follows. The next listener, taking the ticket, in which the main question proposed to him is listed, ponders and prepares the answer at a separate table, using the benefits taken with him, for half an hour. Then, before presenting to the commission, he must report to the commission in full, but briefly, within 15. After that, some members of the commission ask the listener volatile questions.

Listening to this report, members of the commission should have paid attention to the fact that it was not a simple retelling of the relevant excerpts of the manual, but would provide a reasonable consideration of the main issue, even with the personal conclusions of the listener.

Evaluation of the answer was made by the following marks: excellent (12), very good (11), good (10 — 9), quite satisfactory (8 — 7), satisfactory (6). In cases where the answer is unsatisfactory, the listener is announced about re-examination.

In order to enable the highest ranks of the Russian Army to get acquainted with the work of the Higher military science courses, General Golovin invited the generals Ye.K. to a rehearsal on the knowledge of “Thoughts on the structure of the future Russian armed force”. Miller and Postovsky176; for a rehearsal on infantry tactics - generals A.P. Kutepova and Holmsen177; for a rehearsal for cavalry tactics — generals Shatilova and Cheryachukin; for a rehearsal on artillery tactics - General Prince Masalsky178; for a rehearsal on the tactics of the air forces - General Stepanov XXNX and Colonel Rudnev XXNX; for a rehearsal for military field engineering - General Bem179.

At the end of October, 1928 was announced a new admission of students to the junior class of the Higher military science courses. 7 November 1928, General Golovin issued the following order: “I opened a new junior class. Classes will be held on the same programs and to the same extent as was the case for the first regular participants. Some of the changes that I have to make because of my cash constraints are as follows: students in the current junior class will listen to lectures on Tuesdays along with the older ones. Special classes on the junior class program will be conducted on Mondays.

These classes should be: a) the nature of lecture conversations and b) exercises on the map. Taking this into account, I have increased the number of such classes compared to the previous course. ”

Mandatory attendance by all students of the courses of each general lecture on Tuesdays began to give the latter a very special character. These lectures began to fall out of the general system of the passage of military sciences. The topics of the lectures on Tuesdays were mainly new questions and theories, based both on the experience of the war and on the improvements in weapons, which were analyzed in the latest military-scientific foreign literature. At these lectures, the works of the officers who graduated from the Higher Military Scientific Courses were considered later. So, I.I. Bobarykov, on the instructions of the Honored Professor General A.A. Gulevich, made a study on the work of industry in Russia and in France during the 1914 — 1918 war, and gave two lectures on the history and experience of this mobilization. He also, on the instructions of General Golovin, traced the influence of the works of the generals Manikovsky and Svyatlovsky, as well as other Soviet researchers on the development of plans for the first and second five-year plans. It should be noted that in the 13 years of the official existence of the courses, none of the lectures read on Tuesdays was repeated a second time.

The broad attendance of these lectures by “outsiders” military listeners who were not part of the courses allowed General Golovin to speak with the head of the Belgrade military science courses, General Shuberskiy182, who carelessly said that Paris courses are a kind of people's university. General Golovin was referring to the military knowledge that foreign military visitors receive lectures on Tuesdays. General Shubersky understood this expression literally. Therefore, in his book (“On the 25 anniversary of the establishment of the Higher Military Science Courses in Belgrade,” p. 13), he says: “At the very first meeting of the Training Committee, it was decided to organize Courses on the model of our former Academy. By this, the organization of the Belgrade Courses differed from the Paris Courses organized on the basis of a popular university. ” With such a view of the Paris courses, it is quite normal to say that “the composition of the course participants ... consisted ... also from civilians, if they were recommended by the Military Organizations” (ibid., P. 9). This, of course, would have been normal at the University of the People, but this, as mentioned above, was not in the Paris courses. When meeting with General Shubersky, one of the leaders proved that the Paris courses differed from the Belgrade courses with only one extra lecture per week, which did not directly concern the topics studied at the moment in the courses. General Shubersky admitted his mistake.

The only drawback of the Paris courses was the absence in the first years of their existence of research and rehearsal for the course on the actions of the armored forces. This situation was caused by the fact that Russia actually emerged from the war almost immediately after the 1917 revolution, and its army had only the first armored cars. She was not aware of the latest all-terrain vehicles, nor caterpillar Tanks, as well as issues of their use and tactics. Massive tank operations on the Western Front began much later than the February Revolution. Their experience and conclusions from it were very contradictory. This defect was corrected in the 30s by Professor Colonel Zaitzov. He took up the study of new paths in the theory of military affairs, and in particular the work of the British military scientist and armor specialist General Fuller. In 1936, 8 lectures by Professor Colonel Zaitzov were held on the topic: “New ways in military affairs - armored forces”. They were among the general lectures, that is, they were intended for students of all three classes: junior, senior and additional. In 1938, another 5 lectures were held on the same grounds (for all students of the courses) on the topic: “Tactics of armored forces”. The lectures of Professor Colonel Zaitzov attracted the greatest attention of the audience. At the same time, units of mechanized troops were introduced into the tasks of the war game for students of courses.

Meanwhile, the top military leadership of the French and British armed forces did not react with sufficient interest to the theories of General Fuller, up to the 1939 year. And the troops of the Western powers took to the battlefields in 1940 with a large number of tanks, but with completely outdated basics of tank tactics. Large units of German tanks with a new tactic quickly won a complete victory over the forces of the Anglo-French.

A very serious test of knowledge learned by the audience was a two-sided war game, in which 25 lessons were assigned. This game took place when the senior class of courses completed the study of higher tactics. It was produced as follows: the entire senior class was divided into two groups. Lead each mediator - experienced senior leader. By the beginning of the game, the authorities chose a battle site on the map that would correspond to the task that they wanted to base the game on. Then, for each group, information was prepared that allowed each group to form a known idea of ​​the enemy, as well as understand the existing situation and, in accordance with this data, take one or the other decision. The mediator of this group determines between the participants different positions, starting with the commander of this higher unit and ending with that which the last member of the group will occupy. Then the mediator invites them - starting with the commander of the formation and ending with the last occupied post - to write, respectively, the positions of each, orders and instructions. All this must be completed by the end of the session, when it is dealt to the mediator. The two mediators of the parties study together the work and determine what could have been noticed by intelligence or in any other way with respect to the other group, as well as those actions of both groups that could somehow affect the situation. At the next lesson, the mediators, having individually reviewed the decision, orders and instructions, again redistribute posts, and it was recommended that participants be transferred from one position to another each time. Then they are informed of new information about the enemy. Group members must write all orders and orders, given the new data on the situation. During the whole game, group mediators produce light individual criticism of mistakes, both in the basic fulfillment of the task of command and in the formulation of orders and instructions.

Initially, after the end of a tactical task or a war game, it was intended to make a field trip to the places where this task was theoretically taking place. But the very first trip to the Viller-Kottre region attracted the obvious attention of gendarmes; General Golovin decided not to make more such trips.
During the transition from the senior to the additional class, students had to go through rehearsals: 1) for the military engineering defense of the state, 2 for the history of military art and 3 for the highest tactics. Assistants at these rehearsals were: for the military engineering defense of the state — General Bem, and for the highest tactics — General Miller.

The rehearsal in the first year on the history of military art was canceled, because the lectures were not yet lithographed. In addition, the role of the test was played by decisions during the war game in the classroom and at home: on tactics, the General Staff service and the supply and rear services, in the corps reporting task.

While the first course was completing the study of sciences that were part of the senior class program, and preparing for the transition to the supplementary one, General Golovin, in his order from 8 in May 1929, introduced into the additional class program a large written work not exceeding its 20 page size. This work should have the character of the independent creative work of the listener. In fact, she replaced the oral “second topic” of the course of the Imperial Nikolaev Military Academy. At the Higher military science courses this topic will be a purely written work. The order also indicates the reasons for such a deviation from the Academy program. The reasons are as follows: 1) spring rehearsals showed the listeners ’ability to make oral presentations, 2) in writing, it is easier to judge the development and knowledge of the listener and 3) the design of such oral presentations for each listener would take a lot of time as well as expenses for hiring the hall.

Each supervisor was supposed to submit ten topics for each of the courses he had read by 20 May 1929 of the year. These topics should address the latest issues. The works presented by the audience on these topics will be considered by General Golovin and the leader who gave the topic. Topics should be chosen and formulated so that the listener can limit to one or two manuals. These written works are a test of the ability of students to independently study any classic or new military printed work.

Finally, a special instruction regulates the production of special final tests on strategy, top tactics and the service of the General Staff. This test is intended to test the examiner's ability to independently think in these areas of military knowledge. The main part of this is the 15-minute report for a given examiner a few days before a particular topic. This report should be the conclusions of the listener from the particular case specified in the topic. It is recommended that when answering to submit charts, cartograms and tables. In the evaluation, attention will be paid to the richness of its content, the form of the report, clarity of thought, convexity of the content and precise use of the time provided.

At the end of this report, the listener and following the instructions given by the chief manager, the listener will be asked a few volatile questions on the courses of strategy, top tactics and the service of the General Staff. The answers given to the examinees will be evaluated not from the point of view of the factual side, but from the point of view of understanding the modern theory of military art. The distribution of topics among the examinees will be made by lot. The presence of the tests is mandatory for all students of the extra class, even those who are not being examined on this day.

The final exam of the 1 course was very solemnly furnished. General Gulevich, Emeritus Professor of the Imperial Nikolaev Military Academy, two more generals of the Academy Professor, former Chief of the Imperial Naval Nikolaev Academy, Admiral Rusin 183 and General Generals of the General Military Union: General E.K. Miller, General Erdelyi, General Postovsky, General Shatilov, General Prince Masalsky, General Kusonsky, General Suvorov184. Thus, the examination commission consisted of four professors, a specialist in higher military education, and a number of generals who graduated from the Military Academy before the First World War and, therefore, are familiar with the program and requirements for officers of this Academy.

General Golovin closely followed the work of each student and, long before they finished their courses, he outlined which of them might be capable of further scientific work. The best of them were assigned to the departments immediately after the courses, and then after a year or two, they were appointed to the departments to carry out various works and trial lectures. Such were: Colonel Pyatnitsky, Colonel Kravchenko, Colonel Prokofiev 185, Staff Captain at the Yekivsky 186, Staff Captain Konashevich187, Staff-Captain Osip A.V.188, Lieutenant Kuznetsov189, Second Lieutenant Galay190, Snoopho, Zyfxxxxxxxxxx, Lieutenant Lieutenant Kuznetsov191, Lieutenant Galai192, Sn.

In general, General Golovin set himself the task of not only helping those who want to get a higher military education, but also to prepare people who could, in the event of a change in political position, return to Russia, put the Higher Military School there at the proper height.

The organization in Paris of Higher military science courses with the program of the Academy of the General Staff could not help but attract the attention of the Soviet government. There is every reason to assume that one of the students of the 1 course, the head officer who ran, according to him, in 1923 from Soviet Russia, listened to the entire course, successfully passed all the work and tests, one or two weeks before the release, the excluded from the list of courses and then completely disappeared from Paris, - was sent to courses by the Soviet authorities. This assumption is all the more reasoned that soon the information sheet of the Organization of Grand Duke Kirill Vladimirovich notified all its members that this headquarters officer was a Soviet secret agent.

It should also be recalled that in the first year of the courses, when classes were getting better, the Soviet envoy in Paris demanded their closure. General Golovin, having learned of this demand, turned to Marshal Foch. The latter, together with General Golovin, went to the chairman of the Council of Ministers. In a conversation with the latter, Marshal Foch pointed out that a new war with Germany was inevitable, and Russian military emigration was widely admitted to France, as a magnificent fired shot that could be very valuable for France and that it would be ridiculous to prevent this frame from maintaining knowledge. The way out was found in the fact that the courses will continue their work under the name “Institute for the Study of Problems of War and Peace”.

In the future, all students who graduated from the courses were assigned to the Institute for the Study of Problems of War and Peace. In this way, they could better communicate with each other, use books from the course library, attend general lectures on Tuesdays, and sometimes carry out separate assignments from Professor General Golovin in the military science unit.

The courses, as such, formally ceased to exist when France entered the war in September 1939. In fact, they existed in the 1940 year before the start of the German occupation of Paris and produced 6 releases. Total graduated from their 82 listener.

In order to give an opportunity to get a higher military education and to those officers who lived outside of Paris, General Golovin opened 1 January 1931, correspondence courses, according to the program of the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris. Information about the work of correspondence courses are not preserved.

At the end of 1930, the opportunity arose to open a branch of the Foreign Higher Military-Scientific Courses in Belgrade to provide an opportunity to get a higher military education for officers living there. Courses have been opened 31 January 1931 of the year. At the head of the Belgrade courses, General A.N. was appointed by General Golovin to the General Staff. Shuber Belgrade courses graduated 77 students.

Excerpt from the article by Colonel A.G. Yagubova193


The academy was supposed to be opened in Serbia in 1921, that is, without any prior training, without any trained teachers, not a single modern textbook. The students were supposed to provide material to save them from worries about a piece of bread. The head of this academy was proposed to General N.N. Golovin.
General Golovin convinced General Wrangel that such a hasty discovery of the Higher Military School, without serious preliminary preparation, cannot give positive results. And behind the loud sign "Academy" there will be insignificant content.

According to General Golovin, the Higher Military School should be created by means of long-term labor for the education of the teaching staff, united by the unity of the military doctrine, which still needed to be worked on. It was necessary to compile textbooks that fully meet the modern level of military knowledge, and to make a selection of students. As for the latter, with the inevitable limitation of their number and with their material support, the Higher Military School could be filled with people, not so much eager for knowledge, as if they wanted to get rid of their worries about earning their livelihood.

According to General Golovin, the right higher military education should not only provide the necessary knowledge for the top leadership, but also select strong-willed people.

Proceeding from this, General Golovin believed that the émigré Higher Military School should not give students any material benefits, but on the contrary, demand from them sacrifice and perseverance in achieving the goal they set themselves. Under such conditions, General Golovin expected that only people who really wanted to gain knowledge, people who were nationally inclined and believed in the bright future of their people, would go to the Higher School.

The goal of the Emigrant High School, General Golovin, set the following: 1) maintaining the works of the Russian military science education personnel at the level of modern requirements; 2) the creation of a frame of Russian officers with European military education, capable of thinking and creating in the aggregate of all phenomena of war.

The first goal he set for himself was accomplished thanks to a brilliant selection of leaders, such as Professor General Gulevich, Professor Colonel Zaytsov, Generals Stavitsky, Domanevsky, Baranov, Vinogradsky and Colonel Ivanov. As for the second goal, more than 300 officers passed through Paris courses at different times and for different periods. Of these, 82 successfully completed a five-year course and received the right to wear a badge.

---

159 First published in a separate brochure under the same name: BM, 1977.
160 Domanevsky Vladimir Nikolaevich, p. 12 March 1878 in St. Petersburg. Page Corps (1897), Academy of the General Staff (1903). Officer l.-gv. Horse artillery, commander of the 14 hussar regiment. Major General, and. D. Chief of Staff of the Amur Military District. George Knight. In the white troops of the Eastern Front; from February 1918 at General Horvath’s in Harbin, from February 1920 the Chief of Staff of the Commander-in-Chief in Vladivostok at the Social Revolutionary Government. Lieutenant General. In emigration to France, by the time of 1931, he led the group of L.-GW. Horse artillery in Paris. Died 4 on April 1937 in Saint-Genevieve-des-Bois (France).
161 Cheryachukin Alexander Vasilyevich, b. March 18, 1872 From the nobles of the VVD, the son of an official, Cossack Art. Epiphany. Don Cadet Corps (1890), Mikhailovskoye Artillery School (1893), Academy of the General Staff (1899). Officer L.-Gds. 6th Don Cossack battery. Major General, Commander of the 17th Don Cossack Regiment, Chief of Staff of the 4th Cavalry Division, Commander of the 2nd Cossack Combined Division. In the Don army; until February 12, 1918, the commander of the North-Western Front, then hid in the area of ​​​​st. Grushevskaya. From May 4, 1918, again in the army, from May 5 to July and in September-December 1918, deputy and ataman of the "Winter Village" - ambassador to Ukraine, in July-September 1918 in Germany (member of the delegation with the Duke of Leuchtenberg to Emperor Wilhelm). In December 1918, he played an important role in the rescue and evacuation to Germany of several hundred Russian officers. From December 1918 to the beginning of 1920, the ambassador of the VVD in Poland, from March 1920 the director of the Don Cadet Corps until it was disbanded in 1923, was evacuated with the corps to Egypt. Lieutenant General (September 30, 1918). In exile in France, a worker at a factory, by 1931 a member of the association of the Life Guards. Horse artillery, until September 1, 1930, chairman of the Don Artillery Union in Paris, until 1934, deputy military ataman of the VVD, by January 1, 1934, member of the Society of General Staff Officers. Died May 12, 1944 in Nice (France).
162 Vinogradsky Alexander Nikolaevich, b. April 24, 1874 Corps of Pages (1893), Academy of the General Staff (1899), Officers' Artillery School. Officer L.-Gds. Horse artillery. Major General, Commander of the 15th Artillery Brigade, Head of the Russian Artillery Mission to the Romanian Army. Georgievsky Cavalier. In the Armed Forces of the South of Russia. Evacuated in December 1919 - March 1920. May 1920 in Yugoslavia. In exile in France, in 1931 he was a member of the training committee of the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris, in 1934 he was a member of the court of honor of the main board of the Union of Pages; by November 1934 in Lausanne. Died December 2, 1935 in Sainte-Genevieve-des-Bois (France).
163 Ivanov N.P. Colonel. In exile in France, in 1931 he was a member of the training committee, since 1933 he was a teacher, in 1938 he was the head (assistant head) of the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris.
164 Stavitsky Petr Petrovich. Lieutenant general. In exile in France; in December 1924, the chairman of the association of His Majesty's Own Railway Regiment, in 1931 he headed the regiment's group in Boulogne, in 1931 he was a member of the training committee of the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris.
165 Petrov Alexander Markovich. Second lieutenant. in the Volunteer Army. Member of the 1st Kuban ("Ice") campaign. Captain. In exile in France as part of the Drozdovsky regiment. He graduated from the courses of the General Staff in Paris, then a teacher of the same courses. Died in Paris.
166 Alekseev Nikolai Nikolaevich, b. March 25, 1875 Polotsk Cadet Corps (1892), Mikhailovsky Artillery School (1895), General Staff Academy (1902). Officer L.-Gds. 3rd Artillery Brigade. Major General, commander of the 26th Army Corps. In the Don army; from October 18, to November 20, 1918, commander of the Northern Group, from February 1919, chief of staff of the Mamontov group, from February 23, 1919, chief of staff of the 1st Don Army, from May 12, 1919 to April 23, 1920. commander of the 1st Don separate corps, from April 23 to December 1920 chief of staff of the Don Army and the Great Don Army (from November 28, 1919 - the marching headquarters of the Don Ataman). Lieutenant General (April 18, 1920). In exile in France, on May 20, 1938 in Issy-les-Moulines, then in Paris, in 1931 a member of the training committee of the Higher Military Scientific Courses, by January 1, 1934 a member of the Society of General Staff Officers, since 1949 . Chairman of the Union of Russian Cadet Corps, in November 1951, senior representative of the association of life-guards. 3rd Artillery Brigade. Died September 15, 1955 in Paris.
167 Ryabikov Pavel Fedorovich, b. March 24, 1875 Son of a lieutenant colonel. Polotsk Cadet Corps (1893), Konstantinovsky Artillery School (1896), Academy of the General Staff. Officer L.-Gds. Finnish regiment. Major General, Professor of the Academy of the General Staff. Georgievsky Cavalier. In the white troops of the Eastern Front; 2nd Quartermaster General of the Headquarters of the Supreme Ruler, from October 2 to November 8, 1919 Chief of Staff of the Eastern Front, at the same time in 1918-1919. professor at the Academy of the General Staff. Member of the Siberian Ice Campaign. In exile in Japan, in Shanghai, in Czechoslovakia, in 1931 he was a member of the educational committee of the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris. Died August 27, 1932 in Prague.
168 Secretev Alexander Stepanovich, b. August 8, 1881 in Art. Chernyshevsky. From the nobles, the son of an officer of the VVD, Cossack Art. Nizhne-Chirsky Region of the Don Cossacks. Don Cadet Corps (1899), Nikolaev Cavalry School (1901). Officer L.-Gds. Ataman regiment. Colonel, commander of the 24th Don Cossack Regiment. In the Don army; in April-May 1918, commander of the 1st cavalry regiment near Novocherkassk, in 1919 major general, brigade commander, commander of the 2nd Don separate corps, in May 1919 commander of an cavalry group of two divisions, then head of 9 -th Don Cavalry Division, in early 1920 the commander of the 4th Don Corps, from March 1920 the commander of the cavalry group (former General A.A. Pavlov) until the evacuation of Novorossiysk. In the Russian Army without a position. Lieutenant general. In exile from November 1920, from 1921 in Bulgaria, at the end of 1922 he returned to the USSR. Arrested on August 14, 1930. Shot in the case of the "Cossack bloc" on May 8, 1931 in Moscow.
169 Trikoza Evgeny Vladimirovich, p. in 1881, the Nikolaev School of Engineering (1902). Colonel, military engineer. In emigration in France, a teacher of the Higher military-scientific courses in Paris. Died 30 March 1974 in Paris.
170 Pyatnitsky Nikolay Vladimirovich, p. in 1890 Esaul Kuban Cossack troops. In the Volunteer Army. Member of the 1-th Kuban ("Ice") campaign, the commander of the Kuban battery. In VSYUR, the Chief of Staff of the 34 Infantry Division, in the fall of 1919, the staff officer for missions to the headquarters of the Caucasian Army. Colonel Evacuated at the beginning of 1920 from the Crimea on the ship "Konstantin". Gallipolian In emigration to France. He graduated from the Higher Military-Scientific Courses in Paris (1-th edition), then a teacher, a librarian in 1931, a treasurer, in 1938 a manager (assistant manager) of the same courses, in 1941 - 1944. editor of the newspaper Office of the Russian emigration "Signal" in Paris. Convicted for 10 years, until 1952 was in a French prison. Died 19 on November 1962 in Paris.
171 Bubnov Alexander Dmitrievich, b. in 1883 in Warsaw. From the nobility, the son of an officer. Gymnasium, Naval Corps (1903), Naval Academy (1913). Rear Admiral, Head of the Naval Directorate of the Headquarters of the Supreme High Command. From December 1918 to 1920, a member of the Russian delegation at the Versailles Conference from Admiral Kolchak. In the VSYUR and the Russian Army; from May 1919 commander of a destroyer division, from August 20, 1919 to February 8, 1920 chief of staff of the Chernomorsky fleet. Evacuated to Turkey. June 29 (October 2) 1920, he returned to the Russian Army in the Crimea (Sevastopol) on the ship "Constantine". In exile in France and Yugoslavia; in 1923-1941 Professor at the Yugoslav Maritime Academy. He died on February 2, 1963 in Kralya (Yugoslavia).

172 Krasnov Petr Nikolaevich, b. September 10, 1869 in St. Petersburg. From the nobles of the VVD, the son of a general, Cossack Art. Karginsky Region of the Don Cossacks. Alexander Cadet Corps (1887), Pavlovsk Military School (1889), Cavalry Officer School. Officer L.-Gds. Ataman regiment. Major General, Commander of the 3rd Cavalry Corps. Georgievsky Cavalier. From October 25, 1917, he led the fight against the Bolsheviks near Petrograd. In the winter of 1917/18, he hid in Art. Konstantinovskaya. From May 3, 1918 to February 2, 1919, military ataman of the VVD, cavalry general (August 26, 1918). In the Northwestern Army since July 22, 1919; until September 9, 1919 in the reserve of ranks at the army headquarters, then head of the propaganda department, in January 1920 the Russian military representative in Estonia, a member of the liquidation commission of the Northwestern Army. In exile in Germany, from March 1920 near Munich, by November 1920 in Berlin, from November 22, 1921 in Santeny (France), from April 1936 in Dalevitz, near Berlin. As of December 1924, Honorary Vice-Chairman of the Life Guards Association. Ataman regiment. Since March 31, 1944, the head of the Main Directorate of the Cossack troops under the Ministry of the Eastern Regions of Germany. Issued by the British in Lienz on May 19, 1945 and taken to the USSR. Executed in Moscow on January 16, 1947. 
173 Gulevich Arseny Anatolievich, b. February 14, 1866 in Moscow. 3rd Moscow Cadet Corps (1883), Alexander Military School (1885), Academy of the General Staff (1892). Officer L.-Gds. Finnish regiment, commander of the L.-Gds. Preobrazhensky Regiment. Lieutenant General, Commander of the 21st (37th) Army Corps. Georgievsky Cavalier. Stayed in Finland. Since December 1918, he was a participant in the organization of the campaign of volunteer formations from Finland to Petrograd, a representative of the North-Western Army in Finland, until 1920, the head of the Red Cross institutions in Finland. In exile in France, since 1920 in Paris, in December 1924, Deputy Chairman and Chairman of the Historical Commission of the Guards Association, Commander of the Union of Preobrazhentsev, Chairman of the Union of Officers - Participants in the War, Chairman of the Union of Preobrazhentsev, Professor of the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris, in 1931 he was a member of the training committee of courses, from October 1933 he was deputy chairman of the Union of the Invalids, from September 1934 he was deputy of the Guards association, from 1937 he was the chairman of the Guards association. Died April 12, 1947 in Paris.
174 Boborykov (Bobarykov) Ivan Ivanovich, b. in 1890 Foreign Ministry official. Wartime official. In December 1918 in the 1st separate artillery battalion of the Russian Corps in the Hetman's army. At the beginning of 1919 in Germany at the Inter-Allied Commission on Prisoners, then at the English officers' school. In the VSYUR and the Russian Army from January 1920 in the 3rd Army Corps until the evacuation of the Crimea. Gallipoli. In the autumn of 1925, he was seconded to the 6th artillery division in France. Collegiate Secretary. In exile in France. He graduated from the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris (1st edition), in 1938 he was the head (assistant head) of the same courses. Died 1981
175 Repiev Mikhail Ivanovich, b. September 14, 1865 From the nobility of the Simbirsk province. Simbirsk Cadet Corps (1882), Konstantinovsky Military School (1884), Officer Artillery School (1908). Major General, Chief of the 166th Infantry Division and Commander of the 18th Army Corps. Georgievsky Cavalier. In the Volunteer Army and the VSYUR at the disposal of the Black Sea Military Governor, since September 1918, the inspector of artillery of the Astrakhan Corps, the 1st Army Corps, then in the reserve ranks at the headquarters of the Commander-in-Chief of the VSYUR, from July 24, in September-October 1919, the inspector of artillery 5 th cavalry corps, from November 13, 1919 - the troops of the Kiev region, then in the reserve of the ranks of the troops of the same region, from December 8, 1919 in the reserve of the ranks of the troops of the Novorossiysk region (did not arrive on March 25, 1920), head of defense Novorossiysk. Evacuated. May 30, 1920 returned to the Russian Army in the Crimea (Sevastopol) on the ship "Poti". In the Russian Army, an artillery inspector of the 1st Army, in October 1920 an artillery inspector of the Russian Army before the evacuation of Crimea. Lieutenant General (January 27, 1919). On December 18, 1920 in Gallipoli, artillery inspector of the 1st Army Corps. In exile since April 1922 in Bulgaria, then in Yugoslavia, since 1924 in Paris. The first chairman of the Main Board of the Gallipoli Society and the Gallipoli Society in France, in 1931 assistant in combat and economic affairs and member of the training committee of the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris, since 1933 assistant commander of the 1st Army Corps. Chairman of the Society of Artillery Officers in France, chairman of the association of the Simbirsk Cadet Corps. Died April 29, 1937 in Paris.
176 Postovsky Alexander Ivanovich, b. January 7, 1861 From the nobility, the son of a lieutenant general. Voronezh Gymnasium (1877), Pavlovsk Military School and Mikhailovskoye Artillery School (1880), General Staff Academy (1888). Officer L.-Gds. 3rd Artillery Brigade. Lieutenant General, at the disposal of the Minister of War. Georgievsky Cavalier. In exile in 1931, Chairman of the Society of General Staff Officers. In exile in France. Died March 23, 1941
177 Holmsen Ivan Alekseevich, b. September 28, 1865 Finnish Cadet Corps (1886), Academy of the General Staff (1896). Officer L.-Gds. Semyonovsky regiment. Major General, Commander of the 1st Brigade of the 53rd Infantry Division (captured since 1915). Georgievsky Cavalier. In 1919-1920. representative of Admiral Kolchak in Berlin, then a military representative of the All-Russian Union of Socialist Youth and the Russian Army, in the summer of 1921 the head of the Russian delegation in Germany, from April 1922 the representative of General Wrangel in Paris. Lieutenant General (1919). In exile in France, since 1924 he was the head of the 1st department of the ROVS, since December 1926 he was a member of the association of the Life Guards. Semyonovsky regiment, since 1930 the chief treasurer of the ROVS, chairman of the Grenadier Association, by January 1, 1934, a member of the Society of General Staff Officers. Died March 19, 1941 in Oslo.
178 Prince Masalsky Vladimir Nikolaevich, b. 31 October 1860 Corps of Pages (1880) Officer L.-Gds. Horse artillery. Artillery General, Artillery Inspector of the Romanian Front. Georgievsky Cavalier. In the white troops of the Northern Front; from November 18, 1919, head of artillery of the Murmansk Front until April 20, 1920. In exile in France. Chairman of the Mutual Aid Society L.-Gds. Horse artillery. Died April 10, 1940 in Paris.
179 Stepanov Ivan Petrovich. Polotsk Cadet Corps, Mikhailovsky Artillery School, Sevastopolskaya aviation School (1913). Lieutenant Colonel of the 28th Artillery Brigade, inspector of aviation of the South-Western Front. St. George Knight. In the Armed Forces of the South of Russia, pilot, assistant combat chief for combatant combat. Evacuated in early 1920 from Novorossiysk on the ship "Panama". In the Russian Army in aviation units before the evacuation of Crimea. Major General. On December 18, 1920, in the 1st company of the Air Battalion of the Technical Regiment in Gallipoli. In exile in France. He died on March 3, 1951 in Paris.
180 Rudnev Evgeny Vladimirovich. Alexander Cadet Corps, Nikolaev Engineering School (1906). Captain, Head of the Moscow Aviation School of the Imperial All-Russian Flying Club. Since 1918 in the hetman's army in Odessa. In the Volunteer Army and VSYuR from September 16, 1918, on secondment to the mobile air base of the army, from October 17, 1918 commander of the 3rd aviation detachment, from November 1, 1918 on secondment to the fleet, from December 20, 1918 and . O. aviation inspector of the Odessa region, from August 8, 1919, head of the organizational department of the department of the chief of aviation of the All-Union Socialist Youth League (from August 12 - also the head of the combat department), from March 1, 1920 on assignment to the Sevastopol Aviation School, from June 29 - to the department of the chief aviation of the All-Russian Union of Youth Leagues, since July 12, the assistant to the head of the department for the technical part.
Colonel (February 12 1920). In emigration to France. Died 7 June 1945 in Paris.
181 Bem Evgeny Yulievich, b. March 1, 1870 Nikolaev Cadet Corps, Nikolaev Engineering School (1889), Academy of the General Staff (1896). Major General, Commander of the 18th Engineering Regiment, Inspector of the Engineering Unit of the Kyiv Military District. In the white troops of the Northern Front; head of military communications of the Arkhangelsk and Murmansk fronts, from 1919 to January 1920 at the headquarters of the Commander-in-Chief of the Northern Region, from January 1920 his representative in Finland. In exile in France. The organizer of the Military Engineering Courses, in 1931 the head of the Higher Military Technical Courses, since 1943 the head of the 1st department of the ROVS. Died May 17, 1951 in Paris.
182 Shubersky Alexander Nikolaevich, b. August 20, 1875 in St. Petersburg. Corps of Pages (1895), Academy of the General Staff (1904). Officer L.-Gds. Horse artillery. Major General, and Chief of Staff of the Guards Rifle Brigade, Chief of Staff of the 3rd Caucasian Army Corps, Quartermaster General of the Headquarters of the Kyiv Military District. Georgievsky Cavalier. Since 1918 in the hetman's army; member of the military-scientific committee at the Main Directorate of the General Staff, November 30, 1918 appointed and. O. Chief of the General Staff; in November-December 1918 in Kyiv. In the Armed Forces of the South of Russia; in the reserve of ranks at the headquarters of the Commander-in-Chief of the All-Union Socialist Youth League, from April 28, 1919, the chief of staff of the 2nd Kuban Corps, from September 17, 1919, the quartermaster general of the headquarters of the troops of the Kiev region, then in the reserve of the ranks of the troops of the Kiev region, from December 8, 1919 in the reserve of the ranks of the troops of the Novorossiysk region (did not arrive on March 25, 1920). Evacuated in 1919-1920. from Novorossiysk to Constantinople on the ship "Konstantin". May 1920 in Yugoslavia. In exile in the same place, on August 10, 1928 in Belgrade, a member of the association of the L.-Gds. Jaeger Regiment, in 1930 he organized the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Belgrade, in 1935 he headed the Military Scientific Institute in Belgrade. After 1945 in the south of France, chairman of the department of the Union of Russian military invalids in Nice, chairman of the department of the Union of Pages. Died June 11, 1963 in Menton (France).
183 Rusin Alexander Ivanovich, b. August 8, 1861 Naval Corps (1881), Naval Academy (1888) Admiral, Head of the Naval Academy, Head of the Naval Staff of the Supreme High Command. In exile in France, in 1932 he left the Cabin in Paris for the Naval Assembly; chairman of the All-Foreign Association of Maritime Organizations, chairman of the Cabin Company in Paris, in 1931 a member of the educational committee of the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris; on January 31, 1944, an honorary member and from January 20, 1949, honorary chairman of the Society of Former Russian Naval Officers in America. Died November 17-18, 1956 in Casablanca (Morocco).
184 Suvorov Mikhail Nikolaevich, b. August 15, 1877 From the nobility of the Kaluga province. Son of an officer. 2nd Moscow Cadet Corps (1894), Moscow Infantry Junker School (1896), General Staff Academy (1906). Officer L.-Gds. Jaeger Regiment. Major General, and D. Chief of Staff of the Guards Rifle Division, Chief of Staff of the 2nd Latvian Rifle Division, commander of the 121st Infantry Regiment. Taken hostage in September 1918 in Petrograd. Worked in an underground organization. In the Northwestern Army; from May to August 12, 1919, a member of the Political Conference under General Yudenich. In exile in France, on August 10, 1928 in Paris, a member of the association of the L.-Gds. Jaeger Regiment, since 1930 a member of the court of honor of the Paris group of association, by January 1, 1934 a member of the Society of General Staff Officers. Died February 1, 1948 in Paris.
185 Prokofiev Sergey Alexandrovich. In VSYUR and the Russian Army before the evacuation of the Crimea. Gallipolian In the autumn of 1925, as part of the Alekseevsky Artillery Division in France. Colonel In emigration there, a member of the association of the Konstantinovsky Military School. He graduated from the Higher military-scientific courses in Paris (1-th edition), in 1938, the head (assistant manager) of the same courses.
186 Yanovsky Vladimir Georgievich, p. in 1897, in the All-Soviet Union and the Russian Army before the evacuation of the Crimea. Evacuated from Sevastopol on the ship "Chersonese". Headquarters captain. In emigration to France. He graduated from the Higher military-scientific courses in Paris (1-th edition), in 1938, the head (assistant manager) of the same courses.
187 Konashevich Philip Andreevich. An officer. In the Volunteer Army since the autumn of 1917 in the Kornilov shock regiment. Member of the 1st Kuban ("Ice") campaign. In the VSYUR and the Russian Army in the 2nd Kornilov regiment before the evacuation of the Crimea. Staff captain. On December 18, 1920 in the 5th company of the Kornilov regiment in Gallipoli. In the autumn of 1925, he was part of the Kornilov Regiment in France. In exile in France, in 1934 he was a member of the board of the Gallipoli Society in Paris, an employee of the EMRO. He graduated from the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris (2nd edition), in 1938 he was the head (assistant head) of the same courses. Died September 2, 1970 in Paris.
188 Osipov Alexey Vladimirovich, b. in the Saratov province. Volunteer. In the Volunteer Army; in June-September 1918, a scorer on an armored train No. 1 ("General Alekseev"), from November 10, 1918, an ensign. In the VSYUR and the Russian Army in armored train units before the evacuation of the Crimea. Lieutenant. Evacuated to about. Proti on the ship "Kizil Yermak". Gallipoli. On December 30, 1920 in the 1st battery of the 6th artillery battalion. In the autumn of 1925, as part of the 6th artillery division in France. Staff captain. In exile in France. He graduated from the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris (2nd edition), in 1938 he was the head (assistant head) of the same courses, a member of the editorial board of the Army and Navy magazine. After 1945 in the USA, in 1950-1951. member of the Gallipoli Society of California, by 1956 in Los Angeles. Died after 1963
189 Kuznetsov Georgy Mikhailovich. Lieutenant. Georgievsky Cavalier. In the VSYUR and the Russian Army before the evacuation of the Crimea. Gallipoli. In exile in France. He graduated from the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris (4th edition), in 1938 he was the head (assistant head) of the same courses, in 1938-1939. member of the editorial board, secretary, editor of the Army and Navy magazine in Paris. After 1945 in the USA. Captain, representative of the Commander-in-Chief in the USA, editor of the Military Bulletin in New York, since 1976 head of the ROVS department in the USA. Died January 19, 1982 in New York.
190 Galai Nikolai Yakovlevich, b. in 1903 in the VSYUR and the Russian Army before the evacuation of the Crimea. Since the summer of 1919, a volunteer in the 3rd battery of the Drozdov artillery brigade. Gallipoli. In the autumn of 1925, as part of the Nikolaev Engineering School in France. Second lieutenant. He graduated from the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris (1st edition) and taught at them, in 1938 the head (assistant head) of the courses, a member of the NSUV, during the Second World War on the Eastern Front, head of the retraining school for surrendered Soviet officers, then at the Institute for the Study of the USSR. He died in 1969 in Munich.
191 Khvolson Konstantin Vladimirovich. School of jurisprudence (1917-1918). Lieutenant L.-Gds. Izmailovsky regiment. In exile in France. He graduated from the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris (1st edition), then a teacher, in 1938 the head (assistant head) of the same courses, since 1938 a member of the editorial board of the Army and Navy magazine, in November 1951 secretary and Treasurer of the Department of the Izmaylovtsep Union in France. Died June 3, 1969 in Paris.
192 Vlasov Andrey Alekseevich, b. in 1899 in the VSYUR and the Russian Army in armored train units before the evacuation of the Crimea. George Cross 4th class. Second lieutenant of the 6th artillery division. In exile in France. He graduated from the Higher Military Scientific Courses in Paris (5th edition), in 1938 he was the head (assistant head) of the same courses. By 1969, an employee of the magazine "Military Story". He died on December 13, 1980 in Shell (France).
193 Yagubov Alexander Georgievich. The son of an officer. Simbirsk Cadet Corps, Konstantinovsky Artillery School. Colonel, commander of the battery of the 36 artillery brigade. Member of the campaign Iasi-Don. In the Volunteer Army and the All-Soviet Union in the 3 th battery of the 3 light artillery battalion, from January 3 1919 in the 1 armored car division of the same (later Drozdovskaya) brigade, then the commander of the 3 division, from the 24 of the first brigade of the same brigade. Gallipolian In the autumn of 1919, as part of the Drozdovsky artillery division in France. In emigration in Bulgaria and France, from 3, the chief of security of Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich. He graduated from the Higher Military-Scientific Courses in Paris (2-th edition) and taught them, then the deputy head, and 1920 of the head (assistant head) of the courses; in 1925, a member of the board of the Society of Gallipoli in Paris. 1923 died on August 2 in Paris.

Comments

[Volkhov]

In exile, the military set the tone and failed everything, doing secondary affairs in the first place - how could an army, let alone an academy without a state, be for graduates only in a foreign army, for example, in the Abwehr.
It was "not cool" to take the example of Jews or Gypsies - first create a distributed state structure, then find a territory even in Honduras, then a network in Russia, then an enclave in hard-to-reach areas like Kamchatka or Chukotka, where even at 48 revolted prisoners held the district for six months as a result, they were deceived and shot, the ditches did not even fill up).
That is an example of academicians - how not to do it. The resistance after 93 collapsed in about the same way - they also believed the generals.

[washi]

Instead of working for their MOTHERLAND, it was not clear what they were doing. Really it was not clear in 1927 that Soviet power was for long. If so, then all the assassination attempts on Stalin and his associates are true. And purges of the 30s were necessary. And how we lacked competent personnel.

[Jaros81]

And what do you, gentlemen, do not like about white and tsarist officers? By the way, in 1927 it was really unclear how firmly the new government was on its feet.

[Zynaps]

And what do you, gentlemen, do not like about white and tsarist officers?

It’s very cool to watch how former pioneers and children of workers and peasants flaunt the word "gentlemen", like some graduates of the Corps of Pages.

specifically Golovin was an excellent and intellectually honest expert on the problems of the Russian Army in WWI. his work "Russia's Military Efforts" helped to avoid mistakes in the future. There is only one claim to Golovin - during the war he became a confidant of General Vlasov and helped him in every way.

to other whitewarers who did not cooperate with the enemies and did not crap, there are no special complaints. they lost, and this played a positive role for the further fate of the country. if they won, it would have been much worse - given the heterogeneity and sometimes cardinal contradictions among the whitewarers, Russia was waiting for the fate of the Warlords and the payment of the Entente’s bills for help. there was no question of any industrialization and revival of the country.

Quote: Jaros81

By the way, in 1927 it was really unclear how firmly the new government was on its feet.

and this is called arrogant red pursuit. 1927 - the first military alarm. a crisis that we were able to overcome, and which set the impetus for forced industrialization.

[Jaros81]

I’ve never been a pioneer, and wasn’t even going to join there, although I was suitable by age

[Zynaps]

and was a brave little scout among the red-necked cattle?

[Jaros81]

I also did not sign up for scouts. Me and the Yankees are out of my way

[albert]

82 graduate listeners? Somehow all this is not serious.

[Jaros81]

Well, I think so, they trained military theorists, a kind of scientists, but there are not many of them. Moreover, they did not want to be allowed to command troops. Their task is theory and strategy.

[stolbovsn]

The most interesting question is whether at least one student of the courses showed himself in real hostilities after graduation and on whose side did he participate in WWII?

[Jaros81]

some officers went to the service of the Wehrmacht in the ROA, but their end is deplorable. Most were transferred to the USSR, where they received appropriate punishment.
But such a famous general as Denikin refused to cooperate with the Germans. Moreover, he called on emigrants not to support Germany in the war with the USSR, repeatedly calling all representatives of emigration collaborating with Germans "obscurantists", "defeatists" and "Hitler fans"

[Zynaps]

Quote: Jaros81

such a famous general as Denikin refused to cooperate with the Germans

this is explained ridiculously simply: Denikin was an Anglophile and the same Krasnov from Shkuro - famous Germanophiles - rated below the baseboard since the time of the Civil. but after the war, the dearest Denikin called on the Americans and allies to bombard the USSR and begin a military invasion before it recovered from the war. he was such a principled gentleman and lover of the motherland. in my own way.

[Jaros81]

I explain it even easier. He was a patriot and not alone. For example, I cited Denikin as the most prominent person and famous general

[Zynaps]

approximately like Solzhenitsyn - the same patriot snitch who demanded to drop the atomic bomb on the USSR. Well, not a talent. not Slushchev, and especially not Svechin. Denika the hanger - and nothing more.

[Jaros81]

Listen to you, all the generals are "informers-patriots", but executioners like Trotsky, Frunze, Tukhachevsky, etc. - straight samples of a real officer