Mikhail Frunze. Red Army Commander and Front Commander

13 492 158
Mikhail Frunze. Red Army Commander and Front Commander
M. Frunze in a photograph from 1919.


В previous article We discussed Mikhail Frunze's origins and early life, as well as his participation in the revolutionary struggle. Today, we'll continue this story and discuss him as an outstanding Soviet commander during the Civil War.



Red Commander


In the summer of 1918, Frunze was appointed military commissar of the Ivanovo-Voznesensk Governorate, and then of the entire Yaroslavl Military District. In these positions, he was actively involved in organizing Red Guard detachments, and in July, he drew attention to himself with his decisive actions in suppressing the Yaroslavl Uprising, organized by Boris Savinkov, one of the leaders of the Socialist Revolutionary Party. It should be remembered that the situation was very serious; the rebels were finally defeated only 15 days later.

He also managed to open two higher education institutions in Ivanovo-Voznesensk: a higher technical school (based on the Riga Polytechnic Institute evacuated to the city) and an institute of public education. By 1930, five separate institutes had been created from the technical school's faculties, transforming Ivanovo into a major scientific and educational center.

But let's return to 1918 and see that on December 26, Trotsky signed an order appointing Frunze commander of the 4th Army of the Eastern Front.


Commander of the 4th Army of the Eastern Front M. Frunze, January 1919.

Frunze's chief of staff was former major general of the tsarist army, Fyodor Novitsky, who, incidentally, recalled the beginning of his work with him as follows:

Frunze dreamed of getting what he called a "little regiment," preferably a mounted one, given his love of horseback riding. I urged Mikhail Vasilyevich not to be modest and to strive for an army commission. Such a prospect only amused Frunze, as he couldn't imagine himself as an army commander without any prior training or combat experience. I, however, had a completely different opinion.


F. F. Novitsky, future lieutenant general aviation and the head of the N. E. Zhukovsky Air Force Academy

By March 1919, Frunze had become commander of the Southern Group of the Eastern Front, which included the 1st, 4th, 5th, and Turkestan Armies. The 26-year-old Mikhail Tukhachevsky commanded the Fifth Army.

At Frunze's request, the Ivanovo Provincial Executive Committee sent a large group of Bolsheviks and non-party weavers to his disposal, from which a separate 220th regiment was formed – it became part of the 74th brigade of Chapaev's division.


Ivano-Voznesensk Weavers Regiment


Commander of the 220th Regiment G. Gorbachev and the commissar of this regiment E. Kapustyansky, June 1919.

By the way, in the famous 1934 film, Furmanov brings this regiment into Chapaev’s division.

A shock group was formed, which played a major role in subsequent events. It included the 25th (Chapayev) and 31st Rifle Divisions and a separate cavalry group.

In March and April 1919, Frunze was distracted by suppressing large-scale peasant unrest in the Samara and Simbirsk provinces, also known as the Chapan War. At the same time, Kolchak's armies were advancing from the east. The number of peasant rebels was large, but their units were quickly and easily defeated. By late April, Frunze's troops had launched an offensive against Kolchak, inflicting a series of defeats on him, so that very soon the former admiral's armies could only defend themselves. By May 1919, Buguruslan, Bugulma, and Belebey had been liberated. The White Guards made their final attempt to stop the Red forces near Ufa. It was then that Chapayev was wounded during air raids, and Frunze himself suffered a concussion.


Wounded Chapaev, D. Furmanov sitting on the left and P. Isaev lying down

This didn't stop the Reds, and on June 9, Chapayev's 25th Division entered Ufa, its commander awarded the Order of the Red Banner. The important Izhevsk-Votkinsk industrial region came under Soviet control. Frunze received his first Order of the Red Banner and was appointed commander of the Eastern Front.

Commander of the Eastern Front



Frunze and Trotsky at the parade in Samara, 1919

Kolchak's complete defeat in 1919 was only prevented by the fact that the most combat-ready units of the Eastern Front had to be sent against Denikin's Armed Forces of Southern Russia and Yudenich's Northwestern Army.

Chapaev's 25th Division was ordered to march toward Uralsk with the goal of cutting off the White Cossacks from Denikin's troops, and the 31st Division was sent to Voronezh—you'll remember that these divisions were part of the Shock Group created by Frunze.

The strong 2nd Division also left the Eastern Front: some units were sent to Tsaritsyn, others to Petrograd.


Soldiers of the 2nd Rifle Division of the Eastern Front near Petrograd, 1919.

The situation was truly dire: on September 17, 1919, Denikin's troops captured Sumy, Oboyan, and Stary Oskol, and on September 20, Kursk. And on September 28, Yudenich began his offensive on Petrograd. On October 6, Denikin's forces captured Voronezh, on October 13, Orel, and on October 20, Yudenich's army was close to Petrograd – Yamburg, Luga, Tsarskoye Selo, and Pavlovsk had already been captured, with only 20 kilometers remaining. It all ended in a terrible defeat for the White Guard troops. The armies of the Armed Forces of South Russia fled to Novorossiysk, the disastrous evacuation of which forever ruined Denikin's military reputation.


English Tanksabandoned by Denikin in Novorossiysk

Yudenich's army retreated to Estonia, where it was disarmed, and its soldiers and officers were robbed and herded into camps, where conditions were so brutal that many fled to Soviet Russia.


Narva. Interned soldiers of Yudenich's army. February 1920.

Frunze's troops achieved success even earlier: Perm, Yekaterinburg, Zlatoust and Chelyabinsk were liberated, and on August 10, 1919, Frunze told a correspondent of the Izvestia newspaper:

Kolchak is broken and five-sixths defeated. He still has some reserves, and he will resist, holding on at advantageous positions. But essentially, the dispute with Kolchak is settled… The mood of the population in the areas occupied by our troops is entirely in our favor.

The central Soviet government fully agreed with him, and the task of finishing off Kolchak was entrusted to Vladimir Aleksandrovich Olderroga, a major general in the Tsarist army who had voluntarily joined the Red Army in the spring of 1918. And on August 15, Frunze was appointed commander of the Turkestan Front. This likely took into account the fact that the subject of the article was born in Pishpek (Bishkek), attended a gymnasium in Verny (Almaty), and was familiar with local customs and traditions.

On November 14, the remnants of Kolchak's army, led by Kappel, began a tragic retreat, which émigrés later called the "Great Siberian Ice March." It's worth noting that there was nothing grand about it. Between 100 and 150 White Guards advanced eastward from Barnaul and Novonikolaevsk (Novosibirsk) and were battered by everyone: the Red Army troops of the Eastern Front, partisans, and militias from the rebellious cities. Only 25-30 men reached Chita on March 14, 1920, half of whom were sick and wounded.

Commander of the Turkestan Front


The new Turkestan Front had to be opened because Kolchak's Southern Group of Forces, as well as units of the Orenburg and Ural Cossacks, had been pushed back into Central Asia, where they were still attempting to resist. In his new position, Frunze commanded approximately 114 fighters. This number subsequently increased through the mobilization of the local population. Almost immediately, Frunze launched the Aktyubinsk Offensive, during which, by September 4, his forces managed to defeat General Belov's army. The White Cossacks didn't hold out for long, but it was fighting the Ural Cossacks that Vasily Chapayev died.

The death of Chapaev


In the late autumn of 1918, the legendary Red divisional commander was sent to study at the Military Academy, but by early January 1919, he had left without permission and reported to Frunze, with whom he had developed a very good relationship. Initially, he commanded the separate Aleksandrovo-Gaisky Brigade, and in April, the 25th Division, which, as we recall, liberated Ufa and was then sent to Uralsk. Here, Chapaev's division was quite successful, and with a raid into the rear, on the town of Lbischensk, the Whites wanted to destroy its headquarters: they hoped to decapitate the enemy and sow confusion in the Red forces.


The headquarters building of Chapaev's division in Lbischensk (currently the village of Chapaev)

At this time, the main forces of the 25th Division were located 50 kilometers from Lbischensk, which, in addition to headquarters, housed the Revolutionary Committee, the tribunal, and the rear services. The divisional school was also located there, and its cadets were charged with defending the city in the event of a White attack (which no one believed would happen).

The Whites managed to assemble a cavalry strike force numbering between 1,200 and 2,000 men, and Colonel Timofey Sladkov was appointed to command it. This detachment also included his chief of staff, Nikolai Borodin, who, incidentally, died during this raid (in the Soviet film "Chapayev," this officer appears under the name Borozdin).


N. Borodin in a photograph from 1913


Colonel Borozdin in the film "Chapaev", 1934

Lbischensk was attacked around three o'clock in the morning on September 5. The Whites managed to achieve the effect of surprise, resulting in the deaths of about one and a half thousand poorly trained cadets and rear service personnel (many of whom did not even have weapons), 800 people were captured, many of whom were killed immediately. Only a small detachment (about 100 men), including Chapaev himself, offered fierce resistance. General Staff Colonel M. Izergin wrote about this:

Chapaev himself held out longer than anyone else with a small detachment, with whom he took refuge in one of the houses on the bank of the Ural, from where he had to be driven out artillery fire.

It was thanks to his actions that many Red Army soldiers were able to retreat to the river and cross to the other bank. Chapayev was not among the survivors. According to the most widespread version, proposed by Furmanov, the wounded divisional commander drowned while attempting to swim across the Ural River. In 1962, Chapayev's daughter, Klavdiya, received a clarifying letter from two Hungarians who had served in her father's division and were with him during the final battle on September 5, 1919. They reported that the divisional commander, wounded in the head and stomach but still alive, had been placed on a makeshift raft, but died during the crossing. He was buried there, the makeshift grave covered with branches.

It's worth noting, incidentally, that during the civil war, the Czechs and Slovaks, with rare exceptions like Jaroslav Hašek, sided with the Whites, while the Hungarians, as a rule, fought for the Reds—over 60 of them! And both sides noted the exceptional resilience and reliability of the Red Hungarian units.


Hungarians of the 3rd International Astrakhan Rifle Regiment

The traditional hatred between them was so great at that time that the Czechs and Slovaks usually immediately shot captured Hungarians, and the Hungarians shot captured Slovaks and Czechs.

One of the "Red" Hungarians, Mate Zalka, under the name "General Lukács," led the 12th International Brigade during the Spanish Civil War and died on June 11, 1937, near Huesca. Imre Nagy, who became the head of the Hungarian government after World War II, according to investigator N. A. Sokolov, even participated in the execution of the family of citizen Nicholas Romanov (former Emperor Nicholas II). In 1956, he announced Hungary's withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact and appealed to the UN for the protection of its sovereignty. At the insistence of János Kádor (and against the opinion of Khrushchev), he was hanged on June 16, 1958. "treason and conspiracy to overthrow the people's democratic system"And Bela Kun would become chairman of the Crimean Revolutionary Committee in November 1920, but more on that later, in another article.

Let's return to the events of our civil war.

The Whites' hopes for disruption in the 25th Division's operations were dashed. Its soldiers were eager to avenge their beloved commander, and it became the main striking force of the 4th Army.

On October 4, the White Army's Separate Ural Army became active, coordinating its actions with Denikin's advance on Tsaritsyn. But by November, it was cut off from other White Guard forces and surrendered one position after another. And on December 19, 1919, the Kazakh government of Alash Orda, allied with the Ural Army, announced the capitulation of its troops.

Algemba


Meanwhile, the young Soviet republic was desperately short of oil, and so, on December 24, 1919, the Council of Workers' and Peasants' Defense issued a resolution ordering the State Construction Committee to immediately begin construction of a railway line and an oil pipeline from Aleksandrov-Gai to Emba, leading to the Dossor and Makat oil fields, which were not yet occupied by the Red Army. The project was ambitious but difficult to implement: the route to the oil fields lay through waterless, salt-marsh semi-deserts and deserts.


The proposed route of the Algemba oil pipeline

Cavalry units of Frunze's 4th Army of the Turkestan Front captured these fields on January 8, 1920. On January 17, 1920, the Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council, L. Trotsky, sent Frunze a telegram ordering the 4th Army to be transferred to the construction of the aforementioned railway. However, the 4th Army remained a combat army and was not relegated to labor status, as some others were. Furthermore, the 25th (Chapayev) Division was sent to the Polish Front.

On January 19, Frunze sent a telegram to Moscow stating that all necessary orders had been given, but he also indicated:

Taking into account the difficulties of the present difficult conditions of transport and communications, as well as the dismantling of the aforementioned sections of the tracks, the delivery of a large quantity of stocks of building materials and their distribution along the line of the planned construction, the difficulty of placing the required number of work teams outside the villages in the unusual conditions of the waterless steppes and the lack of fuel, I consider it my duty to report that the implementation of the construction will encounter major obstacles.

He was right: construction was never completed, especially since Soviet power was established in Baku and Grozny in the spring of 1920. However, due to inertia, work at Algemba continued until August 1921. Enormous amounts of money were wasted.

The Agony of Dutov's Orenburg Army


Let's return to December 1919. By the beginning of the month, the White Ural Army's front had finally collapsed. In January 1920, this military campaign ended with the liberation of the city of Guryev. Only 162 Cossacks left for Krasnovodsk and then Persia with the last commander of the Ural Army, Vladimir Tolstov.

Meanwhile, Dutov's 20-strong army, which also included General Bakich's units and the Cossack detachments of Zakharov and Razumnik-Stepanov, retreated south—through Karkaralinsk to Sergiopol and Semirechye, where the half-mad sadist Boris Annenkov still held out. The last stage of their journey was in history The "Hunger March" also began. An epidemic of typhus and typhoid fever also broke out. By the end of December 1919, having lost 9 of their 20 men, the Orenburgers arrived at Annenkov's domain—and were horrified by the terror and atrocities perpetrated on the territory. General Bakich recalled:

The method of command and order in the partisan units of Ataman Annenkov, where the basic requirements of military service were not observed, law and order were denied, incredible atrocities and robberies were allowed, both in relation to the peaceful population of villages and stanitsas, as well as in relation to the ranks of my detachment, who, due to illness, were unable to stand up for themselves, caused bitterness against the partisans of General Annenkov on the part of the ranks of my detachment.

M. Frunze's victories in Central Asia


On October 13, 1919, Frunze's troops joined forces with units of the Turkestan Soviet Republic, and soon the first cotton train was sent from Tashkent to Orenburg. In February 1920, after the railway was restored, Frunze arrived in Tashkent with the front headquarters.

On February 4, 1920, Krasnovodsk, where large White Guard and British forces had been stationed until then, was captured. Vladimir Mikhailovich Ionov took part in the operation to liberate the city as the chief of artillery. He was the son of a tsarist general who had defected to the Soviets, a former governor of the Semirechye region, a recipient of nine imperial orders and the Golden St. George's Sword. He was also the brother of the White Ataman of the Semirechye Cossack Host, who became an ally of the aforementioned Boris Annenkov.

The Whites' position was frankly hopeless. On April 2, 1920, Orenburg Ataman Dutov was the first to cross the Kara-Saryk Pass into Chinese territory, followed by General Bakich and Ataman Annenkov. However, even without them, the situation in Central Asia remained tense. Medieval vassal states of the Russian Empire—the Khanate of Khiva and the Emirate of Bukhara—still existed there, and their rulers were hostile to the new central government.


Frunze during negotiations in Bukhara, April 1920.

The population of Turkestan was also terrorized by Basmachi gangs, as reported in the "Report of the Secret Department of the Cheka on the insurgent movement as of November 1920":

In Turkestan, in the Fergana region, a special kind of banditry—Basmachi—is rampant. "Basmach" means "robber" in the native Uzbek language. But Basmachi has long ceased to be just a bandit movement. It has transformed into a politically White Guard anti-Soviet movement. The Basmachi contingent consists of kulaks (Sarts) or bais (small landowners) dissatisfied with Soviet policy in the native kishlaks (villages). The movement is nationalist in nature against Russians... The Basmachi even attack their own people, robbing and killing. Recently, they have been attacking railways. and they dismantle the roads, burn cotton and soap factories, attack rich cotton reserves and burn them, dealing a blow to our textile industry... By the way, among the Basmachi there are many Russian officers and Cossacks from Annenkov's defeated detachment, who made their way to Fergana from China.

The fight against the Basmachi dragged on for many years; in a battle with a large detachment of these bandits in May 1921, the aforementioned Vladimir Ionov lost his arm.

What about Khiva and Bukhara?

In November 1919, an uprising broke out in the Khiva Khanate, but the Red Army came to the rescue, and the khan's forces were routed. On February 2, Said Abdullah Khan abdicated, and on April 26, 1920, the Khorezm People's Soviet Republic was proclaimed.

On August 28, 1920, an uprising broke out in Bukhara (its participants reached five thousand), and its leaders appealed to the Soviet authorities and Frunze for help. About nine and a half thousand Red Army soldiers with 40 guns headed for Bukhara, supported by the Aral Military Flotilla. The emir's army consisted of about 43 fighters and 55 guns. Nevertheless, by August 29, Frunze's forces had already captured cities such as Karshi, Shakhrisabz, Termez, Chardzhui, and Merv. And on September 2, Bukhara was stormed—and it must be said that the Red Army's losses in the fighting on the narrow streets of that city were quite heavy. The emir fled, pursued by the aforementioned Vladimir Ionov. At the border with Afghanistan, he abandoned his harem of 300 women. On October 8, 1920, the Bukhara People's Soviet Republic was proclaimed.

But even earlier, on September 20, Frunze received a new assignment – ​​he was now to command the Southern Front, which was operating against Wrangel's army. Shortly before his departure, the subject of this article had his first child, a daughter, Tatyana, born in Tashkent.


Frunze with his wife, daughter and wife's sister, 1921.

We will discuss Frunze's Crimean triumph in a separate article.
158 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. + 13
    19 January 2026 03: 36
    Frunze's chief of staff was the former major general of the tsarist army, Fyodor Novitsky,


    They are truly amazing people. Not everyone is destined to rise to the rank of general twice in their lifetime (major general of the RIA, lieutenant general of the Red Army).
    1. +5
      19 January 2026 08: 12
      To rise to the rank of general twice in his life

      Yes, exactly to achieve the rank!
      1. -2
        20 January 2026 14: 16
        There were also some good people among the nobility. However, the Russian Empire suppressed them and didn't allow them to demonstrate their knowledge and talents.
    2. +3
      19 January 2026 12: 08
      Fedor Novitsky,
      They are truly amazing people. Not everyone is destined to rise to the rank of general twice in their lifetime (major general of the RIA, lieutenant general of the Red Army).
      and I was lucky to stay alive during the "wild 30s"
    3. +4
      19 January 2026 13: 26
      And there were plenty of those. Samoilov, Ignatiev, for example—among the most famous.
      1. +4
        19 January 2026 13: 28
        Quote: Bersaglieri
        And there were plenty of those. Samoilov, Ignatyev, for example—among the most famous.


        Sometimes it seems like there are a lot of them. But when you start counting, there are only a few.
        1. -1
          19 January 2026 16: 09
          Quote from kromer
          Sometimes it seems like there are a lot of them. But when you start counting, there are only a few.

          And what's the calculation based on? Can you provide documentary evidence? And for those who were executed, briefly describe for what reason and under what article? It's just that sometimes there are a lot of people like you who like to throw liquid manure at the fan.
          1. +6
            19 January 2026 16: 14
            Quote: Fitter65
            And what's the calculation based on? Can you provide documentary evidence? And for those who were executed, briefly describe for what reason and under what article? It's just that sometimes there are a lot of people like you who like to throw liquid manure at the fan.


            Hello, garage! I was actually talking about those who became generals twice in their lives.
            1. -5
              19 January 2026 17: 15
              Quote from kromer
              Hello, garage!

              To get to the garage, call 014.
              Quote from kromer
              Actually, I was talking about those who became generals twice in their lives.

              Where did you write that? It's just that with the site overrun with Olgovichi and others like them, it's hard to think of anything positive.
              1. +4
                20 January 2026 02: 19
                Quote: Fitter65
                Where did you write that? It's just that with the site overrun with Olgovichi and others like them, it's hard to think of anything positive.

                Where did I write about executions?
            2. +1
              22 January 2026 04: 06
              Even more interesting is the fate of those who became generals in the White (not the Tsarist!) army, and generals in the Red/Soviet army.
              1. 0
                22 January 2026 07: 19
                Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
                Even more interesting is the fate of those who became generals in the White (not the Tsarist!) army, and generals in the Red/Soviet army.


                Somehow I don't remember any like that. belay
                1. +2
                  22 January 2026 18: 28
                  Kruse A. Ya., Dogadin V. M.
                  1. 0
                    22 January 2026 18: 32
                    Dogadin is missing. He was only a colonel in the Soviet Army.
                    But Kruse is an interesting character. Thank you.
          2. +3
            20 January 2026 12: 34
            Quote: Fitter65
            And from what quantity should we count?

            The number is known: 385, the overwhelming majority died in their 20s due to age (they were generals, after all), those who lived to 37 were mostly shot, but even those who survived—is such a life necessary?
            scientist artilleryman General Durlyakhov
            In May 1931, he and several other employees of the Artillery Committee were arrested on charges of “excessively active development of scientific research work so that after the overthrow of Soviet power, as the inventors had hoped, the results of the research could be used by the counterrevolution.”
            ?

            General Sapozhnikov, a gunpowder chemist:
            He was arrested in the case of Bazho, Dukes (Savantov) and N.V. Petrovskaya (Wolfson)[7][8] in December 1919, but was released in March 1920 thanks to the personal petition of A.M. Gorky to V.I. Lenin[9]. Both sons of A. V. Sapozhnikov, also participants in this case, were shot.
            In October 1930 he was arrested again on charges of participating in a counter-revolutionary military organization and in January 1931 sentenced to death with replacement by 10 years in the camps

            and so forth
            Soviet General Kuzin's daughter was sent with him to Kazakhstan -like the daughter of... the Tsar's general

            Some managed to escape from the Soviet Union to Belgium, some to China, some to the USA,
            etc. etc.

            Вы читайте, читайте, там там немного фамилий -https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BA_%D0%B3%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2_%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%B8_%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D1%81%D0%BB%D1%83%D0%B6%D0%B1%D0%B5_%D0%B2_%D0%A0%D0%9A%D0%9A%D0%90#%D0%93%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8B_%D0%BE%D1%82_%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%84%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B8
            Quote: Fitter65
            It’s just that with the dominance of the Olgovichi and others like them on the site, don't you think it's good?.

            and that's why it's necessary have a good mood, Alexander! hi
            1. 0
              21 January 2026 16: 37
              From Wiki: in the “Spring” case, according to some sources, more than 3000 people were arrested, among them were A. E. Snesarev, A. L. Rodendorf, A. A. Svechin, P. P. Sytin, F. F. Novitsky, A. I. Verkhovsky, V. I. Galkin, Yu. K. Gravitsky, V. A. Olderogge, V. A. Yablochkin, E. L. Slukhotsky, N. Sollogub, A. A. Baltiysky, M. D. Bonch-Bruevich, N. A. Morozov, A. E. Gutor, A. Kh. Bazarevsky, M. S. Matiyasevich, V. F. Rzhechitsky, V. N. Gatovsky, P. M. Sharangovich, D. D. Zuev, N. E. Kakurin, I. A. Troitsky and others
              1. +1
                22 January 2026 13: 00
                Quote: Kotofeich
                According to some sources, more than 3000 people were arrested in the Vesna case.

                the talk was about the royal ones generals in the service of the Red Army
        2. +1
          20 January 2026 23: 58
          A bit. If we're talking about "twice-ranked generals and admirals." Karbyshev, Kitkin, Oldenrogge...
          1. +4
            21 January 2026 13: 33
            Quote: Bersaglieri
            A bit. If we're talking about "twice-ranked generals and admirals." Karbyshev, Kitkin, Oldenrogge...


            Karbyshev is out of the question. He only rose to lieutenant colonel at RIA.
          2. 0
            21 January 2026 14: 05
            Quote: Bersaglieri
            Oldenrogge

            He didn't have time to become a general under the USSR - he was shot in 1931 as a traitor, which is exactly what he was.
            1. +1
              21 January 2026 18: 10
              Quote: Olgovich
              shot in 1931 as a traitor, which he was.


              By the decision of the Military Tribunal of the Kyiv Military District of April 30, 1974, the case was dismissed for lack of corpus delicti and Olderogge was posthumously rehabilitated.
              1. 0
                22 January 2026 13: 02
                Did this make him no longer a traitor of 1918?
                1. +1
                  22 January 2026 13: 08
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  Did this make him no longer a traitor of 1918?


                  And who did he actually betray?
                  1. 0
                    22 January 2026 13: 12
                    Quote from kromer
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    Did this make him no longer a traitor of 1918?


                    And who did he actually betray?

                    Homeland.
                    1. +1
                      22 January 2026 13: 15
                      Quote: Olgovich
                      Homeland.


                      Andrey, I don't really understand what you're talking about. Could you please elaborate?
                      1. 0
                        22 January 2026 13: 19
                        Quote from kromer
                        Andrey, I don't really understand what you're talking about. Could you please elaborate?

                        Fighting on the side of the Reds is a betrayal of the Motherland – my opinion
                      2. +1
                        22 January 2026 13: 22
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Fighting on the side of the Reds is a betrayal of the Motherland – my opinion


                        The oath was given to the Tsar. The Tsar abdicated. The oath was then annulled. By definition, he could no longer betray. But he could make a choice. He made it.
                      3. 0
                        22 January 2026 13: 26
                        Quote from kromer
                        The oath was given to the king.

                        And to the Provisional Government. Betrayed.
                      4. +1
                        22 January 2026 13: 27
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Quote from kromer
                        The oath was given to the king.

                        And to the Provisional Government. Betrayed.


                        Andrey, what kind of Provisional Government was it in 1918?
                      5. -2
                        22 January 2026 13: 30
                        Quote from kromer
                        Andrey, what kind of Provisional Government was it in 1918?
                        The Russian successor state to the WP.

                        My personal perception is that fighting on the side of the Reds is a betrayal of Russia - see Odessa, etc.
            2. +3
              22 January 2026 13: 10
              Quote: Olgovich
              shot in 1931 as a traitor, which he was.

              I wouldn't be so categorical. History is a strange thing. In 1919 he wasn't a traitor, in 1931 he became a traitor, in 1974 he wasn't a traitor again. But what's the reality?
              1. 0
                22 January 2026 13: 13
                Quote: Kotofeich
                But how really?

                My personal opinion is that he has been a traitor since 1918.
                1. +1
                  22 January 2026 13: 22
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  my personal opinion

                  It does happen. I can't dispute it, I don't have the facts. hi
          3. +1
            21 January 2026 16: 39
            Quote: Bersaglieri
            twice generals and admirals

            Vladimir Grigorievich Fedorov. Evgeniy Aleksandrovich Berkalov. Nikolai Fedorovich Drozdov. Nikolai Georgievich Korsun. Alexander Alexandrovich Samoilo. Alexander Viktorovich Stahl.
            Mostly technical specialists, and they weren't caught in the crossfire of repression. Well, except for Berkalov.
    4. +5
      19 January 2026 15: 18
      Frunze's chief of staff was the former major general of the tsarist army, Fyodor Novitsky,


      They are truly amazing people. Not everyone is destined to rise to the rank of general twice in their lifetime (major general of the RIA, lieutenant general of the Red Army).

      A very competent comrade). He foresaw the situation years in advance. In fact, it was Novitsky who was initially appointed Army Commander-4. And Frunze was supposed to serve under him as a commissar. As on all other fronts. But Fyodor Fyodorovich refused and therefore outlived his commander by almost 20 years. stop

      From the memoirs of Frunze's senior adjutant, Sirotinsky:

      "Back in December 1918, the Central Committee of the RCP(b) summoned M.V. Frunze to Moscow. F.F. Novitsky, the military commander of the Yaroslavl Military District, also traveled to Moscow with him. A former general in the Tsarist army, F.F. Novitsky was one of the first Tsarist generals to defect to the Soviet regime. In Moscow, the Revolutionary Military Council of the Republic appointed Novitsky commander of the 4th Army of the Eastern Front, and M.V. Frunze a member of the Revolutionary Military Council of this army. F.F. Novitsky was dissatisfied with this appointment. To understand the reason for his dissatisfaction, it is necessary to briefly review the previous joint work of Frunze and Novitsky.

      From the very first days of his appointment as District Commissar of the Yaroslavl Military District, M.V. Frunze impressed Novitsky and other military specialists working in the district with his exceptional knowledge of military affairs. The district's military commander's skepticism toward the new district military commissar quickly gave way to profound respect.

      After several months of working together with Mikhail Vasilyevich, Novitsky became convinced that Frunze “would appear at the front as precisely that commander, that leader of the fighting masses, which at that time we did not have, or had in very limited quantities.”

      Novitsky conveyed his thoughts to Trotsky, who held the post of Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the Republic. Trotsky shrugged his shoulders in displeasure and declared that everything would be as he, Trotsky, had decided. But when the Party Central Committee pointed out the incorrectness of the Revolutionary Military Council's decision, the previous order was rescinded, and on the same day, December 26, 1918, M. V. Frunze was appointed commander of the 4th Army of the Eastern Front, and F. F. Novitsky was appointed Chief of Staff of the same army and a member of the Revolutionary Military Council.
      1. +1
        19 January 2026 17: 24
        From the very first days of his appointment as district commissar of the Yaroslavl Military District, M. V. Frunze impressed Novitsky and other military specialists working in the district, exceptional knowledge in the field of military affairs.
        Well, yes, apparently in hard labor, Frunze, in order to broaden his horizons and foreseeing his future appointment as army commander, intensively studied the works of Clausewitz.
        What you can't read in memoirs laughing
        He shrugged his shoulders in displeasure and declared that everything would be as he, Trotsky, had decided. But when the Party Central Committee pointed out the Revolutionary Military Council's decision as incorrect, the previous order was rescinded.
        Yeah, the Central Committee of the Party and Comrade Lenin personally Yes
        1. +1
          19 January 2026 21: 49
          From the very first days of his appointment as district commissar of the Yaroslavl Military District, M. V. Frunze impressed Novitsky and other military specialists working in the district with his exceptional knowledge of military affairs.
          Well, yes, apparently in hard labor, Frunze, in order to broaden his horizons and foreseeing his future appointment as army commander, intensively studied the works of Clausewitz.
          What you can't read in laughing's memoirs

          So it was Adjutant Frunze who wrote this. laughing No one knows what Novitsky actually said. But the fact remains: he refused, and the order was overturned.
          1. +4
            19 January 2026 22: 56
            No one really knows what Novitsky actually said. But what he wrote is known, cited in several books:
            In Moscow, we expressed our desire to the Chief of the General Staff, who relayed our request to the Revolutionary Military Council, where we were both summoned the following day. M.V. Frunze was the first to be received. After his negotiations, he went into the reception room and managed to utter only one phrase to me: "Give up the Southern Front." I didn't have time to clarify what this phrase meant, as I was then invited into the office.

            Without asking about any of my wishes, I was categorically informed that I was being appointed Chief of Staff of the Southern Front, and since M.V. Frunze asked not to separate him from me, he was also appointed there as a member of the Revolutionary Military Council of the Front.

            Not considering it possible to personally refuse the appointment given to me, I nevertheless protested M.V. Frunze's appointment in the strongest possible terms and began ardently arguing for his appointment to a major leadership role, simultaneously asking to be appointed to any position under him. For a long time, they resisted, citing the fact that M.V. Frunze was a civilian. But finally, I was informed that our previously planned appointments would be reviewed and that we would receive a response the following day.
            And indeed, at 6 p.m. the next day, we received a telephone call from the Revolutionary Military Council informing us that our request had been honored and that M.V. Frunze was being appointed commander of the 4th Army on the Eastern Front, and I was his chief of staff. The appointment order was issued on December 26, 1918, but we were prohibited from going to the front until the district had completed its urgent assignments.
            This is a completely different version.
            But both of these versions are presented in memoirs. And as is well known, memoirs and other eyewitness accounts occupy an honorable second place in terms of the reliability of the information they contain, second only to newspapers.

            I believe that if you set your mind to it, you will find someone else’s memoirs, which contain another version of the story of the appointment of Frunze and Novitsky.
    5. +2
      20 January 2026 10: 02
      It is also interesting that he was an aviation lieutenant general.
  2. +9
    19 January 2026 03: 55
    was later called the "Great Siberian Ice March". Let us note that there was nothing great about it.


    Well, it depends on how you look at it. Walking about 2500 kilometers through the harsh Siberian frosts, through snowdrifts, passing through rebel towns, and being subjected to constant attacks by partisans and Red Army troops, you still get there. It's not like going to the store for bread.
    1. +2
      19 January 2026 05: 44
      Despite all my antipathy towards "whites", I completely agree with you.
      1. +1
        19 January 2026 15: 13
        Then Napoleon's flight in 1812 can be considered the "Great Retreat to the West..."
        1. +6
          19 January 2026 15: 20
          Quote: yumico
          Then Napoleon's flight in 1812 can be considered the "Great Retreat to the West..."


          Napoleon was effectively fleeing. Napoleon's army arrived at the border completely incapacitated (except for the Old Guard).
          But here, Voitsehovsky brought a combat-ready army, and the distance was 2,5 times greater. And Siberian frosts were -50 degrees below zero, not European ones.
          1. -5
            19 January 2026 16: 00
            Quote from kromer
            Napoleon was effectively fleeing. Napoleon's army arrived at the border completely incapacitated (except for the Old Guard).
            And then Voitsehovsky brought in a combat-ready army,

            Napoleon defeated the Russian army at Maloyaroslavets, where Kutuzov retreated for two days on foot after the battle, at Krasnoye, where almost all of Napoleon's corps broke through the encirclement, and at the Berezina, where the Russians, having forced a counter-battle on Napoleon, fled to the western bank of the Berezina in such disarray that they were unable to burn the bridges across the unfrozen floodplains of the turbulent rivers, which alone could have led to the destruction of the Grand Army without a general battle while attempting to ford dozens of marshy floodplains.
            1. VLR
              +2
              19 January 2026 17: 55
              The French believe Napoleon won the Battle of Maloyaroslavets. However, they also believe that it was from Maloyaroslavets, not Moscow, that his army's tragic retreat began. Ségur later told veterans of the Grande Armée:
              "Do you remember that ill-fated battlefield where the conquest of the world stopped, where 20 years of continuous victories crumbled to dust, where the great collapse of our happiness began?"
              1. -2
                19 January 2026 20: 06
                Quote: VlR
                Segur later told veterans of the Grande Armée:
                Ségur's book is considered somewhat unreliable. His story of a wounded man without legs surviving by hiding behind the corpse of a horse is quite extraordinary. The memoirs of someone who actually served in the Second St. Petersburg Militia are permeated with fear, anticipating whether infection will set in and death will follow the wound, or whether the body will overcome the infection and the pus will disinfect the wound. Her account certainly flatters me as a Russian, but in this regard, the Soviet film "Kutuzov" is more emotional. In it, in response to his marshals' bickering about the reasons for their failures, the actor playing Napoleon utters the line that the decision to start a war against Russia was already a mistake. Incidentally, Napoleon diligently avoided war with Russia, but his emotionality and overestimation of his genius pushed him to execute the Duke of Égienne, and his unwillingness to accept Russia's violation of the Continental Blockade provoked him to decide to fight Russia. Normal relations between Russia and Europe inevitably lead to Russia's rise if it is governed by adequate politicians like Peter the Great, Catherine II, Alexander II, or Putin. The desire to pacify and contain Russia led to the downfall of Napoleon, Wilhelm, and Hitler. Why belittle Napoleon's talent and underestimate the good fortune and greatness of the Russian generals who defeated France in a war that was difficult for Russia until the capture of Paris?
                1. +2
                  20 January 2026 12: 57
                  Quote: gsev
                  Peter I, Catherine II, Alexander II, or Putin

                  An interesting selection...
                  1. 0
                    20 January 2026 13: 34
                    Quote: Senior Sailor
                    An interesting selection...

                    I was referring to Alexander III. Under him, Russia's industrial growth began. Under Alexander II, there was a decline of approximately 20-30%—very reminiscent of the industrial collapse under Yeltsin. Although under Alexander II, Primorsky and Amur regions were annexed, and the Caucasian War, which Nicholas II had unsuccessfully waged throughout his reign, was won. Who are you confused about: Putin or the other characters?
                    1. +1
                      20 January 2026 15: 08
                      I meant Alexander 3.

                      I wouldn't say that this made the series more logical, but... yeah, yeah)))
                      Quote: gsev
                      Under him, the growth of Russian industry began.

                      And stagnation in the army and navy.
                      Quote: gsev
                      Under Alexander II there was a decline of approximately 20-30% - very reminiscent of the industrial catastrophe under Yeltsin.

                      Under the Liberator, large-scale reforms were carried out, which inevitably impacted economic indicators. In principle, yes. The old industry was destroyed, but the tricky part was that leaving it as it was was impossible. Because artisans and assigned peasants couldn't produce the necessary equipment.
                      Quote: gsev
                      The Caucasian War, which Nicholas II won,

                      You got the number wrong again)))
                      Quote: gsev
                      Who confuses you, Putin or the other characters?

                      Uh... well, he doesn't really fit in either. Especially in the second iteration.
                      1. -1
                        20 January 2026 15: 18
                        Quote: Senior Sailor
                        Uh... well, he doesn't really fit in either. Especially in the second iteration.

                        Is drone production up and running? It seems like a Starlink analogue is even on the way. Just six months ago, it seemed like Russia's technical vision was a complete disaster. And today, drones can mine Ukrainian railways. Perhaps Putin is much more successful than Stalin. Who else on your list do you have complaints about? By the way, Zyuganov didn't even dare promise to expel Chubais from Russia. But Putin forced him to flee to the West.
                      2. +3
                        20 January 2026 15: 30
                        Quote: gsev
                        Is drone production established?

                        Yes, in that sense, you can compare him to Pyotr Alekseevich. First, he'd bring things to a complete standstill... and then heroically overcome them.
                        Quote: gsev
                        Perhaps Putin is much more successful than Stalin.

                        I don’t think that the IVS screwed up the Russian Spring.
                        Quote: gsev
                        By the way, Zyuganov

                        Found the leader...
                        Quote: gsev
                        did not even dare to promise to expel Chubais from Russia.

                        Make promises?
                        Quote: gsev
                        And Putin forced him to flee to the West.

                        He tried for twenty years... And who, may I ask, appointed him to RUSNANO?
                      3. -4
                        20 January 2026 15: 43
                        Quote: Senior Sailor

                        I don’t think that the IVS screwed up the Russian Spring.

                        Stalin made a major mistake. From 1947 onward, he, Beria, Belkin, and Abakumov effectively became agents of influence for the American intelligence services, carrying out repressions against the national-patriotic wing of the Central European Communist Parties, initiated by Allen Dulles. This mistake later sparked unrest in Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary. Informed people convinced me that Putin was the only sane democratic and liberal (in our original, good sense of the term) politician, compared to everyone else, including Yavlinsky.
          2. -3
            19 January 2026 22: 42
            Combat-ready? Your skull isn't weighing on your brain—20 alive, half of them wounded. Out of more than a hundred thousand who went on the campaign. Let's not forget that the participants in this campaign are traitors to the Russian people, just in case.
            1. 0
              20 January 2026 02: 56
              Yes, 20-25 thousand combat-ready. The divisions retained 1,5-2 personnel and were consolidated into regiments.
              1. 0
                20 January 2026 12: 02
                Well then, reread the primary sources again, and don't resort to Wikipedia and "according to other sources." The original documents even state that up to 150 people took part in this "campaign." And only about 20 made it to the final point, of which only 9 survived. You anti-Sovietists can piss in their eyes, you still can't even "see" YOUR OWN facts.
  3. +7
    19 January 2026 04: 22
    Construction was never completed, especially since Soviet power was established in Baku and Grozny in the spring of 1920. However, due to inertia, work at Algemba continued until August 1921.


    Problems encountered during construction:
    - Lack of pipes. Only fifteen miles of the required five hundred were in stock, and the factory that produces them was idle.
    - Lack of storage capacity for oil. The field was short of storage capacity, and the oil had to be dumped into the sand.
    - The hardships of work in a waterless desert region. Workers died of typhus and cholera.
    - There were transportation problems. There was a shortage of building materials, and it was difficult to deliver them along the route.
    And here's the kicker: the project was deemed economically pointless.

    By the way, there is still no railway or oil pipeline at the site of the Algemba construction.
    1. +2
      19 January 2026 19: 55
      Quote from kromer
      By the way, there is still no railway or oil pipeline at the site of the Algemba construction.

      They built from the side of Aleksandrov Gai and Emba
      The embankment was filled from Aleksandrov Gai for 18 km, the rails were laid for 12.
      Further on there is a flat steppe - without the slightest hint of construction.
      Aleksandrov Gai couldn't feed several thousand people for very long. The medical sector was a complete disaster – Aleksandrov Gai had two doctors before the revolution, two paramedics, and a midwife. It's unknown whether they remained during the Algemba period.
      Transportation by rail from Saratov to Aleksandrov Gai did not create any difficulties - the trains were running
      The number of builders is unknown, but it is absolutely certain that it was not 45,000 - there was physically nowhere to accommodate such a number, there are no dugouts for such a number, and without dugouts or permanent houses in the steppe in winter, it is impossible to survive.
      The fact that there was no major funding there (Wiki writes about 1 billion) is true, there was nowhere to spend it.
      It seems to me that this was a financial scam by a small group of people who had access to the budget, a simple embezzlement.
  4. +2
    19 January 2026 09: 08
    Mate Zalka, under the name "General Lukic"

    In the USSR, Matvey Mikhailovich Zalka, a Soviet writer, completed "Cavalry Raid," "Apples," and the novel "Doberdo" just before his death in Spain, where
    From 1936, under the name of "General Lukács," he commanded the 12th International Brigade. Lukács, not Lukic. Alexey Vladimirovich Eisner (1905-1984) was Mate Zalka's adjutant during the Spanish people's war against fascism, and is also the author of the book "The Man with Three Names," and there is no mention there that Mate Zalka's pseudonym was "General Lukic."
    1. VLR
      +1
      19 January 2026 13: 43
      Yes, that's a typo. Thank you for noticing it, we'll fix it.
      1. +2
        19 January 2026 18: 23
        Valery, it’s a pity that your article doesn’t mention a word about Frunze leading the defeat of Makhno’s Insurgent Army and the detachments of Yuri Tyutyunnik, for which he was awarded a second Order of the Red Banner in 1924.
        1. VLR
          +1
          19 January 2026 18: 25
          There will be more to say about the solution to the "Makhno and Petliura problem"
  5. +1
    19 January 2026 09: 28
    Basmachi... The movement is nationalistic in nature against the Russians... By the way, among the Basmachi there are many Russian officers and Cossacks from Annenkov's defeated detachment, who made their way to Fergana from China.

    These are the white "patriots" and "defenders of the Russian people from the Bolsheviks."
    1. +3
      19 January 2026 10: 04
      These are the white "patriots" and "defenders of the Russian people from the Bolsheviks."
      I don't think so. More likely, they were fighting for their past lives and choosing *allies* based on the principle of *with anyone, but against the Soviets*. The same principle applied during the Great Patriotic War in relation to those who fought on the side of the Nazis. hi
      1. +2
        19 January 2026 10: 35
        Tell me, Sergey, did those same people who "fought for their past lives" when they invaded Soviet Belarus, Ukraine, Transcaucasia, and Central Asia, with allies chosen based on the principle of "with anyone, but against the Soviets"—did they sow kindness, wisdom, and eternal goodness in the occupied villages, hamlets, auls, and kishlaks? For example: did they distribute livestock brought from abroad to peasants and farmers? Did they dig wells and canals for irrigation? And so on.
        1. 0
          19 January 2026 10: 54
          sowed the good, the reasonable and the eternal?
          Alexey! Of course not! What motivated them? In my opinion, it was banal... revenge! hi
          1. +7
            19 January 2026 11: 25
            Revenge for your past life? When you kept the people in darkness and ignorance? Are these the same people we lost and now we all whine about? Oh, what a shame they didn't win! How we long for darkness and ignorance again. Darkness and ignorance have arrived. Few rejoice, except for the wicked and shape-shifting.
            1. +2
              19 January 2026 12: 40
              Revenge for your past life?
              I would put it differently. Revenge for the fact that they were deprived of their former life.
              Are these the type of people we lost and now we all whine about?
              I don't think we're all whining about them. bully
              How we long to return to darkness and ignorance.
              No, not at all and absolutely.
              Oh, what a pity that they didn't win?
              Did I write about this? bully
              1. -2
                19 January 2026 13: 59
                I would put it differently. Revenge for the fact that they were deprived of their former life.

                To keep the people in darkness and ignorance, or were those we're talking about purely engaged in enlightenment? They went out into the community, handing out worn-out tailcoats to peasants and farmers for work in the fields. They were engaged in a purely noble cause: revenge. laughing And I’ll note that I didn’t formulate anything; my posts are based solely on your formulations. bully
            2. 0
              19 January 2026 13: 44
              Quote: parusnik
              Revenge for your past life? When you kept the people in darkness and ignorance? Are these the same people we lost and now we all whine about? Oh, what a shame they didn't win! How we long for darkness and ignorance again. Darkness and ignorance have arrived. Few rejoice, except for the wicked and shape-shifting.

              So this is the legacy of the USSR. Who is the true successor to Yeltsin's legacy, the one who dismembered the USSR? Or are you going to say he has nothing to do with the optimization of medicine, education, and ideology?
              Moreover, the collapse of the USSR is a natural historical process, so no one fought for it.
              1. 0
                19 January 2026 14: 03
                So this is the legacy of the USSR.

                What Soviet legacy are you talking about, please clarify? We're discussing the Basmachi and those who joined them here. What are you talking about?
                1. 0
                  19 January 2026 14: 05
                  Quote: parusnik
                  So this is the legacy of the USSR.

                  What Soviet legacy are you talking about, please clarify? We're discussing the Basmachi and those who joined them here. What are you talking about?

                  You wrote it in such a way that one can think about today's time.
                  1. -1
                    19 January 2026 14: 06
                    No, I didn't write about today's time, that's how you read it or you wanted to read it that way. hi
      2. +3
        19 January 2026 16: 06
        Quote: ArchiPhil
        The same principle applied during the Great Patriotic War in relation to those who fought on the side of the Nazis.

        Incidentally, this principle is still in effect today. Novaya Gazeta's coverage of events in the North Caucasus was directed by D. Dudayev's secretary, Ms. Aset, through her agent, A. Politkovskaya. These women transformed Novaya Gazeta, which had a large Jewish staff, into a PR agency recruiting suicide bombers for the Islamist underground. Only Politkovskaya's daring dramatically curtailed the activity of this collective terrorist agent.
  6. -2
    19 January 2026 10: 00
    Novitsky:

    Frunze, since he could not imagine himself in the role of army commander without having any preliminary training or combat practice for this. I had a completely different opinion.
    On what basis, if he didn’t know him and really wasn’t involved in anything other than armed banditry.
    What blatant flattery.
    And yes, it was Trotsky who saved the Eastern Front, not Frunze, about which the author does not say a word.
    Hungarians, as a rule, fought for the Reds – over 60 men! And both sides note the exceptional resilience and reliability of the Red Hungarian units.
    Nothing surprising—these Russophobes continued what WWI started, fighting, as before, against Russia. The atrocities committed by these foreign mercenaries, as well as by sadistic Baltic mercenaries, against Russians in both the Civil War and the Great Patriotic War, are countless.

    ,
    The 25th (Chapayev) Division was sent to the Polish front
    The author tactfully does not indicate his commander-Kutyakova, who turned out to be a German spy and was shot in 1938, and also a member of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR.

    Frunze was an excellent organizer, but military affairs were handled by...
    professionals.

    By the way, being a young citizen of Russia, during the German attack on it, he not only did not go to the front, but also waged a treacherous fight against his homeland
    1. +4
      20 January 2026 14: 31
      as well as Baltic mercenaries
      - Why are the country's citizens mercenaries? The Baltics were part of the Russian Empire before the Revolution, in case you've forgotten. So, half of those fighting in the Civil War (on both sides) could be considered "mercenaries."
      1. -2
        20 January 2026 14: 52
        Quote from shikin
        The Baltics were part of the Russian Empire before the revolution, in case you forgot.

        The Council of People's Commissars recognized independence Pribaltova back in 1918
        1. +3
          20 January 2026 14: 55
          So what? Are you going to count Rokossovsky as a mercenary too? And many others (besides the Balts)—Poles, Finns.
          And the same Vatsetis.
          1. +1
            21 January 2026 14: 09
            Quote from shikin
            So what? Are you going to count Rokossovsky as a mercenary too?

            Was Rokossovsky a Polish citizen in 1918? No.

            And the Latvians, citizens of independent Latvia and even fighting there for Soviet power, when they got their asses kicked, went to work as mercenaries in Russia.
            1. 0
              21 January 2026 15: 46
              Finland also had a struggle for Soviet power, in which Tsarist General Mannerheim didn't stand on ceremony. Are those Finns also "mercenaries"? Or perhaps you'll also consider the Spaniards, led by Dolores Ibárruri, mercenaries after Franco's victory? And her son, a Red Army lieutenant in WWII?
              And these Latvians - "mercenaries" - did they go back to Latvia, or did they become Russian citizens?
              1. -1
                21 January 2026 16: 43
                And these Latvians - "mercenaries" - did they go back to Latvia?

                Very many.
                Quote from shikin
                became citizens of the Russian Federation

                Thank God, they didn't live to see Russia)))
                1. -1
                  21 January 2026 18: 43
                  I simply shortened it to "RSFSR," but it doesn't change the essence. Two S's are gone, and not everyone is happy about it.
                  1. +1
                    21 January 2026 18: 51
                    Quote from shikin
                    I just shortened it to RSFSR, but the essence doesn't change.

                    It's changing, and very dramatically. Today's Russian Federation is neither Soviet nor socialist.
                    And I repeat
                    Quote: Senior Sailor
                    Most of the surviving Latvian Riflemen did not wish to live in Soviet Russia (for which they had fought so stubbornly), but preferred to return to bourgeois Latvia, where they settled in quite comfortably. Some even served as military commanders in the national army (Manguls, Gregors, Auzans, and a few others).
                    1. 0
                      21 January 2026 18: 58
                      Perhaps. But quite a bit remains.
                      And during the civil war, all of them were definitely not citizens of Latvia.
                      And the fact that the essence of the Russian Federation hasn't changed—I meant Russia and the federation. And the fact that it's neither Soviet nor socialist—yes, the loss of those letters has greatly altered the country's inner essence.
            2. +2
              21 January 2026 15: 55
              Moreover, "on February 8, 1918, the German offensive began. The several regiments of Latvian riflemen remaining in the unoccupied part of Latvia began to hastily retreat to the central and northwestern regions of Soviet Russia (by February 22, the last Latvian regiment had left Latvian territory)."
              And about the "declaration of independence" of Latvia: "Under the conditions of actual occupation by German troops, on November 17, 1918, the Latvian Provisional National Council and the Democratic Bloc agreed to jointly form a provisional parliament."
              So the Latvian riflemen were never citizens of bourgeois Latvia.
      2. 0
        20 January 2026 15: 18
        Quote from shikin
        Why are the country's citizens mercenaries?

        I understand Olgovich to be implying that after the Treaty of Riga, most of the surviving Latvian Riflemen chose not to live in Soviet Russia (for which they had fought so stubbornly) but chose to return to bourgeois Latvia, where they settled down quite well. Some even served as commanders in the national army (Mangul, Gregor, Auzan, and a few others).
        Quote from shikin
        So in "mercenaries" can enroll half of the fighting in the civil war

        Necessary!
        1. +2
          21 January 2026 14: 21
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          As I understand it, Olgovich is hinting that after the conclusion of the Riga Treaty, the majority of the Latvian riflemen who survived until that time did not want to live in Soviet Russia (for which they fought so stubbornly), but preferred to return to Bourgeois Latvia, where they settled down quite well.

          On the approaches to Latvia, red flags, ribbons, and the like were thrown into the ditches and replaced with national ones. People fought for money. And they hated Russians, too.

          But they were also officially citizens of Latvia - by the decree of the Council of People's Commissars of 1918, Latvia was recognized as independent.
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          Some even served as military leaders in the national army.

          and in the SS.

          Some became recipients of the Order of the Red Banner and the Nazi Iron Cross.

          The chief prosecutor of Nazi Germany was also a Red Rifleman in Russia.
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          Necessary!

          At the registration point in the Red Army, a man is asked:
          -For what ideals of the Soviet government are you joining the army?

          -Well, for 15 rubles a day.

          So they walked - the Chinese, the Estonians, and there was nothing to eat.
  7. +1
    19 January 2026 10: 01
    It's worth noting, incidentally, that during the civil war, the Czechs and Slovaks, with rare exceptions like Jaroslav Hašek, sided with the Whites, while the Hungarians, as a rule, fought for the Reds—over 60 of them! And both sides noted the exceptional resilience and reliability of the Red Hungarian units.

    The most combat-ready unit of the 25th Chapayev Division was the international cavalry regiment (made up of Hungarian hussars captured during WWI), named after Wienerman, their first commander. Hussar sabers always defeated Cossack sabers in a horse-drawn battle.
    1. Ash
      +1
      21 January 2026 14: 19
      I just watched the 67 film "Stars and Soldiers." It was directed by a Hungarian, and our guys from Mosfilm. The most memorable characters were played by M. Kazakov and S. Nikonenko, and a young Alentova under a different name. Even our all-powerful (Dark) Demon (Fire) made his mark in the credits, though I never got a good look at him in the film. Still, it was quite instructive.
      1. 0
        21 January 2026 16: 47
        Quote: Ash
        but I never really got a good look at it in the film.

        He was still young, he hadn't really grown a moustache yet)))
  8. +4
    19 January 2026 10: 47
    In March and April 1919, Frunze was distracted by suppressing large-scale peasant unrest in the Samara and Simbirsk provinces, also known as the Chapan War. Meanwhile, Kolchak's armies were advancing from the east. The number of peasant rebels was large, but their forces were quickly and easily routed. By late April, Frunze's troops had launched an offensive against Kolchak, inflicting a series of defeats on him, so that very soon the former admiral's armies could only defend themselves.

    The author could have explored the history of the Chapan Uprising more fully, in terms of Frunze's decisions to suppress it. It was truly a major peasant uprising of the time against the policies implemented by the Bolsheviks. The distortion of the very idea by those directly responsible for it triggered the uprising; gross misjudgments of the situation and propaganda accelerated the speed and radicalization of the rebels, despite the real chance of curbing the escalating discontent.
    The political necessity of suppressing any uprising is obvious, and it had to be suppressed, otherwise power would not be retained.
    But the form of suppression and the repressions that followed the suppression, which had a punitive form and methods, do not paint Frunze in a good light either.

    The rapid rise of military leaders during a civil war is a virtually inevitable phenomenon in all countries where such a war is underway. However, Frunze lacked any real military talent, no new forms and tactics of armed conflict, and no new aspects of operational art, despite his successes at the front. It would be interesting to read the author's account of his work, separating it from that of the military specialists who accompanied him throughout the war.
    The article itself, given its vast historical context, is interesting. Frunze's figure is controversial and unique, though it seems we already know everything about him. Perhaps the author will return to this Civil War commander again, in an article about a more specific operation, where we can see him from different perspectives, particularly in the suppression of the Chapan Uprising.
    1. +5
      19 January 2026 11: 21
      Quote: Vasily_Ostrovsky
      But the form of suppression and the repressions that followed the suppression, which had a punitive form and methods, do not paint Frunze in a good light either.

      Whether they paint or not... this isn't a game of daisy-maiden, this is civil war and... famine. When the peasants were given land for free and fought for it, some of the newly minted landowners decided not only to thank the new government for the land and share the harvest with the army fighting for their well-being and the starving population in the cities, but they began to destroy food detachments, and with brutal cruelty... for which these farmsteads got what they deserved... you give me, and I'll give you the devil, they've become too cunning. They were so cunning that they later slaughtered the cattle and buried the grain when they organized collective farms and punished themselves with famine... cunning farmsteads
      1. +1
        19 January 2026 11: 30
        Quote: Konnick
        Whether they paint or not... this is not a game of daisy, this is a civil war and... famine.

        The most difficult work can be done while remaining human. The trigger for the uprising was not the government's policies, but their implementation by certain overzealous commissars, security officers, and food requisitioning detachments—the list is well-known. Robbery, drunken beatings of peasants, mindless violence, and permissiveness are the cause, and the government confirmed this.

        Quote: Konnick
        When the peasants were given land for free and fought for it, some of the newly minted landowners decided not only to thank the new government for the land and share the harvest with the army fighting for their well-being and the starving population in the cities, but they began to destroy the food detachments, and with brutal cruelty.

        This is completely untrue. The community already had its own land, and no one gave anything to the peasants... They supported the Red Army and the Soviet government...
        A very primitive view of history, unfortunately – we fought for them... The peasantry in Russia was a resource for the proletariat, for the cities and industry. It got so bad that passports weren't issued until the 60s, to keep people from fleeing the villages...
        1. -2
          19 January 2026 11: 42
          Quote: Vasily_Ostrovsky
          This is completely untrue. The community already had its own land, and no one gave the peasants anything...

          This is something new...but what about the landowners' lands? It looks like your ancestors were from the Holodomor...
          1. +2
            19 January 2026 12: 10
            Quote: Konnick
            It looks like your ancestors were from the Holodomor famine.

            My ancestors should not be touched, personal attacks do not do you honor
            There was a lot of shouting about land, the slogans were beautiful... But where is that land? One can recall collectivization, and also about farm laborers in Soviet times – farm laborers lasted right up until 32-34.
            The Tsarist landowners left, and the "Reds" arrived, also distributing land to themselves under the banner of "for Soviet power" and "for the Bolsheviks." This ideological slant was widely exploited by crooks.
            1. -2
              19 January 2026 14: 09
              The Tsarist landowners left, and the "Reds" arrived, also distributing lands for themselves under the banner of "for the power of the Soviets" and "for the Bolsheviks."

              And name the main Red Bolshevik landowners by name and surname.
              1. +5
                19 January 2026 14: 35
                You can choose from the list of outstanding Bolsheviks yourself, you can start with Trotsky and go all the way down to the village elder - a party member... the riots didn't just happen across the country, the main initiator was a protégé of the new government, who imagined himself a tsar within the boundaries of his village or volost
                1. -2
                  19 January 2026 15: 46
                  How many hectares of land did Trotsky, Dzerzhinsky, etc. personally own? And what documents confirm this?
            2. The comment was deleted.
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
        2. +4
          19 January 2026 16: 19
          Until the 60s, passports were not issued to peasants

          To be honest, Vasily, they were issued to those who worked on state farms. There was an interesting nuance here, though: in the 1954 passports of my mother's Ivanovo parents, who lived in the village of Peshchery and worked at the state farm spinning and weaving mill in the village of Lomy, the social status column listed them as "individual farmer." But my father's relatives, who worked in the village as collective farmers, didn't have passports, so despite their "vacation" certificates from the collective farm, they were effectively attending my parents' wedding "semi-illegally."
          1. +4
            19 January 2026 16: 46
            My mother moved from the village to the city of Ivanovo after seventh grade to study at a pharmaceutical technical school; no one was held back at that age. Her birth certificate was her primary document. It was used to record her residence registration. She received her passport in the city.
            Another way for village girls to obtain a passport was to marry a city man. For men, besides enrolling in school, another effective way to escape the village was the Soviet Army. Some, like my father, enrolled in military academies, while others, after demobilization, found mass jobs in construction, factories, the police, or enlisted for extended military service. Less ambitious residents usually remained in the villages, and the rural population gradually declined anyway.
          2. +5
            19 January 2026 17: 44
            Quote: Richard
            To be honest, Vasily, they did give it out to those who worked on state farms.

            To be honest, colleague, a collective farm and a state farm are essentially different types of ownership and management. A state farm is practically an agricultural factory, and its workers (remember, they weren't called "state farm workers" but "workers") were no longer peasants. You yourself, in your comment, describe the difference with personal experience.
            1. +6
              19 January 2026 18: 00
              the workers of the state farm were no longer peasants
              .
              That's the inexplicable oxymoron of those times—they were essentially no longer peasants, but workers. And de jure, they were individual peasants. I can only assume that this was due to the registration stamp.
              1. +1
                19 January 2026 18: 15
                As you may recall, the gradual (or not so gradual) replacement of collective farms with state farms failed miserably for obvious reasons. The collective farms were unwilling to transform, and no leader wanted to risk crushing such a large population in calmer times, after the end of the era of harsh leaders. Otherwise, the prospect of a repeat of the famine or a complete dependence on imports would have been real.
                Labor productivity in agriculture was very low throughout the entire period of the USSR and lagged behind world leaders by 3 to 8 times...
                Lately I've been reading a lot of archives from the 20s and 30s and up to the 60s in the Far East, and the picture in agriculture there is so... not sad, but simply horrifying, I never thought it could be like this...
                1. +3
                  20 January 2026 10: 18
                  I don't know, but in many regions, state farms' production indicators were better than those of collective farms, especially before the mass conversion of collective farms into state farms under Khrushchev. Overall, state farm workers generally had a higher standard of living than collective farmers. There were regions where state farms predominated, such as Tuva, where there were only a few collective farms. Incidentally, state farms also predominated in the Leningrad region from the 60s onward, especially near Leningrad.
                  "The gradual (or not so gradual) replacement of collective farms with state farms has gone down the drain." Well, I wouldn't say that. Under Khrushchev, a significant number of collective farms were converted into state farms. And often, it was the lagging collective farms that were converted.
              2. +4
                19 January 2026 20: 09
                However, villagers who worked on the railroad or MTS had a different entry in the fourth column, "Social Status," of their 1953 passports: "Employees." Unlike collective farmers and state farm workers, villagers working for the MTS and the linear railway were entitled to service allotments of arable land and up to one hectare of hayfield per family. Service allotments were granted only for the duration of the employment relationship, effectively tying those who received them to their place of work.
          3. +4
            20 January 2026 10: 10
            Initially, there were other exceptions. Passports were issued to everyone living within a hundred-kilometer border zone, in the suburbs of major cities like Moscow, Kyiv, Leningrad, and Kharkiv. In the three Baltic republics, all rural residents also had passports.
            1. +4
              20 January 2026 13: 52
              Thanks, Sergey, I didn't know about that. Great clarification!
      2. +7
        19 January 2026 14: 03
        Quote: Konnick
        Quote: Vasily_Ostrovsky
        But the form of suppression and the repressions that followed the suppression, which had a punitive form and methods, do not paint Frunze in a good light either.

        Whether they paint or not... this isn't a game of daisy-maiden, this is civil war and... famine. When the peasants were given land for free and fought for it, some of the new landowners decided not only to thank the new government for the land but also to share their harvest with the army.
        What is a peasant supposed to live on? Or do you think he has hectares of land there?
        1. +1
          19 January 2026 17: 48
          Quote: Panin (Michman)
          What is a peasant supposed to live on? Or do you think he has hectares of land there?

          According to the apologists of Bolshevism, the peasant must simply die for the sake of a bright future, which he will not see and to which he is not allowed
          1. +3
            19 January 2026 18: 42
            Quote: Vasily_Ostrovsky
            Quote: Panin (Michman)
            What is a peasant supposed to live on? Or do you think he has hectares of land there?

            According to the apologists of Bolshevism, the peasant must simply die for the sake of a bright future, which he will not see and to which he is not allowed

            By the way, where did you put your article "Manuscripts Don't Burn"?
            1. +4
              19 January 2026 18: 46
              Quote: Panin (Michman)
              By the way, where did you put your article "Manuscripts Don't Burn"?

              The editors removed the material as controversial. Editorial decisions are not subject to criticism; such are the rules.
          2. -5
            20 January 2026 10: 56
            And according to the apologists of capitalism/anti-Bolshevism, what should a peasant do for a bright future?
  9. +5
    19 January 2026 10: 58
    It is worth noting, by the way, that during the civil war, the Czechs and Slovaks, with rare exceptions like Jaroslav Hasek, ended up on the side of the Whites, while the Hungarians, as a rule, fought for the Reds – over 60 thousand people!

    It seems that this conclusion is somewhat hasty. For example, in the Far East, there were quite a few Czechoslovak units that defected to the Reds.
    My assessment of the Hungarians' and Czechs' resilience seems to me to be in keeping with the reality of the situation; as a rule, they fought to the bitter end. One of the reasons was likely that they weren't citizens of the Russian Empire and treated war as a craft. Additionally, the idea, which was somewhat detached, was present; the personal component of hatred was absent or greatly diminished.
  10. -1
    19 January 2026 11: 19
    “Here everything is concentrated in one place: the covenants of the past, the poison of the present, and the mysteries of the future.”
    Saltykov-Shchedrin M.E. Dried vobla.
    You couldn't say it better than the writer about the article.
    There are tons of articles online about the Lbishchensky raid. Those who are interested can read them! And those who aren't can study the Short Course of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks).😋
  11. +5
    19 January 2026 11: 54
    In the summer of 1918, Frunze was appointed military commander of the Ivanovo-Voznesensk province, and then of the entire Yaroslavl military district.
    military Commissioner - The author missed an important word.
    A commissar in the Soviet army was usually a Bolshevik attached to a military specialist in a commanding position—a former RIA officer. He ensured that the former did no harm or sabotage. He also protected him from attacks by particularly zealous Red partisan commanders or former non-commissioned officers.
    Frunze served as a commissar to the commander of the Yaroslavl Military District, F.F. Novitsky, a former general of the RIA, who graduated from the Pavlovsk Military School and then the Nikolaev Academy of the General Staff and by that time had extensive experience in staff and field work.
    Then, after his appointment to the Ural Front, Frunze took Novitsky with him as his closest aide—chief of staff. And when Frunze was appointed commander of the Turkestan Front, Novitsky again became his chief of staff.
    1. VLR
      +2
      19 January 2026 12: 08
      Yes, that's right, the word "commissar" is missing, we'll insert it. Thank you.
  12. 0
    19 January 2026 13: 32
    The author has once again become engrossed in compiling Soviet historiography, covering much that is irrelevant to Frunze's direct activities, without even attempting a rudimentary analysis. As a result (in my opinion), the article is boring, and most importantly, it doesn't provide the key to answering the question: how did Frunze, who had never served a single day in the army before his appointment to the front, manage to have such a successful military career?

    When the government of the RSFSR decided it needed to form a regular army, a certain difficulty arose. An army had to be class-based, that is, composed of workers and peasants. But Lenin understood perfectly well that any army must be led by military professionals. These were former RIA officers—elements alien to the class. A forced decision was then made: initially, we would use former officers, but assign them trusted Bolshevik commissars to vigilantly monitor the loyalty of the former officers and prevent them from sabotaging or harming them.
    Frunze's military career began precisely in this way: he was a party nominee and initially served as a "commissar" under the commander of the Yaroslavl Military District, F.F. Novitsky.
    But then something quite unusual happened: the Party sent Frunze to the Ural Front, and not as a commissar to some former commander, but as a commander, and a high-ranking one at that – an army commander. And yet, at that point, Frunze had no military experience whatsoever.
    So what was the key to the success of the victories of the troops entrusted to him literally from the first months of the war and his rapid military career thereafter?

    It's safe to assume that while still a commissar in the Yaroslavl Military District, Frunze became close to its commander, former RIA General F.F. Novitsky, who had graduated from the General Staff Academy in 1895 and had extensive military experience. A trust, even mutual sympathy, developed between these two completely different men. And after receiving his appointment to the front, Frunze "dragged" Novitsky along with him, who became his personal "brain of the army."
    Novitsky, as General of Staff, developed plans for offensive operations and advised Frunze on how best to implement them. Frunze, in turn, implemented these plans, ensuring that his subordinate commanders faithfully executed their orders. He also maintained an iron grip on all those eccentric Bonapartes and Chapayevs born of the Civil War. Frunze, being a well-known Bolshevik, also had direct access to Trotsky and even Lenin. This undoubtedly helped him ensure the timely replenishment of the troops entrusted to him with weapons, ammunition, and combat personnel.
    As a result, a kind of successful tandem Frunze-Novitsky emerged.
    Naturally, Novitsky became Frunze's first military instructor. Mikhail Vasilyevich was undoubtedly a capable student, and by the end of the war, he himself was a military specialist. And, apparently, he came to the conclusion that military affairs were his calling, not a temporary burden.
    Again, we must not forget that at one time Frunze's direct, and then immediate superior, was another graduate of the Nikolaev Academy of the General Staff, S.S. Kamenev, who apparently also took part in the formation of the future famous Soviet military leader M.V. Frunze.

    After the end of the Civil War, the participation of military specialists and their significant contribution to the success of the battles was gradually hushed up, and ultimately their names remained unknown to the general public. Furthermore, many military specialists were "purged" in 37-38, along with many Civil War heroes who turned out to be foreign spies.
    And in Soviet historiography, the heroes of the Civil War were exclusively communists, and the most famous were those who did not survive until 1937.
    The only exceptions were Budyonny, Timoshenko, and Voroshilov. But that's another topic.
    1. -1
      19 January 2026 14: 19
      So, M.V. Frunze didn't educate himself? He was simply a natural. smile
      1. -2
        19 January 2026 15: 14
        So, M.V. Frunze didn't educate himself? He was simply a natural.
        Who's doing well?
    2. +3
      19 January 2026 14: 31
      In many ways, they're right, but Frunze certainly had outstanding abilities. But not all Kraskoms had them; many remained at the rank of sergeant major at best...
      Even figures like Budyonny are not exactly a model of military thought.
      1. -2
        20 January 2026 11: 03
        "Budyonny is not a paragon of military thought, not at all," and then what? Wait a minute, this "not a paragon," as you say, is a FULL Cavalier of the St. George's Cross, the organizer of the First Cavalry Army, and he gave "real" soldiers like Denikin and the rest a good beating. What more do you want?!
      2. +1
        22 January 2026 04: 19
        Quote: Vasily_Ostrovsky
        Even figures like Budyonny are not exactly a model of military thought.

        The Germans seemed to think differently. lol
  13. +2
    19 January 2026 15: 06
    Thank you for the article. The circumstances of Chapaev's death were a revelation to me—since childhood, I'd always thought, from watching a film, that he was attacked in some village, on the front lines, which is why it was so sudden.
    Let me fantasize a little:
    In March and April 1919, Frunze was distracted by suppressing large-scale peasant unrest in the Samara and Simbirsk provinces, also known as the Chapan War. At the same time, Kolchak's armies were advancing from the east. The number of peasant rebels was large, but their forces were quickly and easily defeated, and by the end of April, Frunze's troops launched an offensive against Kolchak, inflicting a series of defeats on him.

    Did the crushing of peasant uprisings serve as a fuel for the units of the article's subject? After all, it's been noted more than once that many prisoners were mobilized into the Red Army upon capture. After all, there was no need to round them up—they were here, ready, already fired upon. Perhaps this is precisely why:
    At Frunze's request, the Ivanovo Provincial Executive Committee sent a large group of Bolsheviks and non-party weavers to his disposal, from which a separate 220th regiment was formed.

    Perhaps this move was dictated by the need to have a reliable unit on hand that would definitely not defect to the enemy or run away.
  14. 0
    19 January 2026 15: 40
    From Barnaul and Novonikolaevsk (Novosibirsk), between 100 and 150 White Guards moved east – they were beaten by everyone:
    And my great-grandfathers. good
  15. -1
    19 January 2026 15: 51
    citizen Nicholas Romanov (former Emperor Nicholas II)
    The biggest traitor of Russia!!!
  16. +1
    19 January 2026 16: 01
    The Whites managed to assemble a cavalry strike force numbering between 1,200 and 2,000 men, and Colonel Timofey Sladkov was appointed to command it. His chief of staff, Nikolai Borodin, was also in this detachment.
    During the attack on Lbischensk, Borodin commanded the Whites' 6th Cavalry Division, and Sladkov the 2nd. This means the enemy attacked the city's garrison with two cavalry divisions simultaneously from several directions.
    According to one version, Chapaev was wounded in the arm; according to another, he was also seriously wounded in the stomach.
    The main reason for the defeat was criminal carelessness—there was a failure to post combat guards and the required number of outposts. Frunze repeatedly warned of the need for these measures in his orders.
    1. +3
      19 January 2026 18: 45
      Quote: Marrr
      The Whites managed to assemble a cavalry strike force numbering between 1,200 and 2,000 men, and Colonel Timofey Sladkov was appointed to command it. His chief of staff, Nikolai Borodin, was also in this detachment.
      During the attack on Lbischensk, Borodin commanded the Whites' 6th Cavalry Division, and Sladkov the 2nd. This means the enemy attacked the city's garrison with two cavalry divisions simultaneously from several directions.
      According to one version, Chapaev was wounded in the arm; according to another, he was also seriously wounded in the stomach.
      The main reason for the defeat was criminal carelessness—there was a failure to post combat guards and the required number of outposts. Frunze repeatedly warned of the need for these measures in his orders.

      I don't think outposts would have helped against two cavalry divisions. The main reason was the headquarters' distance from its division.
      1. +5
        19 January 2026 19: 01
        The outposts would have helped to detect the enemy's advance in advance, which would have made it possible to quickly withdraw the division headquarters from Lbischensk and, as a result, to remove it from the attack and preserve its personnel, along with Chapaev.
        During the Civil War, with its unpredictability and lack of stable lines of combat contact, the headquarters of all armies often had to flee, or more precisely, on horseback.
        By the way, this was also the case during the First World War. Shaposhnikov described in his memoirs how, during his time, all future officers, regardless of the branch of the military, were required to learn horse riding precisely for such occasions.
  17. +4
    19 January 2026 16: 44
    It should be noted, by the way, that during the civil war, the Czechs and Slovaks, with rare exceptions like Jaroslav Hasek, ended up on the side of the Whites, while the Hungarians, as a rule, fought for the Reds.

    An interesting point. In my opinion, the involvement of "foreign specialists" in the Civil War still awaits further investigation.
    I had the chance to visit the Revolution Museum in Sviyazhsk, where letters and memoirs from both the Whites and the Reds were preserved—very interesting reading. It's just a shame it reflects one of the most tragic chapters in our history.
    1. +5
      19 January 2026 19: 16
      There's a book like this, but it's quite rare: Armand Abramovich Müller. "In the Tribe of Revolution (1917-1920): Memories of a Commander of a Red Guard Internment Detachment." I knew the author as a child, and he talked about the paradox of the Austro-Hungarians fighting the White Czechs in the Cis-Baikal and Trans-Baikal regions.
      1. +3
        19 January 2026 19: 55
        Of course "In Flames..."
  18. +2
    19 January 2026 18: 00
    Yes, don't forget to detail the Crimean triumph. Especially how, just a few days after the liberation of Crimea (I think it wasn't even a week later), Semyon Karetnikov betrayed his former Makhnovist allies, issued them an unacceptable ultimatum, and surrounded and killed most of the corps.
    1. VLR
      +1
      19 January 2026 18: 18
      There will be two articles: the first is about the liberation of the peninsula, the second is about what happened after Wrangel's evacuation.
  19. +2
    19 January 2026 18: 25
    Frunze was not forgiven for his agreement with Wrangel's officers, his collaboration with Makhno, and most importantly, his position that all participants in the civil war must be forgiven and a life must be built together, both with the revolutionary classes and with the overthrown classes, as a single people, finding reasonable compromises.
    1. +5
      19 January 2026 19: 05
      Frunze was not forgiven
      Who exactly did not forgive and in what document is this reflected? belay

      I love this site - in the comments you always learn something new and previously unknown to historical science. laughing
    2. 0
      19 January 2026 19: 07
      They didn't forgive me, so what did they do? They ate me like a baby, who ate them?
    3. -3
      20 January 2026 11: 06
      Really? The Bolsheviks actually released their opponents on parole, and even recruited them into their service...
    4. 0
      9 February 2026 08: 42
      As for forgiving everyone, I allow myself to doubt it. In letters to Trotsky, he emphasized the problem of Makhno and his peasant movement: "I have decisively stated that now is the most opportune time to disarm his army. Makhno has stopped fighting Soviet power, but only temporarily. We forced him to do so. And the slightest change in circumstances will cause him harm again." He also ordered: "... I order: 1) The front troops to consider Makhno and his entire detachment enemies of the Soviet Republic and the Revolution."

      2) Commanders of all units of the Red Army that have contact with Makhnovist detachments are to disarm them and destroy those that offer resistance. 3) The entire territory of the Ukrainian SSR is to be cleared of bandit gangs as soon as possible and thereby ensure the possibility of peaceful construction."
  20. BAI
    +1
    19 January 2026 21: 22
    British tanks abandoned by Denikin in Novorossiysk

    They are very similar to the Luhansk ones (or rather, the opposite)
  21. +3
    19 January 2026 21: 56
    Frunze and Trotsky at the parade in Samara, 1919

    Near the Cathedral, on Cathedral Square since 1853 (Communal Square (from 1924 to 1935).
    1. +2
      19 January 2026 21: 58
      Now Kuibyshev Square.
  22. -2
    20 January 2026 14: 05
    Hungarians, as a rule, fought for the Reds – over 60 thousand people

    Stalin gives completely different figures: from the “Short Course in the History of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)”
    " Hungarians - 150.000, Poles - from 60 to 80 thousand, Chinese - 40.000, Bulgarians - 25.000, Czechs - 6.000
    in May 1918 toThe Red Army consisted mainly of mercenary foreign invaders.

    Voluntary conscription into the Red Army failed completely, and people had to be forced into it, using executions and hostages.
    1. +1
      20 January 2026 17: 11
      Stalin gives completely different figures: from the “Short Course in the History of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)”
      ”: Hungarians - 150.000, Poles - from 60 to 80 thousand, Chinese - 40.000, Bulgarians - 25.000, Czechs - 6.000
      Did you read it on the internet?
      1. +1
        21 January 2026 15: 01
        Quote: Marrr
        Did you read it on the internet?

        once again:and
        from the “Short Course in the History of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)”
        1. +3
          21 January 2026 16: 13
          Quote: Olgovich
          Quote: Marrr
          Did you read it on the internet?

          once again:and
          from the “Short Course in the History of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)”
          Would you be so kind as to tell me in which section and chapter of the Short Course in the History of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) the digital data you provided is contained?
          Hungarians - 150.000, Poles - from 60 to 80 thousand, Chinese - 40.000, Bulgarians - 25.000, Czechs - 6.000
          ????????
          I looked at the document you mentioned at the link https://pbd.su/wp-content/uploads/Краткий-курс-истории-ВКПб.pdf?ysclid=mkmnzhalkh575160858 and did not find such data.
          Where can I see them?
          1. -3
            21 January 2026 17: 48
            In Olgovich's fevered imagination. There's a lot of alternative history in there, actually.
          2. +2
            21 January 2026 19: 12
            Quote: Marrr
            Where can I see them?

            Encyclopedia "Civil War and Military Intervention in the USSR" 1983:
            In total, over 370 internationalist detachments, companies, battalions, legions, regiments, brigades, and divisions were created during the Civil War. Approximately 250–300 foreign internationalists served in these units, as well as in other units and subdivisions of the Red Army, at various times.
            1. +2
              22 January 2026 13: 06
              Thanks for the link.
              It reminded me of my youth, when, as an operative, I first took over as a duty officer for the department as part of a police task force. The next day, I had to send the department's daily workload (about 30 people). There were several items on which the information could be gathered by the end of the workday, at best. But the information had to be submitted before it even started.
              I went to see my boss and he gave me some brilliant advice that I later used many times:
              "Make a lantern, but don't let it burn too brightly. No one will check your information anyway."

              I believe this is a similar case: the historian was given a task that was clearly impossible, so he screwed up - he gave purely hypothetical figures based on his own inner conviction, and made a clever caveat: "for the years of the Civil War," i.e., the information on the numbers is given with a cumulative total for the entire period.
              Try to double check laughing

              I suspect that other historians subsequently used this data repeatedly in their scholarly works as an indisputable historical fact, and drew some sweeping conclusions based on this "fact."
              This is how Soviet historiography worked.
              And then in the 21st century, historical surprises began to pop up one after another, like the 28 Panfilov men, the grand tank battle near Prokhorovka, and so on.
              1. +1
                22 January 2026 13: 58
                Quote: Marrr
                "Make a lantern, but don't let it burn too brightly. No one will check your information anyway."

                Well said good
    2. +1
      20 January 2026 18: 05
      Quote: Olgovich
      In May 1918, the Red Army consisted mainly of mercenary foreign invaders.

      Very controversial thesis.
      The number of foreigners in the ranks of the Red Army (in the broad sense, since this should include irregular ethnic units and subdivisions, and the structure of the Red Army had not yet stabilized by that time - May 1918) rarely exceeded 250 thousand people, and fluctuated greatly in different periods.

      Quote: Olgovich
      Voluntary conscription into the Red Army failed completely, and people had to be forced into it, using executions and hostages.

      This thesis is also too categorical. Overall, the Red Army was formed on a voluntary basis, drawing on units returning from WWI, persuaded by the Bolsheviks, workers, and peasants. Among them were many who wavered and fled upon approaching their villages and hamlets, but the Red Army was constantly growing.
      That said, coercion played a significant role in recruiting the Red Army, but all sides did so out of necessity... It must be acknowledged that the Bolsheviks understood and implemented the role of agitation in the troops significantly better than the Whites, which is why desertions were significantly lower than among the Whites. However, the Red Army itself was large in numbers, and 250 foreigners were certainly not decisive in achieving victory in the Civil War.
      1. +1
        20 January 2026 18: 48
        Quote: Vasily_Ostrovsky
        It must be acknowledged that the Bolsheviks understood and carried out the role of agitation in the troops much better than the Whites, due to which there were many times fewer deserters than among the Whites.


        The propaganda certainly worked, but... The Bolsheviks promised one thing, the monarchists another, the Socialist Revolutionaries a third... and the bulk of the soldiers weren't party members. That's why entire regiments defected from the Whites to the Reds, then from the Reds to the Whites.
        1. +1
          20 January 2026 18: 55
          Quote from kromer
          and the bulk of the soldiers were not party members.

          That is why they looked not only at the slogans, but also at who was winning. People are not fools, even without education, but they understood that you can’t beat a whip with a butt.
          1. +1
            20 January 2026 19: 07
            Quote: Vasily_Ostrovsky
            They looked not only at the slogans, but also at who was winning,


            That's true. The situation at the front worked better than propaganda.
      2. +1
        21 January 2026 15: 07
        Quote: Vasily_Ostrovsky
        Very controversial thesis.
        The number of foreigners in the ranks of the Red Army (in the broad sense, since this should include irregular ethnic units and subdivisions, and the structure of the Red Army had not yet stabilized by that time - May 1918) rarely exceeded 250 thousand people, and fluctuated greatly in different periods.

        from 600 thousand to a million - up to a third of the Red Army.
        Quote: Vasily_Ostrovsky
        This thesis is also too categorical. In general, the Red Army was formed on a voluntary basis, from units returning from WWI.

        No, no one really wanted to fight anymore, so the voluntary conscription of January 1918 failed, so in May they issued a decree on FORCED conscription into the army - with military registration and enlistment offices, registrations, repressions and executions.

        In 1919, the country became the world champion in desserts - 1,5 million!
        1. +1
          21 January 2026 15: 15
          Quote: Olgovich
          from 600 thousand to a million - up to a third of the Red Army.

          Such estimates are not supported by archival data or research of either that time or subsequent ones; I have not come across such figures.


          Quote: Olgovich
          No, no one really wanted to fight anymore, so the voluntary conscription of January 1918 failed, so in May they issued a decree on FORCED conscription into the army - with military registration and enlistment offices, registrations, repressions and executions.

          The Red Army wouldn't have survived or won if that had been the case, and the army would have been sustained by terror and coercion. I don't deny the use of these coercive measures, but they weren't widespread or decisive. There's no point in equating wishful thinking with reality... They followed the Red cause, that's a fact.
  23. +2
    20 January 2026 21: 09
    Quote: Vasily_Ostrovsky
    The number of foreigners in the ranks of the Red Army (in a broad sense, since this should include irregular ethnic units and subdivisions, and the structure of the Red Army had not yet stabilized by that time - May 1918) rarely exceeded 250 thousand people.
    In my opinion, as a person who perceives history as a science, and not as a literary genre, it is impossible to provide any numerical data on how many people were in the Red Army during the different years of the Civil War. foreigners, the matter is completely pointless. No one kept precise counts—and it was impossible, anyway. These are simply figures plucked out of thin air or, at best, from various memoirs, in which the authors also provide them in a guesswork fashion.

    One can only perceive (or not perceive) on faith Some approximate data on the total number of people listed in the Red Army. Because I seriously doubt that anyone seriously bothered with these calculations during the war. Or after.
    In the chaos that reigned in those years, it was simply ridiculous to talk about statistical work.
    1. +3
      21 January 2026 15: 22
      Accurately calculating the events of that period is indeed a very difficult task. Documentation was poor, archives were poorly preserved, and they burned like a blaze of fire. But this doesn't preclude, despite all the difficulty, the need for research. The Krivosheev Commission has done this work, and there are other statistical studies and numerous sources from the 20s. Historians will never write any history if they adopt the attitude of, "Well, there was a war, so what's there to look for?"
      1. +1
        21 January 2026 16: 18
        But this doesn't preclude, despite all the difficulty, the need to conduct research. The Krivosheev Commission has done such work,
        The only question is the usefulness of this work, because it is ridiculous to operate with some digital data when it is not even possible to accurately judge the error made in calculating this data.
        When there is a lack of precise information, it is better not to provide numerical data at all than to provide them conjecturally, but with the confidence of an eyewitness.
        It is this approach that distinguishes a serious historian from a writer of alternative history.
  24. +1
    27 January 2026 13: 55
    Some mention has been made of the Hungarians, but there is no mention of the Germans and Austrians, who played a crucial role in the defeat of Makhno's Ukrainian rebel army. German artillerymen from prisoner-of-war camps in Central Asia, fighting in the Red Army, reduced 500 machine-gun carts of the partisans to splinters with their 4-inch guns, as they simply weren't expecting such a long-range fire. German stormtroopers, well-trained for fighting in fortified areas, drove the Makhnovists out of Gulyai-Pole. The Turkestan cavalry, cemented by the European discipline of the Austrian cavalrymen—the Hungarian hussars—proved an unexpected surprise for the Ukrainian Cossacks, accustomed to fighting White and Red cavalry.