Revolutionary General Jean-Charles Pichegru

2 822 38
Revolutionary General Jean-Charles Pichegru
Charles Pichegru in a portrait by Alexandre-François Caminade

As we have already noted in one of recent articles, the only commander equal to himself, Napoleon agreed to recognize the early deceased General Louis Lazare Hoche, about whom he once said:

If Gosh had crossed my path, I would have had to either retreat or break him.

And about the death of his rival he said:



In the end, there were two of us, but one was needed.


General Louis-Lazare Gauche, monument in Montreuil

However, he also rated the hero of today's article highly for his military talents. According to Dr. O'Meap's memoirs, it was Jean-Charles Pichegru on Saint Helena whom Napoleon called the most capable general of the Republic.

The origin and early life of Charles Pichegru


Jean-Charles Pichegru was born on February 16, 1761, to a poor landowner in the village of Les Planches, near Arbois. In this small Burgundian town, the future general attended college and then enrolled at the École Militaire de Brienne. There, Pichegru met an as yet unremarkable young Corsican cadet named Bonaparte, eight years his junior. He even began giving him additional mathematics lessons.

Pichegru's military service began in June 1780, when, at the age of 19, he entered the army as a private. artillery Metz Regiment (Regiment d'artillerie de Metz, from January 1, 1791 – 2nd Artillery Regiment). In February 1781, the young man found himself in America as part of the expeditionary force of Generals Rochambeau and Lafayette, who fought on the side of the rebellious colonists, taking part in the Battle of Kingsbridge and the siege of Yorktown. He returned to France in 1783 and was sent to serve first in the garrison of Strasbourg, then in Besançon.

On August 1, 1785, Pichegru was promoted to sergeant. On July 5, 1789, he was promoted to staff sergeant. On February 6, 1792, we see him as only an adjutant (a non-commissioned officer's rank—a rank higher than sergeant but lower than ensign). It was only on June 15, 1792, that Pichegru became a first lieutenant. During this time, he was an ardent supporter of republican ideas and even served as president of the Revolutionary (Jacobin) Club of Besançon.

On 18 Vendémiaire, Year I of the Republic (October 9, 1792), the now 31-year-old subject of this article was elected lieutenant colonel of the 3rd Battalion of Volunteers of the Garde Department, which became part of the Army of the Rhine. He soon became deputy commander of this regiment. His superiors quickly took notice of this proactive officer, as well as his strong organizational skills, and Pichegru was transferred to staff work. By August 22, 1793, he had achieved the rank of brigadier general.
Meanwhile, in the same year of 1793, Lazare Carnot and Louis Antoine Saint-Just were tasked with finding promising generals of non-noble origin who could be entrusted with the command of large military units. Carnot then turned his attention to Jourdan, about whom Napoleon once remarked to Lannes:

Jourdan holds a title greater than mine. I didn't have to win the battle that saved France.


Jean-Baptiste Jourdan, statue on rue de Rivoli, facade of the Louvre

Saint-Just “discovered” Pichegru and Lazare Hoche, but it was the first of them that became his favorite.

On October 4, 1793, Pichegru was promoted to divisional general and given command of the Upper Rhine Division, but by October 27, the 32-year-old subject of this article had become commander of the Army of the Rhine. And the aforementioned Lazare Hoche was given command of the Army of the Moselle on November 2, 1793—and he was only 25 years old at the time.

Revolutionary General Charles Pichegru


Pichegru's first task was to restore order to the poorly disciplined troops entrusted to him. He therefore initially avoided major battles, instead tiring the enemy with constant small skirmishes. Pichegru's Army of the Rhine and Hoche's Army of the Moselle were able to launch an offensive in the second half of December 1793. The Austrians were routed at Fréschwiller, and the people's representatives to the army wrote to Paris:

It would take too much time to describe in detail the miracles of valor of our brave warriors.

Hoche's army's successes were more highly regarded, and at the Second Battle of Weissenburg, Pichegru found himself under the operational control of his young rival, a fact that greatly displeased Saint-Just, who had patronized the article's hero. Despite the victory, which forced the Austrian commander Dagobert von Wurmser to withdraw his troops beyond the Rhine and the Prussian general Charles-Guillaume-Ferdinand of Brunswick to retreat to Mainz, Hoche was relieved of command and given command of another army – the Army of Italy. However, just 10 days after his appointment, he was arrested in Nice (April 1, 1794) and remained in prison until the Thermidorian Coup, which ended with the fall and execution of Robespierre and his closest associates. Hoche was released on July 27, 1794.

But let's return to Pichegru, who initially became commander of the combined Rhine-Moselle Army, and in February 1794, replaced Jourdan as commander of the Northern Army (a position he held until March 1795). Pichegru's subordinate was such a prominent French commander as Jean-Victor Moreau. He would later replace the subject of this article as commander of the Northern Army.

The peak of Charles Pichegru's military career


Pichegru's most successful campaigns were those of 1794-1795, in which he fought against the troops of Britain, Austria, and the Dutch Republic.


Georges Bertin Scott de Plagol. General Pichegru during the Dutch campaign

The Allied plan for the First Anti-French Coalition was developed by the notorious General Mack—the same General who would later plot the route Suvorov's army would take in Switzerland and the dispositions for the Battle of Austerlitz. The plan was to capture the French fortress of Landrecies, and then the city of Saint-Quentin, which opened the road to Paris. The Allies faced two French armies: Pichegru's Army of the North and Charbonnier's Army of the Ardennes. On April 30, 1794, their opponents succeeded in taking Landrecies, but Charbonnier's army pinned down the Allied forces on the left flank, while on the right flank they were constantly harassed by units of Pichegru's Army of the North. However, the French attempts to cross the Sambre River were unsuccessful.

On June 4, four divisions of the Army of the Moselle arrived, led by Jourdan. He also took command of the Army of the Ardennes and the right-flank units of the Army of the North. Among others, he commanded General Jean-Baptiste Kléber (to whom Napoleon would hand over command of the Army of the East in Egypt in 1799) and three future marshals – Soult, Lefebvre, and Bernadotte. Jourdan's forces became the Army of Sambre and Meuse. The French were now able to cross the river and besiege Charleroi; its garrison capitulated on June 26. That same day, the Battle of Fleurus took place, the very one Bonaparte had spoken of when he called Jourdan the savior of France.


Jean-Baptiste Jourdan in J.-B. Moses' painting "The Battle of Fleurus." Note the balloon "l'Entreprenant" (in the upper right corner of this painting): with its help, General Jourdan was the first in stories During this battle, he transmitted signals to his troops

The commander-in-chief of the First Coalition, Prince Frederick of Coburg, arrived at Charleroi only a few hours late. Unaware that the fortress had already surrendered, he ordered an attack on the French at Fleurus, and victory seemed within reach, but Jourdan dispatched the divisions of Lefebvre and Bernadotte. The fate of the battle was still undecided when Frederick of Coburg received news of Charleroi's fall. The enemy commander wavered, ordering a retreat, deciding not to tempt fate with further fighting. The French followed him. Units led by Pichegru captured Nieuport, Ostend, and Bruges, then, advancing toward Ghent, they pushed Prince Coburg's forces back toward Brussels.

Finally, on July 10, Pichegru defeated General Clerfayt at Soagnes. The Austrian forces lost contact with the British and Dutch and retreated to Lüttich. Their allies retreated to Breda. On July 24, the French occupied Antwerp, and Aachen, Jülich, Cologne, and Bonn soon fell as well. Kléber laid siege to Maastricht. Pichegru, having captured the fortress of Sluys on August 24, occupied Breda and forced the Duke of York's troops to retreat across the Meuse River. From then on, the French enemy suffered repeated defeats, losing fortresses and towns. Trying to stop Pichegru, the Dutch opened the dams, but the freezing temperatures quickly froze the water, and this tried-and-true method failed. Having captured Bommel Island, the French crossed the Waal River in January 1795, finally separating the English and Dutch troops, and Amsterdam was also occupied at the same time.


General Pichegru's army enters Amsterdam, 1795 (detail of a painting by Paul Boutini)

The apotheosis of that campaign was the astonishing capture of Dutch ships by French cavalrymen. fleet, frozen in the ice in the Zuiderzee Bay. On the night of January 23, 1795, the hussars of Colonel Lahur, subordinate to Pichegru, mounted infantrymen of the 15th Line Infantry Regiment on their horses' croup and approached the Dutch squadron across the ice, numbering five ships of the line, three frigates, five corvettes, and several merchant ships, which turned out to have 650 cannons. Here's how it looks in a painting by Léon Morel-Fatio:



The surgeon of the Dutch ship "Snelheid" recalled:
On Saturday morning, an orderly informed me that a French hussar was near our ship. I looked out the gun port and indeed saw the hussar.

The shocked Dutch sailors surrendered without a fight.

On February 14, 1795, with the capture of Groningen, Pichegru effectively completed the conquest of the Netherlands; the stadtholder fled to England. Holland not only capitulated, but also entered into an alliance with France under the name of the Batavian Republic. And Pichegru became one of the most popular generals of the French Republic.

From “Savior of the Fatherland” to convict



General Pichegru in a portrait painted in the Netherlands in 1795.

As we recall, it was Pichegru who was the unwavering supporter of Saint-Just, who had done so much to remove (and even arrest) his rival general, Lazare Hoche. Nevertheless, Pichegru supported the Thermidorian Coup and, on April 1, 1795, suppressed the Germinal popular uprising in Paris. He was subsequently awarded the title of "Savior of the Fatherland" by the Directory and the post of commander of the Army of the Rhine (which became the Army of the Rhine and Moselle on April 20). In May 1795, he succeeded in taking Mannheim. However, according to some scholars, Pichegru failed to provide sufficient support to his rival, Jourdan, forcing him to withdraw his troops beyond the Rhine.

Apparently, at this time, Pichegru began to think that the best solution for France would be to restore the monarchy – of course, limited and constitutional.

In August 1795, a certain Foch-Borel, posing as a champagne merchant, arrived at the general's door from the Prince of Condé. He promised him the rank of marshal, as well as a million livres immediately, plus a hundred thousand in annual rent. All he had to do was "simply" conclude an armistice with the Austrians and march his army on Paris. In subsequent correspondence, Pichegru urged the Bourbons to "moderation and prudence," which, incidentally, greatly irritated and displeased them.

Meanwhile, as commander, Pichegru suddenly became overly cautious and indecisive, fearing that victories would strengthen the position of the "directors," while defeat would negatively impact his popularity. This displeased the authorities, and the general decided to "play it safe." Confident of his indispensability, in October 1795 he submitted his resignation to the Directory, and on March 14, 1796, he was dismissed from the army. He was offered the post of ambassador to Sweden, but Pichegru had other, more serious plans. He was still very popular, and so in the spring of 1796 he took part in the elections to the Council of Five Hundred. On April 12, 1797, he became a deputy for the Jura department, and from May 20 to June 18 of that year, he served as president of the pro-monarchist Council.

Supported by the royalist party of the Clichy Club, supporters of the restoration of the monarchy also constituted a majority in the Council of Elders. However, the chief "director," Barras, appealed for help to Bonaparte, commander of the Army of Italy, who dispatched General Augereau to Paris—a staunch republican who immediately declared to the directors that he had "arrived to kill royalists." And on September 4, 1797 (the Fructidor Coup), Augereau not only dispersed the deputies meeting in the Tuileries but also arrested many of them. Among those arrested was Charles Pichegru, who was sent to the "dry guillotine" ("la guillotine seche") of the Guiana penal servitude—effectively to his death, as the survival rate for convicts was only 3%.

It is curious that the English Minister of War, Windham, then proposed intercepting the ship at sea that would be transporting Pichegru.

Escape


Escaping from Guiana was practically impossible, but Pichegru immediately declared:

Better sharks than a slow death here.

Taking advantage of the prison guards' drunkenness, he and seven other prisoners made it to the Dutch colony of Surinam on a pitiful pirogue. By pure chance, a storm washed them ashore near a Dutch fort. Governor-General François de Friederici, governor of Jurrien, allowed the fugitives to board a ship bound for the United States. In 1798, Pichegru moved to England, and in 1799 he found himself at the headquarters of Suvorov's ally, the Austrian Archduke Charles. We then see him at the headquarters of the Russian corps of A. M. Rimsky-Korsakov, which was routed by General Masséna (this defeat forced Suvorov to abandon the march on Paris and change his route through Switzerland). According to some sources, Pichegru proposed his own plan for fighting the French, which was rejected by the Russian general.

The Ignominious Death of General Pichegru


Pichegru appears to have hated his former pupil (in mathematics) Bonaparte, and according to Windham's entry for 16 September 1800, the fugitive French general discussed with him that day "a plan for the removal of Bonaparte by assassination."
At that time, there was another man in Britain who dreamed of dealing with Napoleon: Georges Cadoudal, the leader of the Chouans, the Vendéen rebels from among the peasants of the Maine-et-Loire department (now Mayenne).


Amable Paul Coutant. Portrait of the Chouan Georges Cadoudal

This son of a Breton miller was arrested as early as June 1794, but was released after the Thermidorian Coup. In 1799, Cadoudal again attempted to stir up rebellion in Brittany, and in October the rebels managed to capture Nantes and several other cities. However, in January 1800, they were defeated by General Brune. Cadoudal did not give up the struggle and organized two assassination attempts on First Consul Bonaparte – in December 1800 and August 1803.

Pichegru and Cadoudal traveled to France, where they met their deaths. Incidentally, Jean-Victor Moreau suffered for meeting them: the renowned republican general categorically refused to collaborate with the royalists, but failed to inform the authorities of his meeting with them. Consequently, Moreau was arrested and sentenced to two years. Napoleon ordered his imprisonment commuted to expulsion from the country and a permanent ban on returning to France. Moreau also lost over a million francs, his Paris apartment, which Bernadotte later occupied, and the Château de Grosbois, which passed to Berthier.
But let us return to Pichegru: he was arrested on the night of February 28, 1804 and placed in the Temple.


The arrest of Pichegru

According to eyewitnesses, he was treated very politely and even respectfully, well-fed, and given wine. Nevertheless, on the morning of April 6 of that year, Pichegru was found dead (the date of death is considered to be April 5). A volume of Seneca's works lay on the mantelpiece, open to the page describing the death of Caesar's opponent, Cato of Uthica:

No, Jupiter saw nothing more beautiful on earth than Cato, who did not bend and was not defeated on the ruins of the republic.
Let, he said, let everything fall under the power of a despot, let Caesar's legions rule the land, and his ships the waters, let his soldiers approach my doors—I will find the sure path to liberation. Cato's sword could not free his homeland, but it will free Cato.

Investigators concluded that the former Republican general had hanged himself with his own tie, which he had tied tightly around his neck with a piece of wood, and that same day he was buried in the Parisian cemetery of Sainte-Catherine.


Georges Moreau de Tours. The Death of General Pichegru

Cadoudal didn't long survive Pichegru: he was captured in Paris on March 9 of that same year, 1804, killing a policeman during his arrest. When the prefect of police rebuked him for leaving a wife and children, Cadoudal responded indifferently:

Why didn't you order the bachelors to arrest me?

He was sentenced to death and executed on June 25, 1804.

Pichegru is not forgotten in France. Despite his betrayal, his name was inscribed on the Arc de Triomphe in the Place de l'Étoile in Paris.
38 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    25 July 2026 05: 44
    Revolutions, after all, are society's retribution for the sins of its elite. When the "elite" ceases to serve the country's interests and firmly closes its doors to those below it, society faces only one option: destroy it and move on. Numerous emergencies occur, but despite the sacrifices, a sharp leap forward follows, as people who had no chance under the previous regime begin to realize their potential, their paths completely blocked by degenerate representatives of the "upper classes." Sergeants and ensigns become generals and marshals, disenfranchised clerks become ministers, the children of illiterate peasants become professors and academics. And then the inertia of this momentum gradually fades, and a new, closed elite forms, unaware that it is digging a pit with its own hands for its children and grandchildren, who will be swept away and perhaps even destroyed by society—and this is already the beginning of its end and the beginning of a new round of history.
    1. +2
      25 July 2026 12: 52
      After all, revolutions are a retribution of society for the sins of its elite.
      Revolution is the only tool for dismantling the bureaucracy that is holding back the country's development. In his latest interview, Dee Vance devoted 20% of his speech to two paths for the US's development: the transformation of the Democratic Party into a populist communist party, and the revival of the US as an industrial and scientific power, where society effectively curbs monopolies and the financial sector, and workers and small businesses gain greater rights to participate in the country's governance.
      1. +1
        25 July 2026 14: 56
        I don’t know, maybe I’m wrong, but this is in the realm of fantasy.
        The Democratic Party's leadership will likely change and that will be the end of it.
        1. 0
          25 July 2026 23: 50
          Quote from lisikat2
          I don’t know, maybe I’m wrong, but this is in the realm of fantasy.

          You don't believe me that Dee Vance, in a summer 2026 interview, spoke about his fears about the victory of communists in the United States and the transformation of the Democratic Party of the United States into communist?
          1. 0
            26 July 2026 15: 38
            "talked about his fears" in my opinion, there is a big difference between "talking" and reality.
            Even Zyuganov didn't go that far in his promises.
            1. 0
              26 July 2026 20: 05
              Quote from lisikat2
              Even Zyuganov didn't go that far in his promises.

              What can Zyuganov promise? He's the equivalent of a local bureaucrat. Dee Vance, a member of Trump's team, claims that if the US doesn't bring manufacturing back from China, America will face upheaval, ending either with the rise of the left, with expropriations and dispossession of bankers and insurers, or with the rise of Nazis. Trump himself is a bit of a Nazi. He's already vacillating between annexing Canada or Greenland, colonizing Cuba or Venezuela, plundering the budgets of Ukraine and Russia through arms sales, rare earth mining, and building a bridge over the Bering Strait.
  2. +2
    25 July 2026 07: 53
    Back in the 1920s and 1930s, it was fashionable to compare (and draw analogies) between the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution. Terms like "Thermidor," "Vendée," and others were used quite openly in the press. Besides drawing analogies, attempts were made to predict, based on the French experience, what processes would unfold in Soviet Russia/the USSR. These attempts at prediction occurred both within Soviet Russia/the USSR and in foreign circles, including émigré circles. In this situation, it is interesting to compare Pichegru, Moreau, and Bernadotte, on the one hand, and Soviet military leaders like Blücher and others, who, as was written during the perestroika years, "fell victim to lawlessness," on the other. Napoleon himself, from the perspective of the "ideals of the revolution," turned out to be an open enemy. I am not prepared to evaluate his actions from the perspective of French national interests. But he clearly betrayed the "ideals of the republic," which had elevated him. This immediately brings to mind the Soviet military leader Tukhachevsky. He was almost openly called the "Red Napoleon." But apparently, some people moved from drawing analogies to "correcting their mistakes." In any case, Tukhachevsky never became a "Red Napoleon."
    1. +3
      25 July 2026 09: 15
      Many people back then thought of Napoleon and tried on his hat. But his personality was out of place. And Stalin was too powerful a figure to allow just anyone any kind of "liberties."
      1. +3
        25 July 2026 10: 48
        And Stalin was too strong a figure to allow just anyone any kind of “liberties”.
        Is everyone really happy with what is happening today? bully Or have the personalities simply disappeared and only *grayness* remains? It seems to me that I have answered my own question. No.
        1. +1
          25 July 2026 10: 56
          Yeltsin and his family did indeed elect such a gray and inconspicuous figure—remember, the young Putin? And he began to conduct a negative selection process, clearing the field of any more or less prominent political figures. He succeeded over many years.
          1. +1
            25 July 2026 11: 01
            Succeeded over many years.
            The scary thing is that he, and he was the one who laid the groundwork for the future of his entourage. And here, hoping for elections is simply no longer enough, but that's just it... it just happened. bully
    2. 0
      25 July 2026 12: 16
      You're absolutely right; analogies were being sought even before the Revolution. Everyone was engrossed in Carlyle. And the "abdication" of Nicholas II was a carbon copy of Napoleon's. The examples could be endlessly multiplied. But our soil is different! And with the generals, as you recall, it's the same.
      In Russia, generals are politically incompetent. Absolutely everyone who has dabbled in politics has failed miserably—I'm referring to the period since 1905. Back then, a number of generals flirted with revolution and lost. And in 17. And during the Civil War—the leaders of the defeated White Army were generals. And then, in the 90s, everyone failed miserably—you probably remember them...
      1. 0
        25 July 2026 15: 23
        "a number of generals flirted with revolution" I don't remember who that was?
        Perhaps some of the generals grumbled in private conversations about Nicholas II and the "German dominance," but firstly, it was fashionable, and secondly, hot air and revolution are not the same thing.
        1. 0
          25 July 2026 18: 12
          More accurately, he displayed criminal connivance and cowardice. He was biding his time to see how things would play out. These were little-known generals. Something like this:
          "An outrageous incident occurred in Chita. Governor-General I.V. Kholshchevnikov recognized the authority of the revolutionary committees and councils as legitimate and allowed the revolutionaries to control the post office and telegraph. He legalized the revolutionary militia, which he armed with 100 rifles. This militia immediately looted 14 train cars containing the weapons.
          To clear the railway line, detachments were sent from both sides: General A.N. Meller-Zakomelsky from the west and General P.K. Rennenkampf from the east. It must be said that these small detachments advanced without difficulty. Seeing the generals' determination to suppress the revolution, the "new government" leaders hastened to flee. After negotiations with Rennenkampf, revolutionary Chita surrendered without a fight. A huge quantity of weapons—30,000 rifles alone—was surrendered. Meller-Zakomelsky took a very harsh view of the rebellion. He wrote that "for the good of the cause, it would have been necessary to destroy Chita rather than engage in diplomatic negotiations with all sorts of unions and committees." His opinion regarding the betrayal of local authorities was that "generals like Linevich, Kazbek, Kholshchevnikov, Putyata, Rumshevich, and others could destroy the army and the state; they should be shot, not some railway reserve soldiers." Thus, as early as 1905, the generals began betraying the Tsar. Without their betrayal, the February Revolution would not have happened.
          The uprising in the Sveaborg fortress, the largest on the Baltic Sea, was led by officers Zion, Yemelyanov, and Kokhanovsky. They seized most of the artillery batteries and arrested several senior officers. One of them, General A.P. Ageyev, chief of the fortress artillery, sent a letter to the Sveaborg commandant, urging him to surrender, otherwise the rebels would begin firing their cannons...
          1. 0
            26 July 2026 15: 55
            As I remember, in WWI Rannenkampf showed himself, to put it mildly, not very well.
            1. +2
              26 July 2026 18: 21
              Then be happy for General Kholshchevnikov:
              "Kholshchevnikov Ivan Vasilyevich (May 7, 1852, Yaroslavl province - January 10, 1928, Sevastopol), military governor of the Transbaikal region and acting ataman of the ZKV (1904-06). From a merchant family. Studied at the 2nd Konstantinovsky military school, at the General Staff Academy. Served in the General Staff. Taught at the Elizavetskograd cavalry school. In 1899 he was sent to the Amur region. In mid-1901, he was the chief of staff of the Amur district in Khabarovsk. During the Russo-Japanese War, he commanded the defense of the Amur region. As military governor of the Transbaikal region, thanks to the policy of containment, he managed to prevent either the Black Hundreds or the revolutionary uprising in Chita during the events of the autumn of 1905 terror, for which he was arrested in January 1906 after the arrival in Chita of the expedition of Generals P.K. Rennenkampf and A.N. Meller-Zakomelsky. He was tried in May 1906 in St. Petersburg and sentenced to 1 year and 4 months of imprisonment in a fortress. In 1907, he was pardoned and sent to the army reserves. In the 1920s, he served in the Red Army and was assistant to the chief of staff of the Sevastopol Fortress for operations. After retiring, at the request of the Central Council of the Military-Industrial Complex and the USSR-Polish and the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR, he received a personal pension. He was awarded the Order of St. Vladimir, 3rd class, St. Stanislav, 3rd and 2nd class, St. Anna, 3rd and 2nd class, and foreign orders.
              1. +1
                27 July 2026 11: 52
                Good afternoon. "Have fun."
                1) What's there to rejoice about? The fact that we were tried by a military court but pardoned? Besides him, Stesel (the PA commandant) was sentenced to death but pardoned.
                2) "rejoice" at his awards? I read: "the Order of St. Vladimir was respected at that time."
                In the "History" section there were materials about royal awards.
                Rennenkamff is practically a traitor; remember the destruction of Samsonov's army. His actions are very much like treason.
                P. S
                Besides him, other former generals served in the Red Army. Even Slashchev, remember:
                From executions
                The smoke is billowing.
                Is Slashchev saving Crimea?
                1. +2
                  27 July 2026 12: 48
                  One can be glad for the longevity of Kholshchevnikov, who ended his life in Crimea on a personal pension. Generals who meddle in politics usually come to a bad end. Dukhonin's example alone is worth mentioning.
                  Yes, the officers were almost evenly split between the Reds and the Whites. Even Brusilov served in the Red Army.
                  I read a whole book about Slashchev. A man with such a life stance and behavior will, of course, suffer from slander. From all sides. Generally, material about the Revolution is often not of good quality. People like Slashchev and Rennenkampf deserve a separate discussion.
                  Read about the "traitor" Soviet General Kachalov. It's truly not a pretty story. Other such stories need to be looked into, because in those days—from 1905 onward—there was a lot of slander, hysteria, vilification, and the turning of people into monsters.
                  1. 0
                    27 July 2026 18: 19
                    About Kachalov, I'll take a look at Vika.
                    Ignatiev is vague about Ranenkampff and his role in the destruction of Samsonov's Army. He met with Ranenkampff, and as a military attaché and colonel in the General Staff, he had access to documents marked "secret." He wrote his memoirs after WWII. All "secret" documents from the Tsarist period had already been declassified. For some reason, Ignatiev never mentioned, even in passing, the classified papers of that period.
                    He had a vague: "they said"... Why, like that?
                    1. -1
                      27 July 2026 18: 46
                      So, here you can refer to Vika wink
                      I wasn't seriously interested in Rennenkampf and his story. I just checked out Vika—it's generally well written about him. He defeated the Germans at Gumbinnen. There's nothing about treason.
                      It's written that Antonov-Ovseenko invited him to serve with the Bolsheviks in 1918. I don't know if that's true or not. If it is, then the treason story was invented later. You see? Rennenkampf wouldn't have been invited if he'd been such a notorious figure. So the myth about the death of Samsonov's army was developed later, and in 1918, Rennenkampf was just a general...
                      1. 0
                        28 July 2026 16: 53
                        "He was an odious figure" is my opinion: the Bolsheviks at that time were interested in EVERY specialist. "No time for fat, just to survive" (C)
    3. +1
      25 July 2026 12: 59
      Quote: Vitaly G.
      In any case, Tukhachevsky did not become a “Red Napoleon”.

      Denin was terrified of the potential terror and the fact that it would begin to destroy the Bolsheviks themselves. As early as 1918, Lenin had already banned the execution of Bolsheviks and Left Socialist Revolutionaries for political crimes. There was even an attempt to allow the Right Socialist Revolutionary Party to operate under the condition that the Bolsheviks would dominate. Faced with public rejection of the collectivization policy, Stalin authorized the NKVD to execute fellow party members, fearing that some of them would organize middle peasants and kulaks to overthrow the Stalinist and Chekist regime. The first victims of Stalin's repressions among the Bolsheviks were Ryutin and Smirnov, who had previously defeated Kolchak, and the Red partisans who had ravaged the rear of Kolchak, the White Finns, and Denikin.
    4. +1
      25 July 2026 15: 10
      Actually, I wasn't very interested in Tukhachevsky's career, but as I remember, Tukhachevsky was more of a punisher than a military leader. And Bonaparte was less of a punisher.
      This is about "red Bonaparte"
      PS
      I don't give a damn what happened to Blucher or Tukhachevsky, but the execution of their wives and children is, to put it mildly, not nice.
      1. +1
        25 July 2026 17: 57
        In fact, Tukhachevsky had three official wives and one common-law wife.
        And also two daughters.
        One of the daughters went missing during the Great Patriotic War, the youngest.
        The eldest daughter died in November 1982.
        1. +1
          26 July 2026 16: 13
          "Three official wives" - I'm not interested in Tukhachevsky as a person and I wasn't interested in his biography, I just looked at it from the "vertical" perspective.
          More interesting are Yemelyanov and Kokhansky. They were ideological, and that's more interesting.
  3. +2
    25 July 2026 12: 09
    A remarkable article. It turns out Pichegru started out as "Lafayette's man"—a moderate monarchist—and eventually returned to that. Halfway through the article, it seems he "wavered with the party line," but why would he return to monarchism? So he must have joined the relevant lodge in America or earlier, and remained with it forever. He rose sharply with the help of Jacobin demagoguery and the help of the "brothers," and then "wizarded"—Suvorov's word for it—the young Saint-Just. His career then continued to grow until the royalists decided—wrongly—that it was time to act.
    The Directory's choice between Bonaparte and Pichegru is obvious: the former will play his role as a military instrument far better. He's vain. Pichegru, however, is older and wiser, has more connections, and fewer provincial complexes. His faithful woman (Joséphine) doesn't keep an eye on him. Pichegru is dangerous. Bonaparte has also become dangerous! But that's another matter...
    The context of the article doesn't imply that the Battle of Fleurus "saved France"—indeed, that's not the case. Apparently, Bonaparte's words are just another example of revolutionary pathos and Gallic chatter.
    A funny detail is that the traitor Moreau's apartment was occupied by the traitor Bernadotte wink
    A veritable rose garden of traitors. And whoever isn't a traitor is a robber. But weren't there decent people among the French generals?
    It's a shame a small error slipped into the article: the Prussian Duke of Brunswick couldn't have been named Charles. Karl! His name was Karl-Wilhelm-Ferdinand.
    1. +2
      25 July 2026 13: 06
      Quote: Andrew_andr
      "Lafayette's man" - a moderate monarchist,

      In France, Lafayette is considered the most outstanding revolutionary of the French Revolution—far superior to Danton, Marat, Robespierre, and Saint-Just. He called for moderation and restrained the bloodthirstiness of both monarchists and Jacobins as best he could. It was Lafayette who, during the final overthrow of the Bourbons in 1830, revived the National Republican Guard and effectively led the military operations in Paris against the defenders of the absolute monarchy.
      1. +2
        25 July 2026 13: 24
        If Lafayette had gained real power, it's unclear what would have become of him. And people would have spoken of him differently. wink And so he emerged at the very end, at the peak of the trend. The Orléans monarchy was established. The Holy Alliance de facto collapsed. The victorious revolution cobbled together Belgium and gave it to England – fulfilling the age-old dream of control over the Scheldt estuary. It's still going on more or less like that... Naturally, everyone is happy... Lafayette escaped the rope and turned out better than everyone else.
        1. +2
          25 July 2026 13: 33
          Quote: Andrew_andr
          If Lafayette had received real power, it is not clear what would have happened to him.

          Revolution destroys not only the corrupt elite but also revolutionary extremists. Lafayette, not known for his savage bloodthirstiness, survived his tortuous path and retained his name in history as a positive figure.
    2. +3
      25 July 2026 13: 14
      Quote: Andrew_andr
      A funny detail is that the traitor Moreau's apartment was occupied by the traitor Bernadotte

      In 1812, many French politicians realized that Napoleon was leading France to military and political disaster and sought to avert it by overthrowing Napoleon. During the revolution in Afghanistan, clan councils decided to send family members to serve in various warring forces, so that no matter what happened, the family would not be completely destroyed. My Afghan acquaintances had three of Hekmatyar's bodyguards in their family (at different times), a cryptographer named Tsarandoy, and a high-ranking military officer who assigned personnel to American installations.
      1. 0
        25 July 2026 13: 37
        You know, Bernadotte betrayed him much earlier! This became obvious on the day of the battles of Auerstädt and Jena in 1806. His corps was located between these battlefields, heard the noise from both, and did nothing. He offered no support to Davout. But he still won. Incidentally, that same Charles, Ferdinand of Brunswick.
        It's all Masonic business here, difficult to judge. Bonaparte didn't dare punish Bernadotte. Bernadotte ultimately founded a royal dynasty in Sweden, where one Mason chased another. It's all a mystery. Digging into the archives is pointless—the documents there have been rewritten, and repeatedly. What's left for us? We can assume Bonaparte had his own puppeteers, or at least was wary of certain people, didn't want to escalate matters, and was taking them into account... It's all a nightmare, really. In Afghanistan, things are simpler.
        1. +1
          25 July 2026 14: 04
          Quote: Andrew_andr
          This became evident on the day of the battles of Auerstadt and Jena in 1806.

          Bernadotte is one of France's most successful military leaders. Under his command, the French troops didn't lose all their artillery, as, for example, Suvorov did in Switzerland or Kutuzov lost two-thirds of his army at Austerlitz. Nor did his troops lose one and a half times as many troops as their opponents, as Kutuzov did at Borodino. And yet, I compare Bernadotte to the best Russian commanders of the Napoleonic Wars.
          1. +2
            25 July 2026 14: 12
            Well, Bernadotte didn't find himself (through no fault of his own) trapped in the Alps, like Suvorov. And he didn't fight in the decisive battle against Napoleon, like Kutuzov.
            1. +1
              25 July 2026 14: 23
              Quote: vet
              And he did not fight in the general battle against Napoleon, like Kutuzov.

              The Austrian and Russian monarchs suspected Kutuzov of disloyalty and incompetence and tied his hands on the eve of Austerlitz. Alexander I initially forbade Kutuzov from waiting for reinforcements, suspecting that Kutuzov wanted to prolong the war and incur heavy costs for Russia. He then forced Kutuzov to deploy the units sent to defend the Pratzen Heights to reinforce the attack through a difficult defile, believing that Kutuzov did not understand the need to concentrate forces on the main attack and that Kutuzov was jealous of the glory of the Austrian generals and was sabotaging cooperation with them. For some reason, it's not losers and lazybones who are suspected of treason, but only successful military men, engineers, and businessmen. In Stankino, the FSB has questions not for mediocre teachers, but only for those implementing breakthrough technologies in robotics. In Russia, the system of persecution of genetics and cybernetics after the arrest of Beria and Sudoplatov did not completely disappear, but simply took the form of a behind-the-scenes struggle.
          2. +1
            25 July 2026 18: 31
            I think you're exaggerating. First of all, he wasn't such a great military leader that he could be put on the same level as Suvorov and Kutuzov. Unfortunately, I've forgotten some of the details, and I don't feel like rushing through Wikipedia. Well, under Napoleon, Bernadotte commanded a corps. I found another detail at hand: Bernadotte was "late" not only for the Battle of Auerstadt, but also for Preussisch-Eylau...
            Napoleon gave orders to his marshals to march on Eylau on January 31, 1807. And lo and behold! The officer carrying the order to Bernadotte got lost and ended up right in the hands of the Russians, Bennigsen. Bennigsen, who responded accordingly, resulting in the now-famous battle with a draw.
            Bernadotte didn't even know he had to go there. Information reached him "by roundabout means." Ultimately, he arrived at Eylau on February 11, three days after the battle. The historian writes that, apparently, "such was his fate"—to be forever late. But I, once again, can't help but be paranoid about Bernadotte's Masonic connections to Bennigsen and other commanders of that campaign...
  4. +1
    25 July 2026 14: 03
    The example of that thug Cadoudal, by the way, shows that monarchist terrorists are no less vile than revolutionary ones. And Pichegru, who committed suicide, probably still had a troubled conscience. It's quite possible he realized that at that very moment, the people and his homeland were not on his side.
    1. 0
      25 July 2026 19: 02
      Why do you think Cadoudal is a terrorist? He fought for a long time, armed and armed, as the leader of the Chouans. For his people and homeland, at least for the small Breton homeland and the "Chouan" people. Isn't that true?
      When fighting became impossible, he decided to eliminate the tyrant Bonaparte. Why not compare him to Brutus and the other fighters against Caesar's tyranny? They eliminated Caesar by an act of terrorism, in modern parlance.
      The only thing that distinguished Cadoudal for the worse was that he caused an explosion in Paris, and random people died.
  5. 0
    26 July 2026 12: 44
    In this small Burgundian town, the future general studied at college and then entered the Brienne Military School (Ecole Militaire de Brienne).

    There's a slight inaccuracy. Pichegru didn't enroll at the Military School of Brienne; he served there as a sort of part-time mathematics teacher—a repetiteur de mathématiques—but remained a civilian. This was a common practice—talented students often earned extra money this way.