Military Review

Restoration of imperial traditions in the Red Army

30
Restoration of imperial traditions in the Red Army

80 years ago, on September 22, 1935, personal military ranks for the personnel of the army were restored in the Soviet armed forces fleet and the title “Marshal of the Soviet Union” was introduced. The first of this highest military rank were awarded to K. E. Voroshilov, A. I. Egorov, M. N. Tukhachevsky, V. K. Blucher and S. M. Budenny.


The military rank determines the legal status or status (rights, duties) of a military person in relation to other military personnel. Military ranks are assigned to servicemen in accordance with their official position, military or special training, length of service, membership in the type of armed forces, the nature of the military and merit. In the Russian army, the signs of distinguishing servicemen at different times were: cold weapon, scarves, sewing on uniforms, epaulets, boas, epaulettes, chevrons and buttonholes.

Initially, the concept of military rank was not - soldiers were called (hence the term “rank”) only by the position they held, whose name was derived from the number of “warriors” who were under the command of the commander. Gradually, however, commanders began to perform not only their direct functions, but became the leaders of the military administration, solving a wide range of tasks. In the old Russian squads there were youths, junior warriors, senior warriors (grids), foremen, centurions, tysyatskie (thousand, analogue of the colonel), temniki (from the Russian word "darkness" - 10 000, analogue of the general). The title of centurion unchanged remained until the first decades of the 20th century.

For the first time in Russia, military ranks appeared in the middle of the XVI century in the Strelets army. It is worth noting that before the Romanovs came to power in the Russian state, the Strelets army consisted of hundreds of archers, and there were no archers or Cossack regiments. The word "regiment" meant not an army unit, but a grouping of often heterogeneous forces, designed to solve a specific tactical task. For example, an ambush regiment, a guard regiment, a large regiment, a siege regiment, etc. Accordingly, the Russian army had no units larger than a hundred, and the mercenaries were reduced to “foreign companies” equal in number to hundreds. The introduction of the regimental system of the foreign system in the XVII century led to the emergence of new military ranks, partly analogous to the all-European. This process ended with the adoption of the first Russian Military Charter in 1647.

During the reign of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich, the streltsy hundreds were brought together in rifle orders, five hundred each. The order was commanded by the head, besides, hundreds began to be divided into fifty. As a result, new ranks appeared in the Streltsy army. Under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, the Archer orders are converted into regiments, while their number has been increased to ten hundred. For the first time appeared the title of "colonel", and an increase in the number of connections led to the appearance of the title of "half-head" or "half-colonel." In the regiments of the foreign system was its own hierarchy of titles. The Military Charter of 1647 was for the first time enshrined in law the system of military ranks, military personnel were divided into categories - privates and constables ("lower", "medium" and "high consignors").

In 1680, Tsar Fedor Alekseevich issued a Decree on military ranks, which carried out the unification of military ranks: now the archers, under the penalty of punishment, were named after the ranks of the foreign system. A new title from the category of junior sergeant (non-commissioned officer) - ensign was assigned. In 1698, a new Charter was issued, authored by an Austrian general in the Russian service of A. A. Weide. For the first time, the rank of brigadier was first introduced, since the brigade building of corps and divisions appeared, and specific general ranks for the types of troops were also introduced. Tsar Peter I finally introduced a unified system of military ranks of the Western European type in the 1716 Army Charter and the Maritime Charter of 1720, which were issued in the Table of Ranks in 1722 year. During the reign of other emperors, some titles were abolished.

After the October Revolution 1917 and the creation of Soviet Russia, all the old ranks and ranks were canceled. The commanders in the army and navy differed only in their positions: in the army, the commander of a platoon, company, battalion, regiment, corps division, army, front, in the navy, commander of a ship, detachment, brigade of ships, etc. In 1924, the title for all military personnel was introduced - the red warrior of the Workers 'and Peasants' Red Army, in abbreviated form - the Red Army (Red Navy). Commanders from ordinary soldiers first distinguished by red bows, bandages, then - triangles, squares, rectangles and diamonds.

The problem was that the commanding staff consisted not only of the commanders of battalions, regiments, divisions, corps and armies. Many cuts in circulation were very complex and even ridiculous. If the chief of staff of the army was called the chief officer, then the chief of the operational department of the army was called — nakoperodstarm, deputy commander for maritime affairs — the deputy commander, etc.

As a result, the USSR began to return to the old system. By decree of the Central Election Commission and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR from September 22, personal military ranks for the army and navy personnel were restored, and the following titles were introduced: “foreman”, “lieutenant”, “captain”, “major”, “colonel”. The insignia identified the place on the buttonholes. The sergeants and foremen hung triangles. The lieutenants were given cubes. Senior officers - rectangles. In common language they were called sleepers.

The servicemen, who were in the leadership of the Red Army, began to be divided into a commanding and commanding staff. Senior commanders began with the captain. He was given one sleeper. Major - two sleepers. Colonel received three sleepers. September 1 1939 introduced a new military rank - Lieutenant Colonel. He got three sleepers. Accordingly, the colonel added one more to his three sleepers.

True, the generals have not yet returned. After all, they were recently beaten on the fronts of the Civil War. Kombrigs, divisional divisions, com-corps, commanders of 2 and 1 rank have survived. Kombrig received one lozenge, a divisional commander received two lozenges, and a corps corps received three lozenges. The commander of 2 rank is four lozenges, the commander of 1 rank is four lozenges and a star. Such a system existed until 1940, when the generals and admiral ranks were restored, but without epaulets. The shoulder straps were restored in 1943. Life itself made it do so, because with epaulets the title is much easier to distinguish than with buttonholes. It had a definite meaning in a combat situation.

In addition, the Order of 22 September 1935 was introduced the title of "Marshal of the Soviet Union." Before 26 June 1945 was the highest, then preceding the rank of Generalissimo of the Soviet Union. The marshals were distinguished by a large golden star on the trench coat. The first assignment of the title of Marshal of the Soviet Union took place on November 21 1935, when the chief top military leaders of the Red Army, People’s Commissar of Defense of the USSR K. Ye. Voroshilov, Chief of the General Staff of the Red Army A.I. Egorov, Deputy Commissar of Defense of the USSR were awarded the highest personal military rank. M. N. Tukhachevsky, Commander of the Special Red Banner Far Eastern Army V. K. Blucher and inspector of cavalry of the Red Army S. M. Budyonny. Before World War II, Marshal Timoshenko, GI Kulik, and B. M. Shaposhnikov also received the rank of marshal.

A similar title existed and exists in many countries in several versions: Marshal, Field Marshal and Field Marshal General. Initially, the word “marshal” meant not a military leader, but a high court position (its source was the position of horseman, horse guard, France. Maréchal - “blacksmith shoe”). For the first time, it was used in the Teutonic Order of Knights as a designation for a high military rank. It was a cavalry commander. The sign of distinction of the marshal in many armies was the solemnly presented symbolic rod, decorated with the symbols of the state - the marshal's baton. Tsar Peter I introduced the rank of generalissimo to the commander-in-chief in 1695, then replaced him in 1699 with the rank of Field Marshal, who, in his opinion, “is the commander-in-chief in the army. His warrant and orders must all be honored, in principle, the whole army from his sovereign was handed to him. ” In Russia, there were several dozen field marshals in the period before 1917.
Author:
30 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. inkass_98
    inkass_98 22 September 2015 07: 30 New
    +3
    Alexander forgot yet another “Marshal” - the General Commissioner of State Security, also the whole army was under the command of such a person, starting with Heinrich Yagoda. Then Yezhov and Beria carried this title until it was abolished along with the other special ranks of the NKVD / NKGB.
  2. parusnik
    parusnik 22 September 2015 07: 50 New
    0
    The restoration of imperial traditions in the Red Army ... the restoration ended with the introduction of epaulettes in 1943 ..
    1. creak
      creak 22 September 2015 11: 23 New
      +3
      Quote: parusnik

      The restoration of imperial traditions in the Red Army ... the restoration ended with the introduction of epaulettes in 1943 ..


      In addition, in the image and likeness of the cadet corps of imperial Russia, Suvorov schools were organized in the USSR (the form almost completely repeated the uniform of the cadets) ...
    2. creak
      creak 22 September 2015 11: 23 New
      0
      Quote: parusnik

      The restoration of imperial traditions in the Red Army ... the restoration ended with the introduction of epaulettes in 1943 ..


      In addition, in the image and likeness of the cadet corps of imperial Russia, Suvorov schools were organized in the USSR (the form almost completely repeated the uniform of the cadets) ...
  3. bionik
    bionik 22 September 2015 08: 17 New
    +2
    Of the five, only two remained: Voroshilov and Budyonny.
    1. Severomor
      Severomor 22 September 2015 09: 55 New
      10
      Quote: bionik
      Of the five, only two remained: Voroshilov and Budyonny.


      And rightly so, traitors have no place in the Red Army. They shit nicely.

      - Vasily Gavrilovich Grabin, the designer of guns, sent greetings to you. I met him recently. He presented me with a magazine with his book “Weapons of Victory” and wrote: “This is how the weapons of victory were forged in the era of JV Stalin.” I asked him: "How do you think Stalin was a smart person?" “Smart is not the right word. We have a lot of smart people. He was a spiritual man, he cared about people, Stalin. Khrushchev said that we were not preparing for war. And I did all my guns before the war. But if they listened to Tukhachevsky, then they would not have been. ”

      - He wrote very well. Well done, agrees Molotov.

      - He says: “I asked Tukhachevsky to put our gun on display. He flatly refused. Then I said that I would declare to the Politburo. This gun was the best in the war. Stalin said on January 1, 1942: "Your cannon saved Russia ..." They wrote about Tukhachevsky: "Bonaparte. He could become a traitor. ”

      - What is Bonaparte? He could not become, he was a traitor, the most infamous traitor, the most dangerous.

      21.05.1974

      “One Hundred and Forty Conversations with Molotov” Felix Chuev
      1. dmb
        dmb 22 September 2015 10: 46 New
        +3
        And you can find out what exactly was "shit." Which deserved execution under the law then in force. But don’t you think that Molotov, who was among those who agreed on the death penalty (by the way, it’s also interesting why it was necessary if there is a law), accusing himself of those who were already destroyed and could not object to him, thus whitewashed himself?
        1. Severomor
          Severomor 22 September 2015 11: 33 New
          +5
          Tukhachevsky was arrested on May 24, and 26 already admitted everything:
          “People’s Commissar of the Interior N.I. Yezhov ... I declare that I acknowledge the existence of an anti-Soviet military-Trotskyite conspiracy and that I was at the head of it. I undertake to independently present to the investigation everything concerning the conspiracy, without concealing any of its participants and not a single fact and document. M. Tukhachevsky. "

          In six and a half pages Tukhachevsky talks about the conspiracy of persons from the highest command.

          “I undertake to give sincere testimony without the slightest concealment of anything from my guilt in this matter, as well as from the guilt of other persons in the conspiracy. Today, May 26, I declare that I acknowledge the existence of an anti-Soviet conspiracy and that I was at the head of it. ... Participation in it was: Feldman, Artuzov, Primakov, Putna and others, which I will show in more detail later. ”

          The testimony of the marshal is 143 pages of handwritten text, which are written voluntarily, in an even and calm handwriting.

          Molotov, who was among those ....... thus whitewashed himself?


          Molotov at that time was 84 years old.
          I always adhered to one point of view (can be traced from the book, similar questions were asked at different times). What should he whitewash?

          PS Well, about the 100 tanks of Tukhachevsky only the lazy does not say.
          1. dmb
            dmb 22 September 2015 11: 56 New
            -1
            I recommend that you read his testimony in the original and at least try to relate it to the charges against the ANTI-SOVIET conspiracy. There, by the way, there were other marshals. Moreover, one of them (Blucher) participated in the condemnation of these, and then also turned out to be an "anti-Soviet". And most importantly, you are modestly silent about the law and the need (coordination) of repression. By the way, why then were Yezhov shot, did they destroy the enemies?
            1. Severomor
              Severomor 22 September 2015 12: 07 New
              0
              I recommend reading ....

              I read
              1. dmb
                dmb 22 September 2015 13: 00 New
                +2
                And what convinced you of the “atisovietism” of both Tukhachevsky himself and the rest. And at the same time Blucher? And how is it to be with Yezhov?
              2. dmb
                dmb 22 September 2015 14: 22 New
                -1
                Judging by the minuses, you do not like the questions, this is already good. When you try to answer them yourself, you will very soon realize that your first comment is akin to a “crunch of French rolls” sung by the 7 percentages mentioned by you below.
                1. Severomor
                  Severomor 22 September 2015 14: 38 New
                  0
                  Quote: dmb
                  Judging by the minuses, you do not like the questions


                  Sorry, but you are not a psychic (it’s about the disadvantages that I set))))))? What for? You don’t bet me ..... well, all these minuses are nonsense.

                  I am now in the role of an examiner and must answer questions .... in order .... very quickly.

                  CPSB You convinced me of my innocence, you plus ..... 2 pluses
                  1. dmb
                    dmb 22 September 2015 14: 50 New
                    0
                    As you understand me, they are also not very interested (mute assessments). But if you really became convinced that you were wrong, then the day will not be in vain.
                    1. Severomor
                      Severomor 22 September 2015 15: 04 New
                      0
                      So you did not say anything sensible, only questions ..... Question - the answer is not very interesting for someone who is forced to constantly answer.

                      You are a question, and it’s not difficult to ask, I have to go into documents ..... I can’t answer right away.

                      About wrong - it was sarcasm
                      Pros are real)))
                      1. dmb
                        dmb 22 September 2015 17: 52 New
                        0
                        The fact is that I can answer them. But I would like to hear it from you, taking into account your position. And then, you do not ask questions, your words are an axiom for you.
  4. erased
    erased 22 September 2015 08: 57 New
    +3
    Of the first five marshals of NPOs of the USSR, three were traitors. And the most striking of them - Tukhachevsky - "red Napoleon" - played so much that he went into a conspiracy with the Trotskyists. Of course, an adult man knew what he was doing, but if he had cut his brains in time, he would have avoided the fate of the others. By the way, Stalin, until recently, did not believe that Tukhachevsky was a traitor and an enemy. And just before the coup in 1937 (barely enough time) he and others were arrested. This is how fate turned ...
  5. loaln
    loaln 22 September 2015 09: 41 New
    +6
    Well, firstly, not of imperial, but justified historical traditions.
    And secondly, stop chatting about imperial topics. Chatting not only didn’t come out with a snout, but they were also letting down their country, which had once passed through the “paradise” imperial thickets, choked there with its blood and, besides hatred, left nothing in the souls of posterity. Except, proven traditions.
    Do not jump out of your pants. All the same, the newly-born boyars and princes will not collect land, but trade them. Wholesale and Retail. They are not capable of big "feats".
    No, I'm lying. I forgot about the imperial balls. Getting there is already a feat!
    1. Severomor
      Severomor 22 September 2015 10: 01 New
      +2
      No, I'm lying. I forgot about the imperial balls. Getting there is already a feat!


      But what about the "taste of French bread" for 7% of the population? ))))
      1. Uncle VasyaSayapin
        Uncle VasyaSayapin 22 September 2015 13: 45 New
        +2
        Crackers let crunch on a logging.
      2. 97110
        97110 22 September 2015 14: 37 New
        -1
        Quote: Severomor
        "taste of french bread"

        He for them is a "crunch of French rolls."
  6. Selevc
    Selevc 22 September 2015 10: 02 New
    +3
    Restoration of imperial traditions in the Red Army
    Probably if in the 30s they would have said such things to Stalin and his marshals, they would have been very surprised and would have neigh for a long time !!! A similar analogy can be drawn between the generals of Kaiser Germany and the Third Reich ... I think that the introduction of ranks is just one of the stages in the formation and development of the Red Army ... Naturally, the tsarist army was taken as an example because there were simply no other examples ... The system of military ranks of the tsarist army was understandable and familiar - And who else to take as a basis? Colonial armies of Western Europe? Hindu troops or the army of the king of the zulus
    1. Uncle VasyaSayapin
      Uncle VasyaSayapin 22 September 2015 11: 11 New
      +2
      The form was returned, the epaulettes were returned, the titles were returned, the territories were returned. Fulfilled all the political, economic, social and military tasks that faced the Russian Empire, and which the leadership of the empire failed! Reached second place in the world after the USA. When else was this?
    2. erg
      erg 22 September 2015 12: 52 New
      +5
      On March 17, 1940, Voroshilov filed a note in the name of Stalin and Molotov with a proposal to introduce general ranks (... I present a draft of new military ranks for commanding officers. When discussing this issue with deputies, we came to the conclusion that it was necessary to accept the same number of general ranks in our army ranks, as was the case in the tsarist army and takes place in a number of European armies - German, French, English ...). As you can see, the experience of not only the tsarist, but also the armies of other countries was taken into account. In general, personal ranks for the general staff were introduced in the same 35th year. But they sounded like posts (brigade commander, corps commander, etc.) It turned out that such ranks were not very convenient in everyday life, and in documentation, and therefore a decision arose to return the previous names to senior ranks. By the way, the article has many inaccuracies. Initially, neither the term rank nor the term position was used, but the term rank was used. If, for example, a person with a lower rank, but fulfilled the duties laid down for a senior rank, they usually indicated that the rank was such and such a rank (by rank meant the rank that the employee had, and by the rank itself, those duties or position that he performed). The charter of 1647 did not have legislative force (by the way, like the Weide charter, written later), but was just a fact-finding work of a recommendatory nature. In those days, the government did not interfere in the internal structure of the units, in particular the soldiers' regiments, leaving this to the discretion of the commanders. Only by the end of the 17th century a more or less harmonious system of ranks developed. It was finally enshrined in the charters of Peter 1. Until Peter, the command staff was divided into officers and primary people. The initial people are those who were later called officers, the officers - non-commissioned officers. Interestingly, in the documents of that time, colonels and generals were often isolated from the initial people, apparently emphasizing their status (it was written, for example, colonels and primary people). The same was often done with sergeants (the highest rank among the officers). However, some researchers attribute this to the imperfection of military records management at that time. The foreman position existed at least from the age of 18. In the year 35, this term designated the title. Other ranks of the junior command staff sounded like job titles, but they were just ranks. In 1940, new terms were introduced to designate the ranks of junior commanders (that is, the ranks of sergeants were introduced), and the rank of corporal was returned.
  7. erg
    erg 22 September 2015 14: 20 New
    +3
    The topic of military ranks was already raised in discussions earlier, and according to some comments it was clear that not everyone understands why the European rank system was entrenched in the tsarist, and later Soviet armies. I will give a brief explanation for those who do not quite understand. In the very terms by which we designate titles, the nature of the duties, provisions, status of their wearer is indicated. At the company level: captain, from the old French dropping - head (meaning main). That is the main one in the unit. Probably they didn’t translate into Russian because the head of us was called the commanders of the archery units (orders, later regiments); A lieutenant or lieutenant - deputies (a bailiff, a person who was instructed to lead in the absence of the chief, a lieutenant - literally the seat holder). A sub-lieutenant, a junior lieutenant or a senior - understandably, means the seniority of the deputy, assistant. To manage the unit usually required at least two assistants. The ensign - the carrier of the banner (the banner is not only a symbol, but also a means of signaling), was later listed as a junior officer in the company, an analogue of today's junior lieutenant. At one time, all the junior officers were called the subaltern officer. And since the time of Peter the Great, company level commanders have been called chief officers. The ranks of the captain-lieutenant and subsequently the head-captain were special ranks that were worn only by those who commanded companies that had chefs from senior officers (patronage was introduced under Peter 3, but finally entrenched under Paul. The bottom line is that a company could have a chief from the category staff officers, such a company was called staff, respectively, the title sounds like the head of a staff company). Also, if the company in the regiment was listed as the regiment's command staff (for example, the colonel could also be the company commander, then one of the officers helped him in command of the company. He was named as a lieutenant commander, assistant captain). After the abolition of patronage over companies in 1812, the rank of staff captain remained in the line of combat ranks. At the level of the regiment (the commanding staff of the regiment was called headquarters officers in tsarist times): the colonel is the head of the regiment, the lieutenant colonel (originally a colonel, he is also a large regimental lieutenant or just a regimental lieutenant) is the immediate deputy colonel. Major is a senior. To manage the regiment, several officers were required, because those who did not belong to the deputy colonel, but to his assistants (we still have a division into deputies and assistants to the chief) were simply called senior regiment officers or majors.
    1. moskowit
      moskowit 22 September 2015 21: 27 New
      0
      Dear "erg", in your rather interesting and detailed review of the history of military ranks there is a small pass. You forgot to clarify the meaning of the ranks of the prime major and second major. I think it would not be bad to show the binding of titles to the "table of ranks". True, this is a completely different topic ...
      Novice lovers of military history will be interesting.
      1. erg
        erg 23 September 2015 06: 59 New
        0
        The rank of prime major and second major existed with us in the second half of the 18th century. The charters of that time for these ranks do not establish any cardinal difference, except for the name. Probably so simply denoted the seniority of the majors in front of each other. In the absence of the regiment commander and his deputy, the general leadership of the regiment first passes to the prime minister, and then to the major for seconds. But what I did not mention is the corporal or gefreytor. The term means roughly how freed from part of the duties or attire. The main duty of the army in peacetime is to carry out guard and guard services. Experienced soldiers helped organize this service, were guards, checking, while they themselves were not at the post. Hence the name. Introduced with us under Peter 1.
  8. erg
    erg 22 September 2015 14: 22 New
    +2
    Read more.
    At the level of the junior command staff (non-commissioned officers in tsarist times, they are officers before Peter): corporal - from the word head, also in the meaning of the head. The level commander is about today's squad. In the past, companies were not divided into platoon and squad, but corporality. A sergeant is supposedly an employee carrying the hardships of service (an explanation of the term according to the charter of 1647, since the sergeants were entrusted with the main task of training and managing the company personnel). Senior over all non-commissioned officers, chief assistant officer. A position similar to our foreman. After 1762, there were at least 3 sergeants in the companies. One was appointed senior. The charter of 1796 assigned him the title of sergeant major. Feldfebel - literally field courier. The title reflects the essence - to be connected between officers and junior commanders. The title was introduced even under Peter 1, but it was used only under Paul 1. The ensign - assistant warrant officer. By rank between corporal and sergeant, later before sergeant major, and before the revolution - a special rank for non-commissioned officers of extra-long service, not associated with any special posts. Kaptenarmus (the supervisor of the gun) and the furrier (who was engaged in the material support of the company) are also special ranks between the corporal and the ensign. Subsequently, simply the designation of posts. Since 1796, by decree of Paul 1, all non-commissioned officers, except for ensigns and sergeants, should be referred to simply as non-commissioned officers. In the lists, they were often held under the name of junior non-commissioned officers. But at the same time, the previous hierarchy was preserved within this category. Since then, the terms corporal and sergeant have disappeared from use, and captenarmus and furrier are used as job titles. After the companies began to be divided into platoons and squads, the ranks of the junior non-commissioned officer appeared, who served as a separate non-commissioned non-commissioned officer or equal to him, and the senior non-commissioned officer for the position of a platoon non-commissioned officer, which remained until the revolution. Today, all these ranks are replaced by the ranks of Junior Sergeant, Sergeant, Senior Sergeant. The rank of sergeant major is the rank of foreman (which better reflects the nature of the posts for the foreman rank). The ranks of the ensign and senior ensign were introduced as special ranks and, in addition to the common name, have no analogues in the tsarist army. However, if before the warrant officer did not mean just a junior officer, but he performed special duties, then it would be logical to introduce the rank of ensign as special in today's time.
  9. erg
    erg 22 September 2015 14: 22 New
    +2
    Read more.
    At the general level: General Field Marshal - the main field commander (Marshal - initially a stable at the royal stable, later commander of the cavalry in the knight’s army, the entire army). Commander of the entire army. The modern analogue of an army general is the chief (term general) in the army. Nowadays, the marshal is an honorary title not related to the performance of any special duties. A general from ... (infantry, that is, infantry, artillery, cavalry) - senior over a certain kind of weapon in the army. They fulfill the duties of assistants to the field marshal, can replace him. They are equal to each other. Sometimes this title was called the full general. Those who performed army management duties were called the general-chef. Field Marshal General and General from ... constituted the so-called Anshefism. General lieutenant - assistant chief. So called direct deputy generals. The deputy general of the field marshal was called - the general of field marshal lieutenant. Subsequently - the main position for lieutenant generals, commander of the corps. Major General - Chief Senior over part of the army. The army consisted of units (right left flank, etc.) According to Petrovsky’s charter, each flank should have from 2 to 4 major generals. Subsequently, the chiefs (in tsarist times) or the commanders of the division. Brigadier - brigade commander, the union of several regiments. Below is a major general, but often commanded an equal or greater number of units. Because of this, in 1762, the commission preparing the reform of the army, pointed out the uselessness of this title, proposing to leave only major generals. Officially abolished during the reign of Paul 1. In Soviet times - a similar rank of brigade commander, also subsequently abolished. These are the main combat ranks. In addition to them, there were many more specific, but not yet extant, titles.
  10. moskowit
    moskowit 22 September 2015 19: 21 New
    +1
    For an author with such erudition, the article is superficial. Dear Alexander, he missed the period and the system of military ranks of the regiments of the "new system".
    "In 1681 there were 33 soldiers (61 000 people) and 25 dragoon and reytarsky (29 000 people) regiments. At the end of the 17th century they comprised more than half of all troops and at the beginning of the 18th century were used to form a regular Russian army." (wikipedia)

    Very sorry. Indeed, this period from the first military formations of M. Skopin-Shuisky to the Azov campaigns of Peter, almost the entire 17 century, is very full of significant events in the military history of Russia.