• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Was the Kornilov affair a failed military Putsch by a right-wing general?

Extracts from this document...


Was the Kornilov affair a failed military Putsch by a right-wing general? James Joll describes the Kornilov affair as "a failed attempt at a military Putsch by a right-wing general" (p.230) in his book Europe Since 1870. This view reflects the official government version at the time. This essay intends to see how accurate a picture this version gave of the Kornilov affair. The Kornilov affair officially began on September 9, when Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Army, General L. C. Kornilov, brought a corps to Petrograd and disobeyed an order of dismissal by Alexander Kerensky, head of the Provisional Government1. On September 10 a declaration that Kornilov was a traitor and attempting to overthrow the government led to a majority of the population united to support the Provisional Government and the Soviets. Thus Kornilov's venture failed and on September 14 he surrendered and it was over. Before going into the events, a little background is needed. The two main players in this affair are Kornilov and Kerensky whose relationship was taut over issues regarding how to maintain discipline in the army and the manner in which Kornilov made demands to Kerensky. ...read more.


Kerensky sent moment Savinkov was to Stavka to meet with Kornilov and pass this on to him, and thus Kornilov's plans gained some legal credence. Ukraintsev who was a member of the Commission of Inquiry into the Kornilov affair set up by the Provisional Government to investigate the events states, "We read and re-read the tape trying to discover in it something which could contradict General Kornilov's statement. In fact, a certain imprecision in some expressions was capable of causing doubt, but this was easily explicable by the necessity for General Kornilov to be fairly secretive, as the conversation was not conducted directly, but through an intermediary, namely the military telegraphist. There was the same lack of precision in Kerensky's expressions, obviously for the same reason. Taking this into account, the fact remained that we had in our hands a tape which provided incontrovertible material evidence that the calvary corps was advancing on Petrograd with the knowledge and consent if not of the whole Government, then of its head, and that the accusation against General Kornilov therefore collapsed. What in Petrograd had appeared as a crime of the Supreme Commander was transformed into a legal act and we, the Commission, found ourselves in a totally absurd position."10(p.291) ...read more.


To put the matter somewhat crudely: "Kerensky seized the most propitious moment, in order not to be eaten by Kornilov, but on the contrary to devour Kornilov himself." "12(p.297) It appears that due to Lvov's intervention, Kerensky became anxious that Kornilov's plans differed from his and wished to renege on the agreement thus he betrayed Kornilov. In light of this evidence it appears that neither Kornilov nor Kerensky were innocent in this affair. Kerensky had knowledge of Kornilov's plans to send the calvary corps to Petrograd and had in fact asked him to do as much. After Lvov's visit Kerensky believed he'd made a mistake and thus reneged on the agreement with Kornilov, and used it against Kornilov. Kornilov although believing he had the approval of the Provisional Government to do what he was doing, had been prepared to do so prior to any agreement with Kerensky. The fact of the matter is that there was an attempt at a military coup by Kornilov as when Kerensky called for his dismissal, he refused to step down. Essentially Kornilov had merely reverted to his original plans prior to his agreement with Kerensky. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 essays

  1. Stalin man or monster

    new power again - as shown in source B - this happened with a great deal of human evil suffering. Workers where paid low wages in deplorable accommodation where they suffered from basic amenities such as hot water and electricity, working hours where also unpredictable and lateness was punishable by

  2. How far do the sources suggest that Kornilov main aim in august 1917 was ...

    On the other hand source 1 goes on to state that Kornilov is a defender of Russia and only looks to help Russia get a constitution and hold elections for a fair government. Source 1 talks about Kornilov this way because it is Kornilov himself writing the source, source 2

  1. Explain Why Women Failed To Gain The Right To Vote Between 1900 and 1914

    Men also thought that women should not have the right to vote as they do not fight in the war. Two groups formed because of these matters, the Suffragists and the Suffragettes.

  2. How and why did the Bolsheviks seize power in 1917?

    In December, leaders of the St. Petersburg and Moscow soviets were exiled. This led to serious street fighting in Moscow, but strikers were no match for the professional army. By March 1906, the revolution was completely crushed and in May 1906, the Tsar underlined his victory by introducing Fundamental Laws.

  1. The blance sheet for russia.

    ceased to support the Provisional Government must be one of the greatest mysteries since Saint Paul saw the light on the road to Damascus. But if we leave aside the obvious motivation of spitefulness, malice and impotent rage, we can see that the following passage from a rightwing paper constitutes

  2. Stalin Sources Questions

    Some might suggest that Stalin is complimenting the women for their patriotism for their country. The source does not reveal the nationality or name of the photographer who took the photograph. It does not reveal the date of when the photograph was taken, either.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work