• 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

    The policy of collectivization was dominated with the idea of the government taking the produce of peasants he was faced with lots of tasks to try to get the kulaks to agree to this where at the end he used force.

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

    Industry had come to a standstill. The Duma set up a Provisional Committee to take over government but the Tsar ordered them to disband, to which they firmly refused. On 12th March the Tsar ordered his army to put down the revolt by force, and they firmly refused.

  1. Stalin Sources Questions

    guilty in order to protect their family, was that in 1934 Stalin issued a new law that stated that those who were put on trial were "encouraged" to plead guilty. Stalin said that those who had committed crimes towards Russia and pleaded not guilty would be killed and that afterwards their families may be killed aswell.

  2. Stalin: Man or Monster - Sources Questions

    Bukharin at one time was close to Stalin and would certainly know him well which adds to the reliability. As well alike to source E it has some single detail that I know from my historical knowledge that is true, such as that Stalin was not able to convince everyone

  1. 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

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

    Women were thought not to be wise, so because of this men thought that they could not be trusted with the votes. Many men thought that women needed protecting and that they should be kept away from the world of politics.

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