If Kornilov managed to take Petrograd in September 1917, say Kerensky refuses to arm the Bolsheviks, what happens next, does the Provisional Governement side with the Reds or Kornilov? How does this affect the Eastern front? Does an earlier RCW lead to an early B-L? Does a three way civil war happen in Russia? etc
 
Wasn't Kornilov's entire plan simply "March in Petrograd and hope they will make me dictator"?

In any case, I don't see it ending well for him. OTL Kerensky disliked the Whites, believing that they simply wanted a military dictatorship rather than true democracy.

ITTL I immagine him refusing to recognise Kornilov as new leader and call for resistance against Petrograd. I can't say if he would ally with Lenin ITTL, but a truce with the Bolshevicks is possible.

On the other hand the Germans would be delighted at the collapse of Russia and I can see them assisting the anti-Kornilov front. Sure, Kerensky may not like the Germans but getting rid of Kornilov is more important.

On the other hand Kornilov was a Russian nationalist and he would probably try to keep the war against the Central Powers going (with very poor results probably).

ITTL I can see Kerensky accepting one of Berlin's earlier peace proposals (aka ceding only Poland and Lithuania) if he allows him to focus on Kornilov.
 
Wasn't Kornilov's entire plan simply "March in Petrograd and hope they will make me dictator"?

In any case, I don't see it ending well for him. OTL Kerensky disliked the Whites, believing that they simply wanted a military dictatorship rather than true democracy.

ITTL I immagine him refusing to recognise Kornilov as new leader and call for resistance against Petrograd. I can't say if he would ally with Lenin ITTL, but a truce with the Bolshevicks is possible.

On the other hand the Germans would be delighted at the collapse of Russia and I can see them assisting the anti-Kornilov front. Sure, Kerensky may not like the Germans but getting rid of Kornilov is more important.

On the other hand Kornilov was a Russian nationalist and he would probably try to keep the war against the Central Powers going (with very poor results probably).

ITTL I can see Kerensky accepting one of Berlin's earlier peace proposals (aka ceding only Poland and Lithuania) if he allows him to focus on Kornilov.
Aight that was pretty much what I was thinking, I think the Bolsheviks would make truce with Kerensky since Petrograd was one of their strong hold and they’d want to recover their strenght.
 
Last edited:
Presumably if Kornilov has been allowed to reach the city then the Provisional Government has decided, unlike OTL, that he is the lesser of two evils (compared to the Bolsheviks)? So we might see Kerensky increasingly beholden to the military rather than to the Petrograd Soviet as IOTL.

Presumably that makes peace with Germany even less likely, but also might increase the probability of civil disorder in Russia (unless Kornilov can decapitate the leftist leadership).

But these rambling thoughts are based on an A Level module from six years ago, so I imagine I've got the wrong end of the stick somewhere!
 
Hmmm what if Kerensky sides with Kornilov instead? Technically Kornilov iirc wants Petrograd soviet out iirc.So Basically You'll see some commies dead, and PG basically makes Him dictator.



Or should Kornilov like crown Kerensky as dictator? I've heard smth about Kornilov wanting to put Kerensky as Dictator. Where the Coup was secretly orchestrated by Kerensky all along? Some sourcr say...



If Kerensky haven't hesitated and gave Kornilov the backing ig instead of like otl
 
Hmmm what if Kerensky sides with Kornilov instead? Technically Kornilov iirc wants Petrograd soviet out iirc.So Basically You'll see some commies dead, and PG basically makes Him dictator.



Or should Kornilov like crown Kerensky as dictator? I've heard smth about Kornilov wanting to put Kerensky as Dictator. Where the Coup was secretly orchestrated by Kerensky all along? Some sourcr say...
Do you have any link to the sources, I heard Kerensky himself says he didnt know.
 
Do you have any link to the sources, I heard Kerensky himself says he didnt know.
One take on the Kornilov affair was put forward by Aleksander Kerensky himself, the main target of the coup. In the years after the event, Kerensky described the affair as a right-wing conspiracy that "...developed slowly, systematically, with cool calculation of all the factors involved affecting its possible success or failure."[14] Kornilov, on the other hand, argued that Kerensky was drawn into this conspiracy long after the preparatory work had been completed. In a 1966 interview with Soviet journalist Genrikh Borovik, Kerensky further elaborated on his theory by stating that Winston Churchill had played a central role in the conspiracy.[15]

In 1970 Harvey Asher, who received his doctorate in history and pursued research into the Russian Revolution, suggested that Kerensky and Kornilov had an agreement to use the military to restore order within Russia. Asher then goes on to argue that, upon learning from Lvov that Kornilov favoured the idea of a military dictatorship, Kerensky reneged on their agreement in fear of being removed from power.[16]

According to the British historian John Keegan, Kornilov was maneuvered by others into attempting the coup, but he does not say who those others were.[17] An earlier historian, AJP Taylor, believed that Kerensky encouraged the coup until he realized that Kornilov intended to destroy both the Bolsheviks and any trace of democracy including Kerensky himself.[18]

The American historian Richard Pipes put forward another interpretation of the event in his work The Russian Revolution: 1899–1919. Pipes argued that, far from there being a Kornilov plot, there was in fact a "'Kerensky plot' engineered to discredit the general as the ringleader of an imaginary but widely anticipated counter-revolution, the suppression of which would elevate the Prime Minister to a position of unrivalled popularity and power, enabling him to meet the growing threat from the Bolsheviks."[19]

From da wiki about Kornilov affair
 
I'm definitely thinking that it's likely Kerensky just ends up on top, being suggested that like Kornilov will just put Kerensky as dictator. Maybe a duumvirate like that. But Kerensky has like politicking and knowledge. So it ends up as Kornilov being "Dictator" while kerensky runs the whole operation
 
Also would like to point out that the PG mainly the Kerensky government would not sign peace. As that would mean cut off aid and supplies to Russia. Especially food. Meaning complete economic collapse and widespread starvation might soon follow.
 
... as it seems to me Kornilov himself was rather apolitical. ... aside getting rid of the Bolsheviks and other 'revolutionaries' who were by the unrest and disorder caused by them distracting Rassia from its war against the CP. He seems to have been 'only' a military mind as maybe also 'proven' by the easeness he submitted himself under the 'political' leadership of Alekseyev of the Volunteer Army.

Given the up to day not clear circumstances of the beginning of the Kornilov-affair - was is ordered/approved/talked over with Kerensky in the beginning or not - I would render it well possible that after a successfull 'pacification' of St.Petersburg
-eliminating the Petrograd Soviet​
-as well as the members of the All-Russian Executive Commitee​
-as well as what prominent heads of the Bolsheviks in reach​
and presenting them all (esp. the latter named heads) to Kerensky on a silver plate in September 1917 Keresky being the 'political animal' he was would have quickly sided with Kornilov and installed himself as the now rather undisputed leader of the dependant on him Provisional Goverment.
... regardless whatever Kerensky told (fairy tales ?) afterwards IOTL.

Kornilov would have stayed Supreme C-n-C and would have been happy to turn against the germans once more, letting the political mop-up to Kerensky. ... if in such a TL we would/could see the election for the Russian Constituent Assembly still happen and under what conditions and with what results ...
IIRC one of the consequences of the unsuccessfull Kornilov affair was the immediate abolition of the monarchy - something as i.e. a constitutional version still in the cards at that moments - and declaring Russia a republic.
So ... something alike might still have been possible in TTL with Kornilov - and in its wake - Kerensky - successfull but no 'October' aka bolshevik 2nd revolution anymore.

I have some doubts that after this Kornilov as C-n-C would have been militarily more successfull against the CP forces as they were IOTL, i.e. Operation Albion, civil war in Finnland and whatever - given whatever available forces he might have been able to muster rather minor - offensive operations he might have tried with kinda Operation Faustschlag in its wake even earlier that IOTL.
Reghardless the events in St.Petersburg the troops would still be as unreliable as they were IOTL. ... and not magically return to some kind of 'August 1914'-experience.
Therefore regardless some russian politicians of the PGs after some further defeats of the russian army and advance of german troops even Kerenski would render it 'sensible' to ask for at least an armistice in late(r) 1917 (maybe even earlier than OTL as considerable defeats might have occured earlier with still further deterriorating civilian conditions as IOTL as well). ... despite possible further 'bribing' attemps of the US of A.
The rebelling soldiers and workers are just at the doors in St.Petersburg while Washintgon and Wall Street a rather to far away fro being of life saving help.
 
Last edited:
1572BFEE-5B09-445B-9B21-A69DBF2C5FE6.jpeg

White, James D. “The Kornilov Affair. A Study in Counter-Revolution.” Soviet Studies 20, no. 2 (1968): 187–205. http://www.jstor.org/stable/150017.​
Kornilov’s coalition was an unwieldy one of Moscow and Petrograd industrialists (Tretyakov for example), likeminded generals in Stavka, the Kadet leadership, and much of the organized right. Kornilov would have complete control in the capital if his putsch was allowed to go ahead: why keep the SRs around? Kerensky realized the terrible position he was in, and feared a dictatorship of the right more than he feared his opponents to the left. I don’t really think there’s a chance Kerensky and the civilian government is going to be the top dog after Kornilovists occupy the capital.

CF813CD5-C57E-4B83-98B3-2E9EC50F4944.jpeg

Asher, Harvey. “The Kornilov Affair: A Reinterpretation.” The Russian Review 29, no. 3 (1970): 286–300. https://doi.org/10.2307/127537.​
Kornilov’s action was initially planned as a revolt against the Provisional Government. It changed course when Kornilov was given to understand that Kerensky was going to support his action. This understanding was reached through backchannel miscommunications (Lvov and Savinkov are to blame for this). Notice that Lvov did not mention to Kornilov that Kerensky was ready to “host his troops” - he says “surrender power”. Fairly unambiguous. Kornilov mistakenly believed Kerensky was giving him the go ahead to establish a new government, not to bolster the current one (which he saw as weak and chaotic). Once Kerensky made his true position known, Kornilov continued and fell back to his initial plan of outright revolt with no veneer of legality.

With this said, I don’t really see any weight to the claim that Kornilov was just there to help out Kerensky and ensure smooth sailing for the Provisional Government. He was allied with a bloc of the right and intended to march on the capital with or without the support of the PG. The terms on which Kornilov mistakenly accepted PG support was for the removal of Kerensky and the installation of new men in office. I don’t think a dictatorship of Kerensky with Kornilov’s bayonets was in the cards. Those are the terms that Kerensky wanted, not the ones Kornilov was prepared to carry out.

Also yes the sources are a bit dated here and pre-archival, but it doesn’t look like much has been done post ‘91 on the Kornilov Affair unfortunately.
Wrote about this topic a while back. Not sure I agree with the idea that Kerensky and his network would be left in charge and that Kornilov simply wished to clean out the city and ensure order. He himself may have tried to portray himself as an apolitical and disinterested soldier (common theme with Tsarist officers), but he certainly was allied with political forces which would use the Kornilovist putsch to install themselves - Kadets namely. As the articles I cited suggest, Kerensky realized that he faced a bigger threat from Kornilov's coup than he did from releasing Bolsheviks and letting the Petrograd Soviet go wild. If Kornilov succeeds, I don't see Kerensky lasting very long at all as top dog. Also I wonder if Kornilov could maintain order in his army even with Kerensky's approval. While the Committee for the Struggle Against Counterrevolution was important in agitating soldiers and disrupting rail lines, if Kornilov's force was all that united this couldn't have been possible in the first place. It's possible that Kornilov still faces mutinous soldiers who may not actually fire upon citizens in Petrograd and this could undermine his coup in a different way. Something to consider at least.
 
Already in April 1917, the idea of establishing a military dictatorship became popular among officers dissatisfied with the new order; many military organizations were formed. The aspirations of the military were also supported by some civil organizations, including the Society for Economic Revival of Russia headed by A. I. Guchkov and A. I. Putilov and the Republican Center, which even created its own military department to coordinate the actions of various officer organizations. Various candidates were nominated for the post of military dictator in spring and summer, including M. B. Alekseev, A. A. Brusilov and A. B. Kolchak. (Source is Russian Wikipedia)

Maybe these organisations could take over if Kornilov’s coup were to succeed?
political forces which would use the Kornilovist putsch to install themselves - Kadets namely.
Weren’t the Kadets liberals?
 
Last edited:
Weren’t the Kadets liberals?
The Constitutional Democratic Party, known to history as the Kadets, were founded in 1905 as what Wikipedia describes as a "center-left to left wing" party with a ideology of "Radicalism, Republicanism & Social Liberalism".

However, sometime in late 1906 -when it became clear the revolution started the previous year was failing- they shifted to the center with a new ideology of "Classical Liberalism, Constitutional Monarchy, Parliamentarianism & Plurism".
 
However, sometime in late 1906 -when it became clear the revolution started the previous year was failing- they shifted to the center with a new ideology of "Classical Liberalism, Constitutional Monarchy, Parliamentarianism & Plurism".
Also in the revolutionary year of 1917, the Kadets were the rightmost legal party in the Provisional Government since anything to their right was outlawed as monarchist. From Wikipedia:

A radical party just 11 years earlier, after the February Revolution the Kadets occupied the rightmost end of the political spectrum since all monarchist parties had been dissolved and the Kadets were the only openly functioning non-socialist party remaining.

So in practice, by the time of Kornilov’s coup the Kadets were the effective standardbearers for the parliamentary right and increasingly at odds with the Kerensky government over war policy and appeasement of the soviets among other things. Which led many of them to support the Kornilov coup against the Provisional Government.
 
Last edited:

marktaha

Banned
Also in the revolutionary year of 1917, the Kadets were the rightmost legal party in the Provisional Government since anything to their right was outlawed as monarchist. From Wikipedia:
A radical party just 11 years earlier, after the February Revolution the Kadets occupied the rightmost end of the political spectrum since all monarchist parties had been dissolved and the Kadets were the only openly functioning non-socialist party remaining.
So in practice, by the time of Kornilov’s coup the Kadets were the effective standardbearers for the parliamentary right and increasingly at odds with the Kerensky government over war policy and appeasement of the soviets among other things. Which led many of them to support the Kornilov coup against the Provisional Government.
 
Top