Why is the First World War called the Patriotic War? So what was it about - “until the enemy leaves our land”? and where is it, this “land of ours”? Situation on the southwestern front

As you might guess, the name began to be used only after the Second World War began on September 1, 1939. world war. Before this, the name “Great War” was more often used, and somewhat less often - simply “World War”. In Russia, before the October Revolution of 1917, in addition to the name “Great War,” the following were in use: official names like “Second Patriotic War” and “Great Patriotic War” and such unofficial names as "Great War", "Great European War" and "German War".

The last name emphasized that this was the first war against German state after Seven Years' War 1756-1763, as well as that in the First World War German Empire was the main opponent of the Russian Empire. After the revolution, the First World War in the USSR until the beginning of the Second World War was called the “imperialist war”, and the name “First World War” was written with lowercase, not with capital letter. During the war, the propaganda of the tsarist government sought to liken it to the Patriotic War of 1812, which came to be called the “First Patriotic War.” This was facilitated by the fact that shortly before the start of the First World War, in 1912, the 100th anniversary of the War of 1812 was celebrated on a grand scale.

Following the model of the struggle against " Great Army"Napoleon tried to create horse-drawn partisan detachments from regular and Cossack cavalry, which turned out to be almost useless in conditions of trench warfare and, at best, could only carry out reconnaissance searches. The main thing is that the Russian army has changed a lot over the past hundred years, and has changed far from better side. In 1812, the Russian army was a professional army, consisting of military recruits and nobles, the vast majority of whom already had sufficient combat experience by the beginning of the war. This army numbered about half a million people and could fight almost equally with French army- at that moment the best army in the world.

The general social and economic backwardness of Russia from Western Europe at that time it had not yet affected the army, since the significant population and resources of the Russian Empire made it possible to maintain a strong army, not inferior to the best Western European armies. Then there were enough manufactories to outfit the troops and supply them with cannons and rifles with sufficient supply cannonballs and bullets. During the naked war of 1914-1918 the situation was completely different. By 1917, the Russian army numbered about 10 million people, and the personnel army was knocked out almost completely in the first three months of the war. In 1917, the army consisted mainly of recruits who had little combat experience and little understanding of the goals of the war, since most of them were illiterate or semi-literate. The officers were also, to a large extent, wartime warrant officers and second lieutenants, who did not have much authority among their subordinates.

In the War of 1812, at least, the officers were fully aware of the goals of the war - service to the emperor and the preservation of the greatness of Russia, which required crushing the enemy army, and they knew how to instill this in their subordinates. During the First World War, wartime officers, who, as a rule, were not hereditary nobles, had a very vague idea of the goals of the war and did not have much respect for the last Russian monarch, or for the monarchy as a whole. And for millions of soldiers, the goals of the war in the form of conquering Constantinople and the Straits or helping “brotherly Serbia” were frankly alien, if only because few knew who the Serbs were. And, unlike the war with Napoleon, Russia in the First World War could not field millions of sufficiently combat-ready soldiers and hundreds of thousands of sufficiently trained ones.

A Russian industry, which was several times inferior in volume and quality of manufactured products to the USA, Germany, England and France, and in terms of production per capita - also to Belgium, Italy and Austria-Hungary, was not able to provide an army required quantity rifles, machine guns and guns, as well as ammunition for them, not to mention such modern weapons as aircraft. Russia was not able to maintain transport at the proper level, which played a fatal role in front of February revolution. Finally, in 1812, Napoleon invaded the Russian provinces and reached Moscow, which caused a surge of patriotic feelings for the protection native land and the development of the partisan movement, to which the aggressor’s army, especially after the burning of Moscow, turned out to be very vulnerable. A century later, the Germans reached the Russian provinces proper only in February 1918, when resistance to the Russian army virtually ceased. There was also no talk about the development of the partisan movement. The patriotism associated with the declaration of war had dried up by the end of 1914. As a result, the Russian army was able to fight on equal terms only with the Austro-Hungarian army, torn apart by ethnic contradictions, traditionally defeating the Turks, but completely losing to the German army. But the war led to enemy occupation of Russian Poland, Lithuania, large parts of Belarus and Latvia, and ultimately to a revolution that ended the Romanov monarchy and brought the Bolsheviks to power, which determined the fate of Russia throughout almost the entire 20th century.

Russia suffered a general defeat, and the glorious victories of the Russian army over the Austrians and Turks served only as weak consolation. For all the above reasons, the First World War was not perceived by the overwhelming majority of the population, with the possible exception of a fairly narrow stratum of senior officers, as a domestic war. Therefore, the term “Great Patriotic War” or “Second Patriotic War” in relation to the First World War was used only in official publications, but was practically not widespread among the general population, in diaries, private correspondence, etc.

One hundred great secrets of the First World War / B.V. Sokolov. - M.: Veche, 2014.-416 e. - (100 great).

This unprecedented war must be brought to complete victory. Whoever thinks now about peace, who desires it, is a traitor to the Fatherland, its traitor.

August 1, 1914 Germany declared war on Russia. The First World War (1914-1918) began, which became the Second Patriotic War for our Motherland.

How did it happen that the Russian Empire became embroiled in the First World War? Was our country ready for it?

Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Chief Researcher of the Institute told Foma about the history of this war, what it was like for Russia general history RAS (IVI RAS), President of the Russian Association of Historians of the First World War (RAIWW) Evgeniy Yurievich Sergeev.

Visit of French President R. Poincaré to Russia. July 1914

What the masses don't know

Evgeniy Yuryevich, The First World War (WWII) is one of the main directions of your scientific activity. What influenced the choice of this particular topic?

This interesting question. On the one hand, the significance of this event for world history leaves no doubt. This alone can motivate a historian to study WWI. On the other hand, this war still remains, to a certain extent, “terra incognita” of Russian history. Civil war and the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945) overshadowed it, relegated it to the background in our consciousness.

No less important are the extremely interesting and little-known events of that war. Including those whose direct continuation we find during the Second World War.

For example, there was such an episode in the history of WWII: On August 23, 1914, Japan declared war on Germany., being in alliance with Russia and other Entente countries, supplied Russia with weapons and military equipment. These supplies went through the Chinese Eastern Railway (CER). The Germans organized an entire expedition (sabotage team) there in order to blow up the tunnels and bridges of the Chinese Eastern Railway and interrupt this communication. Russian counterintelligence intercepted this expedition, that is, they managed to prevent the liquidation of the tunnels, which would have caused significant damage to Russia, because an important supply artery would have been interrupted.

- Marvelous. How can it be, Japan, with whom we fought in 1904-1905...

By the time WWII began, relations with Japan were different. The corresponding agreements have already been signed. And in 1916, an agreement on a military alliance was even signed. We had a very close collaboration.

Suffice it to say that Japan gave us, although not free of charge, three ships that Russia lost during the Russo-Japanese War. The Varyag, which the Japanese raised and restored, was among them. As far as I know, the cruiser "Varyag" (the Japanese called it "Soya") and two other ships raised by the Japanese were bought by Russia from Japan in 1916. On April 5 (18), 1916, the Russian flag was raised over the Varyag in Vladivostok.

Moreover, after the Bolshevik victory, Japan participated in the intervention. But this is not surprising: the Bolsheviks were considered accomplices of the Germans, the German government. You yourself understand that the conclusion of a separate peace on March 3, 1918 (Brest-Litovsk Peace) was essentially a stab in the back of the allies, including Japan.

Along with this, of course, there were very specific political and economic interests Japan in the Far East and Siberia.

- But there were other interesting episodes in WWII?

Certainly. It can also be said (few people know about this) that military convoys known from the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945 were present during WWII, and also went to Murmansk, which in 1916 was specially built for this purpose. Was open railway, connecting Murmansk with European part Russia. The supplies were quite significant.

A French squadron operated together with Russian troops on the Romanian front. Here is a prototype of the Normandy-Niemen squadron. British submarines fought in the Baltic Sea together with the Russian Baltic Fleet.

Cooperation on Caucasian Front between the corps of General N.N. Baratov (who, as part of the Caucasian Army, fought there against the troops Ottoman Empire) And British forces- also a very interesting episode of WWII, one might say, the prototype of the so-called “meeting on the Elbe” during the Second World War. Baratov made a forced march and met with British troops near Baghdad, in the territory modern Iraq. Then these were Ottoman possessions, naturally. As a result, the Turks found themselves caught in a pincer movement.

Visit of French President R. Poincaré to Russia. Photo 1914

Grand plans

- Evgeny Yuryevich, who is to blame for this? the outbreak of the First World War?

The blame clearly lies with the so-called Central Powers, that is, Austria-Hungary and Germany. And even more so in Germany. Although WWII began as a local war between Austria-Hungary and Serbia, without the strong support that was promised to Austria-Hungary from Berlin, it would not have acquired first a European and then a global scale.

Germany really needed this war. Its main goals were formulated as follows: to eliminate Great Britain’s hegemony on the seas, to seize it colonial possessions and acquire “living space in the East” (that is, in Eastern Europe) for the rapidly growing German population. There was a geopolitical concept of “Middle Europe”, according to which main task Germany's goal was to unite European countries around itself into a kind of modern European Union, but, naturally, under the auspices of Berlin.

To ideologically support this war, a myth was created in Germany about “surrounding the Second Reich with a ring of hostile states”: from the West - France, from the East - Russia, on the seas - Great Britain. Hence the task: to break through this ring and create a prosperous world empire with its center in Berlin.

- What role did Germany assign to Russia and the Russian people in the event of its victory?

In case of victory, Germany expected to return Russian kingdom to the borders of approximately the 17th century (that is, before Peter I). Russia, in German plans at that time, was supposed to become a vassal of the Second Reich. The Romanov dynasty was supposed to be preserved, but, of course, Nicholas II (and his son Alexei) would be removed from power.

- How did the Germans behave in the occupied territories during WWII?

In 1914-1917, the Germans managed to occupy only the extreme western provinces of Russia. They behaved there rather restrainedly, although, of course, they requisitioned the property of the civilian population. But there were no mass deportations to Germany or atrocities directed against civilians.

Another thing is 1918, when German and Austro-Hungarian troops occupied vast territories in conditions of virtual collapse tsarist army(let me remind you that they reached Rostov, Crimea and North Caucasus). Mass requisitions for the needs of the Reich had already begun here, and resistance units appeared, created in Ukraine by nationalists (Petlyura) and Socialist Revolutionaries, who spoke out sharply against the Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty. But even in 1918, the Germans could not make much of a turn, since the war was already coming to an end, and they sent their main forces to the Western Front against the French and British. However partisan movement against the Germans in 1917–1918 in the occupied territories was nevertheless noted.

First World War. Political poster. 1915

Session III State Duma. 1915

Why did Russia get involved in the war?

- What did Russia do to prevent war?

Nicholas II hesitated to the end whether to start a war or not, proposing to resolve all controversial issues at a peace conference in The Hague through international arbitration. Such proposals on the part of Nicholas were made to Wilhelm II, the German Emperor, but he rejected them. And therefore, to say that the blame for the start of the war lies with Russia is absolute nonsense.

Unfortunately, Germany ignored Russian initiatives. The point is that German intelligence and the ruling circles were well aware that Russia was not ready for war. And Russia’s allies (France and Great Britain) were not quite ready for it, especially Great Britain in terms of ground forces.

Russia in 1912 began to carry out a large program of army rearmament, and it was supposed to end only by 1918–1919. And Germany actually completed preparations for the summer of 1914.

In other words, the “window of opportunity” was quite narrow for Berlin, and if a war was to start, it had to start in 1914.

- How justified were the arguments of opponents of the war?

The arguments of the opponents of the war were quite strong and clearly formulated. There were such forces among the ruling circles. There was a fairly strong and active party that opposed the war.

There is a well-known note from one of the major statesmen of that time, P. N. Durnovo, which was submitted at the beginning of 1914. Durnovo warned Tsar Nicholas II about the destructiveness of the war, which, in his opinion, meant the death of the dynasty and the death of Imperial Russia.

There were such forces, but the fact is that by 1914 Russia was in allied relations not with Germany and Austria-Hungary, but with France, and then with Great Britain, and the very logic of the development of the crisis associated with the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, heir to Austria -The Hungarian throne, brought Russia to this war.

Speaking about the possible fall of the monarchy, Durnovo believed that Russia would not be able to withstand a large-scale war, that there would be a supply crisis and a crisis of power, and this would ultimately lead not only to the disorganization of political and economic life country, but also to the collapse of the empire and loss of control. Unfortunately, his prediction was largely justified.

- Why did anti-war arguments, for all their validity, clarity and clarity, not have the desired impact? Russia could not help but enter the war, even despite such clearly expressed arguments of its opponents?

Allied duty on the one hand, on the other hand - fear of losing prestige and influence in the Balkan countries. After all, if we had not supported Serbia, it would have been catastrophic for Russia’s prestige.

Of course, the pressure of certain forces inclined towards war, including those associated with some Serbian circles at court and with Montenegrin circles, also had an effect. Famous “Montenegrins,” that is, the wives of the grand dukes at court, also influenced the decision-making process.

It can also be said that Russia owed significant amounts of money received as loans from French, Belgian and English sources. The money was received specifically for the rearmament program.

But I would still put the issue of prestige (which was very important for Nicholas II) to the fore. We must give him his due - he always stood for maintaining the prestige of Russia, although, perhaps, he did not always understand this correctly.

- Is it true that the motive of helping the Orthodox (Orthodox Serbia) was one of the decisive factors that determined Russia’s entry into the war?

One of the very significant factors. Maybe not decisive, because - I emphasize again - Russia needed to maintain prestige great power and not turn out to be an unreliable ally at the very beginning of the war. This is probably the main motive.

A sister of mercy writes down the last will of a dying person. Western Front, 1917

Myths old and new

WWII became for our Motherland the Patriotic War, the Second Patriotic War, as it is sometimes called. In Soviet textbooks, WWI was called “imperialist.” What is behind these words?

Giving WWI an exclusively imperialist status is a serious mistake, although this point is also present. But first of all, we must look at it as the Second Patriotic War, remembering that the First Patriotic War was the war against Napoleon in 1812, and we had the Great Patriotic War back in the 20th century.

By taking part in WWI, Russia defended itself. After all, it was Germany that declared war on Russia on August 1, 1914. The First World War became the Second Patriotic War for Russia. In support of the thesis about the main role of Germany in the outbreak of WWII, it can be said that at the Paris Peace Conference (which took place from 01/18/1919 to 01/21/1920) allied powers, among other demands, set a condition for Germany to agree to the article on “war crimes” and admit its responsibility for starting the war.

The whole people then rose up to fight against the foreign invaders. War, I emphasize once again, was declared on us. We didn't start it. And not only the active armies, where, by the way, several million Russians were drafted, but also the entire people took part in the war. The rear and the front acted together. And many of the trends that we later observed during the Great Patriotic War originated precisely during the WWII period. Suffice it to say that partisan detachments were active, that the population of the rear provinces actively showed themselves when they helped not only the wounded, but also refugees from the western provinces fleeing the war. The sisters of mercy were active, and the clergy who were on the front line and often raised troops to attack performed very well.

We can say that the designation of our great defensive wars terms: “First Patriotic War”, “Second Patriotic War” and “Third Patriotic War” - this is the restoration of the historical continuity that was broken in the period after WWI.

In other words, whatever official purposes war, there were ordinary people who perceived this war as a war for their Fatherland, and died and suffered precisely for this.

- And what, from your point of view, are the most common myths about WWI now?

We have already named the first myth. It is a myth that WWII was clearly imperialist and was carried out exclusively in the interests of the ruling circles. This is probably the most widespread myth, which has not yet been eradicated even on the pages school textbooks. But historians are trying to overcome this negative ideological legacy. We are trying to take a different look at the history of WWII and explain to our schoolchildren the true essence of that war.

Another myth is the idea that the Russian army only retreated and suffered defeats. Nothing of the kind. By the way, this myth is widespread in the West, where, in addition to the Brusilov breakthrough, that is, the offensive of the troops of the Southwestern Front in 1916 (spring-summer), even Western specialists, not to mention wide circles public, no major victories They cannot name Russian weapons in WWII.

In fact, excellent examples of Russian military art were demonstrated in WWI. Let's say, in the South Western Front, on the Western Front. This is both the Battle of Galicia and the Lodz operation. Osovets’ defense alone is worth it. Osowiec is a fortress located on the territory of modern Poland, where the Russians defended themselves against superior forces Germans (the siege of the fortress began in January 1915 and lasted 190 days). And this defense is quite comparable to the defense of the Brest Fortress.

You can give examples of Russian hero pilots. You can remember the sisters of mercy who saved the wounded. There are many such examples.

There is also a myth that Russia fought this war in isolation from its allies. Nothing of the kind. The examples I gave earlier debunk this myth.

The war was a coalition one. And we received significant assistance from France, Great Britain, and then the United States, which entered the war later, in 1917.

- Is the figure of Nicholas II mythologized?

In many ways, of course, it is mythologized. Under the influence of revolutionary agitation, he was branded almost as an accomplice of the Germans. There was a myth according to which Nicholas II allegedly wanted to conclude a separate peace with Germany.

In fact, this was not the case. He was a sincere supporter of waging war to a victorious end and did everything in his power to achieve this. Already in exile, he received the news of the Bolsheviks concluding a separate Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty extremely painfully and with great indignation.

Another thing is that the scale of his personality as a statesman turned out to be not entirely adequate for Russia to be able to get through this war to the end.

None I emphasize , no documentary evidence of the desire of the emperor and empress to conclude separate peace not found. He didn't even allow the thought of it. These documents do not exist and could not exist. This is another myth.

As a very clear illustration of this thesis we can cite own words Nicholas II from the Act of Abdication (2 (15) March 1917 at 15:00): "In the days of the greatstruggle against an external enemy who had been striving to enslave our homeland for almost three years, the Lord God was pleased to send Russia a new and difficult test. The outbreak of internal popular unrest threatens to have a disastrous effect on the further conduct of the stubborn war.The fate of Russia, the honor of our heroic army, the good of the people, the entire future of our dear Fatherland require that the war be brought to a victorious end at all costs. <…>».

Nicholas II, V.B. Fredericks and Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich at Headquarters. 1914

Russian troops on the march. Photo 1915

Defeat a year before victory

The First World War, as some believe, was a shameful defeat of the tsarist regime, a disaster, or something else? After all, as long as the last Russian Tsar remained in power, the enemy could not enter the Russian Empire? Unlike the Great Patriotic War.

You are not entirely right that the enemy could not enter our borders. It nevertheless entered the Russian Empire as a result of the offensive of 1915, when the Russian army was forced to retreat, when our opponents transferred virtually all their forces to the Eastern Front, to the Russian front, and our troops had to retreat. Although, of course, the enemy did not enter the deep regions of Central Russia.

But I would not call what happened in 1917-1918 a defeat, a shameful defeat of the Russian Empire. It would be more accurate to say that Russia was forced to sign this separate peace with the Central Powers, that is, with Austria-Hungary and Germany and with other participants in this coalition.

This is a consequence of political crisis, in which Russia found itself. That is, the reasons for this are internal, and not at all military. And we must not forget that the Russians actively fought on the Caucasian front, and the successes were very significant. In fact, the Ottoman Empire was dealt a very serious blow by Russia, which later led to its defeat.

Although Russia did not fully fulfill its allied duty, this must be admitted, it certainly made its significant contribution to the victory of the Entente.

Russia literally didn't have enough for a year. Maybe a year and a half in order to finish this war with dignity as part of the Entente, as part of a coalition

How was the war generally perceived in Russian society? The Bolsheviks, representing an overwhelming minority of the population, dreamed of the defeat of Russia. But what was the attitude of ordinary people?

The general mood was quite patriotic. For example, women of the Russian Empire were most actively involved in charitable assistance. Many people signed up to become nurses without even being professionally trained. They took special short-term courses. A lot of girls and young women from different classes took part in this movement - from members of the imperial family to the very ordinary people. There were special delegations Russian society The Red Cross, who visited the prisoner of war camps, supervised their contents. And not only in Russia, but also abroad. We traveled to Germany and Austria-Hungary. Even in war conditions this was possible through the mediation of the International Red Cross. We traveled through third countries, mainly through Sweden and Denmark. During the Great Patriotic War, such work, unfortunately, was impossible.

By 1916 medical and social assistance wounded was systematized and took on a purposeful character, although initially, of course, much was done on private initiative. This movement to help the army, to help those who were wounded in the rear, had a nationwide character.

Members royal family also took an active part in this. They collected parcels for prisoners of war and donations for the wounded. IN Winter Palace a hospital was opened.

By the way, one cannot help but say about the role of the Church. She was a great help and active army, and in the rear. The activities of regimental priests at the front were very versatile.
In addition to their immediate duties, they were also involved in drawing up and sending “funerals” (death notices) to the relatives and friends of fallen soldiers. Many cases were recorded when priests walked at the head or in the first ranks of advancing troops.

The priests had to do the work of, as they would say now, psychotherapists: they held conversations, reassured, tried to remove the feeling of fear that was natural for a person in the trenches. It's at the front.

On the home front, the Church provided assistance to the wounded and refugees. Many monasteries set up free hospitals, collected parcels for the front, and organized the sending of charitable aid.

Russian infantry. 1914

Remember everyone!

Is it possible, given the current ideological chaos in society, including in the perception of WWII, to present a sufficiently clear and clear position on WWII that would reconcile everyone regarding this historical phenomenon?

We, professional historians, are working on this right now, striving to create such a concept. But this is not easy to do.

In fact, we are now making up for what Western historians did back in the 50s and 60s of the 20th century - we are carrying out work that, due to the peculiarities of our history, we did not do. The whole emphasis was on Oktyabrskaya socialist revolution. The history of WWI was hushed up and mythologized.

Is it true that it is already planned to build a temple in memory of the soldiers who died in WWI, just as the Cathedral of Christ the Savior was once built with public money?

Yes. This idea is being developed. And there is even a unique place in Moscow - a brotherly cemetery near the Sokol metro station, where not only Russian soldiers who died here in rear hospitals, but also prisoners of war of the enemy armies were buried. That's why it's fraternal. Soldiers and officers of different nationalities are buried there.

At one time, this cemetery occupied quite a large space. Now, of course, the situation is completely different. Much has been lost there, but a memorial park has been recreated, there is already a chapel, and the restoration of the temple there would probably be very the right decision. The same as the opening of a museum (with a museum the situation is more complicated).

You can announce a fundraiser for this temple. The role of the Church is very important here.

In fact, we can put an Orthodox church at the crossroads of these historical roads, just as we used to put chapels at the crossroads where people could come, pray, and remember their dead relatives.

Yes, that's absolutely right. Moreover, almost every family in Russia is connected with WWI, that is, with the Second Patriotic War, as well as with the Great Patriotic War.

Many fought, many had ancestors who took part in this war in one way or another - either on the home front or in the active army. Therefore, it is our sacred duty to restore historical truth.

One hundred years ago, on August 1, 1914, the First World War began, which left its mark on the history of our region

Princip and Franz Ferdinand

Only recently, while preparing this publication, I learned that in Russia the First World War was called the Second Patriotic War. The first role was assigned to the Patriotic War of 1812.

After the October Revolution in history books First the world will enter like a shameful, imperialist war. I will give the definition that was given to her at the Bolshoi Soviet encyclopedia 1975:

“The First World War 1914-1918 was an imperialist war between two coalitions of capitalist powers for the redivision of an already divided world, the redistribution of colonies, spheres of influence and investment of capital, the enslavement of other peoples.”

Let us remember what was the reason for starting this war. On June 28, 1914, in the city of Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia, student Gavrila Princip, a Serb by nationality, shot and killed the Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand. When Austro-Hungarian Empire demanded that its officials be allowed into the territory of Serbia in order to “deal with the terrorists,” Russia tried to stand up for Serbia. In response, Austria-Hungary's ally Germany declared war on Russia. Soon France, England and others were drawn into hostilities European countries. Thus began the First World War.

One hundred thousand - to the front

In 1914, the Amur Governorate General, which included the territory of the future Jewish Autonomous Region, had a population of 930 thousand people. The governor general of the huge region since 1911 was Nikolai Gondatti, under whom Far East Russia began to acquire civilized features. And with the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway and the bridge across the Amur, settlers began to come here more willingly. In short, a lot has been done to ensure that the Far East and, in particular, the Amur region cease to be Russia’s “Achilles’ heel.”

It is worth recalling that until 1910, Far Eastern men military service, except for officers, were not conscripted - this was one of the conditions for relocation. But when the First World War began, this condition had to be canceled. Already in September 1914, in addition to recruits, reserve ranks were called up into the army, and a year later - warriors of the 1st and 2nd categories. In two years, more than one hundred thousand people were mobilized for the war, that is, almost every tenth resident of the Far East. And if we take men working age, it turns out that 55.8 percent of the representatives of the “stronger sex” took up arms. For comparison: in Russia this figure was only 47.8 percent.

Soon the Amur Committee was created to provide assistance to wounded, maimed and sick soldiers and their families. It included Governor General Gondatti himself.

A year later, in 1915, it was the turn of the militia, Cossacks from reserve hundreds and squads unfit for combat service to be called up for war.

Where did the Far Easterners fight? One might say, on all fronts: on the Western front they took part in the East Prussian and Lodz operations, and the Battle of Galicia. They fought on the Northern, Southwestern and Romanian fronts. Ussuriyskaya Cossack division, where they entered and Amur Cossacks, under the command of Lieutenant General A. Krymov, completely defeated five German regiments!

Trains with soldiers went west, and during the two years of war, five thousand refugees and several thousand Russian Germans, exiled here from Ukraine and the Volga region, arrived in the Far East.

The children did not know that their fathers fought

It is now possible to speak openly about participation in the First World War, and the participants themselves can safely be considered defenders of the Fatherland. And in the years Soviet power former warriors they tried not to advertise their front-line past, hiding it even from their children and grandchildren.

— I only learned after the death of Andrei Pavlovich’s father that he fought on the Romanian front and was awarded St. George's Cross, says Honorary Citizen of Birobidzhan Fedor Fetisov. — After all, the war was fought under the slogan “For Faith, Tsar and Fatherland,” which the Soviet government did not recognize.

The former front-line soldier did not have any benefits or honors, but she punished him new government with interest - the family was dispossessed and exiled to the Oborsky timber industry enterprise Khabarovsk Territory cut down the forest. And then the head of the family was sent to prison for a year without any trial - for some minor violation of the passport regime.

— Father, despite everything, retained his best human qualities- hard work, kindness. He never swore, did not smoke, and drank only on holidays,” recalls Fyodor Fetisov.

Birobidzhan resident Valentina Sokolova said approximately the same thing about her grandfather Innokenty Zhdanov, a participant in the First World War:

- Grandfather returned from the war somehow different - more intelligent, perhaps. There he learned to read and write, learned to understand politics and people. He was highly respected in the village, and when the collective farm was formed, he was elected chairman. But I learned that my grandfather fought when I became an adult. He didn't like to talk about it.

Most of those called up were from Cossack villages - villages. In the Leninsky district live the descendants of Mikhail Razdobreev, who, after fighting for two years, was seriously wounded by an Austrian bullet. He was literally pulled out of the clutches of death by a sister of mercy from the noblewomen, Evdokia Obukhova. She invited the Cossack to stay with her, but Mikhail Razdobreev returned home to his family.

Two of the Razdobreev family - Grigory and Peter, also participants in the First World War, will be repressed in the 30s. By the way, participation in the war “for faith, the Tsar and the Fatherland” was an aggravating circumstance during the arrest. Mikhail Razdobreev managed to avoid arrest because he died early. Another Cossack from Mikhailo-Semyonovskaya, Grigory Vdovin, fought bravely in World War I and received two Crosses of St. George.

The teacher of the Catherine Nikolsk school, Maria Leskova, compiled her genealogy, starting from her great-great-grandfather, who was among the founders of the village. It turned out that her grandfather Mikhail Leskov fought at the front of the First World War as a regimental reconnaissance officer, was wounded, and also returned from the war with two Georges.

More than half of the Amur men Cossack villages fought in that distant war. There were also deaths. But while obelisks were erected for those who fell on the fronts of the Great Patriotic War, there are no monuments to the heroes of the First World War.

Roman Vertoprahov: hero and enemy

The fate of one of the representatives is interesting famous family Vertoprakhov Roman, a native of the village of Mikhailo-Semyonovskaya. He was a career military man - he graduated with honors from the Irkutsk cadet school, returned to his homeland, entered the 1st Amur Cossack regiment.

Vertoprakhov received his first baptism of fire while participating in the Chinese campaign in 1901-1902 - he received the Order of St. George, IV degree, for capturing two enemy guns. WITH Russo-Japanese War he returned with two awards - the Orders of Stanislava and Anna.

In 1912, Roman Vertoprahov received the rank of colonel. When the First World War began, he formed the 2nd Amur Cossack Regiment and went to the front with it.

The Amur people fought bravely - both the soldiers and their commander. Roman Vertoprakhov returned from the war with the Order of St. Vladimir.

And then begins that part of the biography of the brave officer, which made it possible to call him an enemy of the Soviet regime. He became one of the leaders of the so-called “Gamovsky” uprising against the Soviets in Blagoveshchensk.

After the defeat of the Whites, Roman Vertoprahov managed to leave for Harbin. In 1921, as a major general, he returned to Vladivostok and until August 1922 worked as the head of the naval checkpoint. And then - again emigration to Harbin. When Manchuria was captured by the Japanese, he moved with his family to Shanghai. He died there in 1935 - then Roman Vertoprahov was only 64 years old.

Ten years ago, in the village of Leninskoye, a stone was discovered from the grave of Roman Vertoprahov’s father, Andrei Ivanovich, one of the founders of the village. Recently, this memorial sign was installed at the Church of the Archangel Michael in the center of the village. By the will of fate, the ashes of the heroic son Vertoprahov rest far from his homeland, which he defended more than once and which he loved until the end of his days.

Our great mother Rus' greeted the news of the declaration of war on us with calmness and dignity. I am convinced that with the same sense of calm we will bring the war, whatever it may be, to the end.

I here solemnly declare that I will not make peace until the last enemy warrior leaves our land. And to you, the representatives of the dear troops of the Guard and the St. Petersburg Military District gathered here, in your person, I appeal to all the only begotten, unanimous my army is strong, like a granite wall, and I bless it for its military work.

What's interesting is this - "until the last enemy warrior leaves our land"

How did the 2nd Patriotic War, or the 1st World War (as we are already accustomed) begin according to official history?

On August 1, Germany declared war on Russia. on the same day the Germans invaded Luxembourg. On August 2, German troops finally occupied Luxembourg, and Belgium was given an ultimatum to allow German armies to the border with France. Only 12 hours were given for reflection.

On August 3, Germany declared war on France, accusing it of “organized attacks and aerial bombings Germany" and "in violation of Belgian neutrality."

On August 3, Belgium refused Germany's ultimatum. On August 4, German troops invaded Belgium. King Albert of Belgium turned for help to the guarantor countries of Belgian neutrality. London sent an ultimatum to Berlin: stop the invasion of Belgium, or England will declare war on Germany. After the ultimatum expired, Great Britain declared war on Germany and sent troops to help France.

==================================================

It turns out to be an interesting story... The king probably wouldn’t throw words around like that - "until the last enemy warrior will not leave our land" etc..

But the enemy, at the time of the speech, invaded Luxembourg territory ..How to understand this? Is this what I think, or do you have other thoughts?

Let's see where we have Luxembourg?

A good thing - Luxembourg is aligned in color with the Netherlands, so it turns out that all the land belonged to Russia? Or was it a kingdom of a different kind, World and Global, with Russia as the flagship? And the rest of the countries were not countries, but counties, principalities, regions, or God knows what it was actually called..

Because the Patriotic War, and the second one (the first, I think, was 1812) And then, 100 years later, again - 1914.. You say - “Well, you never know what’s written in the picture, so now, build a theory from this?“But no, my friends.. There’s not just one picture.. But two.. Or three.. Or thirty-three..

The question is this: who and when began to call the Second Patriotic War, the First World War? If they are hiding this from us (those who are engaged in informing the population about the events of history - x/zTORIKI) then there is probably a reason for this? They won’t foolishly do nothing to change the names historical events? What a nonsense..

And there is a lot of such evidence... So there is something to hide.! What exactly? Probably the fact that our Fatherland was much wider at that time, so much so that Luxembourg was our territory, and perhaps it was not limited to this. We all know about the globality of the world in the 19th century - when will this global world was divided and strictly demarcated?

Who lived in the Russian Empire?

Document:
"On the number of measures included in the draft lists of 1904 on the basis of Article 152 of the military regulations of the 1897 edition"

Materials of the Samara recruiting presence. According to materials from the Samara recruiting presence - Germans and Jews - religion

This means there was one STATE, but it was recently divided.

There were no nationalities back in 1904.

There were Christians, Mohammedans, Jews and Germans - this is how they distinguished the masses.

In B. Shaw's Saint Joan, an English nobleman says to a priest who used the word "French":

"Frenchman! Where did you get this word from? Did these Burgundians, Bretons, Picardians and Gascons also begin to call themselves French, just as ours have taken the fashion of calling themselves English? They talk about France and England as their countries. Yours, do you understand?! What will happen to me and to you if such a way of thinking is spread everywhere?

(see: Davidson V. The Black Man's Birden. Africa and the Cigse of the Nation-State. New York: Times B 1992. R. 95).

“In 1830, Stendhal spoke of a terrible triangle between the cities of Bordeaux, Bayonne and Valence, where “the people believed in witches, could not read and did not speak French.”

Flaubert, walking through a fair in the commune of Rasporden in 1846, as if through an exotic bazaar, described the typical peasant he encountered on his way: “...suspicious, restless, dumbfounded by any phenomenon incomprehensible to him, he is in a great hurry to leave the city.”

D. Medvedev. France of the 19th century: a country of savages (instructive reading)

So what was it about -
"UNTIL THE ENEMY LEAVES OUR LAND" ?
And where is she? "THE LAND IS OUR" ?

It is known that during this war, the SOLDIERS DIDN’T WANT TO FIGHT - THEY MEETED ON NEUTRAL TERRITORY, HAD BANGINGS AND “FRATRIZATIONS”

“Brotherhood” on the Eastern Front began already in August 1914, and in early 1916, hundreds of regiments from the Russian side already participated in them, writes “Interpreter”.

On New Year's Eve, 1915, sensational news spread around the world: a spontaneous truce and "fraternization" of soldiers of the warring British, French and German armies began on the Western Front of the Great War.

Soon, the leader of the Russian Bolsheviks, Lenin, announced “fraternization” at the front as the beginning "transformations world wars to civilian war"(note!!!)

Among these news about the Christmas Truce, the meager information about the “fraternization” on the Eastern (Russian) Front was completely lost. "Brotherhood" in the Russian army began in August 1914 on the Southwestern Front.

In December 1914, cases of mass “fraternization” of soldiers of the 249th Danube Infantry and 235th Belebeevsky Infantry Regiments were noted on the North-Western Front.

HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN WITH MULTILINGUAL PEOPLES? THEY were somehow supposed to UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER!!!?

One thing is clear - PEOPLE WERE DRIVEN TO Slaughter by their leaders, GOVERNMENTS, who received orders from some “center”... But WHAT KIND OF “CENTER” IS THIS?

THIS WAS THE MUTUAL DESTRUCTION OF THE PEOPLE

Read the names of settlements in Germany.. We rightfully considered this land ours!!!

Read it, and you will immediately understand “what” Emperor Nicholas II was talking about when he said "Our land" I mean myself, or the society headed by him (this is a question of a different nature) ALL THIS WAS "THE LAND IS OUR"(in addition to the Benelux countries - Luxembourg, Netherlands, Belgium, etc.)

It turns out that if you follow the logic (why was it necessary to hide the name of the Second Patriotic War?) then the goal setting was precisely the concealment of the Global (at that time) World, the Fatherland, which this war “finished off”?

WERE THE STATES IN THE CURRENT TYPE FORMED VERY RECENTLY?

Even during the Great Patriotic War wars, the Nazis, in turn, considered our territory theirs, AND THE POPULATION WITH ITS CITIZENS - they acted as if they had equal rights with the Bolsheviks, at least that's what they thought..And part of the population was quite loyal, especially at the beginning of the war..

SO WHAT WAS IT - “THE FIGHTER” AGAIN?

WHO CONSTANTLY PUT OUR PEOPLES AGAINST EACH OTHER AND HAS A TRIPLE BENEFIT FROM THIS?

TIMES OF TROUBLES

If we go back to the time of the Troubles (17th century) or rather after its end, several foreign princes and even King James of England laid claim to the Russian throne (with what joy?), but the Cossacks managed to push through their candidate, Mikhail Feodorovich, by hook or by crook, which the other applicants were very unhappy with -

SO THEY HAD EQUAL RIGHTS..? And the Polish Tsarevich Vladislav never recognized Michael as Tsar, without showing due respect, according to etiquette, calling him illegitimately elected, considering his rights to the Moscow throne more fundamental..

And here, I would express myself with a quote from the brilliant Leonid Filatov, from “About Fedot the Sagittarius, a daring fellow”

"IT'S LIKE YOUR MOTHER I'M SORRY, UNDERSTAND?"

HOW THIS CONNECTS WITH THE LEGEND OF THE RUSSIAN KINGDOM, AS WELL AS OTHER INDIVIDUAL STATES, I AM NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND.

(wiki) According to the famous Soviet historian, Professor A.L. Stanislavsky, a famous specialist in the history of Russian society of the 16th-17th centuries, a key role in the accession of Michael instead of foreign princes and King of England and Scotland James I, whom the nobility and boyars wanted to elect, was played by those who then united with the Moscow common people Great Russian Cossacks, whose liberties the Tsar and his descendants subsequently took away from everyone possible ways. The Cossacks received a grain salary, and were afraid that the bread that was supposed to go to their salary would instead be sold by the British for money all over the world.

That is, the Great Russian Cossacks “stirred”, fearing that the English king, having sat on the Moscow throne, would take away their bread wages, and why didn’t the very fact that an Englishman would rule in Rus' bother them!? Was this normal, in the order of things?

Interesting why did the Cossacks not participate in wars? that Rus' led? MIKHAL FEODORYCH'S ARMY WAS HALF.... FOREIGN, GERMAN!!

S. M. Solovyov. Works in 18 volumes. Book V. History of Russia since ancient times, volumes 9-10.

..But we saw that in addition to hired and local foreigners during the reign of Michael, there were regiments of Russian people trained in the foreign system; Shein near Smolensk had: hired many German people, captains and captains and foot soldiers; and with them, with the German colonels and captains, were Russian people, boyar children and people of all ranks who were enrolled in military training: with the German colonel Samuel Charles, the Reitar, nobles and boyar children different cities it was 2700; Greeks, Serbs and Voloshans forage - 81; Colonel Alexander Leslie, and with him his regiment of captains and majors, all sorts of officials and soldiers - 946; with Colonel Yakov Sharl - 935; with Colonel Fuchs - 679; with Colonel Sanderson, 923; with colonels - Wilhelm Keith and Yuri Matteyson - initial people - 346 and ordinary soldiers - 3282: German people from different lands who were sent from the Ambassadorial Prikaz - 180, and a total of mercenary Germans - 3653;

Yes, with the German colonels of Russian soldiers, who are in charge of the foreign order: 4 colonels, 4 large regimental lieutenants, 4 majors, in Russian large regimental guards, 2 quartermasters and a captain, in Russian large regimental okolnichi, 2 regimental quartermasters, 17 captains , 32 lieutenants, 32 ensigns, 4 regimental judges and clerks, 4 obozniks, 4 priests, 4 court clerks, 4 profosts, 1 regimental nabatchik, 79 pentecostals, 33 ensigns, 33 gun watchmen, 33 company borrowers, 65 German corporals, 172 Russian caporals, 20 German nabatchiks with a flute player, 32 company clerks, 68 Russian nabbatchikov, two German underage children for interpreting; a total of German people and Russian and German soldiers in six regiments, and Poles and Lithuanians in four companies 14801 people...

OKAY - LET'S LOOK AT THE PHOTOS

Since the beginning of the 19th century.. Opposite ends of the world - from Vietnam to South Africa and Indonesia - what ends, it would seem! But no - the same architecture, style, materials, one company built everything, globalization however... In general, there are a small fraction of photographs here, for acceleration, and at the end of the post there is a mention of MORE, for those who cannot stop right away)) for the sake of braking distance For..

AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 20th century THE WORLD WAS GLOBAL!!!

Kyiv, Ukraine

Odessa, Ukraine

Tehran, Iran

Hanoi, Vietnam

Saigon, Vietnam

Padang, Indonesia

Bogota, Colombia

Manila, Philippines

Karachi, Pakistan

Shanghai, China

Managua, Nicaragua

Kolkata, India. The Prince of Wales entered with an army. The palace in the "colonial" style is already standing

Kolkata, India

Calcutta 1813, India

Cape Town, South Africa

Seoul, Korea

Melbourne, Australia

Brisbane, Australia

Oaxaca, Mexico

Mexico City, Mexico

Toronto, Canada

Montreal, Canada

Penang Island, George Town, Malaysia

Bangladesh, Dhaka

Phuket, Thailand

1914 SECOND PATRIOTIC WAR - This is what contemporaries called the First World War... WHO and why CHANGED this NAME? The Past of the Once Global World..WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT OUR PRESENT HISTORY?

THE ROYAL WORD TO THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE AND MILITARY!
SECOND PATRIOTIC WAR
Our great mother Rus' greeted the news of the declaration of war on us with calmness and dignity. I am convinced that with the same sense of calm we will bring the war, whatever it may be, to the end.
I here solemnly declare that I will not make peace until the last enemy warrior leaves our land. And to you, the representatives of the dear troops of the Guard and the St. Petersburg Military District gathered here, in your person, I appeal to all the only begotten, unanimous my army is strong, like a granite wall, and I bless it for its military work.

What's interesting is this - "until the last enemy warrior leaves our land"

How did the 2nd Patriotic War, or the 1st World War (as we are already accustomed) begin according to official history?

On August 1, Germany declared war on Russia. on the same day the Germans invaded Luxembourg. On August 2, German troops finally occupied Luxembourg, and Belgium was given an ultimatum to allow German armies to enter the border with France. Only 12 hours were given for reflection.

On August 3, Germany declared war on France, accusing it of “organized attacks and aerial bombardments of Germany” and “violating Belgian neutrality.”

==================================================

It turns out to be an interesting story... The king probably wouldn’t throw words around like that - "until the last enemy warrior will not leave our land" etc..

But the enemy, at the time of the speech, invaded Luxembourg territory ..How to understand this? Is this what I think, or do you have other thoughts?