Kerensky And Kornilov

Kornilov was not without his critics. His heroic actions differ from an account by General Brusilov, his superior. The Danish historian Munck points out Brusilov’s account of the capture of Kornilov. In this account, Kornilov and his troops were surrounded and taken prisoner, because he did not follow the order to withdraw his division, and this coincides with earlier actions where Kornilov disregarded the expressed order to withdraw which cause excessive and unnecessary loss of troops. In a sense, Brusilov sees him as an average general that was not suited for large commands. This account Brusilov provides is suspect for he was passed up for the position of Commander-in-Chief, and this could provide a reason for Brusilov to provide a less …show more content…
Kerensky remembered this differently. In the attempt to distance himself from the appointment of Kornilov, Kerensky hints that it was Provisional Government who was responsible for the vetting of the general. He writes, “Kornilov’s good qualities and defects were both well known to the Provisional Government… Therefore the appointment of Kornilov was due to the serious considerations in his favour, and not at all to “irresponsible influences” on the Premier, Kerensky.” Ignored, by Kerensky, is the relationship between Kerensky and Savinkov. Thompson believes Kerensky based his decision to appoint Kornilov because of Savinkov’s recommendation and Kornilov’s optimistic report during a conference of army commanders over which Kerensky presided. Leonid Strakhovsky believed Kerensky was without real power, therefore had no choice but to select Kornilov who wield power and infuse strength in order to bolster a weakening …show more content…
N. Trubetzkoy’s later expressed opinion of General Kornilov. ‘My general opinion of Kornilov,’ wrote Prince Trubetzkoy, ‘is, that he is above all a soldier unable to grasp complicated political matters, and as such he offers a particularly remarkable sample of our commanding staff’.” In support of Kerensky and Prince Trubetzkoy, Thompson believes Kornilov was unfamiliar with the politics and socials issue of the time, and the general views were simplistic and limited. Supporting Thompson and for the most part Kerensky is the surprised Denikin after he read the conditions, noting the first condition as the most surprising. Abraham Ascher views the demands as naïveté in political matters, and agreeing with Kerensky, lacked the “diplomatic expression so essential for a man in high