The Science Work
History
Site is for sale: mail@thesciencework.com
Category: History

Review of the book: O.V. Budnitsky. The Russian Jews between red and white (1917-1920)



O.V. Budnitsky's kniga reminds an excursion that offsprings of once sovereign, but nowadays become scanty surnames drive on the patrimonial nests in Europe. History - nearly from creation of the world, - is adapted by them that served as a suitable background for the narration about faultlessly nice ancestors. Do not ozabochivatsya by reliability of stated, of pleb eev-tourists passionlessly "do not hear bewilderment of other" and, tiring with rise on the highest tower, carelessly pass the doors which are really intriguing, firmly locked - whether in torture chambers, whether in wardrobe with skeletons in cases. And visitors should respect the right of the owner for the mystery of private life and to share his rational belief that history - history, but it is necessary to pay, care bills for a roof, a facade, a succession duty, at last... Privacy, misters!

Analogy would be perfect, but the 500-page text of the doctor to an istori-cha of sky sciences is far not so harmless as the guide-dilet nonsense Anta, and the history of Civil war in Russia - not whose subject that was privatizations.

O.V. Budnitsky's work - justification of his statement that "only Jews in Civil war were killed for the fact that they are Jews, irrespective of on la, the yuzrast and a politicha of sky beliefs" and that "riots of an era of Civil war were a presage" the Holocaust (page 343).

I will leave a statement on professional conscience of the author that for national identity in the years of Civil war killed "only Jews". I will remind of the Armenians killed with thousands in 1918 - 1919

Azerbaijanians and Turks, about the Azerbaijanians exterminated then by Armenians and also about the Russians who are cut out on the outskirts of the former empire for the fact that they are Russians: in Ukraine, the North Caucasus, in Turkestan, Bukhara, Khiva...

More important in this case those zis about the Jewish riots of times of Civil war as Holocaust "presage". In a basis it is not new. But we will pay tribute to O.V. Budnitsky's frankness: he for the first time proclaimed it without any bashful oho is brisk. If before it was talked about "A Holocaust of the Ukrainian Jewry" (D. Roskis), that "in some respects... riots are comparable to the Holocaust" (A. Grinbaum) that "spontaneous robberies and murders about put on themselves heritage which led twenty years later" to the Holocaust, what R. Payps wrote about, fairly emphasizing that then there was "a question of communication of Jewry and the Bolshevism", O.V. Budnitsky convinces the reader: Civil war became a predsha stvennitsy the Holocaust for all Russian Jewry tightly clamped between red and white and exterminated by them. And in implication - a conclusion: riots, murders, total zoological anti-Semitism of Russians did not depend on their ideological preferences at all. Thus, following logic of the author if Germans after World War II "were cleaned" from judeophobia as soon as got rid of Hitlerism ideology, then Russian of such grace not to be honored in any way. Here about it, in fact, all 500 pages of the book.

Actually they were required to O.V. Budnitsky to tell the same that one of I.E. Babel's characters formulated in two phrases: "Unless from God was not a mistake to lodge Jews in Russia that they suffered, how in hell? And what it would be bad if Jews lived in Switzerland where they would be surrounded by the first-class lakes, mountainous air and the continuous French?"

Therefore the pretentious title of the book only first looks only pretentious ("for the sake of a witty remark..."). In fact, the heading precisely expresses an essence of an author's plan, returning to the question "who is guilty?" the author, in effect, is inspired by the same in what in the 1920th many practised, "героическирубившиеся" in obozakhgrazhdansky. What already then wise G.V. Gessen warned against, starting the edition of the "Archive of the Russian revolution": "There is no more harmful and idle pastime, perhaps, than to look for... right and guilty. There is no stretch in if to tell what guilty is not present, or is even more true that all of us are guilty..."

O.V. Budnitsky approached a problem of justification of the statements with ease unusual. So, he affords very responsible statements and generalizations for armed forces - both red, and white, - having the most approximate ideas of their device and activity, persons of military leaders, moods of privates. And not Udo being narrowed even to study at least the documents most necessary on this subject which are stored in RGVA. Also the considerable array of documentary publications without which it is simply inconceivable vyra-today is not demanded by it

a botka of full ideas of those stories of history go sudarstvenno-go and military building, national policy and the international relations of an era of Civil war that directly correspond to a book perspective. In this number there were earlier classified documents of V.I. Lenin, VIII sjezdarkp (b), the agenda zas edaniypolitbyuro the Central Committee, the SNK, VSNKh, RVSR protocols, information reports of SK about political morale of the Soviet hinterland, correspondence of Bolshevist "leaders", letters "in the power" ordinary citizens, etc. Even reference books on history Red and white armies and modern specialized encyclopedic editions are ignored.

Not reasonably e and not explained by the author in any way, it is frank e neglect not to fill plentiful references to statements and estimates of foreign authors, an avalanche of extensive quotes from memoirs of contemporaries. It is appropriate to remember an apt remark of B.A. Slutsky: "Memoirs not history, but the epos, only without rhythm. Unless the epos can be fair?"

But O.V. Budnitsky "justice", that is impartiality of a source, disturbs obviously in the last turn. Therefore, for example, without any reservations - if only "in I will shift" - ispoll information of frankly doubtful property etsyatsya sometimes. It seems "characteristic and partly amusing", on O.V. Budnitsky's assurance, the episodes known only with slovv. Sevsky (page 121, 452-453). This feuilletonist lampoonist cooperating in the press of the White South, obviously belonged to number of admirers of "the Jewish jokes". In any case, its Izvestia about anti-Semitism red that the nebrezgliya was picked up by O.V. Budnitsky, is sustained in the corresponding spirit. Also are no more plausible. For that matter, it was far more respectable to address creativity of other contemporary and eyewitness of events - and much more authoritative - the ARC. Averchenko. He will find quite suitable passages. For example: "If to Russian... to start singing "International", it begins to hang up on a lamp of the passerby of the person in a starched shirt and points now..." It quite keeps within the ideas of ethno-cultural features of Russians set by the author.

Picked up by O.V. Budnitsky a source) Wai the base on which he bases the constructions is used very peculiar. Especially balancing act around allegedly of anti-Semitism of the outstanding Orthodox Christian impresses you think of S.N. Bulgakov's la humanist. Having accurately quoted V.A. Maklakov's certificate that the father Bulgakov - "a certain opponent of riots", and having supplemented it with the reference to A.V. Kartashev who characterized Bulgakov's identity as "noble, topmost achievement of the Russian culture", the author, however, "develops a plot": as if in "the emigrant press there were messages about rabble-rousing sermons of Bulgakov and even that their texts become unstuck in the form of leaflets". And then, without pressing in examinations, concludes: "what contents of the "leaflets" belonging were (My discharge. - A.K.) to Bulgakov's feather... to judge

it is difficult because their texts did not remain" (page 272-273). Here and still an argument in favor of a thesis about natural anti-Semitism of Russians.

Quite certain oggenok is given personally A.I. Denikin's st - sign for the White movement. The author emphasizes that it was "one of the most progressive Russian military leaders" (page 165), and "the most loyal in relation to Jews" (page 212). But, it appears, - too the masked anti-semite. Concerning participation in "rabble-rousing propaganda" in this case the author providently refrained from insinuations: nevertheless real actions of the commander-in-chief In the SURREALISM are documented incomparably more stoutly, than life of the philosopher refugee. And the reference to anonymous "messages of the emigrant press" here obviously does not pass. But at one of respectable memoirists - the prince P.D. Dolgorukov - found s a mention as the general roughly scornfully reacted to the offer of assistance from a certain I.S. Schneerson. Allegedly "Denikin's resolution" said: "Any Shneerzonov" (page 212).

Nakhodka so vozradovat O.V. Budnitsky that he entitled it one of sections of the work and made a generalization core: "This phrase of Denikin [Perhaps nevertheless Dolgorukova? - And. А".] can quite serve as an epitaph to "relationship" of Jews and Volunteer army..." (page 212)

There are no words - relationship developed regrettably. But for understanding of the background of it, if reached generalizations, it is worth paying attention to "a real trifle": Shneerzon disinterestedly offered himself to army not the fighter on a front line, but provision dealer. And the frauds created by a quartermaster part by businessmen - "dobrokhoga" including from Jews, had long scandalous popularity. I will remind that the same I.E. Babel quoted by the author very selectively with skill wrote about "bankers without kith or kin, the apostates who got hold on deliveries" that "adjusted a set of trite, falshivovelichavy locks in St. Petersburg". And the baron N.E. Wrangel (his informative memoirs are among many which the author did not begin to use) demonstrated that, having faced realities of food deliveries to army even during war of 1877 - 1878, came to a conclusion: "To deal with quartermasters, it is necessary to be either the madman, or the swindler". The Russian-Japanese and world wars gave a set of examples of flagrant abuses from suppliers, "working for defense". In detail known to the Russian generals, they induced Denikin, the person scrupulous and disinterested, to suspiciously st concerning supply operations of dealers, caused his conviction in self-interest of all suppliers irrespective of nationality.

But O.V. Budnitsky does not accent attention on views and reputation of the general disinterested person (just does not know them?) and absolutely at malchivat about reputation on this subject concrete Shneerzon.

To all this the venerable author filled the text on anything with not based generalizations which sometimes simply and y mlyat refinement at all their external prostovatost.

"... The orthodox church, more precisely (!) certain priests" (page 268) became the main source of the anti-Semitic promotion, times accepting absolutely inflammatory character. An ego - about one specific priest: V.I. Vostokov. "... Anti-Jewish violence... begins to proceed about t of the power, more precisely (!) from those forces which applied for being the central power" (page 372). And it - about an era of total disorder of statehood when nearly in the kayaedy county were available applying for the central power.

So the situation with sources and their author's interpretation is.

Now about a research object.

To the professional historian, which the author of the book is, it is undoubted, clear that in any and furthermore civil, war the main victims are steadily born by civilians. This terrible regularity it is thousandfold also the Civil war in Russia confirmed. In 1917 - 1920 "between red and white", that is between the most active and organized parties of the tragedy, the absolute majority the population of the country stayed. Defenseless, separated, ograblyaemy, humiliated, forced, killed. Suffering and dying out everywhere and without national distinctions. Including, undoubtedly, and most of the Russian Jews. Realizing all this, apparently, it is impossible to insist on exclusively ethnic criterion of identification of those who then appeared in the most vulnerable ("between...") positions. And if so, then it is rather about the Bashkirs who rose in 1919 or in 1920 it is permissible to tell about Northern Tavriya's German colonists that they were "between red and white".

But whom O.V. Budnitsky when he speaks about "the Russian Jews" who became, according to him, the exclusive victims Civil understands? Perhaps peace inhabitants of places, city handicraftsmen, small bourgeoises, ordinary employees and intellectuals? Not at all. All these "little people" interest the author only hundred-tistiche a ska: in the form of the summary and rounded figures of the victims of riots. And the words of sincere grief on these weak and helpless, innocent, for anything tortured not to find in the text. And even not to feel. Least of all this chubby volume is suitable as an epitaph to true martyrs, and is equal also to unknown heroes. Only was also enough - for a sarcastic remark that time Jews were as a part of the Bolshevist management, it was necessary to cripple in revenge the Jewish shoemaker, to rape his wife and to kill the child. Characteristic sarcasm. But it was worth expecting from the professional historian at least attempt to estimate as these really senseless villainies coordinate with infinite series of villainies of not less "logical". For example, murder in 1918 more than 800 residents of Petrograd "in reply" on one specific M.S. murder ^фицкого one specific L.I. Kannegiser. Or mass executions in 1919 in Moscow "in reply" on murder by the German officers in Berlin "leaders ger-

Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg's May proletariat". It - about the victims and "logician" of Civil war.

In introduction O.V. Budnitsky providently made "книксен" to the inevitable critics, having said that, really, the Jewish tragedy - only a part of that time all-Russian that among Jews there were both victims, and executioners and that "it is impossible to tell about them divided into various groups "in general"" (page 8-9). Only yut the statement it, as well as other correct words, remained the declaration which is directly dispersing from the main book contents. Introduction, I will notice, looks written absolutely to other book. In fact the author speaks about "Jews in general", as required meaning traditionalist - religious Jews, "the ancestors who refused religion" "assimilated" in different degree. Including not only about carriers, but also figures of the Russian culture. And also about those who "internationalist" did not attach to the Jewry any significance (as many Soviet masters) or expressly renounced syuy roots (as the commander of the Red Army T.S. Hvesin). But artificially and at all the influential group German, Austrian, the Hungarian "foreign internationalists", and in fact - the madyarizovanny and germanized European Jews led by the executioner of the Crimea Béla Kuhn is brought out of attention limits.

Respectively, the author completely gives himself a free hand for juggling by the facts, estimates, reasons, the assumptions and, at last, statements concerning the place and a role of Jews in the White movement and in construction of the Bolshevist mode.

As for white, in one it is possible to agree with the author: in Armed forces in the south of Russia really preferred Jews not to take on service. But to extend similar representation to other white armies sufficient about snovany at the author is not present. In general, its digressions out of borders of the region of a maloudachna which is rather developed by it. Can be an example "Nikolaev [-on - Amur] an incident" 1920, contrary to the known facts presented by the author first of all in the form of the Jewish disorder.

Returning KVSYUR, we will note that O.V. Budnitsky gives the participation facts, despite everything, of certain representatives ro ssiysky Jews in material and political support of the White movement and in fights as a part of white formations. Including as colleagues of the general L.G. Kornilov on the "Ice" pozhd. Otherwise goyurya, recognizes, as among white Jews were.

However this circumstance literally burns in colourful descriptions of those prosecutions to which white subjected the Jews who were sincerely aspiring in their ranks - military and politicians. General impression which develops when reading appropriate sections of the book is quite unambiguous: the author persistently tries to convince the reader that not so political, cultural, spiritual and patriotic reasons became the reasons

rejection of edinomyshlenniyuv-Jewish, - as the main thing anti-Semitism of white Russians, irrational, general and invincible steadily acted.

to

Red paid much less attention: two rather small chapters - "Bolsheviks and Jews" and "Jews and the Red Army". In essence, both in that, and in another the main place is taken by reasonings on "red" riots. About ru to the driving participation of Jews in creation of the Bolshevist mode it is told muffledly. It would be desirable to remind that at top of a Bolshevist pyramid there were at all not people's commissars about whom O.V. Budnitsky writes. And the Bolshevist imperious elite was not limited at all to those dozens of characters among whom he selects single (that to him and is required) examples of participation of Jews in the management of life of the Soviet Russia. If it is necessary not to dissemble, tell about very considerable weight party, military-political, administrative and, at last, KGB rukoyuditel, to a yutorga in conditions of that time quickly became organized in numerous regional and departmental groups. O.V. Budnitsky consciously or out of ignorance bypasses a question who yuzglavlyal these groups.

In fact, the speech about the one who in those x specific conditions literally disposed of life and the death of each person in each province, the kayaedy county, was "the tsar, god and the military chief" everywhere - from the volost to the industry. Therefore simple statement of what yes, is valid in the Central Committee of Bolshevik party there were several Jews, are perfect nedo statoch-but for judgment of merits of case. The sources (which did not interest the author) convincingly demonstrate that in 1918 - the beginning of 1919 very considerable part rukoyuditely not only central, but also - what is especially important! - me the stny power from a stavlyala Jews. Among them: first secretaries of gubkom and ukom of party, chairmen of rear and front-line revkom, provincial and district executive committees of Councils of Deputies, revtribunal, rukoyuditel of various extraordinary supply and procuring bodies, KGB bodies, at last.

The same picture was observed everywhere and in armed forces of the Soviet Russia. Not only in the Red Army, but also, to O.V. Budnitsky's data, in the Red fleet, yuyska of internal protection, Prodoyul-stv of unlimited army and also numerous "parts about soby appointments" vs ekh provinces, counties and the cities. The sources helping to see this picture - not behind seven seals.

Considering all this, the sections of the book devoted to stay of Jews in the ranks of red could be much more voluminous and objective. But it is obvious that the author consciously left from the material contradicting his installations. The main thing for it was to prove tragedy and hopelessness of situation "Jews in general".

This motive steadily sounds on all pages scanty central boards "Jews and the Red Army". Here the author not in material. It confuses guerrilla groups with parts of the regular Red Army, the Red Army of the Soviet Ukraine with RKKA of the Soviet Russia, mixes various concepts and tortures -

sya to judge processes in the 5-million Red Army which is already united since June, 1919 on materials of guard platoons. The head was obviously necessary as some kind of capstone to hold all "свсд" an author's plan. Really, it is impossible to goyurit about Jews "between red and white", without having shown red.

Anyway, specifics of istochnikovy base and the author's argument especially affected this chapter. It is essentially important to dwell upon its shortcomings. Because despite the modest volume of the text and reliable information, the most significant generalizations of the author exactly here are concentrated.

The author considers the many-sided subject "Jews and Red Army" exclusively unilaterally, simplifying and flattening. Everything comes down to ""victories" of red parts over the Jewish population" (page 453) and "a problem of an appeal of Jews in the Red Army" (page 438). And the appeal turned into a problem as if is exclusive because of a deep-rooted antis of an emitizm, "peculiar to fighters of the Red Army" (page 448). It would be far more honest to call the head "Jews and anti-Semitism of the Red Army".

Deliberately detailed narration about attempts of the Jewish organizations in 1919 to attract at last Jews in front parts of the Red Army opens the head. Colloquial and paper this work is really very demonstrative. But only the pustoprozhno Stew and microscopic results. But its depiction allowed the author to drown literally in words a core question - the place and a role of Jews in the Red Army.

The author claims: "To establish how many Jews actually served in the Red Army, quite difficult. Statistics on the national or religious principle was not kept" (page 447). Ego not so. And statistics on the national principle was kept, and established how many Jews served in the Red Army, for a long time. Still in the early eighties at a research of social and national composition of RKKA it became clear, in particular, that as of January 1st, 1921 the share of Jews in staff of the majority of army associations did not exceed 0.3% and only that dislotsir atsya in the territory of Ukraine, reached on average 1.6%. At the regular organization of the RKKA shooting connections of that time it meant on average in 3 - 16 people on crew or 9 - 42 on a division. And judging by summary data on command structure and about rewardings of the period of Civil war, this national contingent at all not in poll front divisions was distributed. First of all the percent of Jews as a part of the leading military-political bodies attracts attention. In frontoyum and army links (RVS of fronts and armies) it made respectively 6.5 and 12.3%, in divisional (military commissars) - 10.2% in shooting and 5.6% in cavalry divisions. It - without political departments, politkom of headquarters and managements. By the way, front Jewish commanders among Front commanders were absent, among nachdiv and nashtadi-v - them literally units, among commanders - only one (the 8th army with

October, 1919 till March, 1920 ordered, and it is not too successful, GYa. Hawkers). And in isolated cases "the temporary execution of a position" of front chiefs by their political commissioners for a period of two days up to two months took place. And among the zhashchikh-Jewish who are awarded the order the Red Banner for 1919 - 1921 in total 57 voyennosla only 7 were ordinary Red Army men (including one cadet). And yut political workers of various levels - 21, that is it is three times more. The others served at various command and administrative positions, including medical staff and "from the standing dlyaporucheniye at...". The Ivety case the relevant sources and researches - not behind seven seals.

Thus, the bulk of Red Army men-veterans did not see Jewish fighters in the environment, knew units of Jewish commanders, but heard about Jews-politrabognikakh much. If not to romaticize "commissioners in dusty helmets", it is necessary to recognize: the commander often acted on a front line by the principle "do as I", and politrabo the tnik usually sent from the back of paper with the instruction "do, told a kakyateba". It never brought the authority at fighters and to nobody.

Having avoided examination and judgment me hundred and valid roles of Jews in the Red Army as one of factors of emergence of anti-Semitism among Red Army men and tragic consequences of its growth by 1920, the author displaces focus of attention to riots - according to him, "practically nothing differing from denikinsky" (page 479). Those that were made by fighters of the 1st Cavalry in the second half of September, 1920 in a number of places of the Poltava and Volynsk provinces. The flash "anti-Jewish (intertwining with anti-Communist) moods" among cavalry soldiers is presented only as inevitable result of primordial anti-Semitism of Cossacks and peasants of Don, Kuban and Stavropol Territory of whom mainly and the most combative regiments 1 Horse consisted (page 480-490).

Meanwhile then the slogans which became popular with a part of pervokonnik like "We go to clean the back from kikes", quoted by O.V. Budnitsky, suggest an idea that for anti-Semitic eksets of owls just the situation in the back where on blood shed in fights by pervokonnik the power of Bolsheviks was consolidated gave the initiating impulse. That power which drove the escaped winners of "white hares" on the Polish guns and machine guns for the sake of some unknown to them "world revolution". That which, hardly cleared the North Caucasus of denikinets began to select violently on a surplus-appropriation system the last that else remained in the ruined farms of red fighters, dooming to hunger of their old men parents, wives and children. That, at last, which shot them peryugo and the favourite commander B.M. of Dumen-co. This power had to be associated already strongly in their consciousness with sonorous Jewish surnames that nearly daily came s to hear in the orders read before stro I eat, and from the political fighters re-reading them the Soviet newspapers. Here also it happened that happened: violence and a lie "komissaroderzhaviya", the hardest losses, a shame and troubles -

stviye of unknown defeat and retreat caused hitherto flash of hatred to "kikes in the back" which fell upon unfortunate locals - Jews and not only.

I will emphasize that I do not drive at the self-slightest attempt of justification of thugs and murderers here at all. A penalty which part of them incurred under sentence of tribunal in the same the 1920th, perhaps, even insufficient punishment for nasty crimes. In any case, to similar crimes is not present and there should not be justifications. But in the same way and "explanation" of those conditions - welfare, military-political, etc., - which turned fighters into criminals, cannot and should not be false. It is necessary objectively, in a real historical context to consider what in fact cultivated anti-Semitism in consciousness of ordinary Red Army men and the commanders who left their environment that weaved it into hard knot with the anti-Bolshevism. O.V. Budnitsky did not even try to make.

Its addressing really black pages of history 1 Horse and tragedies by the victims of riots of that time is similar to journalistic savoring "fried" and comes down to reproduction of single quotes from diary entries of a number of contemporaries and superficial and factual publications. The ego allowed to present tragic events in predetermined light, having saved from work of a research of that historical reality in which anti-Semitic moods in the 1st Horse in the youth of summer - an early autumn of 1920 blossomed. (And for fidelity of scale I will emphasize: in the 1st Horse, but not in all Red Army.)

All necessary archival sources, including Politupravdeniya's documents of RVSR, the headquarters, RVS and a political department of the 1st Horse are more exhaustively available to such research long ago - comprehensive and objective-. Business only in the researcher ready and capable to their impartial judgment and interpretation. Already simple acquaintance to the materials which are stored nowadays in RGVA, I believe, would warn O.V. Budnitsky against lightweight and irresponsible judgments like the fact that "parts of the Red Army, especially during failures, sometimes compensated defeats from white by "victories" over the Jewish population" (page 453).

The fact of severe punishment of thugs from among pervokonnik induced O.V. Budnitsky to speak approvingly of "ruthless punishment" of Bolsheviks of anti-semites in the ranks of the Red Army (page 493). However in the book for some reason there was no place even for a mention of the brightest manifestations of this valid ruthlessness. Especially strange - especially for once Rostov historian - default about loud Rostov "Dumenko's business" looks.

The commander Konno-sv one case Boris Makeevich Dumenko, the native of family of the Don nonresident peasant, organized at the beginning of 1918 to Dona guerrilla horse group and in continuous fights with belokazaka grew up it in connection, on serving then about snovy 1st Cavalry.

In January, 1920 its Horse and summary yurpus took Novocherkassk, having made a decisive contribution to a victory over Denikin's troops. And in February of Dumenko's komkor together with workers of his headquarters arrested according to personal instructions of L.D. Trotsky. A pretext the committed murder of the military commissar of the case V.N. Mikeladze became unknown whom. And here reason...

On March 27 revvoyentribunat the Caucasian front, being based only on testimonies of commissioners and commanders from among envious persons and Dumenko's foes, formulated charge. One of the first points said that a komkor and its colleagues "conducted obviously and secretly anti-Semitic promotion, calling responsible heads of the Red Army and communists the kikes who sat down at the back". (And not proved murder of the military commissar was removed by nothing in the last, the tenth, point.)

The statement of a political lump of one of crews formed the basis: allegedly Dumenko broke the award of the Red Banner handed by Trotsky in March, 1919 in Tsaritsyno from a breast and threw it with the words "It Is Not Necessary to Me from the Kike Trotsky with Whom It Is Necessary to Be at War". During the investigation brigade commander D.P. Zhloba marking to take the place of a komkor, supported this charge, having shown what as if on boozes in the headquarters of the case was proclaimed: "Down with kikes and communists!".

The visiting session of Revvoyentribunal Respubliki judged Dumenko and his colleagues on May 5-6, 1920 in Rostov-on-Don. To Rukovsdit - for providing the necessary sentence - Trotsky sent the deputy chairman of RVTR Ya.A. Rosenberg.

Dumenko in court said: "I did not conduct any anti-Semitic promotion, no propaganda anti-Communist in my parts existed, and I did not participate anywhere in any propaganda against kikes and td. If personally abused kikes, abused communists, then till this moment did not know that it is high treason... When dumped Nikolay, said that everyone can goyurit that he wants..." Rosenberg directly caught it: "... You in a conversation not only abused any given communist personally. Of course, it is personally possible to abuse, it is not propaganda, but you goyurit that communists, commissioners take away national property that kikes took away all power that the Soviet power is a swine..." Dumenko denied everything, is equal as Trotsky's certification by "kike" and other, grew diligently blind-lenno e the investigation from rumors and slander.

Other member of the court - the chairman of RVT of the Caucasian front Zorin tried to help Rosenberg: Whether "You goyurit that kikes sat down at the back and write orders?" - "I did not tell it. When on a meeting the question was asked me why with us there are no Jews, I told that they are not capable to serve in a cavalry".

It is indicative that accusers Kolbanovsky and A.G Beloborodov, understanding that charges of anti-Semitism are quite transparent, did not even mention them, pressing "guerrilla warfare" and "gangsterism", obtained from the same slanders.

But the defenders invited by the chairman Donispolkoma A.A. Znamensky are barristers Isay Izrailevich Shik and Iosif Io si-

fovich Byshevsky, - could not pass by such "fight against anti-Semitism". Just the conscience and professional honor did not allow. "If defendants abused communists, called Jews kikes and divided a cavalry prejudice that the Jew is not capable to sit on a horse and has to serve in infantry, then all this is not high treason..." - Shik said. He was echoed by Byshevsky: "Speak; that Dumenko the anti-semite also conducted anti-Semitic promotion in the case, and the facts are not represented. Where to this charge of the proof? He quarreled, however, words, offensive for national vanity, but never put persons in these words it hateful and rabble-rousing sense. Where on its way of a victorious procession there were riots? Whether yes to it and the cavalry created by it the court is obliged what quietly in Rostov judges him now, Dumenko, and his headquarters?"

But Rosenberg obviously considered himself to the obliged not Dumenko, and the boss - to Trotsky. And the first point of a sentence - to execution! - put anti-Semitism: "Conducted systematic anti-Semitic and anti-Soviet policy, abusing Central Soviet vdast and calling in the form of an offensive curse of responsible ruyuvoditel of the Red Army kikes..."

of Royuvuyu a role, yutory was played in the fate of the hero-yumkora by charge of "an offensive curse" to Trotsky's address, yaryu and documentary precisely the writer V. Karpenko showed in the novel dilogy "Dumenko". Other episodes of the fight against anti-Semitism yutory in RKKA directed the Jews holding visible posts in rear and front governing bodies, still 5vdut the researcher.

So, studying the subject "Jews and Red Army" would demand first of all clarification of a question: why those "thousands of fellows from places" what these Ro went in "on a sledny and decisive battle" against old, on the whole directed not on a front line at all - in front parts of the Red Army, - but in its political, supply and retaliatory bodies?

O.V. Budnitsky does not answer this question distinctly. In vsyayum a case, extraordinary social mobility evreysyuy youth in 1918 - 1920, yutory he does not specify scales, but also cannot ignore, obviously did not lead to a little noticeable increase in number of Jews in front-line units. The references to special hatred of natives of the Jewish places which became a platitude to "belobandita" which defeated them straight to move to KGB bodies, and is equal also statements about allegedly high education level making the Jewish young men irreplaceable in various rear institutions do not maintain criticism and in any case demand a specification and personalisation. And maybe, defining in this orientation became nevertheless other reasons? Let's remember: during war, - it was repeatedly mentioned also by Lenin with Trotsky, - first of all those material resources which the Soviet Russia had then went to army, and exactly the Bolshevist rukoyudstvo steadily gave to the military of departments preference in norms of ware supply and the sizes of food rations. In this regard rear orga-

ny, institutions and institutions of the Red Army, including the military-political and retaliatory bodies which were actually in the back (including special departments, revvoyentribunala, various military schools, etc.) gave an optimum opportunity of rather safe use of all material and imperious privileges. Plus to it the possibility of vengeance to real, imaginary and potential offenders in certain cases appeared.

So can be, it joined - once again and in a specific form - the survival mechanism developed by thousand-year tragic experience of the people? From death all tried to hide. Enormous scales of evasion from mobilization are widely known. But everyone chose ways of evasion on himself. Peasants habitually ran up on the woods. And residents of the cities and places looked for the ways. Including - heading the Commissions on fight against desertion.

Of course, these reasons cannot have and have no broad interpretation. The dedication of particular persons on fronts Civil is so indisputable, as well as heroism of many thousands of Soviet Jews on fronts of the Great Patriotic War when historical realities were any more not is comparable others.

The Russian Jews gave to civil war both honest veterans sloggers, and bright gero ev. I will carry Miron Iosifovich Korol to the first (subsequently - the prominent security officer S.N. Mironov) who, being a lieutenant of old army, voluntarily entered RKKA the private and from 1918 to 1920 - "full time" - fought in artillery parts on a front line. Other example-nachdiv-16 Samuil PiyuusovichMedvedovskiy. It imyao. V. Budnitsky at least mentions, listing the Jews, most famous in the Red Army, - political workers and commanders. But, the right, legendary fearlessness and abilities of this gentleman of a military leader of awards Of St. George and awards of the Red Banner before which Ya.F. Fabritius decorated with an order serving under his supervision as the brigade commander quailed even four times deserved much bigger, than formal spisochno e a name mention. Also other hero - already White movement, - the colonel of the General Staff of Borya is known?

Lily Octavia
Other scientific works: