The disarmament of anarchists in the provinces of the Central Chernozem region in the spring of 1918 (based on the materials of the Orel and Voronezh provinces).

Zubarev Ivan Yur'evich ORCID: 0000-0001-6733-138X Postgraduate student of the Department of Russian History, Voronezh State Pedagogical University 86 Lenin Street, Voronezh, 394043, Russia, Voronezh Region iwan.zubarew2016@gmail.com Other publications by this author

The February Revolution of 1917 and the political processes that followed it became a catalyst for a new round of development of the anarchist movement in Russia. According to the calculations of the researcher of Russian anarchism V. V. Krivenky, by the autumn of 1917, anarchist organizations operated in more than 60 cities and towns of the country, and the number of their members reached 3 thousand people ^{[1, p. 253]}. In addition to the numerical increase, the influence of anarchists on the masses also grew, by the autumn of 1917, the anarchists had become an influential revolutionary force in the country. In some places, such as in Bryansk, members of anarchist organizations took the lead in local labor movements and made their way into government.

The tactical activity of Russian anarchists has also changed. If during the First Russian Revolution of 1905-1907 the anarchist movement in Russia was mainly a network of disparate, autonomously operating groups, the main method of political struggle of which was terror, then in 1917 – the first half of 1918 the anarchists began to actively organize the "all-Russian" unified anarchist movement. Russian anarchist groups were divided according to different trends that determined the methods of political struggle and agitation, in the pre-revolutionary stage this prevented them from opposing the tsarist government. In 1917-1918, this changed, and various large organizations already included representatives of different movements ^{[2, p. 10]}. Unification, the creation of a single anarchist force has become one of the main slogans of anarchist agitation. In the summer of 1917, at the conference of anarchists of 17 cities, held in Kharkov, the delegates present spoke about the need to unite "all anarchist forces"^{[3, p. 47]}. At the same time, the congress announced the preparation of the All-Russian Congress of Anarchists, the preparation of which was to be handled by the "Provisional Information Bureau of the Anarchists of Russia" (VOBAR). In the spring of 1918, the first "All-Russian Federation of Anarchist Communists (VFAK) was formed, of course, Petrograd and Moscow groups played a leading role in building a unified organization ^{[2, p. 12]}.

After the October Revolution of 1917, with the rise of counter-revolutionary forces and the outbreak of civil war in the country, anarchists began to make the first attempts to create organized armed groups. At the same time, of course, there were already separate partisan detachments operating autonomously. The activities of these formations were often accused by the new government of pogroms and various crimes.

The first calls for the creation of armed anarchist formations were present in the anarchist press as early as the end of 1917. One of the first to put forward this slogan was B. A. Verkhoustinsky, an activist of the Petrograd Federation of Anarchist Groups (PFAG), in the article "Anarchist squads": "We recognized that: the land belongs to the people. Factories are for the people. Palaces are for the people. So be it: The masses are weak to do this, the free squads will either help them with their strength or die with them" ^[4]. The creation of such formations was considered by the author of the leaflet as a fighting force for the implementation of the "third revolution".

However, some materials of the anarchist press show that in the winter and spring of 1918, the anarchists rather tried to create a force to fight counter-revolutionary forces. For example, the March issue of Anarchy contained the following call: "Forget all the party disputes and strife about who should hold power. Without hesitation, everyone to arms!"^[5]. A statement with a similar meaning was also contained in the articles of the MFAG's printing body to the newspaper Anarchy. In the appeal "To arms!", the main enemies of the accomplished revolution were called "German hordes", it was to combat foreign intervention that the appeal proposed to unite in combat anarchist squads under the black banner ^[6]. The emphasis on the fight against the interventionists was also made in the February "anarchist appeal": "at a time when the revolution rolled over the 9th wave, German, Russian and Polish counter-revolutionaries are driving their punitive battalions into revolutionary hotbeds"^{[2, p. 201]}. The emphasis on the fight against counter-revolutionary forces and interventionists was also made in the propaganda of anarchist groups in the Central Chernozem region, for example, in the leaflets of Voronezh anarchists ^[7]. Thus. It can be argued that the main reason for the organization of the "Black Guard" was the desire of the anarchists to create another force to fight the opponents of the revolution. At the same time, of course, in agitation, the anarchists did not shy away from calls for the continuation of the revolution, they opposed some decisions of the Bolshevik government. This could have caused fears of the new government towards the armed army being built by the anarchists.

Despite the fact that supporters of anarchy began to create combat detachments back in 1917, the first reports about the created "Headquarters of the Black Guard" date back to March 1918. In the first message of the headquarters dated March 5, 1918, the rule for joining the ranks of the "Black Guard" was established. According to the message, those wishing to join were required to have a recommendation from members of the movement, who did not have it, could not be included in the list of a combat organization^[8]. Methods for combating counter-revolutionaries were proclaimed as open armed struggle, there were arrests, searches, and disarmament. The tasks of the combat organization were formulated: 1) The establishment of forms of social life in accordance with the ideals of anarchism within Russia; 2) the protection of conquered rights and 3) the struggle against the enemies of the revolution ^{[3, p. 115]}.

Also, in March, the Moscow anarchists entered into an open confrontation with the Bolsheviks. The active seizure of buildings and weapons caused great concern on the part of the authorities. At this time, the number of clashes between anarchist and Bolshevik squads increased, as a result of one of which one representative of the Cheka was killed. Such activity on the part of the anarchists led to the defeat of the Moscow Federation and the headquarters of the "Black Guard" in April 1918. On March 22, a resolution of the Cheka was published in Izvestia VTsIK, according to which only the organs of the Cheka were allowed to carry out arrests, searches, requisitions ^{[9, p.]}. Thus, the requisitioning activities of the anarchists were illegal. This was the formal reason for the defeat of the Moscow Federation on April 12.

Armed clashes between the authorities and anarchist combat detachments took place in the spring of 1918 in the provinces of the Central Chernozem region. These events had a number of both similar and distinctive features.

In the Orel province, the first armed clash between the authorities and an anarchist detachment occurred even before the defeat of the headquarters of the "Black Guard" in Moscow. In early March, an anarchist detachment of the head of the Kursk armored division I. P. Sukhonosov, numbering 500 people, arrived in Orel from Kursk. The commander of the detachment offered assistance to the Orel council "to clean up the city of Orel from criminal elements", the council accepted the help and appointed him commissioner for the protection of the city ^{[10, p. 19]}.

Over the course of several weeks, members of the squad carried out a number of illegal arrests of representatives of the local bourgeoisie, and were also involved in robberies. The detachment conducted its activities not only in Orel, but also in neighboring Bolkhov, where, on March 10, members of the detachment arrested representatives of the county executive committee. In addition to the robberies, the soldiers of the detachment were involved in the murders. In the criminal nature of the actions of the members of the detachment, the case of the public murder of a girl in the Oryol Garden by the adjutant of I. P. Sukhonosov after refusing to dance with him is indicative ^{[10, p. 29]}.

On the night of March 7-8, I. P. Sukhonosov convened a meeting at which he proposed to the authorities to hold a "St. Bartholomew's Night" for "former exploiters, demanding extraordinary "dictatorial" powers for himself, thus seeking to legitimize his expropriation activities.

I. P. Sukhonosov's anarchists were disarmed and driven out of the city only in mid-March, with the help of the 142nd Zvenigorod Regiment that arrived in Orel on the 15th. The anarchists demanded that the Red Army soldiers who arrived disarm, but were refused, after which a shootout took place.

On March 16, the gubernatorial executive committee developed a plan to disarm the anarchists, the main striking force of the authorities was the Zvenigorod regiment, as well as Kovalev's Socialist Revolutionary detachment and several local workers' squads. However, in the evening, the anarchists themselves struck the first blow at the barracks where the Red Guard regiment was located. The attack was unsuccessful and the anarchists were rounded up and arrested. After the events in Orel, I. P. Sukhonosov returned to Kursk, where he joined the discontented fighters of the partisan detachments who had raised an armed rebellion. The Soviet authorities blamed the anarchists for the April uprising in Kursk: "The actions of the German occupiers activated the anarchists who had accumulated at the Kursk railway junction. They set up their headquarters, located in the Hanbek hotel, and called on the anarchist sailors to fight the Soviet government."^[11]

  However, it should be mentioned that the rebel units included not only anarchists. It is not known exactly what percentage of the rebels were members of the anarchist detachments. According to the memoirs of B. Krasnov, a participant in the events, the mutiny was caused by general dissatisfaction with supplies. According to his memoirs, the fighters began to be divided into "ours" and "not ours". "Ours" included the units of the local garrison subordinate to the governor, which were primarily supplied with everything necessary. Everyone else was called "Not ours", including the partisans ^{[12, p. 90]}. The rebellion was suppressed only on April 29 with the help of the troops who arrived. Thus, in Kursk, the anarchist detachments were only part of the rebel forces.

In addition to I. P. Sukhonosov, in March another anarchist detachment under the command of A. Shapiro entered the territory of the province and settled in Bryansk. The visiting fighters stated that they were going to "take revenge on the White Guards" for the murder of the chairman of the Congress of Soviets of the 4 northern counties of Chernihiv province, P. B. Shimanovsky. Their short stay in the city was accompanied by arbitrary arrests, robberies and extortion. According to the memoirs of a witness to the events, K. P. Voitinsky, the anarchists arrested local merchants and imposed a "half-million indemnity" on the city ^{[13, p. 69]}.

The anarchist continued to stay on the territory of the province later, after the disarmament of I. P. Sukhonosov and other detachments. So, at the end of March, a detachment from Petrograd arrived in Karachev. A representative of the anarchists who arrived told the local authorities that the purpose of their arrival was to organize a faction. In early April, an armed detachment arrived at the anarchists stationed in Karchayev. The commander of the Gurov detachment stated that the purpose of their arrival was to protect the anarchist federation under construction, noting that "although the anarchists ignore the power of the local Council, they will support it in the fight against counterrevolution" ^{[13, p. 71]}. The representative office of the detachment put forward a number of demands to the local executive committee, such as: "the issuance of money to support the federation of anarchists and the organization of partisan detachments, as well as the provision of provisions"^{[13, p. 71]}.

In parallel with the Kursk and Moscow events, an armed confrontation developed between the arriving troops and the local authorities in Voronezh. The first detachments from Ukraine arrived in the city in March, and gradually flooded the territory of the province. At the end of March-beginning of April, according to the memoirs of the head of the Voronezh combat workers' squad of the Socialist Revolutionary M. A. Chernyshev, a detachment of the anarchist G. K. Petrov arrived in Voronezh, numbering "1200 sabers" and having "8 armored cars" ^{[14, p. 92]}. Which was quite a significant force.

On March 24, anarchists seized the merchant Samofalov's hotel, carried out a number of robberies, but on March 29, local authorities were able to take control of the situation by making arrests and putting some of the rebels on trial.  According to the News of the Central Executive Committee of March 29, 1918: "according to information from Voronezh, a group of so-called anarchists, who seized one of the large hotels and several armored cars and for several days brought confusion to the normal life of the city, was rebuilt, the hotel was cleaned, the armored cars were selected" ^{[15, p. 317]}. It should be mentioned that local anarchists reacted negatively to the predatory activities of the arrived comrades, stating that these actions have nothing to do with "ideological anarchism" ^{[16, p. 49]}.

However, these events were only the beginning of the confrontation. The anarchists of G. K. Petrov who arrived in the city were joined by a cavalry detachment from Ostrogozhsk under the command of I. N. Domnich. By April 11, when the mutiny began, the rebels had about 2,500 people with an armored division in their ranks." At the same time, in the memoirs of M. A. Cherynshev, the anarchists who arrived are presented as "an unbridled, undisciplined gang." He recalls drunkenness among the armed group, indiscipline of the fighters [14 p. 3-51].

The Voronezh historian M. E. Razinkov established the course and period of the armed uprising most accurately. According to his research, the performance began on April 11 and was suppressed on the 14th ^{[17, p. 130]}. The first day was the most successful for the rebels. On April 11, the rebels began to disarm local detachments on the side of the authorities and seize the territory.  The main demand of the rebels was the creation of a conciliatory body – the "federation of anarchists", which, in addition to the anarchists themselves, would include the Socialist Revolutionaries and Bolsheviks. The negotiations were conducted by representatives of local authorities from among the social revolutionaries. The next day, after the arrival in the city of the leaders of the local Bolsheviks (N. N. Karandashev, I. A. Chuev, N. P. Pavlunovsky), the development of a plan to suppress the rebellion begins.

First of all, on April 12, forces were formed under the command of M. A. Chernyshev to suppress the uprising. Chernyshev's detachment stood up to protect the local authorities, as well as local workers' squads, a banking squad that had an armored car at its disposal. Also, according to some reports, the Red Guard detachment that arrived in Voronezh from Bobrov played an important role in suppressing the rebellion.

The forces of the rebels were concentrated in the city in three places: in the Mariinsky Gymnasium, in the local seminary, as well as at the Voronezh I railway station, where the main part of the anarchists was located. On April 12, the troops of the provincial executive committee surrounded all the centers of the rebels. The anarchist armored train was blocked by the forces of the railway squad under the command of Shustov at the station. This episode is reflected in detail in the memoirs of a member of the railway squad S. A. Spitsyn, who noted the following: "According to the message at Voronezh-I station that anarchists were coming, our squad began to detain them. The anarchists began to threaten us. We dismantled the railway lines behind the bridge and delayed the train. We took away a lot of weapons from the anarchists, a machine gun and an armored car" ^{[18, p. 189]}. The execution of the rebels who fled from the station is reflected in the memoirs of M. A. Chernyshev and Gerashchenkov ^{[18, p. 118]}.

Once blocked, the anarchists resisted. The shootout lasted until the morning of April 13, after failed negotiations, the rebels at the station were disarmed. On April 14, the units of the rebels who were in the gymnasium and seminary were defeated, after which the uprising was finally suppressed. The exact number of victims is unknown, according to the memoirs of a participant in the events V. I. Bersov, "from 400-500 people were captured, who were disarmed and sent to the Bristol hotel" ^{[18, p. 108]}.

The Soviet researcher I. G. Voronkov believed that the rebellion was the result of a conspiracy of the left SRS against the Soviet government under the leadership of Bukharin and Trotsky. In his opinion, the conspirators aimed at creating a new government from the left Bolsheviks and left Socialist Revolutionaries ^{[19, pp. 180-181]}. The researcher's main argument was that the rebellion occurred after the III Provincial Congress of Soviets, where the Socialist Revolutionaries opposed the conclusion of peace with Germany. At the same time, some of the left SRS who were in Voronezh supported the uprising. This version is characterized by political bias. In addition, there was no visible split between the Bolsheviks and the left SRS in Voronezh after the April uprising. Historian M. E. Razinkov noted that a serious consequence of the rebellion was a "split within the left SRS" ^{[17, p. 35]}.

According to E. G. Shulyakovsky, the anarchists were at the head of the uprising, "relying on their detachment armed with armored cars and on unstable elements of the Ostrogozhsky regiment" ^{[20, p. 43]}. Of course, the news of the defeat of the Moscow comrades could probably have stirred up the anarchist detachments in the city. However, there is no need to talk about any strong influence of anarchists in the city before and after the uprising. It is likely that the anarchists who arrived in the city became only part of the armed resistance, but not its main core. In addition, the main demand of the rebels was the creation of an advisory body, which would include both the Socialist Revolutionaries and the Bolsheviks. The fighters who opposed the government complained mainly about the lack of supplies, which echoes the events in Kursk. In addition, there were no calls for the overthrow of the central government in the slogans of the rebels. This rebellion is seen more as a spontaneous riot caused by the discontent of armed groups who arrived from the war, rather than a clearly organized conspiracy.

Thus, the spring of 1918 became a time of confrontation between the new government and the growing armed anarchist detachments. These events became part of the Bolsheviks' struggle to consolidate their power.  In addition to Moscow and Petrograd, armed clashes also occurred in the provinces of the Central Chernozem region. However, contrary to the data of some Soviet studies, the anarchists were not the full-fledged instigators of this confrontation, but rather only a part of it, supporting the general discontent of the motley partisan detachments operating in 1918 on the Ukrainian front against the interventionists. The clash of anarchists and Bolsheviks in Orel and Voronezh, despite the similarities, had serious differences. If in Orel, I. P. Sukhonosov's detachment essentially captured the city, pursuing a policy of terror, then the Voronezh performance was rather similar to the "April uprising" in Kursk, where partisan detachments of various political colors based in the city rebelled against the authorities.