What do you think?
Rate this book
Moscow 1941: A City and Its People at War
The story of the invasion of Moscow, told through its people.
Fought over a territory the size of France, the Battle of Moscow in 1941 cost the Russians as many casualties as the British lost in WW1. It marked the first strategic defeat of the Wehrmacht and halted their seemingly unstoppable advance across Europe. This is the story of that battle - and the ordinary men and women who fought it.
Based on huge research and scores of interviews, this book offers an unforgettable and richly illustrated narrative of the military action that took place in Moscow during 1941. It paints telling portraits of Stalin and his generals: some apparatchiks, some great commanders. It also traces the individual stories of soldiers, politicians and intellectuals, writers and artists and dancers, workers, schoolchildren and peasants.
Putin's invocations in contemporary propaganda shows that the Great Patriotic War remains highly emotional for Russia, and many former Socialist Republics. Many of these countries must grapple with troubling legacies behind the appalling cost of victory - from the role of Stalin to the complicity of collaborationist forces from the occupied USSR in atrocities both behind the front line and the rapid Nazi advance.
Fought over a territory the size of France, the Battle of Moscow in 1941 cost the Russians as many casualties as the British lost in WW1. It marked the first strategic defeat of the Wehrmacht and halted their seemingly unstoppable advance across Europe. This is the story of that battle - and the ordinary men and women who fought it.
Based on huge research and scores of interviews, this book offers an unforgettable and richly illustrated narrative of the military action that took place in Moscow during 1941. It paints telling portraits of Stalin and his generals: some apparatchiks, some great commanders. It also traces the individual stories of soldiers, politicians and intellectuals, writers and artists and dancers, workers, schoolchildren and peasants.
Putin's invocations in contemporary propaganda shows that the Great Patriotic War remains highly emotional for Russia, and many former Socialist Republics. Many of these countries must grapple with troubling legacies behind the appalling cost of victory - from the role of Stalin to the complicity of collaborationist forces from the occupied USSR in atrocities both behind the front line and the rapid Nazi advance.
488 pages, Hardcover
First published November 3, 2006
65 people are currently reading
777 people want to read
About the author
Rodric Braithwaite
18 books27 followersSir Rodric Quentin Braithwaite is a retired British diplomat and an author. From 1988 to 1992 Braithwaite was ambassador in Moscow, first of all under Margaret Thatcher to the Soviet Union and then under John Major to the Russian Federation. Subsequently, he was the Prime Minister's foreign policy adviser and chairman of the UK Joint Intelligence Committee (1992–93), and was awarded the GCMG in 1994.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 56 reviews
October 15, 2011
Overall an excellent effort! Bravo! I read criticisms by those who rated the book low and found that they contradict each other: one thinks it’s shallow, another – too detailed, one lacks personal accounts, another complains about their unnecessary abundance.
My humble Muscovite’s impression is that it is a well-balanced take on the extremely important, but bitterly disputed matter. The author doesn’t just through you into the midst of the battle for the last 100 miles to the city, but first he sets stage, which helps to get a bigger picture. It’s impossible to understand the battle without knowing that much (or that little, If you wish) of background facts and processes, you are reading about the larger-than-life clash of two very unique states. You need to go back to the events happened as early as 1905 Russian Revolution and tell about recent archive discoveries of Post-Communist 1990-es.
Personal narratives from people from all layers of society serve an essential tool too. They add depths, and human touch, because emotions and feelings there are timeless and easy to relate to. Without them the narrative could turn into dry enumeration of divisions, pieces of artillery, types of tanks and kilometers trudged through. I think if you look for that kind of story you better turn to one of Osprey’s books.
I am impressed by how a Western author treats the material. His tone is respectful and attentive. Here and there he gives a legendary glossed version of a fact (a one we were taught in Soviet schools) and then recites recent attempts to debunk it, making the book interesting even to Russian readers. He doesn’t try to sensationalize though. His summation of the story of tortured Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya, who was made an icon in the USSR is indicative:
“In all the confusion and rumour-mongering, however, one thing remained beyond doubt. A young girl did die gallantly, though perhaps pointlessly, at the hands of the Germans”.
What I found even more valuable is his appropriate cross-comparison snippets of British experience of similar ordeals: The London Blitz, rationing, wartime losses etc. When put in perspective, it all helps to grasp the magnitude of what was happening in those months. It also shows that many weird and sometimes brutal measures were echoed by or firstly introduced by similar or comparable actions in Great Britain (like requisition of domestic pigeons). This helps to demonstrate that it’s not Russians, who were quirky, but the time itself called for abnormal and sometimes illogical (by peacetime standards) actions.
P.s. Believe it or not, but Mr. Zeldin mentioned in the book as a promising young actor of “The Swinemaiden and The Shepherd” still acts at 96.
My humble Muscovite’s impression is that it is a well-balanced take on the extremely important, but bitterly disputed matter. The author doesn’t just through you into the midst of the battle for the last 100 miles to the city, but first he sets stage, which helps to get a bigger picture. It’s impossible to understand the battle without knowing that much (or that little, If you wish) of background facts and processes, you are reading about the larger-than-life clash of two very unique states. You need to go back to the events happened as early as 1905 Russian Revolution and tell about recent archive discoveries of Post-Communist 1990-es.
Personal narratives from people from all layers of society serve an essential tool too. They add depths, and human touch, because emotions and feelings there are timeless and easy to relate to. Without them the narrative could turn into dry enumeration of divisions, pieces of artillery, types of tanks and kilometers trudged through. I think if you look for that kind of story you better turn to one of Osprey’s books.
I am impressed by how a Western author treats the material. His tone is respectful and attentive. Here and there he gives a legendary glossed version of a fact (a one we were taught in Soviet schools) and then recites recent attempts to debunk it, making the book interesting even to Russian readers. He doesn’t try to sensationalize though. His summation of the story of tortured Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya, who was made an icon in the USSR is indicative:
“In all the confusion and rumour-mongering, however, one thing remained beyond doubt. A young girl did die gallantly, though perhaps pointlessly, at the hands of the Germans”.
What I found even more valuable is his appropriate cross-comparison snippets of British experience of similar ordeals: The London Blitz, rationing, wartime losses etc. When put in perspective, it all helps to grasp the magnitude of what was happening in those months. It also shows that many weird and sometimes brutal measures were echoed by or firstly introduced by similar or comparable actions in Great Britain (like requisition of domestic pigeons). This helps to demonstrate that it’s not Russians, who were quirky, but the time itself called for abnormal and sometimes illogical (by peacetime standards) actions.
P.s. Believe it or not, but Mr. Zeldin mentioned in the book as a promising young actor of “The Swinemaiden and The Shepherd” still acts at 96.
April 22, 2015
Since the cold war, the US government and news media have continuously demonized Russia and ignored the role that Russia played in defeating Germany in WWII. So too the popular culture: growing up as I did on a diet on war films, I was under the impression that my heroes Audie Murphy and Lee Marvin had themselves defeated Hitler. In a recent diplomatic scuffle, the US Ambassador to Czechoslovakia was made no longer welcome in the Czech Republic because he criticised the Czech President's plan to attend Russian MayDay celebrations in honour of the war dead. The Czech President said, "Were it not for Russia, I'd now be speaking German." In light of all of the above, and the propaganda in the mainstream media regarding Ukraine, I decided to do some reading to fill in my education.
In 1941 Germany was on a roll. With the appeasement of France and England, Germany annexed Austria and part of Czechoslovakia in 1938. Then in 1939 Germany invaded and quickly conquered Poland. BY April 1940 Germany had conquered Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg and France. Then, while maintaining aerial bombardment of England, Germany turned its attention to Russia. In June 1941 invaded Russia along a 2700 mile front with 145 Divisions and nearly 4 million men.
This book was written by Sir Rodric Braithwaite, a British diplomat and author who was Great Britain's Ambassador to Russia from 1988 to 1992. It tells the story of the war and the invasion from the Russian point of view. The climax is the decisive battle for Moscow.
We learn about the lead-up to the war, Stalin's purges, the organisation of the Military, the roles of Stalin and the Generals during the war. We learn about the lives of many individual politicians, soldiers, artists and families. We get to see from a citizen's perspective what it meant to live in Moscow under war time conditions and Moscow coming under siege.
Russian defences finally held less that 20 miles from Moscow. Russia re-grouped and pushed back the Germans all the way to Berlin decimating the bulk of German armies, armour and artillery. By the time the Allies landed in Normandy, Germany was broken. Some statistics that I found stunning, given the lack of "history" on the war in Russia: Germany deployed a maximum of 195 Divisions on the eastern front. On the western front, against the Allies, Germany deployed a maximum of 79 Divisions. When they met in Berlin, Russian losses totalled over 27,000,000 including 7,000,000 military.
In 1941 Germany was on a roll. With the appeasement of France and England, Germany annexed Austria and part of Czechoslovakia in 1938. Then in 1939 Germany invaded and quickly conquered Poland. BY April 1940 Germany had conquered Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg and France. Then, while maintaining aerial bombardment of England, Germany turned its attention to Russia. In June 1941 invaded Russia along a 2700 mile front with 145 Divisions and nearly 4 million men.
This book was written by Sir Rodric Braithwaite, a British diplomat and author who was Great Britain's Ambassador to Russia from 1988 to 1992. It tells the story of the war and the invasion from the Russian point of view. The climax is the decisive battle for Moscow.
We learn about the lead-up to the war, Stalin's purges, the organisation of the Military, the roles of Stalin and the Generals during the war. We learn about the lives of many individual politicians, soldiers, artists and families. We get to see from a citizen's perspective what it meant to live in Moscow under war time conditions and Moscow coming under siege.
Russian defences finally held less that 20 miles from Moscow. Russia re-grouped and pushed back the Germans all the way to Berlin decimating the bulk of German armies, armour and artillery. By the time the Allies landed in Normandy, Germany was broken. Some statistics that I found stunning, given the lack of "history" on the war in Russia: Germany deployed a maximum of 195 Divisions on the eastern front. On the western front, against the Allies, Germany deployed a maximum of 79 Divisions. When they met in Berlin, Russian losses totalled over 27,000,000 including 7,000,000 military.
November 7, 2015
-Irregular y algo falto de rumbo, en ocasiones.-
Género. Historia.
Lo que nos cuenta. Con el subtítulo Una ciudad y su pueblo en guerra, aproximación a la actitud del pueblo soviético, con especial atención a los moscovitas pero no exclusivamente, antes, durante y algo después de la ofensiva alemana de verano de 1941 que introdujo a la URSS en la Segunda Guerra Mundial y llevó al enemigo muy cerca de Moscú.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com....
Género. Historia.
Lo que nos cuenta. Con el subtítulo Una ciudad y su pueblo en guerra, aproximación a la actitud del pueblo soviético, con especial atención a los moscovitas pero no exclusivamente, antes, durante y algo después de la ofensiva alemana de verano de 1941 que introdujo a la URSS en la Segunda Guerra Mundial y llevó al enemigo muy cerca de Moscú.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com....
February 14, 2022
Sold, straightforward, narrative history of a key, and often overlooked, front in the war against nazism.
June 2, 2010
While the focus is the German attack, there is a large amount of background material that make this a very interesting book.
September 4, 2019
Wonderful history, balances overall narrative, historical facts, and individual stories in a great way. Gave me several other books I now need to read though...
One of the best points Braithwaite makes is this - do you know any one person that died in WWII? For every one US/UK person that died 85 Soviets died. EIGHTY FIVE.
If WWII was the marvel cinimatic universe, the Soviet Union would be the Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy, Wakanda, and Dr. Strange. The UK would be Ant-Man and the Us the Wasp. Very important to the war effort, but oh so small. It isn't a perfect analogy.
One of the best points Braithwaite makes is this - do you know any one person that died in WWII? For every one US/UK person that died 85 Soviets died. EIGHTY FIVE.
If WWII was the marvel cinimatic universe, the Soviet Union would be the Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy, Wakanda, and Dr. Strange. The UK would be Ant-Man and the Us the Wasp. Very important to the war effort, but oh so small. It isn't a perfect analogy.
December 27, 2022
This book is incredibly disappointing. What could have been a fascinating read quickly degenerates into little more than a compendium of collected first-hand accounts, which seem almost to be randomly thrown together. It's also very badly written and has no discernable narrative or structure. Its conclusions, such as they are, are also underwhelming.
January 12, 2015
In the year 1941 Moscow, Russia was invaded by the Germans during The Second World War. The book Moscow 1941: A City and Its People at War describes the trouble the people had to got through and the desperate things they had to do to stay alive. To defend for their city the Russians had to make difficult decisions that would question them morally. Women at the time were not involved in war because they were considered not equal to men. They had to make choice and they chose to allow women to fight alongside the men. School children were told to drop their books and pick up guns to fight alongside theirs fathers and Mothers in the bloody battle of Moscow. This story appealed to mean because it shows how people pull together to work as a team for one common goal and along the way make difficult decision that would change them forever whether for worse or for the better. Originally this book interested me because my family comes from Ukraine which used to be part of the Soviet Union before its collapse in the 1990s. I enjoy learning about history especially during the World War II era. I would rate this book 4 out of 5 stars because at some parts does get a bit slow at times. Other than that its a good read.
July 15, 2010
Books about the Eastern Front of World War 2 are like Dan Brown books for the Religious Conspiracy crowd – I just can’t get enough of them. However, I felt very disappointed after reading this one. For a start I thought it would be a description of the military events surrounding the pivotal events of the Battle of Moscow – for many people the turning point of the war. However, the military events were skipped. I am disappointed but the back cover did say that there would be a description of how ordinary people experienced the events and not the battle itself. Therefore are we going to read about how ordinary workers, soldiers, and peasants experienced the battle? Unfortunately no! Instead we get descriptions of what this film star did or what this ballet dancer did or what these well heeled students did. I am not interested in what a group of bourgeoisie did – I want ordinary people. Not nearly as good as Anthony Beevor who combines the military, strategic and ordinary into one very readable volume.
July 19, 2009
Bardzo dobra książka dla osób, które orientują się w historii II Wojny Światowej. Nie odkrywa ona Ameryki, ale pozwala spojrzeć na bitwę o Moskwę od strony zwykłych ludzi - żołnierzy i mieszkańców Moskwy. Pojawiają znane postacie historyczne - politycy i dowódcy tacy jak Stalin, Guderian, Żukow czy Rokossowski, ale też ludzie jak Wasilij Grossman [korespondent gazety Armii Czerwonej Krasnaya Zvezda (Czerwona Gwiazda):].
May 13, 2010
A windy, unwieldy account that wobbles confusingly between focusing on the human histories of common Muscovites and the broader military scene. The prose is colorless and vague; the author is aware of his story's import but helpless to do it justice, instead delivering a painfully prosaic narrative that tapers off, leaving the impression of history done by rote.
July 10, 2024
3.5 stars. Not my cup of tea as history, but nonetheless interesting, an important document, and clearly very well-researched. The author, a senior diplomat in the Foreign Office, obviously has great knowledge of, and admiration for, the ordinary people of Moscow, and this book tells the story of the German attack on their city in 1941 through the lens of their experiences. He is impressively well-read in the available archive sources, and also managed to interview 76 survivors in person - no mean feat in 2006, even in semi-thawed post-Soviet Russia. The anecdotes recorded are interesting, revealing, and usually humbling.
What you think of it as a work of history will depend on your view of this kind of history. It has become very fashionable to tell the story of historical events through the voices of ordinary people as a counterbalance to conventional dry accounts of the same events from official archives and more "objective" documentary sources. My problem with this approach is that it adds an extra level of subjectivity - this book quotes several famous legends of the Battle of Moscow - and the fact that some of them turned out to have been at least partially invented. So if that's the case for the famous ones, what price the ordinary folks' memories ? Also, the people quoted are of course mostly those who survived. They aren't necessarily the people with the best memories, or the people closest to the most important events, or the people with the most interesting stories to tell. They just survived. In the circumstances, jolly well done ! But does it make their stories history ? Or just anecdote ? This book mentions in passing Emil Gilels, David Oistrakh, Yuri Averbakh, and an entire train carriage-load of Russian composers and musicians - but that's all. Just names them. It mentions them only because we've heard of them, not because they did anything of interest during the war.
And the composition of books like this necessarily creates problems for readability. The chapters follow the chronological story from the invasion through to the battles west of Moscow with a concluding chapter summarising the rest of Russia's war. But the individual stories are often taken through in full - so the narrative bounces backwards and forwards and sideways both geographically and temporally. One minute we're in Moscow in July, the next we're in Vyazma in October, and then back again. This makes for a disjointed story, and becomes irritating, especially in a work of history. The other stylistic annoyance in books like this is they can easily degenerate into anecdotal fragments joined up by dull and repetitious connecting passages of the "x did y just like everyone else had to" variety. The author tries hard, but can't always avoid this happening because of the nature of the source material.
I also found some of the literary style and phraseology distracting:
".......in many ways they were not all that worse off......." I know it's a comparative already, but in this case the mild redundancy "that much" is more harmonious.;
".......they ordered the construction of a series of grandiose (sic) works to defend the capital......." "Massive" ? "Colossal" ? "Gigantic" ? "Grandiose" seems an odd choice of word here.;
".......to order the commander to shoot each and if necessary every soldier who had retreated without orders." A spectacularly-florid way of saying "any" !;
"Praskovia and her colleagues from the 242nd Volunteer Division had been badly battered as they retreated before the German advance." The individuals had ? Or the unit had ?
There are many more examples, all jarring uncomfortably on the flow of the narrative.
If you can put up with the style and you are OK with this type of history, this book is well worth reading. For all my minor objections, I did finish it - and enjoy it. And the people described were truly extraordinary. Appropriately-enough, the author rounds off with a quotation from the "Testament" of Yuri Danilkovski, a teenage would-be poet who was killed in 1944:
"Respect what is human in everyone, seek it out and nurture it. The true citizen of the future is he who is free from prejudice and convention, who does not fear for himself and does not fear the misunderstanding of others, who places above all else in life the marvellous emotion of love and the happiness of untrammelled creativity. That is the humanity for which I died." Humanity would have been better off if he, and many others like him, had survived.
What you think of it as a work of history will depend on your view of this kind of history. It has become very fashionable to tell the story of historical events through the voices of ordinary people as a counterbalance to conventional dry accounts of the same events from official archives and more "objective" documentary sources. My problem with this approach is that it adds an extra level of subjectivity - this book quotes several famous legends of the Battle of Moscow - and the fact that some of them turned out to have been at least partially invented. So if that's the case for the famous ones, what price the ordinary folks' memories ? Also, the people quoted are of course mostly those who survived. They aren't necessarily the people with the best memories, or the people closest to the most important events, or the people with the most interesting stories to tell. They just survived. In the circumstances, jolly well done ! But does it make their stories history ? Or just anecdote ? This book mentions in passing Emil Gilels, David Oistrakh, Yuri Averbakh, and an entire train carriage-load of Russian composers and musicians - but that's all. Just names them. It mentions them only because we've heard of them, not because they did anything of interest during the war.
And the composition of books like this necessarily creates problems for readability. The chapters follow the chronological story from the invasion through to the battles west of Moscow with a concluding chapter summarising the rest of Russia's war. But the individual stories are often taken through in full - so the narrative bounces backwards and forwards and sideways both geographically and temporally. One minute we're in Moscow in July, the next we're in Vyazma in October, and then back again. This makes for a disjointed story, and becomes irritating, especially in a work of history. The other stylistic annoyance in books like this is they can easily degenerate into anecdotal fragments joined up by dull and repetitious connecting passages of the "x did y just like everyone else had to" variety. The author tries hard, but can't always avoid this happening because of the nature of the source material.
I also found some of the literary style and phraseology distracting:
".......in many ways they were not all that worse off......." I know it's a comparative already, but in this case the mild redundancy "that much" is more harmonious.;
".......they ordered the construction of a series of grandiose (sic) works to defend the capital......." "Massive" ? "Colossal" ? "Gigantic" ? "Grandiose" seems an odd choice of word here.;
".......to order the commander to shoot each and if necessary every soldier who had retreated without orders." A spectacularly-florid way of saying "any" !;
"Praskovia and her colleagues from the 242nd Volunteer Division had been badly battered as they retreated before the German advance." The individuals had ? Or the unit had ?
There are many more examples, all jarring uncomfortably on the flow of the narrative.
If you can put up with the style and you are OK with this type of history, this book is well worth reading. For all my minor objections, I did finish it - and enjoy it. And the people described were truly extraordinary. Appropriately-enough, the author rounds off with a quotation from the "Testament" of Yuri Danilkovski, a teenage would-be poet who was killed in 1944:
"Respect what is human in everyone, seek it out and nurture it. The true citizen of the future is he who is free from prejudice and convention, who does not fear for himself and does not fear the misunderstanding of others, who places above all else in life the marvellous emotion of love and the happiness of untrammelled creativity. That is the humanity for which I died." Humanity would have been better off if he, and many others like him, had survived.
July 21, 2025
Although there were many large and obvious signs that Germany was about to attack the Soviet Union in the summer of 1941, the Soviet leadership (Stalin) chose to ignore them. Trains bearing Soviet grain and other raw materials were on their way to Germany while the German armored units and aircraft were decimating Soviet Red Army formations. So rapid was the advance of the German forces, millions of Red Army soldiers were surrounded and captured.
There was a great deal of debate among the German leadership as to what should be the primary goal of conquest in 1941. There were those that considered the capital city of Moscow to be the primary goal while others were in favor of maintaining the broad front.
This book is about the near conquest of Moscow by the German forces. While other areas of the front are mentioned, the focus is on the city and how the people and the leadership responded to the crisis. What is made very clear is one of the most important historical facts. Had the Germans made a concentrated drive on Moscow, they could have taken it. Even though their forces were split, small units came within visual range of the city.
It is fascinating to be taken within the Soviet government at a time of true existential crisis, when all of the mistakes made by Joseph Stalin were exposed. One of the most interesting historical tidbits is that when the officials went to wake Stalin after it was clear that the Germans were attacking, he thought that he was going to be arrested.
While it is unlikely that the capture of Moscow by the Germans would have led to their victory against the Soviet Union, it is clear that without the capture of Moscow, the Germans could not win. Although it is possible there could have been a negotiated settlement like the treaty of Brest-Litovsk. The Soviet Union simply had too many resources available, most specifically (wo)manpower and the willingness to throw it at the Germans. The Soviet Red Army was the only military in the Second World War where significant numbers of women served in combat roles.
This book is an important description of the most critical time during the Second World War. Had the Soviet Union not survived the onslaught of 1941, it is difficult to imagine how the Allies could have successfully invaded Europe in 1944. It is impossible to understand how the Allies won the Second World War without knowing how the Soviet Union survived the German onslaught of 1941. This book explains how it survived.
There was a great deal of debate among the German leadership as to what should be the primary goal of conquest in 1941. There were those that considered the capital city of Moscow to be the primary goal while others were in favor of maintaining the broad front.
This book is about the near conquest of Moscow by the German forces. While other areas of the front are mentioned, the focus is on the city and how the people and the leadership responded to the crisis. What is made very clear is one of the most important historical facts. Had the Germans made a concentrated drive on Moscow, they could have taken it. Even though their forces were split, small units came within visual range of the city.
It is fascinating to be taken within the Soviet government at a time of true existential crisis, when all of the mistakes made by Joseph Stalin were exposed. One of the most interesting historical tidbits is that when the officials went to wake Stalin after it was clear that the Germans were attacking, he thought that he was going to be arrested.
While it is unlikely that the capture of Moscow by the Germans would have led to their victory against the Soviet Union, it is clear that without the capture of Moscow, the Germans could not win. Although it is possible there could have been a negotiated settlement like the treaty of Brest-Litovsk. The Soviet Union simply had too many resources available, most specifically (wo)manpower and the willingness to throw it at the Germans. The Soviet Red Army was the only military in the Second World War where significant numbers of women served in combat roles.
This book is an important description of the most critical time during the Second World War. Had the Soviet Union not survived the onslaught of 1941, it is difficult to imagine how the Allies could have successfully invaded Europe in 1944. It is impossible to understand how the Allies won the Second World War without knowing how the Soviet Union survived the German onslaught of 1941. This book explains how it survived.
March 9, 2020
The concept of ‘Moscow 1941 – A City and Its People at War’ caught my immediate attention. I have a perhaps slightly morbid fascination with ‘last grand stands’ of history such as fall of Constantinople in 1453, days before Lee’s capitulation at Appomattox Courthouse in 1865 or conquest of Berlin in 1945. German assault on Moscow in 1941 could potentially have turned into one of such pivotal events… but never did. When I picked up this volume, I hoped it would give me insight into how population of this great city dealt with the dire threat poised against it in that fateful winter of 1941. And it did exactly that, but somehow I can’t help but feel unsatisfied and disappointed.
The author starts of his story on June 22nd 1940, exactly a year before start of Operation Barbarossa. The narrative that follows tries to depict reactions of leadership and ‘common people’ as the situation slowly changes from a distant threat of possible conflict into mortal danger for the entire city.
The part dealing with ‘leadership’ – Stalin, his inner circle, local officials of the city – is of ‘standard popular history’ variety. Readers with previous knowledge of events covered this book will certainly appreciate the wealth of anecdotes provided by the author, but I doubt that this book will provide deeper insight into inner workings of Soviet power apparatus during crisis of autumn and winter of 1941.
Main part of the book is dedicated to the ‘common’ people of Moscow. The author collects a vast selection of ‘human interest’ tales, often retold as first person recollections. Those stories are remarkably similar and share the same elements of tragedy, lack of control, stoicism, sense of sacrifice for greater good. I am convinced that vast majority of the readers will find this mosaic of life-stories poignant, powerful and of importance. In my case, for some unexplainable reason, they failed to have any effect whatsoever.
I’ve spent some time searching for the reasons why this book failed to move me the way it hopes to. In the end I came to the conclusion that its intention was clear and so forced that I felt it literally shoved into my brain, demanding certain reactions. And I didn’t appreciate it all that much.
The author starts of his story on June 22nd 1940, exactly a year before start of Operation Barbarossa. The narrative that follows tries to depict reactions of leadership and ‘common people’ as the situation slowly changes from a distant threat of possible conflict into mortal danger for the entire city.
The part dealing with ‘leadership’ – Stalin, his inner circle, local officials of the city – is of ‘standard popular history’ variety. Readers with previous knowledge of events covered this book will certainly appreciate the wealth of anecdotes provided by the author, but I doubt that this book will provide deeper insight into inner workings of Soviet power apparatus during crisis of autumn and winter of 1941.
Main part of the book is dedicated to the ‘common’ people of Moscow. The author collects a vast selection of ‘human interest’ tales, often retold as first person recollections. Those stories are remarkably similar and share the same elements of tragedy, lack of control, stoicism, sense of sacrifice for greater good. I am convinced that vast majority of the readers will find this mosaic of life-stories poignant, powerful and of importance. In my case, for some unexplainable reason, they failed to have any effect whatsoever.
I’ve spent some time searching for the reasons why this book failed to move me the way it hopes to. In the end I came to the conclusion that its intention was clear and so forced that I felt it literally shoved into my brain, demanding certain reactions. And I didn’t appreciate it all that much.
February 23, 2024
Englantilaisen Rodric Braithwaiten "Moskova 1941" (WSOY, 2007) käsittelee toisen maailmansodan massiivisimpiin taisteluihin kuulunutta kamppailua Neuvostoliiton pääkaupungista. Saksalaisten hyökkäyksen voima vei Wehrmachtin tykinkantaman päähän Moskovasta. Neuvostoliitto horjui pahemman kerran, mutta ei kukistunut ja puna-armeija onnistui pysäyttämään vyöryn joulukuussa 1941. Stalinin vainoista huolimatta kansa yhdistyi taistelemaan hyökkääjää vastaan.
Tietokirja vertautuu nimeään myöten Antony Beevorin teoksiin, vaikka ei ehkä ihan niin mukaansatempaavaa luettavaa olekaan. Sotahistoriallisten käänteiden lisäksi kirjassa tuodaan esille yksittäisten ihmisten kokemuksia ja kohtaloita maailmanpalon keskellä.
Sotakuvauksessa ei jumituta ainoastaan taistelutapahtumiin ja sisäpolitiikkaan, vaan esille nostetaan myös kulttuuripoliittinen näkökulma. Elokuvaa, balettia, kaunokirjallisuutta, teatteria ja musiikkia (NKVD:llakin oli kuulemma oma jazz-yhtye) nostetaan ilahduttavissa määrin esille.
Neuvostoliiton kokemat tappiot ja siviiliväestön kärsimykset olivat käsittämätöntä luokkaa, eikä sinänsä ole ihme, että ns. suuren isänmaallisen sodan muisto on iskostunut niin voimakkaasti venäläiseen mielenlaatuun. Surullista nykytilannetta Ukrainassakin yritetään iskostaa kansalaisten mieliin "fasismin vastaisena taisteluna".
Tietokirja vertautuu nimeään myöten Antony Beevorin teoksiin, vaikka ei ehkä ihan niin mukaansatempaavaa luettavaa olekaan. Sotahistoriallisten käänteiden lisäksi kirjassa tuodaan esille yksittäisten ihmisten kokemuksia ja kohtaloita maailmanpalon keskellä.
Sotakuvauksessa ei jumituta ainoastaan taistelutapahtumiin ja sisäpolitiikkaan, vaan esille nostetaan myös kulttuuripoliittinen näkökulma. Elokuvaa, balettia, kaunokirjallisuutta, teatteria ja musiikkia (NKVD:llakin oli kuulemma oma jazz-yhtye) nostetaan ilahduttavissa määrin esille.
Neuvostoliiton kokemat tappiot ja siviiliväestön kärsimykset olivat käsittämätöntä luokkaa, eikä sinänsä ole ihme, että ns. suuren isänmaallisen sodan muisto on iskostunut niin voimakkaasti venäläiseen mielenlaatuun. Surullista nykytilannetta Ukrainassakin yritetään iskostaa kansalaisten mieliin "fasismin vastaisena taisteluna".
August 18, 2022
This is a very well detailed account of things leading up to and including the Moscow siege in WWII. There's a plethora of voices in the book concerning practically every event talked about, my only issue is that they come up very randomly (without much introduction), with some accounts only being a paragraph long, then disappearing.
I expected this to be more recollection/people based, but I'm not disappointed with the historical parts either. There's a lot of good myth dispelling too, such as the Soviets being caught completely unexpected/unprepared by the Nazis (there were plenty of behind-the-scenes reasons with Stalin for that). It was also interesting to get a brief history of Moscow in its beginnings, with the reason why it was considered "a village" so late into modernity.
Contains a serious amount of references/footnotes and some photographs. A definite must-read for anyone interested in the Battle of Moscow.
I expected this to be more recollection/people based, but I'm not disappointed with the historical parts either. There's a lot of good myth dispelling too, such as the Soviets being caught completely unexpected/unprepared by the Nazis (there were plenty of behind-the-scenes reasons with Stalin for that). It was also interesting to get a brief history of Moscow in its beginnings, with the reason why it was considered "a village" so late into modernity.
Contains a serious amount of references/footnotes and some photographs. A definite must-read for anyone interested in the Battle of Moscow.
February 25, 2019
Ouvi bons comentários e fiquei com a expectativa um pouco alta com relação ao livro, mas ela não foi correspondida.
Inicialmente é descrito um pouco do passado da cidade e da vida sob o sistema comunista. Depois os rumores da guerra, a invasão alemã, a formação das unidades militares e dos partisans e os combates.
Quando fala dos ataques aéreos, das evacuações, dos voluntários para a guerra, o autor cita muitos exemplos e mostra muitos relatos de pessoas envolvidas nos acontecimentos, mas na maioria das vezes são apresentados em sequência e alguns fora de lugar, mal organizados, deixando a leitura cansativa.
Em alguns pontos do livro há excesso de pontuação, atrapalhando a fluidez do texto.
Tanto na narrativa quanto na qualidade do conteúdo não dá pra comparar com grandes livros do gênero, mas por falta de publicações (principalmente em português) nesse tema, é um bom livro.
Inicialmente é descrito um pouco do passado da cidade e da vida sob o sistema comunista. Depois os rumores da guerra, a invasão alemã, a formação das unidades militares e dos partisans e os combates.
Quando fala dos ataques aéreos, das evacuações, dos voluntários para a guerra, o autor cita muitos exemplos e mostra muitos relatos de pessoas envolvidas nos acontecimentos, mas na maioria das vezes são apresentados em sequência e alguns fora de lugar, mal organizados, deixando a leitura cansativa.
Em alguns pontos do livro há excesso de pontuação, atrapalhando a fluidez do texto.
Tanto na narrativa quanto na qualidade do conteúdo não dá pra comparar com grandes livros do gênero, mas por falta de publicações (principalmente em português) nesse tema, é um bom livro.
November 11, 2021
A former British ambassador to Moscow writes an interesting and informed history of the Battle of Moscow based partly on conversations with Muscovites who were there. Stalin's rule before the war and the oppression of daily life in the country is described in detail. The war released many into death or privation but the people were unified in the defense of their homeland.
One of the statistics from the book that most sticks in my mind is this: for every British or American soldier who died in the war, 7 Japanese soldiers died, 20 German soldiers died, and 85 Soviet soldiers died. 80% of the fighting in the Second World War took place on the Eastern front. It's no wonder that Russians consider the WWII victory to be their victory.
One of the statistics from the book that most sticks in my mind is this: for every British or American soldier who died in the war, 7 Japanese soldiers died, 20 German soldiers died, and 85 Soviet soldiers died. 80% of the fighting in the Second World War took place on the Eastern front. It's no wonder that Russians consider the WWII victory to be their victory.
July 6, 2017
An interesting anecdotal history of the Battle of MOSCOW, 1941. Braithwaite is not a historian, but he was the former UK ambassador to Russia during the downfall of the Soviet Union. As such, he has conducted interviews with many of the participants and their descendants has read the many of the memoirs of Soviets who were involved in the defense of Moscow. He has also described the cultural and entertainment involvement during this period. I enjoyed the book and recommend it has an interesting take on the impact of the Nazi invasion of Russia on the various strata of Soviet society at that time.
May 8, 2023
This was a well-written and enjoyable history of the early days of the Soviet Union's involvement in World War II. I perhaps expected a bit more from it, in terms of sociology or social psychology and the challenges facing a wartorn populace, but the author did a solid job, overall, of painting a picture of Moscow in 1941.
The first portion of the book threw me a bit with it's big-picture focus, recounting some of the leadup to the war, including the intelligence that Germany was about to invade and Stalin's dismissal thereof. The amount of focus on this element of the war surprised me, as there was nothing especially Moscow-centric in it, other than the Soviet warplanning that assumed the Germans would have to choose their invasion route and the fact that the political center of the USSR was located in Moscow.
The later chapters that focused more on individuals' experiences were far more engaging and more akin to what I'd expected when I picked up this book.
Overall, a great intro to a major theater of the war--one that often gets far less attention than its more famous brethren in Stalingrad and Leningrad.
The first portion of the book threw me a bit with it's big-picture focus, recounting some of the leadup to the war, including the intelligence that Germany was about to invade and Stalin's dismissal thereof. The amount of focus on this element of the war surprised me, as there was nothing especially Moscow-centric in it, other than the Soviet warplanning that assumed the Germans would have to choose their invasion route and the fact that the political center of the USSR was located in Moscow.
The later chapters that focused more on individuals' experiences were far more engaging and more akin to what I'd expected when I picked up this book.
Overall, a great intro to a major theater of the war--one that often gets far less attention than its more famous brethren in Stalingrad and Leningrad.
August 12, 2019
The story of the battle for Moscow. However this account focusses on the civilians caught up in this monstrous and tragic battle. The horrific loss of life and utter ruthless nature of Stalinism. Tragic you compelling brilliant too.
August 24, 2018
I feel like reading this would be a 6 month battle. Either it was too dense or I am. Abandoned.
February 9, 2020
Pro-Russian propaganda.
August 22, 2021
En excellent protrayal of the German invasion of the Soviet Union as lived from Moscow.
December 19, 2021
a bit unfocused, but packed with interesting anecdotes
May 23, 2016
The conventional wisdom is that to fully understand current events we need to revisit the past, and I think Ambassador Braithwaite (British Embassy in Moscow 1988-92; not light and easy days on the job, I'll bet) has provided a good snapshot of what the Soviet capital was going through when the Nazis were raining bombs and shells on it. His research puts some light on Stalin's regime and how it operated under pressure. For example, on a single page the reader learns that as Russian soldiers defending the Western approaches to the capital "went on fighting not only when fighting had become pointless, but even when it had become physically impossible", the Politburo was cobbling together trains, men, and other precious resources to move Lenin's body from its mausoleum on Red Square to Siberia. He describes the most awful days, beginning in late October, when the Wehrmacht tapped into the city's PA system and broadcast the Horst Wessel song as a cold rain fell amongst the ashes of burning Soviet government documents. As the city administration shut down, citizens began to throw away their portraits and busts of Soviet leaders; there was little else to do, according to this history, because the factories' gates were locked and the Communist Party was issuing small arms only to its own members, who though armed were increasingly loading up their cars with "domestic treasures" and fleeing to the East. The non-Party folks instead picked up hammers and spades; the ones who weren't fortifying the city with these tools were reportedly looting it or spending their days in queues for food. In this narrative, Braithwaite reminds the reader that putting people under the dome often brings out both the best and worst in them. While the regime was pulling prisoners out of their cells at the Lubyanka and sending them to Kuibyshev (to execute them before the Nazis did, evidently), it also was moving some of the bright lights from the arts like Dmitry Shostokovich there. While Panfilov's Heroes were allegedly dying to the last man against German tanks on the Volokolamsk Highway, General Vlasov was turning traitor and becoming one of the most despised men in Russian history. To elucidate--Ambassador Braithwaite does his best to give an objective account of these events, and via personal interviews and research has done his best to cut through the type of legends a regime creates to motivate its people. In my opinion, he in no way denigrates the sacrifices Soviet citizens made in this terrible time: "for every Briton or American who died [in the Second World War]," he writes, "the Japanese lost seven people, the Germans twenty, and the Soviets eighty-five." At the same time, however, this work foreshadows (it was written in 2006) the sort of nationalistic indignation that certain demographics in Russia display today when someone shows up to write an objective history of Soviet events. "[T]o the fury of the orthodox and the elderly," he writes, "who increasingly resented the attempts of intellectuals and liberal politicians to revise the history of the war, [these efforts were viewed] as a shameful slur on the history of the Victory." One need look no further than the Russian media's treatment of Ukraine recently to see this playing out a decade after "Moscow 1941" was published and 75 years after the events it chronicles. Indeed, Braithwaite elucidates this further (and I think with a hint of compassion for this Hero City and its defenders) in the book's final paragraph. "'I envy my friends who died in the war,' wrote one elderly woman as the Soviet Union fell about her ears in the autumn of 1991. 'I envy the fact that they left this life without having lost their faith, without becoming disillusioned.'" As this greatest generation passes on, it's getting harder to get at the truth we receive from authors like Anne Applebaum, Solzhenitsyn, and Tim Snyder; there is, in fact, an orchestrated effort to fog up the lens. I believe, however, that Rodric Braithwaite has similarly put in the hours and intellectual curiosity to help us cut through that fog and therefore I have no reservations about recommending this book.
July 21, 2018
Moscow 1941 is a very interesting book. It tells the story of the first year, more or less, of the German attack on the Soviet Union as viewed through the eyes of the people of Moscow. We do step back a few years on occasion to discuss the Revolution and Stalin's rise to power and the purges of the 1930s which affected the Soviet armed forces. And we do see the end of the story with the fall of Berlin, but the focus is on the time period beginning in June 1941 through the end of the Soviet counteroffensive in April 1942.
The author (who was the British ambassador in Moscow from 1988 to 1992) has done an amazing job of interviewing participants and making use of many sources that are not available in English. Weaving these stories together makes this book unique in terms of the breadth of the source material. So if it definitely worth the effort to read it.
I wanted to like this book more than I actually did. There are some structural problems with the book. First, there simply aren't enough good maps. Portions of the narrative deal with the military aspects of the struggle, and without good maps it becomes difficult to tell what is going on. The second problem is that the narrative is quite "choppy" in places. I think this is an understandable consequence of using so many sources, but it does make following all of the narrative threads difficult.
My final complaint is with the author's repeated comparisons of the German invasion in 1941 and the French attack in 1812. He even has a table on one of the maps showing how much more quickly Napoleon got to Moscow compared with Army Group Center. The comparisons are not valid because of the diversion of the German effort to capturing Kiev, something that simply did not come into play in 1812. So the comparison is invalid. And despite the author's complaints about revisionist historians, this is an area of legitimate research and speculation.
The author (who was the British ambassador in Moscow from 1988 to 1992) has done an amazing job of interviewing participants and making use of many sources that are not available in English. Weaving these stories together makes this book unique in terms of the breadth of the source material. So if it definitely worth the effort to read it.
I wanted to like this book more than I actually did. There are some structural problems with the book. First, there simply aren't enough good maps. Portions of the narrative deal with the military aspects of the struggle, and without good maps it becomes difficult to tell what is going on. The second problem is that the narrative is quite "choppy" in places. I think this is an understandable consequence of using so many sources, but it does make following all of the narrative threads difficult.
My final complaint is with the author's repeated comparisons of the German invasion in 1941 and the French attack in 1812. He even has a table on one of the maps showing how much more quickly Napoleon got to Moscow compared with Army Group Center. The comparisons are not valid because of the diversion of the German effort to capturing Kiev, something that simply did not come into play in 1812. So the comparison is invalid. And despite the author's complaints about revisionist historians, this is an area of legitimate research and speculation.
November 10, 2014
This is one of those rare books that opens one's eyes to the reality of war beyond the senseless numbers, battlefield jargon and the clatter of arms. The battle of Moscow was arguably the largest battle of the second world war, and perhaps the most decisive. Millions of combatants engaged over several months in a protracted struggle for the city, which was saved but barely so from the German onslaught. There are many accounts of operations Barbarossa, the 1941 summer invasion of the Soviet Union, and Typhoon, the march on Moscow in the fall of same year. Millions died, and millions more suffered injury, imprisonment and displacement. But what did it mean for the Moscovites, those faceless inhabitants of the city? Who were those people who volunteered in their multitudes to die defending the city as the battles approached its edges, who stood on roofs of buildings as sentries braving the bombs and watching for fires in the wake of night raids by the German Luftwaffe, who dug trenches and erected barriers to defend their city? What motivates a people to stand and fight, and how does the social fabric of a great city such as Moscow enter the picture? In Braithwaite's narrative, we meet some of those people: we ache for their losses and suffering and take heart in their boundless courage. Bariathwaite's is not a blow by blow military history of the battle, and perhaps because of that, one gets the better sense of it. This is one of the most moving narrative of the battle of Moscow that I have read. I would place it next to Vasily Grossman's A Writer At War in terms of giving a human dimension to a gargantuan struggle that consumed everything in front of it. Highly recommended.
September 16, 2013
A range of reviews for this one suggest, as was my feeling, that what it does well, it does very well, but that there are also notable weaknesses. For familiar events, like D-Day, finding new personal stories has become the means of justifying yet another book. Here, I think the diversity of reviews reflects whether the reader in question knows the overall story or not. I don't have the sense that the author has a vivid picture of his ideal reader.
Braithwaite brings an obvious fascination with Moscow and its citizens as he traces the most profound experience within their living memory. His cast is large, and he regularly introduces a character at the point in the narrative where that person's pivotal experience is most relevant, but then confuses the overall chronology by giving both their back story and their subsequent fate. For a reader unfamiliar with the larger picture, I can see where these diversions could be a real problem.
Yet Braithwaite must be an effective interviewer, and have good methods of finding interesting people to interrogate. Capturing their experience has inherent value.
His unclear sense of audience comes through when he inserts British parallels to the Soviet experience, often with a feeling of non sequitur.
But overall, I am glad to have read the book.
Braithwaite brings an obvious fascination with Moscow and its citizens as he traces the most profound experience within their living memory. His cast is large, and he regularly introduces a character at the point in the narrative where that person's pivotal experience is most relevant, but then confuses the overall chronology by giving both their back story and their subsequent fate. For a reader unfamiliar with the larger picture, I can see where these diversions could be a real problem.
Yet Braithwaite must be an effective interviewer, and have good methods of finding interesting people to interrogate. Capturing their experience has inherent value.
His unclear sense of audience comes through when he inserts British parallels to the Soviet experience, often with a feeling of non sequitur.
But overall, I am glad to have read the book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 56 reviews