What do you think?
Rate this book
The Great Terror: A Reassessment
When The Great Terror was first published in 1968, it was universally acclaimed as one of the most important books ever written about the Soviet Union. Such was the wealth of new information that began to emerge, that a revised edition was published in 1990, giving further depth and breadth to this momentous period.
This brand new edition brings us right into the present day by way of a fascinating and informative introduction from the author, which explores the reactions to the book's initial publication - including the response from Russia - and the new information which has subsequently been made available about the Soviet Union. The Great Terror remains an outstanding work of modern history and essential reading for all.
This brand new edition brings us right into the present day by way of a fascinating and informative introduction from the author, which explores the reactions to the book's initial publication - including the response from Russia - and the new information which has subsequently been made available about the Soviet Union. The Great Terror remains an outstanding work of modern history and essential reading for all.
592 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1968
112 people are currently reading
5108 people want to read
About the author
Robert Conquest
132 books157 followersGeorge Robert Ackworth Conquest was a British historian who became a well known writer and researcher on the Soviet Union with the publication, in 1968, of his account of Stalin's purges of the 1930s, The Great Terror.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 123 reviews
December 15, 2009
Amongst my other reading at present I’ve been working my way through Robert Conquest’s classic The Great Terror>, an exploration of the Stalinist purge in Russia in the mid-1930s. I’ve reached the most terrible phase of that terrible part of the nation’s history, the so-called Yezhovchina, named after Nikolai Yezhov, then head of the NKVD, the Soviet security police.
It’s difficult to know how the nation was able to survive the ever growing spiral of denunciations, arrests and executions, embracing the whole of society, high and low, in and out. It’s difficult to know how people, ordinary people, could go to sleep at night, knowing that they might very well be visited by the secret police in the early hours of the morning, their favourite time. It’s difficult to know how Russia avoided a collective breakdown in the midst of this horror.
Here’s one story that caught my attention, a demonstration of the manic stupidity of the whole period, the kind of thing that emerged in the process of lunatic denunciations. It concerns one Sylakov, a deserter from the Red Army. He gave himself up in Kiev claiming that, for whatever reason, that he had been involved in an anti-Soviet plot. He told of a planned raid on a post office in which he had a leading part, intended to provide funds for a terrorist cell. This was not enough for the NKVD, so after a good kicking, he implicated the whole of his old military unit, right up to the commanding officer. The attacks planned were not now on a post office, no, but on government leaders.
Following this almost the whole of his unit was arrested, from the commanding officer right down to the drivers, wives included. Sylakov’s family were also drawn in, his two sisters, his father and his old and crippled mother. So, too, was an uncle, who had only ever met his nephew once. The said uncle was discovered to have served once as a corporal in the old Imperial Army, and was immediately promoted by the NKVD into a Tsarist general!
As with a rock thrown into a silent pool, the rings grew ever wider as this absurd tale progressed, embracing more and more, to the point that every cell in Kiev prison was occupied by someone implicated in the ‘Sylakov Plot.’ But no sooner had the intensity of the Terror slackened with the fall of Yezhov in late 1938 than the NKVD began to re-examine the whole case, now a complete embarrassment. The suspects were all interrogated again, with a view to getting them to withdraw their forced confessions. Some, fearing a trick, refused and had to be given another kicking, to get them to reject statements that carried the death sentence! Is there any greater madness than this?
It’s difficult to know how the nation was able to survive the ever growing spiral of denunciations, arrests and executions, embracing the whole of society, high and low, in and out. It’s difficult to know how people, ordinary people, could go to sleep at night, knowing that they might very well be visited by the secret police in the early hours of the morning, their favourite time. It’s difficult to know how Russia avoided a collective breakdown in the midst of this horror.
Here’s one story that caught my attention, a demonstration of the manic stupidity of the whole period, the kind of thing that emerged in the process of lunatic denunciations. It concerns one Sylakov, a deserter from the Red Army. He gave himself up in Kiev claiming that, for whatever reason, that he had been involved in an anti-Soviet plot. He told of a planned raid on a post office in which he had a leading part, intended to provide funds for a terrorist cell. This was not enough for the NKVD, so after a good kicking, he implicated the whole of his old military unit, right up to the commanding officer. The attacks planned were not now on a post office, no, but on government leaders.
Following this almost the whole of his unit was arrested, from the commanding officer right down to the drivers, wives included. Sylakov’s family were also drawn in, his two sisters, his father and his old and crippled mother. So, too, was an uncle, who had only ever met his nephew once. The said uncle was discovered to have served once as a corporal in the old Imperial Army, and was immediately promoted by the NKVD into a Tsarist general!
As with a rock thrown into a silent pool, the rings grew ever wider as this absurd tale progressed, embracing more and more, to the point that every cell in Kiev prison was occupied by someone implicated in the ‘Sylakov Plot.’ But no sooner had the intensity of the Terror slackened with the fall of Yezhov in late 1938 than the NKVD began to re-examine the whole case, now a complete embarrassment. The suspects were all interrogated again, with a view to getting them to withdraw their forced confessions. Some, fearing a trick, refused and had to be given another kicking, to get them to reject statements that carried the death sentence! Is there any greater madness than this?
July 16, 2012
Which is more terrifying? Stalin's 1936-38 terror, or Western liberals' inability to recognize it? Updating his original work "The Great Terror" with a vast amount of new data, Conquest scrupulously details and puts into context the purges themselves: the many players and defendants, the shifting political cross-currents, the rounds of trials and arrests.
And he does the same for the many Western observers - intellectuals, writers, journalists, and left activists - who were oblivious to it or actively sought to hush it up, even decades later when there were no longer any shreds of doubt. This is the equivalent of Holocaust denial.
And a Holocaust it was. While left-wing apologists pooh-poohed the numbers of purge deaths as in the thousands, the estimates of those killed politically in the people's progressive utopia are now solidly in the eight figures, with as many as 15 to 20 million arrested and executed, or worked to death in the camps, in the years up until Stalin's death in 1953. As many more died were starved by the Communists in the Ukraine to break the peasantry a few years earlier. Yet most people seem never to have heard of any of this.
As much as I wanted to enjoy this book for it's profound historical importance, I found it difficult to get through it. As a historian and documentarian, Robert Conquest is unrivaled. As a writer, he doesn't make it easy on his readers. This book is probably more suited to be an academic reference than a consumer market book.
The author goes into fascinating detail about how the depraved mind of Stalin might have processed perceived threats to his power and gives a palpable feel for what those who lived during this era must have felt. He goes into thought provoking detail about just how maniacal and pervasive the purge mentality became. No one was trusted, not even those closest to Stalin. It seems that just about anyone was liable to be arrested and executed just for making the wrong glance. He also demonstrates how and why the purges increased exponentially, leading to millions of Russian citizens going to prison, or their deaths, on absolutely no basis of criminal wrongdoing.
Overall, the book has a cohesive structure from one chapter to the next, but all too often the author tends to give a dry recitation names, dates, and facts with little contextualization. He also assumes the reader has some familiarity with Russian politics and institutions. Many of the terms specific to Russia and the period covered are mentioned but never explained very well, if at all.
Despite these minor flaws, Conquest did a tremendous job in researching and uncovering the magnitude and details of Stalin's Great Terror. No other account prior to this gave a glimpse of just how extensive Stalin's campaign of terror and suppression was. This is without question the definitive book on the Stalinist purges.
And he does the same for the many Western observers - intellectuals, writers, journalists, and left activists - who were oblivious to it or actively sought to hush it up, even decades later when there were no longer any shreds of doubt. This is the equivalent of Holocaust denial.
And a Holocaust it was. While left-wing apologists pooh-poohed the numbers of purge deaths as in the thousands, the estimates of those killed politically in the people's progressive utopia are now solidly in the eight figures, with as many as 15 to 20 million arrested and executed, or worked to death in the camps, in the years up until Stalin's death in 1953. As many more died were starved by the Communists in the Ukraine to break the peasantry a few years earlier. Yet most people seem never to have heard of any of this.
As much as I wanted to enjoy this book for it's profound historical importance, I found it difficult to get through it. As a historian and documentarian, Robert Conquest is unrivaled. As a writer, he doesn't make it easy on his readers. This book is probably more suited to be an academic reference than a consumer market book.
The author goes into fascinating detail about how the depraved mind of Stalin might have processed perceived threats to his power and gives a palpable feel for what those who lived during this era must have felt. He goes into thought provoking detail about just how maniacal and pervasive the purge mentality became. No one was trusted, not even those closest to Stalin. It seems that just about anyone was liable to be arrested and executed just for making the wrong glance. He also demonstrates how and why the purges increased exponentially, leading to millions of Russian citizens going to prison, or their deaths, on absolutely no basis of criminal wrongdoing.
Overall, the book has a cohesive structure from one chapter to the next, but all too often the author tends to give a dry recitation names, dates, and facts with little contextualization. He also assumes the reader has some familiarity with Russian politics and institutions. Many of the terms specific to Russia and the period covered are mentioned but never explained very well, if at all.
Despite these minor flaws, Conquest did a tremendous job in researching and uncovering the magnitude and details of Stalin's Great Terror. No other account prior to this gave a glimpse of just how extensive Stalin's campaign of terror and suppression was. This is without question the definitive book on the Stalinist purges.
Want to read
May 31, 2012This guy's real name is Robert Conquest? My nom de plume is going to be Biceps Wellhung.
August 21, 2023
Martin Amis mined this heavily in Koba the Dread: Laughter and the Twenty Million and I was initially halted by Conquest's assertion that the 1936 harvest was "reasonably good" when in fact the harvest failed and the shortages affected everyone. I realize that Conquest operated in a different milieu during the Cold War. Perhaps I shouldn't be aggrieved that Conquest and Kingsley Amis openly slept with their students but that lingers for me. Perhaps more so when he's certain he understands the diabolical in terrestrial form.
Despite all that, this is harrowing reading. There are haunting excerpts from survivors. The book does rely heavily on transcripts from the Moscow Show Trials-- very lengthy citations. Conquest has scores to settle with the apologists of Stalinism. He spends considerable time dismantling their deceits and explanations. That isn't the most riveting. This remains admirable scholarship.
Despite all that, this is harrowing reading. There are haunting excerpts from survivors. The book does rely heavily on transcripts from the Moscow Show Trials-- very lengthy citations. Conquest has scores to settle with the apologists of Stalinism. He spends considerable time dismantling their deceits and explanations. That isn't the most riveting. This remains admirable scholarship.
December 23, 2012
durrrrrrRRR
October 5, 2015
Conquest's The Great Terror is the definitive work in English on Stalin's purges and the death of Bolshevism. For readers interested in the ascendency of Stalinism in Russia this is the primary source.
September 17, 2016
The Great Terror is a book of enormous importance because it was the first book on Stalin's purges written by a member of the Anglo-Saxon race employed as a professor at a major university in an Anglo-Saxon country. During the 1970's when I was studying history at an Anglo-Saxon university Slavs were given little respect. The fact that they had lived in Russia or some other country like Poland meant that they had strongly partisan feelings and hence could not be trusted to give a truthful account of anything. However, when Conquest made his case using the methodology accepted in North American and British Commonwealth universities, the historical profession had to finally acknowledge the truth that Stalin had made a huge and savage purge in the 1930s that affected every level of the Soviet communist party.
As a pioneering work by an accredited academic, Conquest's book is indeed a great triumph. He carefully charts out the different stages of the purges explaining which groups were targeted in each successive phase. He explains how incentives were provided to the bureaucrats. If they exceeded their quota of denunciations, they could hope to get promoted. If they failed to meet their quotas they could expect to be quickly purged themselves. The whole exercise became one of trying to denounce before being denounced. It was a true reign of terror.
Moreover, the bureaucrats had to obtain confessions from those denounced and train them to repeat them at the trials. Western observers were shocked to seem long-time communists confess to crimes that would never have committed and in most cases would have never possessed the physical means to do the things they admitted to having done. Robert Conquest again does an admirable good in explaining the methods used to extract the fake confessions and make the supposed criminals publicly confess. Mr. Conquest's book makes very fascinating reading. Research continues to bring to light new facts about the purges, but this book will never really be superseded.
As a pioneering work by an accredited academic, Conquest's book is indeed a great triumph. He carefully charts out the different stages of the purges explaining which groups were targeted in each successive phase. He explains how incentives were provided to the bureaucrats. If they exceeded their quota of denunciations, they could hope to get promoted. If they failed to meet their quotas they could expect to be quickly purged themselves. The whole exercise became one of trying to denounce before being denounced. It was a true reign of terror.
Moreover, the bureaucrats had to obtain confessions from those denounced and train them to repeat them at the trials. Western observers were shocked to seem long-time communists confess to crimes that would never have committed and in most cases would have never possessed the physical means to do the things they admitted to having done. Robert Conquest again does an admirable good in explaining the methods used to extract the fake confessions and make the supposed criminals publicly confess. Mr. Conquest's book makes very fascinating reading. Research continues to bring to light new facts about the purges, but this book will never really be superseded.
August 6, 2022
Robert Conquest's book The Great Terror is a monumental achievement. It chronicles in detail all of the horror of the Stalinist purges of the 1930s.
The book was originally published in 1968 when there was far less information about the Stalinist purges. The author had to rely on the few Soviet documents available, on testimonies from Soviet defectors and from survivors and a lot deduction. When the glasnost era started in the 1980s the Soviet archives started being opened and the author revisited his work in order to add and fill in missing pieces of the history. What is extraordinary is that the opening of the Soviet archives confirmed most of the history of the purge.
Reading this book can be difficult for two reasons. The first reason is that it talks in detail about countless names, officials, arrests, trials and executions. The list can feel almost endless. The trials are discussed in great detail including transcripts of the discussions. Some people may find this tedious, however for anyone interested in this subject matter they are essential reads.
The second reason is the absolute horror and sadism of the purge itself. The terror was all encompassing and it touched all corners of the Soviet society. Up until World War 2 and the start of the Holocaust, the Soviet regime was far greater killer of people compared to Nazi regime. Towards the end of the terror there was hardly a family who didn't know someone that had been arrested, executed or was denounced. The practice of interrogation and torture led to innocent people implicating other innocent people in order for the torture to stop. This snowballed more and more with people denouncing and implicating anyone they could think of. Colleagues, neighbours, friends and family members denounced each other, children denounced their parents.
The Great Terror resulted in the execution of roughly 1 million people, the arrest of 7 million people, the death of about 2 million people in camps and the creation of a gulag population of about 8 million. What started out as a plot by Stalin to get rid of any opposition and ensure total control of the USSR ended up touching every part of Soviet society from the party, to the military, industry, science, the arts, culture. The greatest minds in physics, medicine, transport, engineering and so on were imprisoned and executed. The whole party leadership was mostly executed and the Old Bolsheviks that had been in the party for decades and fought in the Civil War were mostly wiped out. Most of the foreign communists which were in the USSR were also executed as were the veterans of the Spanish civil war. Basically, anyone that had any contact with the world outside the USSR was liable for execution.
The same with the military, of the 5 marshals of the Soviet army only 2 survived the purge. The terror greatly affected the ability of the Soviet army to operate and directly led to the disasters of the Winter War in 1940 and also the immense losses during the German invasion.
At one point when the terror was in full swing the NKVD was just receiving quotas of the number of people to be executed. It did not matter who they were or what they had done. By 1938 the Terror had to be wound down because it ran the risk of leading to the collapse of the economy with so many people under arrest.
What is extraordinary is the fact that many of the Communist leaders that were purged still believed in Bolshevism and in Stalin until the very end. Many of them accepted that if their deaths were for the Party than they were willing to accept it. Others believed that Stalin did not know about the purge and still others died with Stalin's name on their lips.
The author also dedicated a chapter to the way the terror was perceived in the West. Due to the fact that the show trials were public there was quite a big reaction in the Western press. Many people did see through the falseness, however there are quite a few that did not. There is a shameful list of great Western leftist personalities that not only believed that the trials were legitimate but even supported the sentences and the executions.
This book would definitely deserves five stars but for the fact that it is quite old and naturally some of the information is dated. For example, today we know the fates of many of the victims and the killers far better. We have details from the arrests of people like Yagoda and Yezhov and how they behaved and how they were executed. This information was not available at the time that this book was written unfortunately.
Overall, The Great Terror is a must read for anyone interested in Stalinism or Communist history. It tells a story of almost unimaginable inhumanity and also serves as a lesson for future generations. The scars left behind by the crimes of communism can still be seen today.
The book was originally published in 1968 when there was far less information about the Stalinist purges. The author had to rely on the few Soviet documents available, on testimonies from Soviet defectors and from survivors and a lot deduction. When the glasnost era started in the 1980s the Soviet archives started being opened and the author revisited his work in order to add and fill in missing pieces of the history. What is extraordinary is that the opening of the Soviet archives confirmed most of the history of the purge.
Reading this book can be difficult for two reasons. The first reason is that it talks in detail about countless names, officials, arrests, trials and executions. The list can feel almost endless. The trials are discussed in great detail including transcripts of the discussions. Some people may find this tedious, however for anyone interested in this subject matter they are essential reads.
The second reason is the absolute horror and sadism of the purge itself. The terror was all encompassing and it touched all corners of the Soviet society. Up until World War 2 and the start of the Holocaust, the Soviet regime was far greater killer of people compared to Nazi regime. Towards the end of the terror there was hardly a family who didn't know someone that had been arrested, executed or was denounced. The practice of interrogation and torture led to innocent people implicating other innocent people in order for the torture to stop. This snowballed more and more with people denouncing and implicating anyone they could think of. Colleagues, neighbours, friends and family members denounced each other, children denounced their parents.
The Great Terror resulted in the execution of roughly 1 million people, the arrest of 7 million people, the death of about 2 million people in camps and the creation of a gulag population of about 8 million. What started out as a plot by Stalin to get rid of any opposition and ensure total control of the USSR ended up touching every part of Soviet society from the party, to the military, industry, science, the arts, culture. The greatest minds in physics, medicine, transport, engineering and so on were imprisoned and executed. The whole party leadership was mostly executed and the Old Bolsheviks that had been in the party for decades and fought in the Civil War were mostly wiped out. Most of the foreign communists which were in the USSR were also executed as were the veterans of the Spanish civil war. Basically, anyone that had any contact with the world outside the USSR was liable for execution.
The same with the military, of the 5 marshals of the Soviet army only 2 survived the purge. The terror greatly affected the ability of the Soviet army to operate and directly led to the disasters of the Winter War in 1940 and also the immense losses during the German invasion.
At one point when the terror was in full swing the NKVD was just receiving quotas of the number of people to be executed. It did not matter who they were or what they had done. By 1938 the Terror had to be wound down because it ran the risk of leading to the collapse of the economy with so many people under arrest.
What is extraordinary is the fact that many of the Communist leaders that were purged still believed in Bolshevism and in Stalin until the very end. Many of them accepted that if their deaths were for the Party than they were willing to accept it. Others believed that Stalin did not know about the purge and still others died with Stalin's name on their lips.
The author also dedicated a chapter to the way the terror was perceived in the West. Due to the fact that the show trials were public there was quite a big reaction in the Western press. Many people did see through the falseness, however there are quite a few that did not. There is a shameful list of great Western leftist personalities that not only believed that the trials were legitimate but even supported the sentences and the executions.
This book would definitely deserves five stars but for the fact that it is quite old and naturally some of the information is dated. For example, today we know the fates of many of the victims and the killers far better. We have details from the arrests of people like Yagoda and Yezhov and how they behaved and how they were executed. This information was not available at the time that this book was written unfortunately.
Overall, The Great Terror is a must read for anyone interested in Stalinism or Communist history. It tells a story of almost unimaginable inhumanity and also serves as a lesson for future generations. The scars left behind by the crimes of communism can still be seen today.
July 20, 2020
Incredibly comprehensive, but as you can imagine, heavy reading. I'm always a little wary about calling books like this 'good' or saying I enjoy them, because it seems vastly inappropriate, but this was a very well-written book and it had a natural ease of authority that kept things clear and precise; something that's very difficult to do when it comes to such broad subject matters. Some books simply have you flicking back and forth and constantly trying to re-orientate yourself, but this book manages to avoid that.
It's very apparent that this book has been heavily researched, and I was lucky enough to have picked up the revised and updated version which has a decent amount of extra context as facts have become more apparent over the years. Even so, there were moments where I was aware of yet more context that had been revealed in the years since the adaption, and encouragingly it all added up with what I was reading. The chapters spare no detail and quote heavily from secondary sources, covering absolutely every aspect of the Terror and including further context on all the things that enabled the Terror to operate as it was, such as the depressingly efficient interrogation process and the labour camps.
Naturally this isn't something you would sit down with for light reading. It's very dense, and at times it can be a little dry, but this is something that all extensive non-fiction books can fall prey to. With so many facts to cover, it's inevitable that sometimes it can feel a little like a lecture. It's a rare occurrence in this book, though; a lot of the time it reads like prose that just happens to be heavy on stating facts. It's very easy to see why this is the stand-out book on this subject.
It's very apparent that this book has been heavily researched, and I was lucky enough to have picked up the revised and updated version which has a decent amount of extra context as facts have become more apparent over the years. Even so, there were moments where I was aware of yet more context that had been revealed in the years since the adaption, and encouragingly it all added up with what I was reading. The chapters spare no detail and quote heavily from secondary sources, covering absolutely every aspect of the Terror and including further context on all the things that enabled the Terror to operate as it was, such as the depressingly efficient interrogation process and the labour camps.
Naturally this isn't something you would sit down with for light reading. It's very dense, and at times it can be a little dry, but this is something that all extensive non-fiction books can fall prey to. With so many facts to cover, it's inevitable that sometimes it can feel a little like a lecture. It's a rare occurrence in this book, though; a lot of the time it reads like prose that just happens to be heavy on stating facts. It's very easy to see why this is the stand-out book on this subject.
February 23, 2015
It is hard to understand why so many intelligent people admired the socialist experiment of Soviet Union c.1934-1940. These useful idiots defended and lauded systematic mass slaughter on an industrial scale. Conquest's book, originally appearing in 1968, helped convince those still impervious to, inter alia, Hungary and Czechoslovakia. The case is made, with solid and well sourced evidence, that Stalin basically topped anyone who looked at him sideways, or didn't look at him or whatever. Nor were the good and great spared; my battered 1971 Pelican edition has, as Appendix D, a list of Full and Candidate Members of the 1934 Central Committee and of those, I have made notes that 49 of them were shot, mostly in the 1930's, and 7 of them died n prison, under interrogation or by suicide. Osip Mandelstam died in the Gulag in 1938, largely because of a poem he wrote about Stalin, containing the lines: "...the huge laughing cockroaches on his top lip, the glitter of his boot rims. Ringed with a scum of chicken-necked bosses he toys with the tributes of half-men...He rolls the executions on his tongue like berries. He wishes he could hug them like big friends from home."
April 4, 2016
Brilliant work, its value underscored by the savage attacks on it by Kremlin apparatchiks. Originally the standard work on the Great Terror, Stalinism was worse than Robert Conquest reported.
Hitler lost, and failed to complete the cover-up of Nazi crimes (Sonderaktion 1005.) On the other hand, Stalin won, and didn't die until 1953. Stalin had the opportunity to complete his cover-up. The breadth of Stalin's criminality only began to be understood after 1990. Conquest's work is the place to start.
Hitler lost, and failed to complete the cover-up of Nazi crimes (Sonderaktion 1005.) On the other hand, Stalin won, and didn't die until 1953. Stalin had the opportunity to complete his cover-up. The breadth of Stalin's criminality only began to be understood after 1990. Conquest's work is the place to start.
May 28, 2022
I do not get what Conquest reassessed here… The amount of people that he added to Millions of dead is much more than it was. Overall, the total number of people that died in Gulags + were shot is 2.6 Million, with 1.8 Million dying in labor camps and prisons for various reasons from 1930 to 1956 and 799,495 being executed (can vary up to ~805,000). Conquest shows 0 documents proving his point and overestimates the number in 1937-1938 by MILLIONS. Anne Applebaum and Conquest shall not get history awards, but, rather, propagandist awards.
January 17, 2012
One of the most important books written in the 20th century.
August 9, 2015
I remember vividly using this book -- or was it the first edition? -- to refute my friends who refused to believe that evil lurked East of the Brandenburg gate and, especially, in Moscow
August 15, 2024
So many names!
You will be forgiven if you perhaps you've stumbled across an old telephone book at times when reading this massive tome, for the sheer number of prominent and obscure victims of
Stalin's great purge is sure to make your head spin. And so many names leads to a numbness as trial upon trial is heaped upon your eyes (or ears), sin after sin, crime after crime against the Soviet nation, against socialism, against communism, against the Great Stalin himself until it all spins round and round in your brain. Leftists, rightists, counter revolutionaries, Trotskyites, Trotskyites and yet more Trotskyites, deviationists, wreckers and saboteurs, Fascist spies, British spies, Japanese spies, Menshoviks, and a few other terms I'm not recalling at the moment, parade in an endless line to the prisons, to the camps, or to the wrong end of a gun, with or without trial. Along with each victim is almost invariably appended the confession, whether there is a trial or not, a confession is needed, naming the crime and the supporting cast, and thus denunciation after denunciation provides more grist for the Stalinist purge mill.
And yet, it is readable, but only just. For Service does liven things up after a long slog of an opening, to give us the process of the prisons, the ordeal of the camps, the fate of Soviets working in foreign countries, those in Spain and returned willingly or not to the USSR, the plight of the relatives and families of the purged, a small dose of the terror famine in the Ukraine, a small biographical section on our hero, the Great Stalin, and the fate of his greatest scapegoat, Trotsky. I found the prison system, the tortures, the camps, the most interesting, but that's just how my mind works. The grind of the suspicion, allegation, denouncement, confession and trial tend to blur together, one upon another. And yet, that's the point, isn't it? Stalin deluged the nation with an endless parade of criminals and wreckers and anti communist criminals for 3 years until one could hardly avoid the idea there wasn't a loyal soul anywhere in the entire nation and yet... no one rose to challenge the notion of such stupidity. No one revolted, or even thought to do so, as Stalin pried apart society section by section -- the army, the Party, the peasants, the proletariat, the intellectuals, the scientists, the Kulaks, each picked off in succession until there was hardly a family in the country untouched by the purge.
Service's writing falls between two stools here, half scholarly work, half popular bookstore history. He presumes his audience is familiar with the form and function of communism as well as the leading personalities so that he need not waste time explaining who's who and what's why, which is why it's a no go for novices to the topic. You need to have a framework of the Soviet system and its excesses before tackling this beast or else it's just gonna read like gobbledygook and you'll never get through it.
Written at the height of the Cold War and revised at its tail end, it benefits from being produced in that framework of the madness the Cold War was. Post Cold War histories of the Terror I imagine will have an entirely different flavor, and perhaps an apologist one at that. Written with utter disdain and disgust of the Soviet system yet retaining a sliver of pity for the victims of the Terror, even those in the Party that deserved no pity, for their real crimes of their individual pasts were as awful as the imaginary crimes Stalin's machine accused them of, the book has a unique feel to it, I think. It does overreach at the end, going on well beyond the ascent of Beria, and here the sharp edge dulls to that of a butter knife and the narrative limps to a soggy conclusion that was best saved for a second, briefer volume. Nevertheless, it is a phenomenal effort at encapsulating, in one go, one of the greater savageries of the 20th century.
You will be forgiven if you perhaps you've stumbled across an old telephone book at times when reading this massive tome, for the sheer number of prominent and obscure victims of
Stalin's great purge is sure to make your head spin. And so many names leads to a numbness as trial upon trial is heaped upon your eyes (or ears), sin after sin, crime after crime against the Soviet nation, against socialism, against communism, against the Great Stalin himself until it all spins round and round in your brain. Leftists, rightists, counter revolutionaries, Trotskyites, Trotskyites and yet more Trotskyites, deviationists, wreckers and saboteurs, Fascist spies, British spies, Japanese spies, Menshoviks, and a few other terms I'm not recalling at the moment, parade in an endless line to the prisons, to the camps, or to the wrong end of a gun, with or without trial. Along with each victim is almost invariably appended the confession, whether there is a trial or not, a confession is needed, naming the crime and the supporting cast, and thus denunciation after denunciation provides more grist for the Stalinist purge mill.
And yet, it is readable, but only just. For Service does liven things up after a long slog of an opening, to give us the process of the prisons, the ordeal of the camps, the fate of Soviets working in foreign countries, those in Spain and returned willingly or not to the USSR, the plight of the relatives and families of the purged, a small dose of the terror famine in the Ukraine, a small biographical section on our hero, the Great Stalin, and the fate of his greatest scapegoat, Trotsky. I found the prison system, the tortures, the camps, the most interesting, but that's just how my mind works. The grind of the suspicion, allegation, denouncement, confession and trial tend to blur together, one upon another. And yet, that's the point, isn't it? Stalin deluged the nation with an endless parade of criminals and wreckers and anti communist criminals for 3 years until one could hardly avoid the idea there wasn't a loyal soul anywhere in the entire nation and yet... no one rose to challenge the notion of such stupidity. No one revolted, or even thought to do so, as Stalin pried apart society section by section -- the army, the Party, the peasants, the proletariat, the intellectuals, the scientists, the Kulaks, each picked off in succession until there was hardly a family in the country untouched by the purge.
Service's writing falls between two stools here, half scholarly work, half popular bookstore history. He presumes his audience is familiar with the form and function of communism as well as the leading personalities so that he need not waste time explaining who's who and what's why, which is why it's a no go for novices to the topic. You need to have a framework of the Soviet system and its excesses before tackling this beast or else it's just gonna read like gobbledygook and you'll never get through it.
Written at the height of the Cold War and revised at its tail end, it benefits from being produced in that framework of the madness the Cold War was. Post Cold War histories of the Terror I imagine will have an entirely different flavor, and perhaps an apologist one at that. Written with utter disdain and disgust of the Soviet system yet retaining a sliver of pity for the victims of the Terror, even those in the Party that deserved no pity, for their real crimes of their individual pasts were as awful as the imaginary crimes Stalin's machine accused them of, the book has a unique feel to it, I think. It does overreach at the end, going on well beyond the ascent of Beria, and here the sharp edge dulls to that of a butter knife and the narrative limps to a soggy conclusion that was best saved for a second, briefer volume. Nevertheless, it is a phenomenal effort at encapsulating, in one go, one of the greater savageries of the 20th century.
May 9, 2012
OK, let's begin with the obvious - Conquest can lean to polemical language from his excitable right-wing background (really, what is helped by calling someone "odorific"?), and his tendency to let his passion direct his writing can make him seem a less reliable historian. Nevertheless, no one had better compiled the history of show trials than Conquest did in his original 'Great Terror,' and the new version, reflecting new information from the 1990s, puts all the elements in place. For that reason, I'll give the revised 'Great Terror' a solid four stars despite its frantic language.
Conquest should be given appropriate due for assembling details, not only of the show trials that Stalin urged foreign observers to see, but the secret trials of military leaders and other officials. He goes to great lengths to find out what happened to the relatives and friends of key victims of the Great Terror, and we gain a sense of the chilling fact that for every person executed by Stalin, dozens went to the Gulag camps for no reason at all.
Still, Conquest takes a few overreaches in logic. Many modern historians, like Orlando Figes, are willing to buy Conquest's theory that Stalin was directly responsible for Kirov's murder, yet few would say the Great Terror began with Kirov's murder. Figes, in his book 'The Whisperers,' points out that there was an easing of tensions in 1935-36, and Figes counts Kirov's earlier murder among Stalin's littler terrors. Rather, the reason the Great Terror was launched in late 1936 seemed to be more related to the approaching war with Germany and Japan, and the subtle feeling on the part of Stalin that he must execute anyone with even the potential of being a fifth columnist.
Conquest seems to miss a very important part of the story that Figes and others have stressed. The largest number of murders, and the most extra-judicial and illegal murders, took place in the latter half of 1938, well after the high point of the show trials. Yes, many of those convicted in show trials were taken out and shot in the back mere hours after the trials concluded. But thousands of other innocent victims who were sentenced to 10 or 20 years in a labor camp, were taken to remote railroad stations in late 1938 and executed without any legal grounds, simply due to the whims of Stalin or Molotov. Since the scope of these executions did not fully emerge until the late 1990s, maybe Conquest simply didn't have access to all the relevant information. Or maybe he was looking at the wrong part of the problem - the legal system, as opposed to the penal system.
Despite these complaints, this book will probably stand for quite some time as the best English source for Stalin's Great Terror, particularly since Conquest includes transcripts from many of the trials. I was left with the distinct feeling that the problem of Soviet Russia's mid-century horror was not Stalin as a person, but the insidious disease of party vanguardism. The disease occupied the soul of Lenin, with his obsession with violence; it destroyed Trotsky, who lost most integrity when he signed off on Kronstadt; and it took control of the souls of Stalin, Molotov, Yagoda, Yezhov, and others, who perverted the minor problems of centralized socialism and planned economies, turning the inconsistencies into horrific excuses for mass murder.
Conquest should be given appropriate due for assembling details, not only of the show trials that Stalin urged foreign observers to see, but the secret trials of military leaders and other officials. He goes to great lengths to find out what happened to the relatives and friends of key victims of the Great Terror, and we gain a sense of the chilling fact that for every person executed by Stalin, dozens went to the Gulag camps for no reason at all.
Still, Conquest takes a few overreaches in logic. Many modern historians, like Orlando Figes, are willing to buy Conquest's theory that Stalin was directly responsible for Kirov's murder, yet few would say the Great Terror began with Kirov's murder. Figes, in his book 'The Whisperers,' points out that there was an easing of tensions in 1935-36, and Figes counts Kirov's earlier murder among Stalin's littler terrors. Rather, the reason the Great Terror was launched in late 1936 seemed to be more related to the approaching war with Germany and Japan, and the subtle feeling on the part of Stalin that he must execute anyone with even the potential of being a fifth columnist.
Conquest seems to miss a very important part of the story that Figes and others have stressed. The largest number of murders, and the most extra-judicial and illegal murders, took place in the latter half of 1938, well after the high point of the show trials. Yes, many of those convicted in show trials were taken out and shot in the back mere hours after the trials concluded. But thousands of other innocent victims who were sentenced to 10 or 20 years in a labor camp, were taken to remote railroad stations in late 1938 and executed without any legal grounds, simply due to the whims of Stalin or Molotov. Since the scope of these executions did not fully emerge until the late 1990s, maybe Conquest simply didn't have access to all the relevant information. Or maybe he was looking at the wrong part of the problem - the legal system, as opposed to the penal system.
Despite these complaints, this book will probably stand for quite some time as the best English source for Stalin's Great Terror, particularly since Conquest includes transcripts from many of the trials. I was left with the distinct feeling that the problem of Soviet Russia's mid-century horror was not Stalin as a person, but the insidious disease of party vanguardism. The disease occupied the soul of Lenin, with his obsession with violence; it destroyed Trotsky, who lost most integrity when he signed off on Kronstadt; and it took control of the souls of Stalin, Molotov, Yagoda, Yezhov, and others, who perverted the minor problems of centralized socialism and planned economies, turning the inconsistencies into horrific excuses for mass murder.
January 25, 2010
Psychopathy is usually analyzed as an individual psychological phenomenon. As we've seen, the term describes individuals without conscience, with shallow emotions, who are able to impersonate fully developed human beings and mimic feelings of love, caring and other-regarding impulses to fulfill their deviant goals: be that stealing your money, stealing your heart or both. This phenomenon becomes all the more toxic, and dangerous, when such individuals rise to national power and manage to create totalitarian regimes ruled by mind-control, deception, lack of individual and collective rights and freedoms, and arbitrary displays of power.
Psychopathic, or at least seriously disordered rulers, such as Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Ceausescu teach what happens when (their) pathology spreads to a whole country. Given that psychopaths are estimated to be, at most, only 4 percent of the population, it's difficult to imagine how they manage to rise to positions of authority over more or less normal human beings to impose a social pathology in every social sphere: from education, to the police force, to the juridical system, to the media. Few books explain this strange and extremely dangerous political and psychological phenomenon better than Robert Conquest's classic, The Great Terror. This book traces both Stalin's rise to power within the ranks of the Bolsheviks and, concurrently, the spreading of the totalitarian system like a fatal virus throughout Soviet society (and beyond).
The book also exposes the underlying lack of principles even among seemingly ideological rulers like Joseph Stalin. When it suited his purposes, Stalin strategically oscillated siding with the left wing of the communist party (Trotsky, Kamenev and Zimonev) or the right of the Bolshevik party (Bukharin, Rykov and Tomsky), turning each side against the other, to weaken them both and consolidate his own power. He surrounded himself with equally ruthless, unprincipled and sadistic individuals who did his dirty work--Yakov, Yagoda and Beria--placing them in positions of power in the NKVD, or Secret Police.
Stalin engaged in arbitrary displays of power, sending tens of millions of people to their deaths in prison or labor camps. Even his army leaders weren't spared. In a very poor strategic move that showed he cared more about acquiring total control than about his country's victory, Stalin decimated the ranks of his army elite right before the war against Hitler, when the Soviet Union would have needed them most. Nobody was safe from the gulag; nobody could maintain ideological purity. Anybody could be accused of deviationism from communist principles at any time.
Totalitarianism is a pathological system imposed upon an entire country or area. Like a disease, it spreads through the healthy aspects of society. It conditions even ordinary human beings, through the inculcation of fear and through brainwashing, to lose their conscience, their empathy and their humanity. Robert Conquest's The Great Terror is a testament to human corruptibility. This magnificent book will continue to remain historically relevant for as long as we allow disordered individuals to have power over us, our families and our social institutions.
Claudia Moscovici, psychopathyawareness
Psychopathic, or at least seriously disordered rulers, such as Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Ceausescu teach what happens when (their) pathology spreads to a whole country. Given that psychopaths are estimated to be, at most, only 4 percent of the population, it's difficult to imagine how they manage to rise to positions of authority over more or less normal human beings to impose a social pathology in every social sphere: from education, to the police force, to the juridical system, to the media. Few books explain this strange and extremely dangerous political and psychological phenomenon better than Robert Conquest's classic, The Great Terror. This book traces both Stalin's rise to power within the ranks of the Bolsheviks and, concurrently, the spreading of the totalitarian system like a fatal virus throughout Soviet society (and beyond).
The book also exposes the underlying lack of principles even among seemingly ideological rulers like Joseph Stalin. When it suited his purposes, Stalin strategically oscillated siding with the left wing of the communist party (Trotsky, Kamenev and Zimonev) or the right of the Bolshevik party (Bukharin, Rykov and Tomsky), turning each side against the other, to weaken them both and consolidate his own power. He surrounded himself with equally ruthless, unprincipled and sadistic individuals who did his dirty work--Yakov, Yagoda and Beria--placing them in positions of power in the NKVD, or Secret Police.
Stalin engaged in arbitrary displays of power, sending tens of millions of people to their deaths in prison or labor camps. Even his army leaders weren't spared. In a very poor strategic move that showed he cared more about acquiring total control than about his country's victory, Stalin decimated the ranks of his army elite right before the war against Hitler, when the Soviet Union would have needed them most. Nobody was safe from the gulag; nobody could maintain ideological purity. Anybody could be accused of deviationism from communist principles at any time.
Totalitarianism is a pathological system imposed upon an entire country or area. Like a disease, it spreads through the healthy aspects of society. It conditions even ordinary human beings, through the inculcation of fear and through brainwashing, to lose their conscience, their empathy and their humanity. Robert Conquest's The Great Terror is a testament to human corruptibility. This magnificent book will continue to remain historically relevant for as long as we allow disordered individuals to have power over us, our families and our social institutions.
Claudia Moscovici, psychopathyawareness
September 30, 2021
Un volumone che ha letteralmente fatto storia in una "materia" che ancora fatica ad essere affrontata al giorno d'oggi. La lettura è stata lunga e appassionante, le pagine sono ricchissime, dense di riferimenti, circostanziate, c'è la voglia di indagare e di andare fino in fondo. A differenza dell'altrettanto monumentale opera sul tema, Arcipelago GULag di Solzenitsyn, la prospettiva è ribaltata. Arcipelago GULag è un testo che è difficile inquadrare in un genere preciso e presenta l'orrore dal di dentro, in prima persona, dal punto di vista dell'uomo comune che viene prelevato di punto in bianco, "interrogato", imprigionato e quindi deportato nei "campi di sterminio" attraverso il "lavoro". Certo, Solzenitsyn amplia di continuo l'obiettivo e include diffuse ricostruzioni storico-politiche fin dall'avvio di questo orrore, vale a dire dal 1917-1918. Ne ha per tutti e arriva a criticare apertamente l'atteggiamento di molti letterati e personalità della cultura.
Il testo di Conquest ha un formato e un'impostazione molto tradizionali: il classico manualone, corposissima monografia storiografica che coglie tutto il fenomeno (o comunque ampie porzioni di esso) dall'alto e dal di fuori e che è maggiormente concentrato sulla figura di Stalin. L'analisi è essenzialmente rivolta alle vicende storiche, politiche, culturali ed economiche, con particolare enfasi alle "saghe processuali" che presero avvio in particolar modo dopo l'assassinio di Kirov. Grandissime rappresentazioni sceniche, spettacoli sfavillanti appositamente studiati e allestiti per condizionare costantemente (e impressionare) l'opinione pubblica, allo scopo ovviamente di mantenere e rafforzare il potere. Il tutto, con la trascrizione di numerosissimi stralci di atti e verbali dei processi. Pagine potenti che hanno appagato l'impegno necessario alla lettura.
Il testo di Conquest ha un formato e un'impostazione molto tradizionali: il classico manualone, corposissima monografia storiografica che coglie tutto il fenomeno (o comunque ampie porzioni di esso) dall'alto e dal di fuori e che è maggiormente concentrato sulla figura di Stalin. L'analisi è essenzialmente rivolta alle vicende storiche, politiche, culturali ed economiche, con particolare enfasi alle "saghe processuali" che presero avvio in particolar modo dopo l'assassinio di Kirov. Grandissime rappresentazioni sceniche, spettacoli sfavillanti appositamente studiati e allestiti per condizionare costantemente (e impressionare) l'opinione pubblica, allo scopo ovviamente di mantenere e rafforzare il potere. Il tutto, con la trascrizione di numerosissimi stralci di atti e verbali dei processi. Pagine potenti che hanno appagato l'impegno necessario alla lettura.
October 21, 2022
Основна увага, на мою думку, зосереджена на трьох відкритих судових процесах (над Бухаріним та іншими), з описом всього як це відбувалося за тих часів і за того режиму, включаючи допити, суди, зізнання, табори, розстріли, реакції західного світу. Враховуючи рік написання книги, автор виконав вражаючу роботу, зіставляючи ту інформацію, яку надавав сам СРСР, від політичних втікачів, від засуджених до таборів (вижило їх не так і багато, на жаль) та від іноземних спостерігачів.
В той час Великого Терору, людина не була захищена від нього ні будучи партійцем, ні військовим, ні НКВДтистом, ні жінкою, ні дитиною (від 12 років 0_0).
Процвітала брехня, наклепи та кар‘єра на смертях інших людей. Сиділи в таборах та були розстріляними мільйони(!!!) людей. І це все після 1 світової та Голодомору і перед 2 Світовою. Народи СРСР втратили надзвичайно багато потенціалу, заради примх Сталіна та ідеї комунізму.
По суті ідея створення держави комунізму, перетворилась на фашизм під червоним прапором.
В той час Великого Терору, людина не була захищена від нього ні будучи партійцем, ні військовим, ні НКВДтистом, ні жінкою, ні дитиною (від 12 років 0_0).
Процвітала брехня, наклепи та кар‘єра на смертях інших людей. Сиділи в таборах та були розстріляними мільйони(!!!) людей. І це все після 1 світової та Голодомору і перед 2 Світовою. Народи СРСР втратили надзвичайно багато потенціалу, заради примх Сталіна та ідеї комунізму.
По суті ідея створення держави комунізму, перетворилась на фашизм під червоним прапором.
December 13, 2019
An important and incredible story, masterfully told. It’s hard to imagine living through the period described in this book. And as Conquest notes, it was hard for many to believe it was happening at the time. This book describes in detail the litany of Stalin’s crimes, and tells the story with a mastery of detailed historical knowledge, psychological and moral insight, and literary grace. It would be wrong to describe this book as a pleasure to read. But it is a deeply powerful and important work, and has stood well the test of time.
November 10, 2024
Чудова і до біса детальна книга про те, як грубість і страх творять жахіття. Історія про те, як "любила" вусата жаба своїх гадюк. Фундаментальна праця, за що автору респект
June 2, 2022
Masterpiece! Yes I know, I don’t like to throw that word around too much but the book is just that, I’m not sure if Robert Conquest won some awards for it but he absolutely deserves them. The original came out in 1968, just 5 years prior to Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago, but I would recommend getting the 1990 edition that I’ve read, which includes updates and corrections that only enhances the historical accuracy of it that was only possible during the Glasnost epoch of Gorbachev. The book covers so much, it must have mentioned easily over a 1000 names throughout the book, pointless to even try to remember them all, even though you will see a few that repeat quite a few times like Yezhov, Yagoda, Vyshinsky, Bukharin, Molotov, Zelensky, Kirov,etc. The book title would make you think that its only about the era of the Purges with laser like focus on subjects like the arrests, confessions, life in the gulags, the show trials,etc., but Conquest manages to go so incredibly in depth with details and backstories that help you paint a clear picture of the system of government under Stalin as a whole. By the time you reach a third of the book, it becomes impossible to deny that Orwell’s 1984 was based on the Soviet Union and the level of authoritarianism that was exercised there. If I had to make a list of “Books that changed the way I view the world” then this one will have to be definitely in the top ranks of such list. This is an essential book for anyone that is truly and really interested in learning more about the Soviet Union and authoritarianism, and if you’ve never read anything about that era then this book will change you, I guarantee it.
November 28, 2019
It took me a fews months to finish that book. The critical Era It tackles alongside the authors narrative technique didn't tickle the good part at the back of my brain leaving the array of my curiosity unfulfilled.
From an academic standpoint, this book could serve as a great reference as a classic example to cite from credible source - - probably that is why I didn't get to enjoy it as I should have.
This doesn't deny the great information I learned - despite the unnecessary names and dates deviations dibbled in the middle - on Stalin's purge in the mid-30th and all the stories of the great terror people underwent anticipating at any moment "the visit" from the secret police, which were eye-opening.
Overall, it is a 4-star puller.
From an academic standpoint, this book could serve as a great reference as a classic example to cite from credible source - - probably that is why I didn't get to enjoy it as I should have.
This doesn't deny the great information I learned - despite the unnecessary names and dates deviations dibbled in the middle - on Stalin's purge in the mid-30th and all the stories of the great terror people underwent anticipating at any moment "the visit" from the secret police, which were eye-opening.
Overall, it is a 4-star puller.
October 2, 2015
Really well written and compelling; it didn't feel like it was 500+ pages. Admittedly I was reading it purely out of interest so I'm not going to be quizzed on what I remember of it in a few weeks, but despite a wealth of detail it is easy enough to follow the main themes and figures. The numbers involved in the repression and purge are so enormous that one constantly refers back to the individual stories, the people, to restore a sense of realism. For that reason I also found it helpful to have read Figes' The Whisperers which focuses on Stalin's effect on every day life, ordinary individuals - it's an excellent companion to Conquest's account.
January 15, 2013
Wonderful early (1968) detailed account of Stalin's purges and show trials of the late 1930s. Engrossing subject matter and vivid, excellent writing; Conquest updated this book as "The Great Terror: A Reassessment" in the 1990s.
February 7, 2013
Huge book, full of details but, but, incredibly quickly read. Numbers and vastness are overwhelming. Can't help thinking 'how could it happen?, how did Stalin succeed?'. A masterpiece on dictatorship on masses.
July 2, 2012
"Stalin is not a nice guy. We get it. This book was torture."
July 17, 2012
The authoritative work on one of history's darkest periods
December 27, 2021
Book: The Great Terror: A Reassessment
Author: Robert Conquest
Publisher: Oxford University Press Inc; Reprint edition (21 November 1991)
Language: English
Paperback: 570 pages
Item Weight: 794 g
Dimensions: 23.34 x 3.78 x 15.39 cm
Price: 5397/-
Take the case of Kirov.
The author writes, “Late in the afternoon of 1 December 1934, the young assassin Leonid Nikolayev entered the Smolny, headquarters of the Communist Party in Leningrad. The few hours of the city’s thin winter daylight were over, and it was quite dark.
The lights of the former aristocratic girls’ school, from which Lenin had organized the “ten days that shook the world,” shone out over its colonnade and gardens, and eastward up the icy Neva. The outer guard examined Nikolayev’s pass, which was in order, and let him in without trouble. In the interior, the guard posts were unmanned, and Nikolayev wandered down the ornate passages until he found the third-floor corridor on to which Sergei Kirov’s office opened.
He waited tolerantly outside.
Kirov was at home preparing a report on the November plenum of the Central Committee, from which he had just returned. He was to deliver it to the aktiv of the Leningrad Party in the Tavride Palace that evening, and was not expected at the Smolny.
However, he arrived there at about 4:00 P.M., and after speaking to his trusted aide, Leningrad’s Second Secretary Mikhail Chudov, and others, he walked on towards his own office just after 4:30.1 Nikolayev moved from a corner, shot him in the back with a Nagan revolver, and then collapsed beside him.
At the sound of the shot, Party officials came running along the corridor. They were astonished at the absence of guards. Even Kirov’s chief bodyguard, Borisov, who according to standing instructions should have been with him, was nowhere to be seen, though he had accompanied Kirov as far as the Smolny’s front door.
This killing has every right to be called the crime of the century. Over the next four years, hundreds of Soviet citizens, including the most prominent political leaders of the Revolution, were shot for direct responsibility for the assassination, and literally millions of others went to their deaths for complicity in one or another part of the vast conspiracy which allegedly lay behind it. Kirov’s death, in fact, was the keystone of the entire edifice of terror and suffering by which Stalin secured his grip on the Soviet peoples…..”
After this book was written, for at least two decades, Conquest’s tome was the state-of-the-art description or the years 1937–38.
But, starting in about 1988, Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet Union’s final ruler, launched glasnost, the policy of ‘openness’, and the first real open dialogue on the crimes of Stalinism inside the USSR.
Partly due to that discussion, the Soviet Union itself collapsed a few years later.
In succeeding years, Soviet archives opened for the first time to both Russian and foreign historians. Consequently, quite a bit more has been learned about Stalin, about the 1930s, and in particular about the years 1937–38. It became possible to write about Stalinism in different and more precise ways, using sources that were not available in 1968.
What it only did was to substantiate 99 percent of the views of the author.
The three-part narrative has been divided into fiftenn chapters and an Epilogue.
Book I, entitled ‘THE PURGE BEGINS’ is divided into the following five sections:
1. Stalin Prepares
2. The Kirov Murder
3. Architect of Terror
4. Old Bolsheviks Confess
5. The Problem of Confession
Book II, entitled ‘THE YEZHOV YEARS’ is divided into the following nine sections:
6. Last Stand
7. Assault on the Army
8. The Party Crushed
9. Nations in Torment
10. On the Cultural Front
11. In the Labor Camps
12. The Great Trial
13. The Foreign Element
14. Climax
Book III, entitled ‘AFTERMATH’ contains a singular section, viz.
15. Heritage of Terror
The Epilogue is entitled as, ‘The Terror Today’
Though one has heard that ‘History is not a burden on the memory but an enlightenment of the soul’, history indeed bears the burden of the past.
One must bear in mind that ‘The Great Terror’ of 1936 to 1938 did not come out of the blue. Like any other historical phenomenon, it had its roots in the past.
It would no doubt be deceptive to argue that it followed unavoidably from the nature of Soviet society and of the Communist Party. It was itself a means of enforcing aggressive change upon that society and that party. But all the same, it could not have been launched except against the unusually distinctive background of Bolshevik rule; and its special characteristics, some of them barely believable to foreign minds, derive from a specific tradition.
The dominating ideas of the Stalin period, the evolution of the oppositionists, the very confessions in the great show trials, can hardly be followed without considering not so much the whole Soviet past as the development of the Party, the consolidation of the dictatorship, the movements of faction, the rise of individuals, and the materialization of extreme economic policies.
After the death of Lenin in January 1924, there was a struggle for power. Among those who aspired to succeed Lenin was Trotsky, a brilliant Jew who had participated in the revolution of 1905 and was exiled for a long period. Having rejoined Lenin in 1917, he was a gifted orator and a powerful writer who with “the flame of fire” aroused the people to revolutionary fervour. He was the organiser of the Red Army and was rightly called the ‘Russian Carnot’.
Joseph Stalin on the contrary, the son of a cobbler, was a Bolshevik since 1903. He fought the Czarist autocracy and was exiled to Siberia. He became a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party. In 1919, he became the General Secretary of the Central Party Committee. The main difference between Stalin and Trotsky was that while Stalin stood for “socialism in a single country”. Trotsky stood for a “permanent” world revolution.
In the historic contest, Stalin was triumphant and Trotsky was expelled from the Communist Party in 1927 and exiled. On 20 August 1940, Trotsky was murdered under questioning circumstances in Mexico.
During the years 1935-38, there was a sequence of breathtaking trials in Russia.
Most of the old guard of the Bolshevik Party and some Generals of the Red Army were accused of high treason, tried and disposed of.
In January 1935, Zinoviev, the organiser and head of the Third International and Kamenev, Vice-President of the Union Council of People’s Commissars, were arrested and charged with the offence of conspiring to murder Stalin with the help of the German secret police.
Zinoviev was sentenced to ten years’ incarceration and Kamenev to five years’ incarceration.
In August 1936 they were re-tried before the Supreme Military Tribunal and sentenced to be shot. In January 1937, charges of conspiracy to assist foreign aggressors in an attack on the Soviet Union were brought against Radek, a former leader of the Third International, Sokolnikov, former Soviet Ambassador in London and Piatakov.
In June 1937, Marshal Tukhachevsky and seven Red Army Generals were convicted and sentenced to death. In the same year, thousands of persons in all walks of life were arrested and punished. Many famous Bolsheviks, who were the heroes of the Revolution like Borodin and Bela Kun, were imprisoned or deported or deposed.
Even the military judges themselves were eventually liquidated. Six out of the eight military judges who tried the Red Army Generals in 1937 were degraded by the end of 1938. In March 1938, the remaining “old Bolsheviks” were tried and purged. Rykov, Bukharin, Rakovsky and Yagoda were among them.
It is contended that the above-mentioned purges were the outcome of the determination of Stalin and his close associates to concentrate all power in their own hands at all costs.
“If this is true, the purges take their place in the physiological history of single party totalitarian dictatorship as further evidence that the nemesis of monolithic parties is self-destruction and the price of absolute power is absolute corruption…Only when the entire old guard had been destroyed would Stalin feel secure.” Isaac Deutscher, the biographer of Stalin, writes that the chief motive of Stalin was “to destroy the men who represented the potentiality of alternative Government, perhaps not of one but of several alternative Governments.
With the long story of Trotskite opposition in mind, Stalin took no chances. His enemies had to die as traitors not martyrs; hence the grossly exaggerated charges and the insatiable thirst for confession.”
What happened in Russia under Stalin could not be understood or estimated in any commonsensical fashion, if by common sense we mean notions that sound reasonable and natural to the democratic Westerner.
Many of the misunderstandings which appeared in Britain and America during the Great Trials were due to chauvinism, prejudice and intolerance—not necessarily to prejudice supportive of the Soviet regime or of Stalin, but at least prejudice in regard to certain events or interpretations of them as intrinsically improbable.
The Great Trials were, and it should have been plain at the time, nothing but large-scale frame-ups.
But it was unusually difficult for many in the West to credit this, to believe that a State could actually perpetrate on a vast scale such a cheap and third-rate system of dishonesty.
Bernard Shaw typically remarked, “I find it just as hard to believe that [Stalin] is a vulgar gangster as that Trotsky is an assassin.”
Most probably, he would not have been surprised at some such events in quite highly organized societies like Imperial Rome or Renaissance Florence. But the Soviet State appeared to have a certain impersonality, and not clearly to lend itself to actions determined not so much by political ideas as by the overt personal plotting which had afflicted those earlier regimes.
There was another powerful factor.
Both opponents of and sympathizers with the Russian Revolution thought of the Communists as a group of “dedicated” (or “fanatical”) men whose faults or virtues were at any rate incompatible with common crime—something like the Jesuits of the Counter-Reformation.
England has had little recent experience of revolutionary movements, and this idea persists. It is the type of general notion which the uninformed are likely to assume simply out of ignorance, and it has not lost its obscuring power to this day.
Men like Stalin, Kaganovich, Voroshilov, Molotov, and Yagoda had been members of the underground Bolshevik Party in the time of its illegal struggle against Tsardom. Whatever their faults, they had thus established at least enough bona fides to exempt them from the suspicion that they did in fact behave as they are now known to have done.
Even now, doubtless, there are those in the West who find it hard to swallow the notion of the top leaders of the Soviet Communist Party writing obscene and brutal comments on the appeals for mercy of the men they knew to be thoroughly innocent.
The mistake was, in fact, in the idea held in this country about revolutionary movements. In practice, they not only are joined by simon-pure idealists, but also consist of a hodgepodge of members in whom the idealist component is accompanied by all sorts of motivations—vanity, power seeking, and mere freakishness.
Perhaps the commonest reaction was to believe that the case against the accused in the trials was exaggerated, rather than false in every respect. This formula enabled those who subscribed to it to strike what they felt to be a decent commonsensical balance. In fact, it was simply a mediocre compromise between truth and falsehood, between right and wrong.
And the trials were at least directed against rivals of Stalin. The idea that Stalin had himself organized the murder of Kirov, on the face of it his closest ally and supporter—a murder in strictly criminal style—would have been rejected as absurd.
When it was suggested by a few ex-oppositionists and defectors, who knew more about the circumstances than most people, it was hardly thought worth discussing.
Such attitudes showed a basic misunderstanding of the range of political possibility in a nondemocratic culture. More particularly, they showed a failure to grasp Soviet circumstances and, above all, a misjudgment about Stalin personally.
For Stalin’s political genius consisted specifically in this: he recognized no constraints, either moral or intellectual, in his methods of securing power.
A classic, this book!!
Author: Robert Conquest
Publisher: Oxford University Press Inc; Reprint edition (21 November 1991)
Language: English
Paperback: 570 pages
Item Weight: 794 g
Dimensions: 23.34 x 3.78 x 15.39 cm
Price: 5397/-
Take the case of Kirov.
The author writes, “Late in the afternoon of 1 December 1934, the young assassin Leonid Nikolayev entered the Smolny, headquarters of the Communist Party in Leningrad. The few hours of the city’s thin winter daylight were over, and it was quite dark.
The lights of the former aristocratic girls’ school, from which Lenin had organized the “ten days that shook the world,” shone out over its colonnade and gardens, and eastward up the icy Neva. The outer guard examined Nikolayev’s pass, which was in order, and let him in without trouble. In the interior, the guard posts were unmanned, and Nikolayev wandered down the ornate passages until he found the third-floor corridor on to which Sergei Kirov’s office opened.
He waited tolerantly outside.
Kirov was at home preparing a report on the November plenum of the Central Committee, from which he had just returned. He was to deliver it to the aktiv of the Leningrad Party in the Tavride Palace that evening, and was not expected at the Smolny.
However, he arrived there at about 4:00 P.M., and after speaking to his trusted aide, Leningrad’s Second Secretary Mikhail Chudov, and others, he walked on towards his own office just after 4:30.1 Nikolayev moved from a corner, shot him in the back with a Nagan revolver, and then collapsed beside him.
At the sound of the shot, Party officials came running along the corridor. They were astonished at the absence of guards. Even Kirov’s chief bodyguard, Borisov, who according to standing instructions should have been with him, was nowhere to be seen, though he had accompanied Kirov as far as the Smolny’s front door.
This killing has every right to be called the crime of the century. Over the next four years, hundreds of Soviet citizens, including the most prominent political leaders of the Revolution, were shot for direct responsibility for the assassination, and literally millions of others went to their deaths for complicity in one or another part of the vast conspiracy which allegedly lay behind it. Kirov’s death, in fact, was the keystone of the entire edifice of terror and suffering by which Stalin secured his grip on the Soviet peoples…..”
After this book was written, for at least two decades, Conquest’s tome was the state-of-the-art description or the years 1937–38.
But, starting in about 1988, Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet Union’s final ruler, launched glasnost, the policy of ‘openness’, and the first real open dialogue on the crimes of Stalinism inside the USSR.
Partly due to that discussion, the Soviet Union itself collapsed a few years later.
In succeeding years, Soviet archives opened for the first time to both Russian and foreign historians. Consequently, quite a bit more has been learned about Stalin, about the 1930s, and in particular about the years 1937–38. It became possible to write about Stalinism in different and more precise ways, using sources that were not available in 1968.
What it only did was to substantiate 99 percent of the views of the author.
The three-part narrative has been divided into fiftenn chapters and an Epilogue.
Book I, entitled ‘THE PURGE BEGINS’ is divided into the following five sections:
1. Stalin Prepares
2. The Kirov Murder
3. Architect of Terror
4. Old Bolsheviks Confess
5. The Problem of Confession
Book II, entitled ‘THE YEZHOV YEARS’ is divided into the following nine sections:
6. Last Stand
7. Assault on the Army
8. The Party Crushed
9. Nations in Torment
10. On the Cultural Front
11. In the Labor Camps
12. The Great Trial
13. The Foreign Element
14. Climax
Book III, entitled ‘AFTERMATH’ contains a singular section, viz.
15. Heritage of Terror
The Epilogue is entitled as, ‘The Terror Today’
Though one has heard that ‘History is not a burden on the memory but an enlightenment of the soul’, history indeed bears the burden of the past.
One must bear in mind that ‘The Great Terror’ of 1936 to 1938 did not come out of the blue. Like any other historical phenomenon, it had its roots in the past.
It would no doubt be deceptive to argue that it followed unavoidably from the nature of Soviet society and of the Communist Party. It was itself a means of enforcing aggressive change upon that society and that party. But all the same, it could not have been launched except against the unusually distinctive background of Bolshevik rule; and its special characteristics, some of them barely believable to foreign minds, derive from a specific tradition.
The dominating ideas of the Stalin period, the evolution of the oppositionists, the very confessions in the great show trials, can hardly be followed without considering not so much the whole Soviet past as the development of the Party, the consolidation of the dictatorship, the movements of faction, the rise of individuals, and the materialization of extreme economic policies.
After the death of Lenin in January 1924, there was a struggle for power. Among those who aspired to succeed Lenin was Trotsky, a brilliant Jew who had participated in the revolution of 1905 and was exiled for a long period. Having rejoined Lenin in 1917, he was a gifted orator and a powerful writer who with “the flame of fire” aroused the people to revolutionary fervour. He was the organiser of the Red Army and was rightly called the ‘Russian Carnot’.
Joseph Stalin on the contrary, the son of a cobbler, was a Bolshevik since 1903. He fought the Czarist autocracy and was exiled to Siberia. He became a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party. In 1919, he became the General Secretary of the Central Party Committee. The main difference between Stalin and Trotsky was that while Stalin stood for “socialism in a single country”. Trotsky stood for a “permanent” world revolution.
In the historic contest, Stalin was triumphant and Trotsky was expelled from the Communist Party in 1927 and exiled. On 20 August 1940, Trotsky was murdered under questioning circumstances in Mexico.
During the years 1935-38, there was a sequence of breathtaking trials in Russia.
Most of the old guard of the Bolshevik Party and some Generals of the Red Army were accused of high treason, tried and disposed of.
In January 1935, Zinoviev, the organiser and head of the Third International and Kamenev, Vice-President of the Union Council of People’s Commissars, were arrested and charged with the offence of conspiring to murder Stalin with the help of the German secret police.
Zinoviev was sentenced to ten years’ incarceration and Kamenev to five years’ incarceration.
In August 1936 they were re-tried before the Supreme Military Tribunal and sentenced to be shot. In January 1937, charges of conspiracy to assist foreign aggressors in an attack on the Soviet Union were brought against Radek, a former leader of the Third International, Sokolnikov, former Soviet Ambassador in London and Piatakov.
In June 1937, Marshal Tukhachevsky and seven Red Army Generals were convicted and sentenced to death. In the same year, thousands of persons in all walks of life were arrested and punished. Many famous Bolsheviks, who were the heroes of the Revolution like Borodin and Bela Kun, were imprisoned or deported or deposed.
Even the military judges themselves were eventually liquidated. Six out of the eight military judges who tried the Red Army Generals in 1937 were degraded by the end of 1938. In March 1938, the remaining “old Bolsheviks” were tried and purged. Rykov, Bukharin, Rakovsky and Yagoda were among them.
It is contended that the above-mentioned purges were the outcome of the determination of Stalin and his close associates to concentrate all power in their own hands at all costs.
“If this is true, the purges take their place in the physiological history of single party totalitarian dictatorship as further evidence that the nemesis of monolithic parties is self-destruction and the price of absolute power is absolute corruption…Only when the entire old guard had been destroyed would Stalin feel secure.” Isaac Deutscher, the biographer of Stalin, writes that the chief motive of Stalin was “to destroy the men who represented the potentiality of alternative Government, perhaps not of one but of several alternative Governments.
With the long story of Trotskite opposition in mind, Stalin took no chances. His enemies had to die as traitors not martyrs; hence the grossly exaggerated charges and the insatiable thirst for confession.”
What happened in Russia under Stalin could not be understood or estimated in any commonsensical fashion, if by common sense we mean notions that sound reasonable and natural to the democratic Westerner.
Many of the misunderstandings which appeared in Britain and America during the Great Trials were due to chauvinism, prejudice and intolerance—not necessarily to prejudice supportive of the Soviet regime or of Stalin, but at least prejudice in regard to certain events or interpretations of them as intrinsically improbable.
The Great Trials were, and it should have been plain at the time, nothing but large-scale frame-ups.
But it was unusually difficult for many in the West to credit this, to believe that a State could actually perpetrate on a vast scale such a cheap and third-rate system of dishonesty.
Bernard Shaw typically remarked, “I find it just as hard to believe that [Stalin] is a vulgar gangster as that Trotsky is an assassin.”
Most probably, he would not have been surprised at some such events in quite highly organized societies like Imperial Rome or Renaissance Florence. But the Soviet State appeared to have a certain impersonality, and not clearly to lend itself to actions determined not so much by political ideas as by the overt personal plotting which had afflicted those earlier regimes.
There was another powerful factor.
Both opponents of and sympathizers with the Russian Revolution thought of the Communists as a group of “dedicated” (or “fanatical”) men whose faults or virtues were at any rate incompatible with common crime—something like the Jesuits of the Counter-Reformation.
England has had little recent experience of revolutionary movements, and this idea persists. It is the type of general notion which the uninformed are likely to assume simply out of ignorance, and it has not lost its obscuring power to this day.
Men like Stalin, Kaganovich, Voroshilov, Molotov, and Yagoda had been members of the underground Bolshevik Party in the time of its illegal struggle against Tsardom. Whatever their faults, they had thus established at least enough bona fides to exempt them from the suspicion that they did in fact behave as they are now known to have done.
Even now, doubtless, there are those in the West who find it hard to swallow the notion of the top leaders of the Soviet Communist Party writing obscene and brutal comments on the appeals for mercy of the men they knew to be thoroughly innocent.
The mistake was, in fact, in the idea held in this country about revolutionary movements. In practice, they not only are joined by simon-pure idealists, but also consist of a hodgepodge of members in whom the idealist component is accompanied by all sorts of motivations—vanity, power seeking, and mere freakishness.
Perhaps the commonest reaction was to believe that the case against the accused in the trials was exaggerated, rather than false in every respect. This formula enabled those who subscribed to it to strike what they felt to be a decent commonsensical balance. In fact, it was simply a mediocre compromise between truth and falsehood, between right and wrong.
And the trials were at least directed against rivals of Stalin. The idea that Stalin had himself organized the murder of Kirov, on the face of it his closest ally and supporter—a murder in strictly criminal style—would have been rejected as absurd.
When it was suggested by a few ex-oppositionists and defectors, who knew more about the circumstances than most people, it was hardly thought worth discussing.
Such attitudes showed a basic misunderstanding of the range of political possibility in a nondemocratic culture. More particularly, they showed a failure to grasp Soviet circumstances and, above all, a misjudgment about Stalin personally.
For Stalin’s political genius consisted specifically in this: he recognized no constraints, either moral or intellectual, in his methods of securing power.
A classic, this book!!
August 1, 2025
Robert Conquest’s The Great Terror: A Reassessment, originally published in 1968 and substantially revised in 1990 following the opening of Soviet archives, remains one of the most influential and meticulously documented studies of Stalin’s purges during the 1930s. In this work, Conquest offers a comprehensive and harrowing account of the mechanisms, scope, and ideological foundations of mass repression in the Soviet Union, particularly during the years 1936 to 1938. His reassessment confirms many of his original claims and underscores the moral and political significance of the Great Terror in the history of totalitarianism.
Conquest’s central thesis is that the purges—far from being the result of bureaucratic excesses or local misjudgments—were orchestrated from the highest levels of the Soviet leadership, with Joseph Stalin as their principal architect. Utilizing newly available archival materials, as well as émigré testimonies and previously classified documents, Conquest corroborates his earlier estimates of the number of victims—placing the death toll at close to 20 million across the Stalinist era, with the Great Terror alone accounting for hundreds of thousands of summary executions and millions of arrests.
Structurally, the book proceeds chronologically, beginning with the assassination of Sergei Kirov in 1934 and tracing the subsequent escalation of state violence. Conquest deftly interweaves biographical sketches, official transcripts, and survivor accounts, offering a multidimensional portrayal of both perpetrators and victims. His treatment of the show trials—particularly the cases of Zinoviev, Kamenev, Bukharin, and other prominent Bolsheviks—is particularly incisive. He exposes the theatrical nature of these trials and the use of torture and psychological manipulation to extract confessions, portraying them not merely as judicial aberrations but as instruments of ideological purification.
Conquest also addresses the wider social consequences of the terror: the decapitation of the Red Army’s officer corps, the devastation of Soviet intellectual life, and the entrenchment of a pervasive culture of fear. His narrative makes clear that the Great Terror was not a deviation from Stalinism but rather its logical culmination—an expression of a system in which power was maintained through terror, surveillance, and the obliteration of all real or imagined dissent.
From a historiographical perspective, The Great Terror marked a decisive intervention in Cold War debates over the nature of the Soviet regime. While earlier scholars had often accepted Soviet official narratives at face value or emphasized the defensive posture of Soviet policies, Conquest challenged these interpretations with empirical rigor and moral clarity. His reassessment, written in the aftermath of glasnost and perestroika, only strengthened his original position, revealing the extent to which previous Western apologists had underestimated or ignored the scale of Stalinist violence.
Nevertheless, some criticisms have been leveled at Conquest, particularly regarding his tone and rhetorical flourishes, which occasionally veer into polemic. Moreover, subsequent scholarship has refined some of his demographic estimates, suggesting slightly lower—but still staggering—figures. Yet these critiques do little to diminish the broader value of the work. Conquest’s fundamental argument—that Stalinist terror was systematic, ideologically driven, and centrally coordinated—has become a cornerstone of modern Soviet historiography.
The Great Terror is a seminal work of historical scholarship that continues to shape our understanding of the Soviet experience under Stalin. It is both a forensic investigation and a moral indictment, written with intellectual integrity and a profound sense of historical responsibility. For scholars of totalitarianism, modern Russian history, and political violence, Conquest’s work remains essential reading.
GPT
Conquest’s central thesis is that the purges—far from being the result of bureaucratic excesses or local misjudgments—were orchestrated from the highest levels of the Soviet leadership, with Joseph Stalin as their principal architect. Utilizing newly available archival materials, as well as émigré testimonies and previously classified documents, Conquest corroborates his earlier estimates of the number of victims—placing the death toll at close to 20 million across the Stalinist era, with the Great Terror alone accounting for hundreds of thousands of summary executions and millions of arrests.
Structurally, the book proceeds chronologically, beginning with the assassination of Sergei Kirov in 1934 and tracing the subsequent escalation of state violence. Conquest deftly interweaves biographical sketches, official transcripts, and survivor accounts, offering a multidimensional portrayal of both perpetrators and victims. His treatment of the show trials—particularly the cases of Zinoviev, Kamenev, Bukharin, and other prominent Bolsheviks—is particularly incisive. He exposes the theatrical nature of these trials and the use of torture and psychological manipulation to extract confessions, portraying them not merely as judicial aberrations but as instruments of ideological purification.
Conquest also addresses the wider social consequences of the terror: the decapitation of the Red Army’s officer corps, the devastation of Soviet intellectual life, and the entrenchment of a pervasive culture of fear. His narrative makes clear that the Great Terror was not a deviation from Stalinism but rather its logical culmination—an expression of a system in which power was maintained through terror, surveillance, and the obliteration of all real or imagined dissent.
From a historiographical perspective, The Great Terror marked a decisive intervention in Cold War debates over the nature of the Soviet regime. While earlier scholars had often accepted Soviet official narratives at face value or emphasized the defensive posture of Soviet policies, Conquest challenged these interpretations with empirical rigor and moral clarity. His reassessment, written in the aftermath of glasnost and perestroika, only strengthened his original position, revealing the extent to which previous Western apologists had underestimated or ignored the scale of Stalinist violence.
Nevertheless, some criticisms have been leveled at Conquest, particularly regarding his tone and rhetorical flourishes, which occasionally veer into polemic. Moreover, subsequent scholarship has refined some of his demographic estimates, suggesting slightly lower—but still staggering—figures. Yet these critiques do little to diminish the broader value of the work. Conquest’s fundamental argument—that Stalinist terror was systematic, ideologically driven, and centrally coordinated—has become a cornerstone of modern Soviet historiography.
The Great Terror is a seminal work of historical scholarship that continues to shape our understanding of the Soviet experience under Stalin. It is both a forensic investigation and a moral indictment, written with intellectual integrity and a profound sense of historical responsibility. For scholars of totalitarianism, modern Russian history, and political violence, Conquest’s work remains essential reading.
GPT
Displaying 1 - 30 of 123 reviews