Jump to ratings and reviews
Rate this book

The Third Rome: Holy Russia, Tsarism and Orthodoxy

Rate this book
• Was Ivan the Terrible Really a “Mad Butcher?” • Wasn't Emperor Paul a “monster?” • Was Tsarist rule completely “unlimited?” • Was the peasantry under serfdom oppressed? • Who financed the Bolsheviks? • Did the Tsars really represent the Russian people? • Where did Russian Liberalism actually come from? Just in time for the 300th anniversary of Petrograd, a new book on pre-Bolshevik Russian history has been published in English. It is a defense of royalism from Kievan Rus' until the abdication of Tsar Martyr Nicholas II at the end of World War I. For English speaking readers, it is the only published account of Tsarist Russia that succeeds in demolishing the arguments of the kept Anglo-American historians on the “evils” and “tyranny” of the Tsarist government. This work is a concise defense of Tsarism and the notion of Orthodox Russia. Just after the “History Channel's” hatchet job on the Romanovs recently ran on American television, referring to the Tsars as “butchers” and “tyrants,” this new book could not be more useful.

244 pages, Paperback

First published February 1, 2004

3 people are currently reading
170 people want to read

About the author

Matthew Raphael Johnson

13 books20 followers

Ratings & Reviews

What do you think?
Rate this book

Friends & Following

Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!

Community Reviews

5 stars
9 (47%)
4 stars
6 (31%)
3 stars
2 (10%)
2 stars
0 (0%)
1 star
2 (10%)
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
Profile Image for Jacob Aitken.
1,689 reviews420 followers
Read
August 4, 2011
4. 5 stars. Bold defense of a forbidden subject. The author challenges all of your assumptions about Russian history. The author convincingly makes the case that Holy Russia defended Christianity against the hordes of Islam and Revolution. While he does delve into "conspiracy theory," it must be noted that all European revolutions were started by conspiracies. This doesn't need to be proven. Secondly, until 1914 "conspiracy history" was an acknowledged and somewhat respected discipline.



Unfortunately, he could have better documented the Masonic connections with the conspiracies. I think he is correct but needs documentation. That is my one flaw in the book.



The author's rhetoric, while highly entertaining, will put off some readers.
9 reviews
November 22, 2024
nonsensical ramblings of someone with major anger issues that should find a new outlet for them
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews

Can't find what you're looking for?

Get help and learn more about the design.