A Brief History of Russia

by Michael Kort

Detailing the social, economic, and political changes and crises that the people of Russia have had to endure, this book provides a comprehensive account of this vast country's history. It includes coverage on the conquest and rule of Russia by the Mongol Golden Horde; and the reign of terror by Ivan the Terrible.

Genres: History, Russia, Nonfiction

310 pages, Paperback

First published June 1, 2008

Reviews

[Ali · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is a dark portrayal of history of Russia. There may be no factual errors but I’m highly skeptical of soundness of author’s political and social analyses. In final chapters (Post-Soviet Russia) I thought I was listening to a Fox News analyst. This passage about Russia’s foreign policy under Putin administration may be a good example of author’s biased approach:

Russia also offered diplomatic support to Hamas, a fundamentalist Palestinian movement that like Hezbollah was committed to Israel’s destruction. Another Russian arms customer was Sudan, whose fundamentalist Islamic regime received warplanes in 2004 as it engaged in mass murder and ethnic cleansing in its western Darfur region.
These activities inevitably created tensions with the United States and other countries attempting to promote peace and stability in the Middle East…

I am not saying that Russia didn’t do any of these and others mentioned by author, although evidence is not as firm as he pretends to be. But presenting Russia as the main and sometimes only evil in the scene and above all claiming that US invaded Middle East to “promote peace and stability” makes me smile!


To be fair, I should mention that author’s tone becomes annoying only towards end of the book and this book can be used as an introduction to history of Russia, but not something to rely on.

[Stuart Woolf · Rating 2 out of 5]

Two and a half stars.

This is the second book I have read in this series. The first, A Brief History of Mexico by Lynn Foster, was no Pulitzer Prize winner, but it did teach me almost everything I know about Mexico today and helped provide context for understanding ongoing events.

This book was not as strong. Anyone who has casually read the Wikipedia page on Russian history may discover this text leaves more to be desired, a lot more.

A history teacher of mine once opined that Russia was (and may be still) "the least egalitarian society ever." The image that comes to mind whenever I think of Russia or its sphere of influence is, tellingly, a colorless one. Let it be said Russian history is a hugely depressing saga, in the same way American or Mexican history would be if whites' treatment of black slaves, or the colonists' treatment of the indigenous population, was applied universally to all citizens. (Of course, here I am not suggesting oppression is much less of a social evil when applied only to minority groups; rather, I am simply stating Russian history is the history of a slave state.) I would go so far as to say Russian history is an embarrassment, the history of "what not to do", the D Student of Western Civilization.

I have no trouble with cynical history - in part because eliminating biased or normative statements is more trouble than it is sometimes worth, in part because it helps educate and illuminate. But in this case, I think the author's tone - he basically trashes Russia throughout the book - does not provide satisfying answers to basic questions. If Russia failed at everything it did, then how on Earth did go toe-to-toe with the United States throughout much of the 20th century? How did it defeat Nazi Germany, launch the first satellite, or send the first human being into space? These details come off as surprises - aberrations, even - in this book, but my feeling is historical writing, when done well, is not full of surprises.

Russian history makes for an easy target of criticism - and that criticism is deserved. But the task of any serious historian is to explain how Russia went from serfdom to superpower (and inspiration to millions, I might add) in less than a century. This book leaves its readers scratching their heads.

[Suidpunt]

Hierdie boek het ek onder Dewey 947 in die biblioteek raakgeloop, en besluit om hom uit te neem.

Ek het besluit om nie die boek te gradeer nie - om buite stemming te bly.

My grootste kritiekpuntjie is dat die boek, wat oor Rusland handel, vernaamlik van Engelstalige literatuur gebruik maak as bron, met slegs hier en daar 'n vertaling uit die Russies of Duits as bron. Of 'n vertaling uit die Frans, want ek herken die titel Le libre noire du communisme - die Duitse weergawe lê bo-op die boekrak by die koppenent van my bed.

Sekerlik die verhelderendste paragrafie in die hele boek is te vinde op bl. 58:

Peter also directed that Russia establish an Academy of Sciences to promote learning, an idea that emerged from his conversations in 1711 and 1712 with the German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz. The academy was set up shortly after Peter's death, with his personal library at its core.
[...]
These advances were designed for the elite who served the state, while the peasants remained untouched. The long-term implications for Russia were enormous. While the country's elite became more literate and Europeanized, its massed remained mired in illiteracy and attached to their ancient traditions.
[...]
Peter's policies deepened that fissure and added to it a yawning cultural gap. That gap would grow over time until Russia in effect had two separate cultures. Their mutual opposition and lack of comprehension constituted a divisive and dangerous national problem.

Gister, toe ek die boek lees, het ek 'n raakpunt tussen Rusland en Suid-Afrika ontdek. Sowel Tsaar Pietertjie die Grote as ons eie Joachim von Dessin is deur Gottfried Leibniz beïnvloed. Albei here het hul boekversamelings bemaak om landsbiblioteke op te rig. Een verskilletjie: Pietertjie se boeke was nét vir die adel bestem, en die intellektuele kloof het bly vergroot. In die Kaap kon iederéén énige boek na hartelus uitneem. Maar wat gebeur? Tussen 1789-1808 is slegs 87 boeke uitgeneem, skryf ons Russiese besoeker, Wasili Golownin, in sy mémoires.

Nou eers besef ek wat Golownin hierby bedoel het - aan die Kaap kon enigeen die boeke uitneem, maar nie in sy land nie. Dis 'n voorreg wat die Kapenaars nie besef het nie, en nog minder met albei hande aangegryp het.

Dit het my so herinner aan die volgende aanhaling uit die Afrikaanse roman, "Moltrein":

"Die Wes-Berlynse punk met sy leep-oë was miskien die antitese van die Oos-Duitse wag in uniform; die een het mense teen vryheid beskerm, die ander het nie geweet wat om van sy vryheid te maak, behalwe om laat op te staan en af en toe dwelms te gebruik nie."

[A · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dry, but just what I needed to read to be able to understand the Russian literature I love.

[Manuel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very informative book. Couldn't put it down. Russia has a very interesting (if puzzling) history. As a crash course, this book does a good job in condensing a little over 1000 years of Russian civilization. It gives you a bird's eye view of the main events that have shaped the Russian mind. There is a chapter on Russia's golden and silver ages of literature and music, which for a fine arts lover like me was too short. Then again, this is a book about history and is not dedicated to culture per se. Another weak spot was, perhaps, the chapter on Putin. The closer you are to historical events the more difficult it is to give a clear judgment, so I'm not surprised that the author is too harsh on the current President. Time will tell the Putin years were more positive than negative. Overall, this was a good intro.

[Mike Emett · Rating 4 out of 5]

Having to read for a class