Двести Лет Вместе

Двести лет вместе #1-2

by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Александр Солженицын

Russian

Genres: History, Russia, Politics, Nonfiction, Judaism, Religion, Philosophy

508 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2001

About the author

also known as
Alexander Solzenitsyn (English, alternate)
Αλεξάντρ Σολζενίτσιν (Greek)

Works, including One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (1962) and The Gulag Archipelago (1973-1975), of Soviet writer and dissident Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn, awarded the Nobel Prize for literature in 1970, exposed the brutality of the labor camp system.

This known Russian novelist, dramatist, and historian best helped to make the world aware of the forced Gulag.

Exiled in 1974, he returned to Russia in 1994. Solzhenitsyn fathered of Ignat Solzhenitsyn, a conductor and pianist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksan...

Reviews

[Margitte · Rating 5 out of 5]

For the past couple of months I spent my limited free time in reading more non-fictional, alternative, and less-known books about the twentieth century's wars and politics.

This is a monumental and meticulous work by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. I've read most of his books.

From the blurb

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who first exposed the horrors of the Stalinist gulag, is now attempting to tackle one of the most sensitive topics of his writing career - the role of the Jews in the Bolshevik revolution and Soviet purges.

In his latest book Solzhenitsyn, 84, deals with one of the last taboos of the communist revolution: that Jews were as much perpetrators of the repression as its victims. Two Hundred Years Together - a reference to the 1772 partial annexation of Poland and Russia which greatly increased the Russian Jewish population - contains three chapters discussing the Jewish role in the revolutionary genocide and secret police purges of Soviet Russia.

Why this book was banned is historically understandable, but still unsettling, given the era we are living in in which freedom of speech is now more than ever controlled by the thought police. Sad for our times, I would think.

Fortunately it is now more readily available and a must-read for those who are interested in world politics, but in particular the Russian role in world events. If we want to understand our own era we need to know our past. As simple as that. That keeps me reading. I must admit though that depression haunts me when reading these kind of books. Although it might expand my knowledge of the world, it does nothing to lighten the same world up for me. But that's just how it is, right?

Still, curiosity keeps driving me up the unknown alleys of history. I cannot get enough of it.

[Colm Gillis · Rating 5 out of 5]

The authors most controversial book because it discusses relations between the Jews and Russians, mostly from the pre-revolutionary period and Communist eras. I was afraid when I started reading this that it would be a Jew-bashing book. What Solzhenitsyn produced was a very sensitive and humane book, which didnt hide the role of many Jews in Bolshevism but which did not demonize them either. He presents the tragic history of Russia but there never is a simple or 'pat' narrative. Not only is this is a great book about Russian history; one can see many fault lines that are still in operation today, such as the place of a minority in a majority setting. Things I didnt like about this book were the strange turn of phrase of the author and his tendency to presume the reader knows as much about Russian history as he does. But that shouldnt detract from the power of the book and its skill with dealing with a challenging topic.

[Iain M Rodgers · Rating 4 out of 5]

Solzhenitsyn's book "The Gulag Archipelago" had to be smuggled out of the USSR and published in The West.
But now, we in The West have decided to suppress his last work "Two Hundred Years Together" just in case it might be anti-semitic. That tells us something about the society we live in. From what I managed to read of this book it is extensively researched and shows great understanding and compassion. Perhaps one day I will find myself living in a free society where I am able to buy this book instead of having to surreptitiously find bits and pieces of it from various sources. Or perhaps I will be sent to the gulag for having the temerity of attempting to read it.

[Kate · Rating 5 out of 5]

A magnificent work, so full of information that it's hard to grasp the scope of it. Solzhenitsyn tells the tale, with humility and humor, of the inexorably interwoven lives of Russians and Jews. The word "together" is in the title for that reason, as he says. It's less excoriating than I had anticipated (not that I knew what to expect).

Yes, of course there's blame for the disaster that was Jewish-led Bolshevism, and everything that followed, but he tells the other side as well, with almost an empathy, describing Bolshevism as resulting from many generations of diaspora and powerlessness. The early chapters describe this as the Jewish situation under the rule of the tsars, who could (and did) pogrom them, exclude them, and remove them at will.

Solzhenitsyn asserts that 170 million Russians could not have been pushed into Bolshevism by a Jewish minority, and that the fault was with the Russian government, mired in corruption and ineptitude, as well as with many Russian peasants, who relished the destruction of the bourgeoisie. The revolutionaries took advantage, and it was Lenin along with Trotsky and others (all Jewish) who ordered the assassination of Tsar Nicholas II and his family, after the family had been refused asylum in England by their own cousin King George V.

The later chapters are spent on the duality of the Twentieth Century Jewish experience of being residents of countries while also despising the citizens or craving to assimilate.

I read this book online because it's been censored and purged from bookstores. The man was a towering genius and this book is frankly exhausting (in a good way). I hope my "take" as simple and grasping as it is, is a correct interpretation of the information.

[Based Gamer · Rating 5 out of 5]

"You must understand, the leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators."

- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

[Cav · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wasn't sure what to expect from Two Hundred Years Together, given how controversial I had heard it was... However, if you are interested in reading a comprehensive history of the Jews in Russia, then this is the book for you.

Author Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn was a Russian novelist. A prominent Soviet dissident, Solzhenitsyn was an outspoken critic of communism and helped to raise global awareness of political repression in the Soviet Union, in particular the Gulag system. He spent 8 years in the Gulag in what is now modern-day Kazakstan, which he would later document in his famous 1973 book The Gulag Archipelago.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn:


I first became aware of the book after its name was whispered in many online forums and circles. It is apparently one of the most controversial books ever written. It would pull back the curtain on the working of Jewry, but out Solzhenitsyn as an antisemite, or so it was rumoured...

If you are expecting to read this book to obtain proof of Solzhenitsyn's antisemitism, then I have some bad news for you... Only those interested in straw-manning his writing will find that "proof" here.

This was an enormous body of work. The version I read was very well annotated; with some ~3,000 footnotes, across it's voluminous ~1,100 pages.
Solzhenitsyn is recounting history here. That some will be offended by historical fact is almost certain. He addresses this backlash in the latter part of the book:

"...Yet this sentence should be divided into two: is it the case that to “call a spade a spade” and to speak frankly mean being an enemy?
Well, there is a Russian proverb: do not love the agreeable; love the disputers.
I invite all, including Jews, to abandon this fear of bluntness, to stop perceiving honesty as hostility. We must abandon it historically! Abandon it forever!
In this book, I “call a spade a spade”. And at no time do I feel that in doing so it is being hostile to the Jews. I have written more sympathetically than many Jews write about Russians.
The purpose of this book, reflected even in its title, is this: we should understand each other, we should recognize each other’s standpoint and feelings. With this book, I want to extend a handshake of understanding – for all our future.
But we must do so mutually!
This interweaving of Jewish and Russian destinies since the 18th century which has so explosively manifested itself in the 20th century, has a profound historical meaning, and we should not lose it in the future. Here, perhaps, lies the Divine Intent which we must strive to unravel – to discern its mystery and to do what must be done.
And it seems obvious that to know the truth about our shared past is a moral imperative for Jews and Russians alike."

The book is a very detailed chronological telling of the complicated relationship of the Jewish people in and with Russia, beginning in the late 1700's.
It covers The Pale Of Settlement, Jewish rights under Czarist regimes, and details the many pogroms against the Jews of Russia and the Ukraine. Much of the controversy around his book has to do with his writing about the Jewish role in the October Revolution.

Despite what some might believe from the controversial reputation this book has garnered, Solzhenitsyn writes in a very nuanced and balanced way here; covering historical facts in a matter-of-fact manner.
I have chosen a few quotes where he talks about the role of Jews in the Revolution, and Bolshevism:

"...Yes, it was perfectly unreasonable, on the part of the Jews, to join the revolutionary movement, which had ruined the course of normal life in Russia and, consequently, that of the Jews of Russia.
Yet, in the destruction of the monarchy and in the destruction of the bourgeois order—as, some time before, in the reinforcement of it—the Jews found themselves in the vanguard. Such is the innate mobility of the Jewish character, its extreme sensitivity to social trends and the advancement of the future.
It will not be the first time in the history of mankind that the most natural impulses of men will suddenly lead to monstrosities most contrary to their nature..."
*
"...Through many years of detailed studies I have spent much time trying to comprehend the essence of the February Revolution and the Jewish role in it. I came to this conclusion and can now repeat: no, the February Revolution was not something the Jews did to the Russians, but rather it was done by the Russians themselves, which I believe I amply demonstrated in The Red Wheel. We committed this downfall ourselves: our anointed Tsar, the court circles, the hapless high-ranking generals, obtuse administrators, and their enemies — the elite intelligentsia, the Octobrist Party, the Zemstvo,the Kadets, the Revolutionary Democrats, socialists and revolutionaries, and along with them, a bandit element of army reservists, distressingly confined to the Petersburg’s barracks. And this is precisely why we perished. True, there were already many Jews among the intelligentsia by that time, yet that is in no way abasis to call it a Jewish revolution. One may classify revolutions by their main animating forces,and then the February Revolution must be seen as a Russian National Revolution, or more precisely, a Russian ethnic Revolution. Though if one would judge it using the methodology of materialistic sociologists — asking who benefited the most, or benefited most quickly, or the most solidly and in the long term from the Revolution, — then it could be called otherwise, Jewish,for example. But then again why not German? After all, Kaiser Wilhelm initially benefited from it. But the remaining Russian Population got nothing but harm and destruction; however, that doesn’t make the Revolution “non-Russian.” The Jewish society got everything it fought for from the Revolution, and the October Revolution was altogether unnecessary for them, except for a small slice of young cutthroat Jews, who with their Russian Internationalist brothers accumulated an explosive charge of hate for the Russian governing class and burst forth to “deepen” the Revolution..."
*
"...But there are also many Jewish writers who, up to this day, either deny the Jews’ contribution to Bolshevism, or even reject the idea rashly, or—this is the most frequent—consider it only reluctantly.
However the fact is proven: Jewish renegades have long been leaders in the Bolshevik Party, heading the Red Army (Trotsky), the VTsIK (Sverdlov), the two capitals (Zinoviev and Kamenev), the Comintern (Zinoviev), the Profintern (Dridzo-Lozovski) and the Komsomol (Oscar Ryvkin, and later Lazar Shatskin, who also headed the International Communist Youth).
“It is true that in the first Sovnarkom there was only one Jew, but that one was Trotsky, the number two, behind Lenin, whose authority surpassed that of all the others...”

These quotes are but a few of Solzhenitsyn's, that will hopefully give anyone reading this a taste of what the book has to offer. The history of Russian-Jewish relations is a lengthy, and complex one. I'll leave just one more quote about the Jews and the Revolution, which may help the reader gain a historical context:

"...It is obvious that was present in the Russian national consciousness, as early as 1920, the idea of a national revenge on the part of Bolshevik Jews, since it even appeared in the papers of the Soviet government (it served as an argument to Kalinin).
Of course, Pasmanik’s refutation was right: “For the wicked and narrow-minded, everything could not be explained more simply— the Jewish Kahal[1839] has decided to seize Russia; or: it is the revengeful Judaism that settles its accounts with Russia for the humiliations undergone in the past.”[1840] Of course, we cannot explain the victory and the maintenance of the Bolsheviks.—But: if the pogrom of 1905 burns in the memory of your family, and if, in 1915, were driven out of the western territories, with the strikes of a whip, your brothers by blood, you can very well, three or four years later, want to avenge yourself in your turn with a whip or a revolver bullet. We are not going to ask whether Communist Jews consciously wanted to take revenge on Russia by destroying, by breaking the Russian heritage, but totally denying this spirit of vengeance would be denying any relationship between the inequality in rights under the tsar and the participation of Jews in Bolshevism, a relationship that is constantly evoked.
And this is how I. M. Biekerman, confronted with “the fact of the disproportionate participation of the Jews in the work of barbaric destruction”, to those who recognise the right of the Jews to avenge past persecutions, refutes this right: “the destructive zeal of our co-religionists is blamed on the State, who, by its vexations and persecutions, would have pushed the Jews into the revolution”; well no, he says, for “it is to the manner in which an individual reacts to the evil suffered that he is distinguished from another, and the same is true of a community of men."

One puzzling thing I found reading this was that the quote typically attributed to Solzhenitsyn about the Jewish role in the revolution:

"You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. The October Revolution was not what you call in America the ‘Russian Revolution.’ It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be understated. Bolshevism was the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the global media itself is in the hands of the perpetrators.”

...was not actually in the book. At least not in the ~1,100 page first full English translation I read.
A cursory Google search could not turn up the origins of the quote, or indeed if Solzhenitsyn ever uttered the words to begin with...


***********************

Two Hundred Years Together was an epic work from Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. If you are interested in a deep dive into the history of the Jewish people in Russia, then buckle up! You're in for 1,100 pages of it here (assuming you don't read an abridged version).
Solzhenitsyn is one of my favorite writers, and this book is definitely on par with his other great works.
4 stars.

[Cyril · Rating 5 out of 5]

I took a class from an emigre Jewish writer from Saint Petersburgonce upon a time. It was a great class and I got a lot out of it. But the instructor wanted nothing to do with Solzhenitsyn because, he said, Solzhenitsyn was Panslavist, and anti-Semite. I was like, ok, so what’s wrong with that?

Wagner was an anti-Semite, and Israeli Philharmonic still plays his music. Lol!!

[Jacob V. · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is Solzhenitsyn's most controversial book and probably his best. It would also be easily misconstrued by people, and I imagine anyone that would like to could comb through it and de-contextualize quotations to make it say whatever they wanted.

However, it is an incredibly informative and fabulous read on a seldom discussed topic that likely only has highly partisan books.

Solzhenitsyn of course makes the whole book an enjoyable read with his witty interjections and personal anecdotes. He comes off as incredibly sharp and well read, meticulously backing up his statements with quotations from many perspectives.

A must-read.

[Raham · Rating 1 out of 5]

Just another anti-communist drivel by the crypto-fascist Solzhenitsyn.
In regards to Solzhenitsyn writing in his book that Jews had a significant role in the Bolshevik party and the Russian revolution in general:
Solzhenitsyn asserted in his book "200 years together" that Jews were overrepresented in the early Bolshevik leadership and the security apparatus, without citing his sources. He wrote that "from 22 ministers in the first Soviet government three were Russian, one Georgian, one Armenian and 17 Jews". This assertion has been discredited, as the number of Commissars in the first Soviet government on 7 November 1917 was 15, not 22, of whom 11 were ethnic Russians (Milyutin, Yelizarov, Skvortsov, Lomov, Rykov, Lenin, Shlyapnikov, Nogin, Antonov-Ovseenko, Krylenko and Avilov), two Ukrainians (Lunacharsky and Dybenko), one Pole (Teodorovich), and only one Jew (Trotsky).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin.....
Although, this is not a terrible book any means, the amount of falsehoods that Solzhenitsyn makes in his book is an extreme turn off.

[Gaz Culkin · Rating 5 out of 5]

listened to it. Damning.

[Ted · Rating 3 out of 5]

I came upon this book after several years of research into the malingering "question", so my review is somewhat colored by exhaustion with the redundancy of it all.

Solzhenitsyn's most valuable additions from my perspective are the following:

- The discussion about the earliest stages of Jewish settlement in Russia.

- A challenge to Davitt's narrative concerning Kishinev atrocities. Here my doubts remain, primarily due to the author's reliance on a newspaper source he admits to be right-wing in nature. Hard to ascertain if this means (by that time's standards) Der Sturmer-tier, or something more robust.

- His clear separation of the February and October 1917 revolutions based on participating actors and motives. Modern apologists for late Tsardom too often meld Kerensky with Lenin and Trotsky, which is ignorant and frankly disrespectful to the reformers (both Jewish and Gentile) who fought to improve Russia before the Bolsheviks.

[noblethumos · Rating 5 out of 5]

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together (Dvesti let vmeste), published in two volumes between 2001 and 2002, represents the Nobel laureate’s final and most controversial historical work. Unlike his earlier masterpieces, such as The Gulag Archipelago, which secured his reputation as a moral chronicler of totalitarianism, this work takes the form of a sweeping historical narrative that seeks to examine the complex relationship between Russians and Jews from the late eighteenth century to the Soviet period. It is an ambitious undertaking: both a social history and an interpretive essay, attempting to trace two centuries of coexistence marked by tension, cooperation, estrangement, and tragedy.


The first volume addresses the period from the partitions of Poland and the incorporation of a large Jewish population into the Russian Empire through to the revolutions of 1917. Solzhenitsyn carefully examines legislation affecting Jewish communities, including restrictions on residency within the Pale of Settlement, barriers to education, and episodes of state-sanctioned or popular anti-Jewish violence. While acknowledging the pervasive nature of discrimination and the hardships imposed upon Jews, he also emphasizes the participation of Jews in economic life, in revolutionary movements, and in Russia’s emerging intelligentsia. His narrative seeks to balance acknowledgment of oppression with recognition of Jewish agency—an approach that situates him uneasily between apologetic and accusatory interpretations of Russian–Jewish relations.


The second volume moves into the Soviet period, addressing the roles played by Jews within the Bolshevik movement, the apparatus of the early Soviet state, and the cultural and intellectual life of the USSR. Here, Solzhenitsyn is at his most contentious. He emphasizes the disproportionate representation of Jews within revolutionary leadership and security organs during the early decades of Soviet power. At the same time, he recognizes that Jews themselves became victims of the Stalinist system, suffering repression and persecution in turn. His broader interpretive aim is to highlight the tragic entanglement of both peoples in the machinery of revolution and totalitarianism, suggesting that neither side can claim innocence nor total culpability.


The scholarly reception of Two Hundred Years Together has been sharply divided. Supporters argue that Solzhenitsyn, despite his occasionally uneven use of sources, sought a sober reckoning with a fraught chapter of Russian and Jewish history, refusing both idealization and demonization. His insistence on including Jewish voices—through memoirs, letters, and historical accounts—indicates a genuine attempt at balance. Critics, however, contend that the work falls short of the standards of historical scholarship. They point to Solzhenitsyn’s reliance on anecdotal evidence, selective use of statistics, and a tendency to frame Jewish involvement in revolutionary politics in ways that may unintentionally echo antisemitic tropes. In this sense, the book has been read less as a work of neutral historiography than as a moral meditation that reflects the author’s worldview and nationalist commitments.


From an academic perspective, Two Hundred Years Together is best approached not as a definitive history but as a significant primary source—an intellectual artifact revealing how one of Russia’s greatest writers grappled with an enduring question of national identity and minority relations. Solzhenitsyn’s prose, even in historical narrative, retains the moral urgency that characterizes his literary work. His central theme is not ethnic blame, but the tragedy of mutual alienation, suspicion, and violence that prevented true integration and understanding between Russians and Jews.


Two Hundred Years Together is a work of considerable cultural and political significance, though of uneven historical merit. It reflects Solzhenitsyn’s late attempt to provide a moral interpretation of Russian history that encompasses both pride in national endurance and recognition of national failings. For historians, it is less a final word on the “Jewish question” in Russia than a testament to the complexities of memory, identity, and reconciliation in post-Soviet intellectual life.

GPT

[Sean Reeves · Rating 4 out of 5]

It seemed to take me forever to get through this book. The text doesn't flow smoothly because of the translation and there is a lot of fine detail that taxed my concentration. He is careful not to be too critical of Russian Jews and yet he inevitably attracts accusations of antisemitism. At times he is far too accommodating, as when he describes events during World War 2. These are the words that were inserted into the book's text by its editor:

"... readers should note that up until now the author has closely scrutinised all the sources and his own experience, and often found Jewish and Soviet sources to be full of exaggerations and outright lies, especially in relation to supposed hardships suffered by the Jews. However, in the case of alleged actions of Hitler and the Nazi’s (their sworn enemies), all Jewish and Soviet sources are taken by the author to be absolute truth."

The author might have been better off leaving the chapter blank and letting readers draw their own conclusions. Overall the book is very informative however, and provides an honest description of the interaction between Russian Jews and Slavic Jews over their two centuries together.

[Vlad · Rating 3 out of 5]

Слишком академическая книжка с очень большим объёмом данных

[AURORA RU · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Nē, vara toreiz nebija ebreju. Vara bija internacionāla. Pēc sastāva - arī ar daudziem krieviem, daudziem latviešiem. Taču neskatoties uz sastāva raibumu, tā darbojās skaidri antikrieviski. (..)
Un tomēr - kāpēc katram, kas nokļuva Čekas nagos, pastāvēja visaugstākā iespējamība tikt ebreju izmeklētāja pratinātam vai nošautam?"

Neiet viegli man ar Solžeņicinu - viņam tik izkaisīts stils, ka pilnīgi pazūd saturs. It kā daudz informācijas, bet tik nestrukturēti, ka viss izbirst kā caur sietu - nav ne secinājumu, ne kopsaucēju. Nav tādas stingras stāstījuma retorikas. Bet nu kamēr pieminekļu gāzēji vēl nav tikuši līdz Rīgas bibliotēku tīrīšanām, mēģināju kaut ko izlobīt. Paskat, kā atsauksmēs angliski runājošie žēlojas, ka grāmata nekur nav pieejama, jo tak kuš, par šo tēmu mēs nerunājam. Krievijā ir vēl trakāk - tur par tādu grāmatu ir dzirdējuši tikai baigi specifiskos lokos. Cik saprotu, GULAGa manuskriptu veda izdot kontrabandā uz Rietumiem, savukārt šo - no Rietumiem uz Krieviju.

Neko skandalozu gan neatradu, nevar teikt arī, ka tēma tapa skaidrāka, bet vismaz iekrāsojās daži tukšie plankumi - par to, kas īsti notika 1795. gadā un kas - ap 1919.-1929. Interesanti par daudzajiem sarkanajiem latviešiem Kremlī, kā arī par ebreju mentalitāti: savstarpējo solidarizāciju, bet arī ļaunatminību. No 2023. gada skatupunkta, protams, bija interesanti arī par to, kā bolševikiem tuvojoties krievi pameta piedņepras reģionu, savukārt ebreji viņus gaidīja kā atbrīvotājus.

Bet nu - man vairs neder tāda pieeja, ka visus ebrejus liek vienā maisā, jo viņiem tak ir tik dažādi atzari, klani un "ģimenes", katrs ar savu vēsturi un slepenības auru. Daži ir karnevāliski, bet lielākā daļa jau pilnīgi hameleonizējušies. Tā kā mani interesē tieši hazāri, varbūt tuvākā nākotnē mēģināšu История хазар.

[Anna · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very informative and balanced history of Jewish people living in the Russian Empire and later Soviet Union. Solzhenitsyn does a good job uncovering different laws, events, social sentiments that had some major consequences in history. He does mention his opinion more in the second part of the book, more in an attempt to justify telling history as it is and defending himself against antisemitism accusations.
There's a lot of "meat" in this book, and it will take me a few reads to process everything.

[William Jones · Rating 5 out of 5]

A world shattering in depth breakdown of the suppressed history of the relationship of Jews and Russia. It really helps you understand the ideology of Jews creating a state within in a state at the cost of their host nations.

[Bardon Kaldian · Rating 3 out of 5]

In my opinion, Solzhenitsyn’s book is a monument to misunderstanding. It is essentially a work on Christian historiosophy posing as popular historiography.Solzhenitsyn’s chief weakness lies in seeing Jews as a monolithic community. Were he more nuanced, he would have noted that many Russian Jews are actually Russians of (partly) Jewish ancestry & not Jews anymore. Another group would consist of Jewish “Soviets”, a quasi-ideological group with no real national loyalties, except for a Bolshevik-style internationalism. The most important group would be real Jews, individuals possessing authentic Jewish culture & identity. And Solzhenitsyn was trekking through a vast Russian Jewish encyclopedia, picking interesting, but frequently bizarre & insignificant anecdotes or percentages.

In my opinion, Solzhenitsyn did not possess analytical mind; he wrote as a Christian essentialist who, although writing primarily on history, somehow forgot: individuals, peoples…change. Russians, Ukrainians, Letts, Jews in 1920 had been rather different groups from those in 1960. He is myopic on many themes: for instance, he’d like that Jews & Russians confess their respective sins, repent & achieve catharsis, even atonement with God. But- most of them are not believers, so what kind of advice is that ?Jews had been, especially earlier, but even until the end of USSR, more “foreign” than they were in central Europe- here is a quote that illustrates incisively what I mean: “And here is another very thoughtful testimonial (1975): “The efforts spent over the last hundred years by Jewish intellectuals to reincarnate themselves into the Russian national form were truly titanic. Yet it did not give them balance of mind; on the contrary, it rather made them feel the bitterness of their bi-national existence more acutely.”And “they have an answer to the tragic question of Aleksandr Blok: `My Russia, my life, are we to drudge through life together?´ To that question, to which a Russian as a rule gives an unambiguous answer, a member of Russian-Jewish intelligentsia used to reply (sometimes after self-reflection): `No, not together. For the time being, yes, side by side, but not together´… A duty is no substitute for Motherland.”

So, basically, Solzhenitsyn bemoans the fact that Soviet Jews are a separate people & not Russians. I find it absurd because: a) assimilated, fully assimilated “Jews” are Russians; 2) acculturated, not assimilated, Jews are not Russians, but a separate people. And? What’s new? What did he expect?Just a few accents on Soviet Jews from Solzhenitsyn:Perhaps the strongest animus towards them comes from their over-representation in the 2nd & 3rd echelons, so to speak, in the NKVD repression apparatus (mostly interrogators, not executors) & political police. That was the level of the county or city (the highest politics & the 2nd layer were mostly covered by Gentiles). Many deracinated young Jews had fanatically identified with Millennarian Bolshevism & had been overzealous sectarians of a new merciless Utopia. Without religious constraints, seething with revenge against Czar, “rootless”, Russophone, urban, socially mobile – they were reliable props for the new totalitarian society. Their disillusionment with the USSR came during Khrushchev era (the Doctors’ plot that darkened Stalin’s last year was glossed over) & national euphoria in the 1967 Israel’s 6 days war. Their intermarriage rate was ca. 50% and there were 2.3 million of them during the 1960s. It seems that apocalyptic fervor had sizzled & the drab realities of Soviet life, combined with a pro-Arab Soviet policy & American meddling produced first, mostly reluctant refuseniks.

Then, during the 1970s, their national re-awakening surprised everyone (including themselves) & Brezhnev was letting ~ 30,000 of them annually to move out. Funny, until the Yom Kippur war in 1973, more than 95% of them went into Israel; after the war, enthusiasm was, eh, “curbed”- 5-10% to Israel, most of the rest to Europe or the US. After the collapse of the USSR they, “pure” and mixed both, avalanched into Israel, and now there are less than 400,000 of them in Russia.As a coda, I would say: this is a book packed with too many details, but it gains its massive impact by the very voluminousness; there is always a sense that these people, Jews, are essential aliens who, most of them, would like to assimilate, but always one or another incident pops up that keeps Jewish identity alive (propaganda, Holocaust, Israel, Soviet foreign policy,..). One gets the impression they were fascinated more by the apocalyptic promise than by the real, historical country- something very different from Germany and Austria where, were it not for Hitler, they’d be swallowed by assimilation in Hoch Deutsche Kultur. But, since Russians are also a Messianist people- you can’t have two competing Messiahs for the same cause. And during the 1960s, it became evident that Communist Kingdom of Heaven was not in sight.

[Anya Couture · Rating 5 out of 5]

This long-languishing book examines the history of Jewish-Russian relations from the early 18th century to the late 20th century. It covers a range of topics, including the participation of Jews in the Russian Revolution, the role of Jews in the Soviet Union, and the complex dynamics between Jews and the Russian Orthodox Church.

This book is a helpful corrective of many myths - that Russian Jews were innocent and pogroms happened for no good reason, for example. In this book we can see that the initial phase of the Revolution was violent as much due to Jewish resentment and racial hatred as it was due to socialism or civil war. Solzenitsyn is a wonderful writer (or, at least, his translater makes him one) and the book is well worth reading as a work of literature and history.

[Petar Kalpakchi]

Не съм добре запознат с живота и творчеството на Солженицин. Завладян от любопитство към еврейската история, се насочих към книгата му за евреите и Русия. Откровено казано, зашеметен съм от нейното съдържание. Солженицин, основно в опит да обясни едно от най-тъмните периоди на руската история, се
превръща в скрит антисемит. И да, приемам, аз съм последният, който ще застъпва престъпния СССР. Въпреки това, преминаването от критика към СССР към критика на евреите изглежда доста ретроградно и плитко. Солженицин,- обикновено по същия начин - пише обемно, изпълнено с имена и сухи факти. На практика анализ липсва, а интерпретацията на събитията е повърхностна.

[Cheong Hyo · Rating 5 out of 5]

The historical events mentioned in this book literally mirror what's going on in Palestine. Instead of Palestinians being genocided, it was Russian Slavs. Now history is repeating itself.

This book is a must read and will help people took at the genocide in Palestine in a whole new light.

[Arash Ahsani · Rating 5 out of 5]

Accurate book when comes to the title yet incomplete when it comes to the nature of the Jews as a menace on earth.

[Geraldine H. · Rating 5 out of 5]

It seems my response to a certain reviewer with only one book review got deleted.

[Fearless Leader · Rating 5 out of 5]

“And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.”

[Yogy TheBear · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you are an anti-semite and read this book you will end up less of an anti-semite.
If you are a pro Israel zionist and read this book than you will end up less of an zionist.
This book just constantly put me into a revolving spiral of alternating anger and compassion twords the jews. It managed to break the stereotype of the scheming jew or the banker jew or the blasphemes jew and instead replace this with a very complex and nuanced picture of jew society throughout history. There passages about different generations of jews arguing on topics like jews leaving tradition was fascinating. It just hit me how complex and vast the ideas inside the Jewish communities were.