Yezhov: The Rise of Stalin's "Iron Fist"

by J. Arch Getty, Oleg V. Naumov

The definitive study of Nikolai Yezhov’s rise to become the chief of Stalin’s secret police—and the dictator’s “iron fist”—during the Great Terror

Head of the secret police from 1937 to 1938, N. I. Yezhov was a foremost Soviet leader during these years, second in power only to Stalin himself. Under Yezhov’s orders, millions of arrests, imprisonments, deportations, and executions were carried out. This book, based upon unprecedented access to Communist Party archives and Yezhov’s personal archives, looks into the life and career of the enigmatic man who administered Stalin’s Great Terror. J. Arch Getty and Oleg V. Naumov seek to answer a series of troubling questions. What kind of person calmly and efficiently sends thousands of innocent people to their deaths? What could prepare a man for such a role? How could a person whom acquaintances describe as friendly, pleasant, and even gallant carry out one of history’s most horrifying campaigns of terror? The authors uncover the full details of Yezhov’s rise to power and conclude that he was not merely Stalin’s tool but a skillful maneuverer in his own right. The historical documents provide a thorough portrait of Yezhov and reveal a man of fanatical dedication to his leader and his party—a man who became a willing murderer. Readers will find his story chilling, the more so in our own times, when the impulse to terror that engulfed Yezhov seems neither surprising nor unfamiliar.

Genres: History, Biography, Soviet Union, Nonfiction, Russia

315 pages, Hardcover

First published June 17, 2007

About the author

John Archibald Getty III was an American historian and professor at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), who specialized in the history of Russia and the history of the Soviet Union.

Reviews

[Serafima Karkkila · Rating 4 out of 5]

Much can be said about this book.

The authors make it clear in the book's prologue that their approach to N. I. Yezhov's early life isn't "psychohistorical". It's good that they acknowledge this, and it should also be noted that when they say their approach isn't psychohistorical, it really isn't psychohistorical (at least in the early chapters). The authors inform the reader that their intent was to focus more on the "life and times" aspect of N. I. Yezho's life and they speak truthfully.

This is the first (and perhaps only) biography of N. I. Yezhov that focuses this much on "his times" (rather than his life) and before reading this book it had never occured to me how much historical biographies stand to gain from the authors' analysis of their subject's surroundings. This book educated me greatly on the early revolutionary atmosphere in 1917 Russia and also on the period of the Civil War during the early 1920s. In the context of learning more about N. I. Yezhov's life specifically, the authors do a good job in bringing depth to his character by writing about the environment in which he lived in.

For all the good things this book has going for it, there are some rather substantial things that it is lacking. For example, most N. I. Yezhov biographies have a strong focus on his subordinates at various stages of his career and use them to further expand on his personality and inner world through his interaction with them. Especially during N. I. Yezhov's time in the NKVD (yes, this book does not cover said time) his relationship with his comrades was one of the central points of his life. It just feels rather empty reading a book that isolates N. I. Yezhov from his subordinates in such a manner.

Another key aspect of N. I. Yezhov's political life, Stalin, is left largely outside the book. Even though the authors pose many convincing arguments about Stalin's rather unimportant role in N. I. Yezhov's life they fail to justify this level of "Stalin exclusion" from his biography. I suppose this could be illustrated with the thought that a person who has only read this book and another person who was read this and other N. I. Yezhov biographies would surely have the most interesting conversation... (Those who have done so will understand me.)

I find it amusing that despite the authors' acknowledgement of existing works about N. I. Yezhov's life which they dismiss as untrustworthy and call them "hagiographies" - this book is basically a hagiography too. The authors paint a very one-sided picture of N. I. Yezhov as the perfect worker who, according to them, doesn't seem to have any flaws. Whereas his other biographers write about his weakened capacity for work because of his numerous illnesses, the authors of this book only mention his health as a quick sidenote in the epilogue. They write about N. I. Yezhov with praising adjectives and highlight his positive traits and work achievements but don't balance them out with barely any "critique". I'm not saying that writing a biography filled with praise is wrong (actually it is a rather welcome change for the reader accustomed to reading all the dirt that many authors pour on N. I. Yezhov), however it is odd for supposedly objective historical research.

The authors make many bold claims about N. I. Yezhov's life that seek to uproot the universally accepted status quo but, in my opinion, fail to provide sufficient proof to make such bold statements plausible. For exmple, their claiming that N. I. Yezhov's NKVD appointment was unavoidable and not at all premeditated by Stalin. They also highlight N. I. Yezhov's initiative in investigating and reopening the 1934 Kirov assassination case.

Overall, despite some serious problems I have with the book, it was still an incredibly enjoyable and educating experience. This is a perfect read for someone seeking to get a better picture of N. I. Yezhov's life, but I will stress the importance of not starting your research with this particular book. This book is a great source of additional knowledge if you already have a basic understanding of N. I. Yezhov's life.

Some comments about the book itself from a technical point of view. The hardcover book is printed with high quality paper and the font size is just perfect, not mass market paperback small or huge either. The text is very enjoyable to read and never feels too heavy. At about 200 pages, it makes for a quick, light, and entertaining read.

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

Solid monograph. Truly about the rise and about demonstrating continuity amazingly from a genial man to a murderer. Doesn't include the time period (The Great Terror), he is best known for.

[Fausto]

Definitivamente es un buen libro, no rompe con el paradigma totalitario pero contribuye a sepultarlo y a dejarlo como mito, influyendo así con la humanización de figuras como Stalin o Yezhov. La labor de Getty ha sido excelsa, en cuanto a su aprovechamiento de fuentes primarias y de la crítica. Una obra bastante útil en términos relacionados a la historiografía.

[Terry Graap · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the rise of Yezhov in the Communist party in Russia from 1917 to about 1937 when he became the head of the NVKD, the soviet secret police and then he was executed in about 1940.

[E.A.M. Van · Rating 3 out of 5]

Erg grappig om deze twee biografieen over de organisator van de Great Terror parallel te lezen. Het probleem waarmee alle auteurs worstelen is het feit dat na Yezhovs fall from grace het bijna onmogelijk is betrouwbare van gerevisioneerde informatie te scheiden. Dit leidt in beide bio's tot nogal veel vaagheden. Op zich is dit tot op zekere hoogte inherent aan alle geschiedschrijving, maar hier is dit probleem wel behoorlijk bepalend voor het verkrijgen van een adequaat beeld. Yezhov blijft dus een schimmige figuur. Paradoxaal genoeg zou die schimmigheid misschien wel een van de belangrijkste eigenschappen van de man geweest kunnen zijn. Beide boeken verschillen vooral in de toekenning van de mate van autonomie die Yezhov binnen de sovjet-hierarchie had om tot zijn daden te komen. Was Yezhov inderdaad een
volledig door Stalin aangestuurde marionet of, meer analoog met situatie in Nazi-Duitsland, creeerde Stalin een klimaat waarin zijn onderknuppels een zekere mate van (schijn)vrijheid hadden om de Chef te laten zien waartoe ze wel niet in staat waren. Jansen opteert voor het eerste beeld, Getty voor het laatste. Interessante standpunten die door Getty in ieder geval door prettiger leesbaar worden beschreven.