What do you think?
Rate this book
A History of Modern Russia: From Tsarism to the Twenty-First Century, Third Edition
Russia had an extraordinary twentieth century, undergoing upheaval and transformation. Updating his acclaimed History of Modern Russia , Robert Service provides a panoramic perspective on a country whose Soviet past encompassed revolution, civil war, mass terror, and two world wars. He shows how seven decades of communist rule, which penetrated every aspect of Soviet life, continue to influence Russia today. This new edition takes the story from 2002 through the entire presidency of Vladimir Putin to the election of his successor, Dmitri Medvedev.
736 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
133 people are currently reading
2128 people want to read
About the author
Robert Service
42 books268 followersThis author is the British historian of modern Russia. For the British-Canadian writer of Yukon poetry, see Robert W. Service.
Robert Service is a British academic and historian of modern Russia and the Soviet Union. He is a professor of Russian history at the University of Oxford and a Fellow at St. Antony's College, Oxford.
He is the author of the highly acclaimed Lenin: A Biography, A History of Twentieth - Century Russia, Russia: Experiment with a People and Stalin: A Biography, as well as many other books on Russia's past and present. He wrote a marvelous book on communism titled Comrades Communism A World History (International Bestseller). He is married with four children.
Robert Service is a British academic and historian of modern Russia and the Soviet Union. He is a professor of Russian history at the University of Oxford and a Fellow at St. Antony's College, Oxford.
He is the author of the highly acclaimed Lenin: A Biography, A History of Twentieth - Century Russia, Russia: Experiment with a People and Stalin: A Biography, as well as many other books on Russia's past and present. He wrote a marvelous book on communism titled Comrades Communism A World History (International Bestseller). He is married with four children.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 61 reviews
April 5, 2014
Having previously read Robert Service's Lenin, and Comrades, I had already begun to consider Service as the most scholarly authority on modern Russia, and this expertly written volume cements my opinion of him.
The work is neither too long, but perhaps, at over 570 pages, it is perhaps too short as it leaves the reader wanting more.
Covering the entire 20th Century and the first decade of the 21st, Service leaves no stone unturned. All the major personalities and forces for change are included, and certain parts that may be a cause for digression, such as WWII, are kept within an appropriate length for a broad ranged study.
Robert Service, while notably a scholar not known to place faith in the communist ideology, is nonetheless sensitive to the different opinions of the various segments of the population who are nostalgic for the days of old. A central problem Service identifies is corruption, that became endemic under the Brezhnev era with complacent, irresponsible management, and supplementing of income from other, often illegitimate, sources. Service reveals that by the time of the Brezhnev era, a deep cynicism was inbedded in the leadership that had scant regard for the actual ideals of communism, and instead sought little more than to preserve their hold on power. Such logic was behind the selection of the deathly ill Chernenko in the Kremlin succession of 1984, merely as a means to forestall a shakeup of the Soviet hierarchy.
Service gives coverage to the Perestroika era, which is similar to his study in Comrades, but perhaps with more detail. From the breakup of the USSR he covers the power struggles, and uncertainty of the Yeltsin era, and take the readers up to and including the succession of Medvedev and the 2008 5 day war in Georgia.
Service is praising of Russia's achivements in the post Soviet era, and is reasonably optimistic of Russia's future. One cannot discern as to whether Service is a Russophile, though this reader, if asked, would say not. However, Services lack of cultural preference perhaps gives the work a greater sense of objectivity.
As a reader who has read various studies of Russian history, both within education and at leisure, this ranks as one of the best, and certainly the best comprehensive study. Recommended for both experienced Russia hands, or those with a Russia curiosity.
The work is neither too long, but perhaps, at over 570 pages, it is perhaps too short as it leaves the reader wanting more.
Covering the entire 20th Century and the first decade of the 21st, Service leaves no stone unturned. All the major personalities and forces for change are included, and certain parts that may be a cause for digression, such as WWII, are kept within an appropriate length for a broad ranged study.
Robert Service, while notably a scholar not known to place faith in the communist ideology, is nonetheless sensitive to the different opinions of the various segments of the population who are nostalgic for the days of old. A central problem Service identifies is corruption, that became endemic under the Brezhnev era with complacent, irresponsible management, and supplementing of income from other, often illegitimate, sources. Service reveals that by the time of the Brezhnev era, a deep cynicism was inbedded in the leadership that had scant regard for the actual ideals of communism, and instead sought little more than to preserve their hold on power. Such logic was behind the selection of the deathly ill Chernenko in the Kremlin succession of 1984, merely as a means to forestall a shakeup of the Soviet hierarchy.
Service gives coverage to the Perestroika era, which is similar to his study in Comrades, but perhaps with more detail. From the breakup of the USSR he covers the power struggles, and uncertainty of the Yeltsin era, and take the readers up to and including the succession of Medvedev and the 2008 5 day war in Georgia.
Service is praising of Russia's achivements in the post Soviet era, and is reasonably optimistic of Russia's future. One cannot discern as to whether Service is a Russophile, though this reader, if asked, would say not. However, Services lack of cultural preference perhaps gives the work a greater sense of objectivity.
As a reader who has read various studies of Russian history, both within education and at leisure, this ranks as one of the best, and certainly the best comprehensive study. Recommended for both experienced Russia hands, or those with a Russia curiosity.
October 6, 2025
Filling in the Gaps
As Orlando Figes says, Robert Service is extremely good on Soviet Politics. The man certainly knows his stuff and is able to write in a compelling way. After reading his Last of the Tsars and The End of the Cold War, both of which are extremely impressive, it was only a matter of time before I turned to his history of Russia in the Twentieth Century. Following this I will definitely consume more of his work, Kremlin Winter and Lenin being next to the devoured.
I treated this book as a way of filling in the gaps that other books, which focus on specific elements might not cover. It was particularly useful in my understanding of Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko.
It’s hard to point to Service’s political leaning which I think is a good thing. He certainly does not advocate communism (but who seriously does?), but is able to point out some of the advantages of 70 years of Soviet rule. This is a moot point as one could probably pick out positives in any era or epoch in history. I mean Stalin defeated Nazi Germany didn’t he?
I won’t go through the points of the book or the narrative as you should read this work as either a beginner or an expect (as the scholars and experts have and this gives the book gravitas). Russia in the Twentieth Century has produced some of the worst humans in the 100 year period (Lenin, Stalin and Beria to name a few) and some of the greatest (Gorbachev and Stolypin not to mention all of the talented intelligentsia, artists and writers). The fall of the USSR was a great moment in history, but today’s new and violent Russia has another journey to take through a new century of twists, turns and plot twists. I now hope someone can do the same for Russia in the Nineteenth Century!
As Orlando Figes says, Robert Service is extremely good on Soviet Politics. The man certainly knows his stuff and is able to write in a compelling way. After reading his Last of the Tsars and The End of the Cold War, both of which are extremely impressive, it was only a matter of time before I turned to his history of Russia in the Twentieth Century. Following this I will definitely consume more of his work, Kremlin Winter and Lenin being next to the devoured.
I treated this book as a way of filling in the gaps that other books, which focus on specific elements might not cover. It was particularly useful in my understanding of Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko.
It’s hard to point to Service’s political leaning which I think is a good thing. He certainly does not advocate communism (but who seriously does?), but is able to point out some of the advantages of 70 years of Soviet rule. This is a moot point as one could probably pick out positives in any era or epoch in history. I mean Stalin defeated Nazi Germany didn’t he?
I won’t go through the points of the book or the narrative as you should read this work as either a beginner or an expect (as the scholars and experts have and this gives the book gravitas). Russia in the Twentieth Century has produced some of the worst humans in the 100 year period (Lenin, Stalin and Beria to name a few) and some of the greatest (Gorbachev and Stolypin not to mention all of the talented intelligentsia, artists and writers). The fall of the USSR was a great moment in history, but today’s new and violent Russia has another journey to take through a new century of twists, turns and plot twists. I now hope someone can do the same for Russia in the Nineteenth Century!
January 27, 2013
A splendid book on a remarkable country. What a history that country had in the twentieth century and what repercussions it had on the entire world! It is hard to think of another country – including the United States – that had more of an impact on world politics.
Robert Service covers it all superbly. He points out that Lenin was no moralist or humanitarian. It was Lenin who coined the term “dictatorship of the proletariat” which meant NO to democracy, NO to elections; and as the term implies a dictatorship by an authoritarian state. The secret police was integral in Lenin’s agenda.
Mr. Service also points out that Russia (Soviet Union) was always a dual society. The top levels had only limited knowledge of what occurred away from the centre. At the bottom, reports and statistics were embellished to accord with the desires of the upper ruling stratas. This made corruption endemic at all layers of society – for the lower classes it would be the only way to survive.
Khrushchev is portrayed as a partial reformer. It must be remembered that both Khrushchev and Brezhnev continued the repression in Eastern Europe. Gorbachev had the moral courage to stop this.
The only drawback is that little is mentioned on the invasion of Afghanistan and the role it played in the demise and fracturing of the Soviet Union.
Robert Service covers it all superbly. He points out that Lenin was no moralist or humanitarian. It was Lenin who coined the term “dictatorship of the proletariat” which meant NO to democracy, NO to elections; and as the term implies a dictatorship by an authoritarian state. The secret police was integral in Lenin’s agenda.
Mr. Service also points out that Russia (Soviet Union) was always a dual society. The top levels had only limited knowledge of what occurred away from the centre. At the bottom, reports and statistics were embellished to accord with the desires of the upper ruling stratas. This made corruption endemic at all layers of society – for the lower classes it would be the only way to survive.
Khrushchev is portrayed as a partial reformer. It must be remembered that both Khrushchev and Brezhnev continued the repression in Eastern Europe. Gorbachev had the moral courage to stop this.
The only drawback is that little is mentioned on the invasion of Afghanistan and the role it played in the demise and fracturing of the Soviet Union.
February 18, 2021
Great analysis, steps away from any sort of passing judgement and blah blah blah. but also SO dry. Because similar themes and issues constantly crop up in Russian history, it almost feels like you're reading the same never ending chapter over and over again. How many times can a book say "things hadn't been this bad since WW2", before you want to put it down? Still, obviously a very well done history just a shame it's a bit boring.
September 26, 2025
It was my biggest undertaking yet and the further I went the shorter my stints became. I'm not saying it was a trudge, far from it. It was just a biggy. The story of the country is quite remarkable and I believe the author's presentation was captivating.
July 28, 2013
If you wanted to read one book on Modern Russian History without getting bogged down with hundreds of pages of explanations on communism and ideological details, this is it. Robert Service, an Oxford prof specialising in Russian History and author of many biographies of Russian Tsars and Communist leaders, has written a comprehensive but fast paced (each chapter on an era or theme of max 20 pages) book which in 550 odd pages covers the ground from 1914 to 1990. I liked the objective way in which it is written unlike most Western Historians who write on Russia with a huge political and ideological axe to grind. Robert Service lets the facts do the talking and conclusions are foregone but do not seem to be imposed on the reader. The overthrow of Nicholas II, Lenin days, degenerating into horror of Stalin's 'Terror and days of purge', Cold period of Khruschev followed by dreadiness of Breznev, International optimism under Gorbachov coupled with despair with the transition to market economy for Russians, collapse of one of the greatest empires of the world overnight in 1991, cementing nexus of politicians and Oligarchs under Yelstin is well captured in this book. One negative is that though the sub title says ' Nicholas II to Vladimir Putin', it really does not cover the last 15 years under Putin that much. Perhaps the history written in 1997 has not really been updated.. Putin's Russia will be material for yet another worthy book by R Service. Recommended.
April 2, 2020
The price for this book is 320 HRK (that would be about 40 euros) and definitely it isn't worth that much.
Several things that really bothered me, and that's why this is a 3.
Sooooo, so many persons just get named in this book without you really knowing who they are and how they stand in power structure (especially in Soviet union where the title doesn't necessarily mean you are the boss) so you are just puzzled who those people are, and when they disappear as fast as they come you are not sure where they really important or the author just named dropped them.
Also, the thing that bothered me authors stand and judgment on certain questions without some logical or argumented stand, more like he says it was like that because I said it.
His Gorbachev and post-Soviet Russia was just bad, it was biased as hell, very rushed, very confusing, and not at all objective.
Also, this should have been a book about Russia in the 2oth century, but it ended more like Russians leaders in the 20th century.
Didn't really like this book, and if I am not familiar with Russias history I would be even less fond of it because I would be overwhelmed because of the bad writing style.
Several things that really bothered me, and that's why this is a 3.
Sooooo, so many persons just get named in this book without you really knowing who they are and how they stand in power structure (especially in Soviet union where the title doesn't necessarily mean you are the boss) so you are just puzzled who those people are, and when they disappear as fast as they come you are not sure where they really important or the author just named dropped them.
Also, the thing that bothered me authors stand and judgment on certain questions without some logical or argumented stand, more like he says it was like that because I said it.
His Gorbachev and post-Soviet Russia was just bad, it was biased as hell, very rushed, very confusing, and not at all objective.
Also, this should have been a book about Russia in the 2oth century, but it ended more like Russians leaders in the 20th century.
Didn't really like this book, and if I am not familiar with Russias history I would be even less fond of it because I would be overwhelmed because of the bad writing style.
February 28, 2021
I lost steam around Boris Yeltsin, because I could not take another detailed description of who was on what committee at what time. This should have been called a History of Modern Russia's government, which I guess is obvious. Very government figure centric. There was some analysis that focused on the meta-history pieces and cultural dynamics, like the role of Russian ethnic identity and how the meaning of Marxism changed in each era, but also a lot of detailed descriptions of the politicking. Which is actually how things happen, so that's useful I guess, but dang was a lot of it boring.
October 7, 2021
Цікаво і, як мені здалось, досить об'єктивно написана книжка про Радянський Союз та трошки про сучасну Росію. Заповнив деякі пробіли у своїх знаннях, особливо про сталінський період і часи Горбачова. Як вступна, оглядова книжка - дуже ок.
November 16, 2017
Very good overview . Fair on strengths and weaknesses of systems And leaders .
November 28, 2020
If not exactly inspiring, this book does exactly what it says on the tin. While clocking in at over 750 pages, the book seems intimidating at first, the detail feels almost limited while reading. This fact is likely owing to the incredibly vast scope of the topic. While it is clear that this text is highly researched, and the author is particularly knowledgeable, the reader is often left wanting for more details on a number of aspects of the story being told.
April 3, 2025
So much detail. Impressive. Dry as a desert. (3.5*)
January 31, 2025
20th Century Russia in a nutshell: everything gets better and worse at the same time
August 7, 2020
This was generally enjoyable, thoughtful and insightful. I enjoyed Service's evident effortlessness in surveying his subject-matter, as well as the utterly penetrating gaze with which he regards Communism, neither sympathetic for the shock therapy capitalism that followed its demise nor willing to gloss over its own flaws. Fitting ~120 years of history into a single book is no mean feat, and I did feel that Service was generally judicious in his inclusions and exclusions, covering deftly cultural and intellectual history along political and socio-economic developments, though some key events were omitted - among them, the Soviet-Afghan war that proved so critical to its demise - and most critically, sometimes fails to provide analysis and evaluation alongside historical description.
Beyond providing a comprehensive history of Russia, which the book (in its limited pages) proved rather effective at, I did glean some unconventional insights from reading it, the first of which was the continuities between Tsarist/Premodern and Communist/Modern Russia - Service intelligently points out that, for instance, the collectivization of small communitarian farms in the countryside was hardly an import of Communist ideology, but a continuation (if taken to an extreme degree) of the Obshchina, or village commune. Service also points out that while we tend to imagine Stalin to be the ultimate in ruthlessness and Lenin as a rather more distant ideologue figure, Lenin was every bit as merciless, demonstrated in the sheer disregard for human life demonstrated in the post-Revolution Red Terror, today often overshadowed by Stalin's own Great Terror - which Service astutely suggests drew inspiration from the former.
There are also fascinating bits of information about the Soviet regime itself - for instance, Service effectively disproves the notion of absolute control by an omniscient, omnipresent totalitarian state - he argues convincingly that the totalitarian model overlooks the fact that aside from the very top (political elite) and very bottom (gulag inmates) there was much silent disgruntlement and dissatisfaction that the regime could not easily suppress; he draws on both anecdotal histories and acts of (relatively) inoffensive subversion to underscore his point. Further, he disputes the traditional view that the sole 'redeeming feature' of Stalin's Terror and his hyper-statist industrial policy was that it enabled Russia to survive the Nazi onslaught - without straying too far into the realm of the counterfactual, Service does demonstrate that a mere continuation of the NEP might have performed better.
Finally, on the level of historiography, Service is conscious in reminding us that Russian history was not at all inevitable or pre-ordained - especially in the period from 1905 to 1917, contingency upon contingency was paramount (for example, Nicholas II, and with him the institution of Tsarism, might have survived if not for the debacle of the First World War).
In all, I thought that it was certainly decent for such an ambitious timespan in such a short text - the two principal areas in which I would've liked more coverage were the aforementioned war in Afghanistan and more about the economic chaos of the Yeltsin period - how exactly did Russia become the economic oligarchy it is today? After all, 21st-century Russia is defined above all by its dysfunctional oligarchic politico-economic elite, yet Services devotes very little (if any at all) of the book to explaining the rise (and downfall?) of important oligarchs. More of a 3.5 than a 3, really.
Beyond providing a comprehensive history of Russia, which the book (in its limited pages) proved rather effective at, I did glean some unconventional insights from reading it, the first of which was the continuities between Tsarist/Premodern and Communist/Modern Russia - Service intelligently points out that, for instance, the collectivization of small communitarian farms in the countryside was hardly an import of Communist ideology, but a continuation (if taken to an extreme degree) of the Obshchina, or village commune. Service also points out that while we tend to imagine Stalin to be the ultimate in ruthlessness and Lenin as a rather more distant ideologue figure, Lenin was every bit as merciless, demonstrated in the sheer disregard for human life demonstrated in the post-Revolution Red Terror, today often overshadowed by Stalin's own Great Terror - which Service astutely suggests drew inspiration from the former.
There are also fascinating bits of information about the Soviet regime itself - for instance, Service effectively disproves the notion of absolute control by an omniscient, omnipresent totalitarian state - he argues convincingly that the totalitarian model overlooks the fact that aside from the very top (political elite) and very bottom (gulag inmates) there was much silent disgruntlement and dissatisfaction that the regime could not easily suppress; he draws on both anecdotal histories and acts of (relatively) inoffensive subversion to underscore his point. Further, he disputes the traditional view that the sole 'redeeming feature' of Stalin's Terror and his hyper-statist industrial policy was that it enabled Russia to survive the Nazi onslaught - without straying too far into the realm of the counterfactual, Service does demonstrate that a mere continuation of the NEP might have performed better.
Finally, on the level of historiography, Service is conscious in reminding us that Russian history was not at all inevitable or pre-ordained - especially in the period from 1905 to 1917, contingency upon contingency was paramount (for example, Nicholas II, and with him the institution of Tsarism, might have survived if not for the debacle of the First World War).
In all, I thought that it was certainly decent for such an ambitious timespan in such a short text - the two principal areas in which I would've liked more coverage were the aforementioned war in Afghanistan and more about the economic chaos of the Yeltsin period - how exactly did Russia become the economic oligarchy it is today? After all, 21st-century Russia is defined above all by its dysfunctional oligarchic politico-economic elite, yet Services devotes very little (if any at all) of the book to explaining the rise (and downfall?) of important oligarchs. More of a 3.5 than a 3, really.
May 10, 2016
A good introduction to the subject. I did find myself confused at times because Service will be saying all the things that improved under someone and then suddenly say how bad things were. Now, while this is not necessarily contradictory, his tone seems to change. For a minute, it seems like he is doing a revisionist look and then he is back to the usual. I can't really put my finger on it.
July 3, 2024
An interesting read where every era feels exciting to delve into, whether it be about the collapse of the Tsar or the rise of Putin. Sections can feel a bit repetitive at times, but that is due to the cyclic nature of Russia's history rather than the writing style of the author.
June 18, 2024
Reading Robert Service's excellent , exhaustive history of Modern Russia was invaluable in clarifying for me the background to the breakdown of the Soviet Union in the 1990s.
April 15, 2017
(This is a review of the second edition, extended up to 2002.)
Service’s biggest problem boils down to his lack of self-awareness. He has a number of unexamined assumptions about what constitutes a correct way of managing an economy and a government, and thus applies these without justification. Of course, there are plenty of things to criticize the USSR for, but, for example, while the arbitrary nature of the legal system might be something most people would agree is bad, on the other hand one might reasonable wonder if there are not valid debates to be had over the size of the state sector of the economy (Service repeatedly refers to it as “hypertrophied”). To take another example, in the conclusion he presents ‘free’ elections as held in the 1990s as being an unquestionably positive step, even while admitting that, in practice, these elections where deeply flawed. One might wonder why a flawed democratic process that pretends to be “liberal” is fundamentally better than, or even any different to, a flawed democratic process that does not. Perhaps what one pretends to be is more important than what one actually does?
Another tendency that irritates me is his constant assumption that, unlike all the Soviet leaders and officials discussed in the book, he (Service) has interpreted Lenin (and, to a lesser extent Marx) correctly.
All in all, this is not the worst history of the Soviet Union. While his liberal and anti-communist sympathies are clear throughout, Service for the most part refrains from moralizing and rejects the most exaggerated nonsense claims that have been made about the scale of the USSR’s problems; for example, he recognizes that the famines of the 1930s were not somehow orchestrated by Stalin. (He also avoids the self-importance of Figes, who seemed to think he was doing Soviet leaders a favour by accusing them of *only* mass-murder, rather than genocide, and that the biggest flaw of post-Soviet leaders has been not to run the country as he would have.) He’s also better on the Cold War than some other histories have been, and so while Carr (for example) is better on the early years of the Soviet Union (1917–27), Service is the best I’ve read on Stalin and the post-Stalin period (which admittedly isn’t saying much). The post-Soviet era is covered increasingly briefly, with Putin’s election in 1999 being almost the final event of note despite the book claiming to cover up to 2002; it also suffers, to be fair, from the most significant parts of Putin’s leadership having taken place after this edition was published (and so I'll give the third edition the benefit of the doubt in this regard).
Service’s biggest problem boils down to his lack of self-awareness. He has a number of unexamined assumptions about what constitutes a correct way of managing an economy and a government, and thus applies these without justification. Of course, there are plenty of things to criticize the USSR for, but, for example, while the arbitrary nature of the legal system might be something most people would agree is bad, on the other hand one might reasonable wonder if there are not valid debates to be had over the size of the state sector of the economy (Service repeatedly refers to it as “hypertrophied”). To take another example, in the conclusion he presents ‘free’ elections as held in the 1990s as being an unquestionably positive step, even while admitting that, in practice, these elections where deeply flawed. One might wonder why a flawed democratic process that pretends to be “liberal” is fundamentally better than, or even any different to, a flawed democratic process that does not. Perhaps what one pretends to be is more important than what one actually does?
Another tendency that irritates me is his constant assumption that, unlike all the Soviet leaders and officials discussed in the book, he (Service) has interpreted Lenin (and, to a lesser extent Marx) correctly.
All in all, this is not the worst history of the Soviet Union. While his liberal and anti-communist sympathies are clear throughout, Service for the most part refrains from moralizing and rejects the most exaggerated nonsense claims that have been made about the scale of the USSR’s problems; for example, he recognizes that the famines of the 1930s were not somehow orchestrated by Stalin. (He also avoids the self-importance of Figes, who seemed to think he was doing Soviet leaders a favour by accusing them of *only* mass-murder, rather than genocide, and that the biggest flaw of post-Soviet leaders has been not to run the country as he would have.) He’s also better on the Cold War than some other histories have been, and so while Carr (for example) is better on the early years of the Soviet Union (1917–27), Service is the best I’ve read on Stalin and the post-Stalin period (which admittedly isn’t saying much). The post-Soviet era is covered increasingly briefly, with Putin’s election in 1999 being almost the final event of note despite the book claiming to cover up to 2002; it also suffers, to be fair, from the most significant parts of Putin’s leadership having taken place after this edition was published (and so I'll give the third edition the benefit of the doubt in this regard).
March 2, 2023
This is a massive DNF. Mainly because I realized how shit of a historian this dude is.
He was supposedly discredited by the American Historical Review for being not only biased and unfair, but dehumanizing and incredibly harmful towards Leon Trotsky in his biography of him.
Based on some reading and research I did, Robert Service does not treat historical figures as humans and is haphazard with historical data/sources.
That wasn't a critique on this book, but I'm not going to waste my time reading this. A million other amazing historians treat historical figures as human and I will read their books lol.
Insane. Men are pigs.
He was supposedly discredited by the American Historical Review for being not only biased and unfair, but dehumanizing and incredibly harmful towards Leon Trotsky in his biography of him.
Based on some reading and research I did, Robert Service does not treat historical figures as humans and is haphazard with historical data/sources.
That wasn't a critique on this book, but I'm not going to waste my time reading this. A million other amazing historians treat historical figures as human and I will read their books lol.
Insane. Men are pigs.
September 3, 2020
Honestly, a really thrilling read, but the quality of source material is hard to deny. One of the most dramatic centuries in modern history is given an effectively comprehensive treatment, even if fairly compressed. Biggest shortcomings are too much weight put on some minor details and personalities, and the constraint of understanding the USSR primarily through a Russian lens. Can't be too unhappy given the title, but one does feel the limitations at points, especially in the fall of the USSR when the periphery is reasserting itself.
March 11, 2018
My knowledge of imperial Russia is very good; my knowledge of revolutionary Russia good; after that though, it's a bit sparse. So I picked up this book to fill those gaps from Stalin on. It definitely did the job there, and I found the material on Kruschv and Brezhnev particularly interesting. There are a few "British-isms" in the writing that threw me for a loop, but some quick Internet searches explained what the author was trying to convey.
September 10, 2020
My only disappointment was this book ended. I feel Robert, even in his seventies, could still produce a fantastic biography of Putin. He is currently my favourite historian. He writes beautifully but concisely unlike several other writers producing similar content, who seem to revel in complicating the most serious and complex of matters with silly high-brow jargon.
March 6, 2024
Better than other Service books; there still is, however, a fascination on certain subjects - such as religion - that threaten to overwhelm the book. The pace changes rapidly: 2 pages on the 1905 revolution, but 20 on the church in 1943?
Regardless, a good read for those wanting a brief but exemplary overview of the history of the USSR.
Regardless, a good read for those wanting a brief but exemplary overview of the history of the USSR.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 17, 2018
Very informative - dwelling into the merits and issues of the Communist government that was formed in Russia, starting from the falls of the Tsar to the fall of communism. A must-read for those who are interested in the modern Russian state.
February 8, 2024
Interesting, up-to-date, nuanced history but the chapters after Stalin are very dull and quite one dimensionally seem to just list events. Service's prose isn't very good either, and his attempts at irony and humour often fall flat and are irritating.
April 29, 2018
Extremely readable for non-fiction, and unlike many "popular" non-fiction titles it actually includes the footnotes with sources. Would benefit from a more structured bibliography, though.
May 14, 2018
Finally a historian who keeps things factual and doesn't pass moral judgement.
October 10, 2018
Interesting content, tedious delivery.
May 25, 2019
A great overview. Written with panache
If you want an accessible but fluid book on Russian history over the last hundred years this is it. Brilliant
If you want an accessible but fluid book on Russian history over the last hundred years this is it. Brilliant
April 29, 2022
Vast topic covered rather rabidly. Not for those who are not so familiar with the subject. Rather for those like myself who have recently read various deep-dives into different parts of Russian history in this time period. Patches them nicely and I appreciate the chronological approach.
Author is sometimes very neutral and balanced. When it comes to certain people he is very biased. I wouldn't recommend reading after USSR.
Author is sometimes very neutral and balanced. When it comes to certain people he is very biased. I wouldn't recommend reading after USSR.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 61 reviews