This book was one of the highlights of my recent reads on Russian history. Despite being quite knowledgable about this topic I still felt that I got quite a bit from this book and would recommend it.

An interesting perspective on the Russian revolution, a historical encounter that still has a lot to offer in terms of new approaches.

Exactly what it says it is – a short history of the Russian Revolution. In my opinion Swain has done a good job in summarising some very complex events in relatively few pages, and although it’s a fairly dry account, if an introduction is what you need then this is a comprehensive and accessible book that will fit the bill.

I wanted to start off by saying that I received an ebook copy of this book via netgalley in exchange for my honest review.

A Short History of the Russian Revolution discusses the Russian Revolution that ended the Tsarist monarchy and ushers in the communist regime in Russia during 1917. Now I will 30897399say that someone can easily write a 1000 page book on this topic so when I requested this I knew that some things would be missing. When I did finally get to reading it I laughed a bit when the author himself said, "much has to be left out" because this is such a complex period of history.
I will say that Geoffrey Swain did a good job summing up such a complex event(s). For someone who does not know a lot about the Russian Revolution they will benefit a lot from reading this. Swain knows his topic well, he discusses a wide range of related events and organizations which I find important. A historical event did not happen in a vacuum, society prior to the event let to the Russian Revolution and it impacted a lot of events, policies, and individuals following it as well. I will say that this book is very academic, since this is a short history it is jammed packed with facts. So if you are looking for a non-fiction account that reads like a novel this is not for you. This is more of something you would read if you are interested in learning about the event or need a good resources for research. I wish I had read something like this years ago when I took a class dealing with this topic. On another note I really enjoyed was the short timeline in the beginning of the book. It really showed a quick summary before getting into details.

Overall, I think that this is a good book. I ended up giving it a 3.5/5 stars. This is a great book for those who are studying the Russian Revolution, have a serious interest, an introduction to the topic, and a good resource for research, but it is not something I feel many individuals will pick up a read "for the fun of it". But, to restate what I have said, this really is a well written "short" history of the Russian Revolution.

Book Information

Publisher: I. B. Tauris & Company

Publication Date: March 30th 2017

List Price: Varies - $10.60 on Kindle $29.00 on Nook

ISBN: 9781780767925

Pages: 256 pages

In this volume in the I.B. Tauris Short Histories series the reader gets, in the space of 232 pages, or just over 200 if you exclude footnotes, bibliography and index, not only a punchy summary of Swain’s long research in the field but a distillation of scholarly debate on the Russian Revolution.

The argument is lucid and up front, with Swain stating his twin theses in his introduction, namely, that “as Soviet scholars once argued … the October Revolution represented the culmination of those revolutionary ambitions first articulated by Russia’s masses during the failed 1905 Revolution” and that, “unlike any Soviet scholarship”, the Bolsheviks directed the masses “along an unnecessary path which led to dictatorship and terror”. The latter claim is uncontentious but the first is very contentious indeed.

In seeking to make his case Swain rejects the orthodox western Cold War view, associated with Leonard Schapiro and Richard Pipes, that October 1917 was a Bolshevik coup, and in Trotskyite declamatory mode asserts that his book “will not consign … to the dustbin of history” the contrary views of social historians such as Steve Smith and William Rosenberg on the proletariat, Rex Wade on Red Guards, Alan Wildman on soldiers, Graeme Gill on the peasantry and Moira Donald and Sarah Badcock on women. To this end Swain charts “rising impatience with Kerensky’s Government” on the part of the populace “as October … approached.”

Stated in these terms there is little with which to disagree but there is, however, a world of difference between “impatience” and revolutionary intent. It is clear that by October 1917 the Provisional Government had very few friends and even fewer willing to risk their lives in its defence. It is also possible to argue convincingly that the masses gave their tacit support to the Bolshevik takeover, not least attracted by a false prospectus centred on ‘Peace, Bread, Land’ and ‘All Power to the Soviets’. That does not, however, alter the fact that the seizure of power in October was actually accomplished not by the masses but by an elitist party. After all, the basic rationale of the Bolshevik party was that it had to act in the interests of and on behalf of the proletariat because the latter was prey to a false consciousness which militated against its achieving its historic mission of realizing proletarian revolution.

Swain’s book faces stiff opposition from volumes such as Sheila Fitzpatrick’s ‘The Russian Revolution’ (now in its third edition) and S. A. Smith’s ‘The Russian Revolution: A Very Short Introduction’. In terms of scholarship, brevity and clarity it faces that challenge well but it is in terms of passion that some will feel it falls down, while others feel it has an edge. This reader disagrees with some of Swain’s conclusions but nevertheless admires the vigour with which they’re argued. At the very least the book lives up to the admirable aspiration of the series to which it belongs, never to be bland.

This was a random read for me- having no particular interest in the topic! It's very readable and I found it very informative! In fact this book has made want to read more about it! A really interesting and informative read!

I didn’t enjoy this book, but I am convinced that the problem lies with me. For starters, Geoffrey Swain, a University of Glasgow Professor Emeritus, has likely forgotten more about Russian History than I will ever know. Second, the Russian Revolution is not one of my historical interests, it is merely something I wished to know a bit more about. Finally, while the book is titled “A Short History of the Russian Revolution”, “Short” evidently has a vastly different meaning to a distinguished professor than to a casual reader.

=== The Good Stuff ===

* Swain knows what he is talking about. He has a remarkable fluency and grasp of the causes, background and tactics of the Russian Revolution, and the work is impeccably footnoted and referenced.

* The book tackles a broad range of material. The book examines the growth of labor unions, the increased power of the “reformers”, and finally the specific political and paramilitary tactics of the revolution.

* The author is not afraid to mix in his own opinions. His major theme of the book is that the Russian Revolution was not a natural progression from turn-of-the-century events in Russia. Rather it was more of a clean break, and much more of a revolution in political thinking than evolution. He makes a convincing case, and I would never consider myself able to challenge Swain’s mastery of the subject.

* Swain is able to use his knowledge to highlight issues that I never would have considered. For example, there were two types of labor unions in pre-Revolutionary Russia, those organized geographically and those organized by industry. I would have never picked up on it, but the author points out that the geographically organized labor unions had some very different implications in terms of political power and organizing…something that would have not gone unnoticed in Russia.


=== The Not-So-Good Stuff ===

* The entire book is somewhat like drinking from a firehose. The text bristles with facts, and is fatiguing to read. My knowledge of Russian history is not sufficient to sort out the significant facts from the more mundane. And while I could feel the author making subtle points and comparisons, I worry that most of the slipped right by me.

* Swain’s writing style is what I would call “academic”. Long paragraphs abound, and complicated and wordy sentences are the rule. In short, it is written in the type of English that few of us (especially on this side of the pond) rarely read. I found the book to be a slow read, and it took me several days to work my way through the book- a rarity for me.

=== Summary ===

I really can not fault the book. It is very well written, impeccably referenced, and the authors command of the subject is masterful. But I didn’t enjoy it. From the title, I was expecting an “easy-read”, with fast-flowing text and opinions and observations laid out for me so I didn’t have to work too hard.

The book would probably be a hit with more serious amateur historians, or those with an “academic” expectation. Casual readers such as myself will probably not make it through the book.

As a history graduate I have read a variety of books. My biggest passion is Russian history and I had been looking for a nice concise guide to the Revolution, especially with the 100th anniversary of it coming up.
This was well written, accessible (which can be incredibly hard for History books) and interesting.
I would definitely recommend this to someone who has an interest in the topic but does not want a bulky, heavy read.