Russia under the Last Tsar: Opposition and Subversion 1894-1917 by A. Geifman (review)

Abstract

REVIEWS 353 ago, but she has written an elegant and thoughtful study that will surelygive riseto furtherresearchin the yearsto come. StJohn'sCollege, Oxford STEPHEN LOVELL Geifman,A. (ed.).RussiaUnder the LastTsar.Opposition andSubversion I894-I9 17. Blackwell, OxfordandMalden,MA, 999 Viii + 310 pp. Notes.[50.00; [15.99: $59.95; $27.95. THEpurpose of thiscollection of essaysis to bringto a wider audience some of the latest research on the political history of Russia under Nicholas II. The editor laments the growing tendency to ever greater specialization and the consequent inaccessibilityof new researchto undergraduatesand the literate general public. The focus of the book is largely on the political establishment in the widest sense, i.e. all those engaged in the political process either in opposition to or in supportof the ailing regime. The scope of the book ranges from the main revolutionaryparties through to the constitutionalparties and on to the parties of the extreme right. The final section deals with the police, State Council and the Church. All of the essays are succinct, clearly written and provide intelligent, coherent summariesof their individual topics as one would expect. For the intended audience they provide an accessible, up to date guide to recent research. The political parties are well provided for in this book. All the major ones are covered and some of the more obscure ones. A common thread running through them is a move away from a fixation on dominant personalitieswith whom the individualparties and much of theirhistoryare associated.Instead we are presented with a much more textured picture of factions, shifting alliances, splits and not least cooperation across party boundaries. This is surely to be welcomed, giving a much more nuanced understanding of the workings of the political system. Many of the older stereotypes of rigid divisions,fixedconstituenciesand ideological conflicthave allbeen challenged in recent years. Thus both essayson the Bolsheviksand Mensheviksdraw out the high levels of cooperation between party activists particularly at local level, concluding rightly that doctrinal differences were rooted at least as much in the personalities of the party leaders as in ideology. The Socialist Revolutionaries are shown to have had a strong urban base, resisting the exclusive concentration on the peasantry assigned to them by the Marxist parties. Their gung-ho attitudewas particularlyappealing for those members of the working class who wanted to do rather than talk. This applied even more to the anarchistswho attracted the most restless, to say nothing of the most psychologically disturbed, into their ranks. The essays on the constitutional parties from the Kadets to the Union of the Russian People (although thisdoes seem to be stretchingthe label of constitutionala bit)give a welcome breadthto the coverage of the political parties. It is more difficultto comment on the other essaysbecause of the diversity of their subject matter. Individually they all bring something new to the debate. Particularlyimportant are two essays on the Security Police and the Orthodox Church. The lattermustbe the most understudiedmajorsubjectin 354 SEER, 8o, 2, 2002 the historiography of Imperial Russia and this essay provides an important corrective to the standardcliches of the Church and the clergy as unthinking supportersof the regime. What ismissingfromthe book, however, is any attemptto locate the diverse essaysin a widercontext. A specialistwillhave no troublefittingthe individual essays into such a context, but this is not the audience for whom the work is primarily intended. An introduction giving a broader background to the institutions, personalities and events would surely have been helpful in this respect.As it is, it is hard to see how someone lackingthe specialistknowledge could 'develop their own informed opinions on controversial topics' (p. 2). The choice of essaysand the divisionof the book appearssomewhat arbitrary. Partsone and three dealingwith the revolutionaryand constitutionalpolitical partiesarefinein the breadthand coherence of theirscope. Parttwo, however, labelled 'The Other Adversaries'consistsof two essays,one on the anarchists and one on national minorities. Both essaysare importantin themselves,but they make rather uneasy bedfellows. The final section of the book, 'The Establishment' has essays on the security police, the church and the State Council. The firsttwo are obviouslyimportantsubjects,but is a knowledge of the arcaneworkingsof the StateCouncil reallynecessaryforan undergraduate audience seekinga broadunderstandingof the politicsof late ImperialRussia? In conclusion this book is a useful...