Customer Reviews

Great Catherine: The Life of Catherine the Great, Empress of Russia

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

I read Great Catherine as an informal preparation for a class on Russian history. Having finished it, I can't recommend it for anyone interested in her era.

The book does have some strengths. Erickson writes well. She has an abundance of empathy with her subject (which is a strength in a biography but only up to a point). The book does give you a basic timeline of Catherine's life, and may be useful in that regard.

However, the focus of Great Catherine is quite unsatisfactory. The book's central project seems to be redeeming Catherine's reputation from those who claim she was a depraved nymphomaniac. While we've all heard the story involving the horse, I don't think that this is an issue that really has broad historical meaning.

Nonetheless, Great Catherine mires itself in a tiresome recollection of each of Catherine's affairs. Erickson's sympathy for Catherine overrides any inclination she might have had to ask serious and critical questions about how this aspect of Catherine's life may have affected her rule. Whatever she did in the bedchamber, Catherine chose to act in a way that gathered attention and started rumors, making herself the object of ridicule and scorn. The alibi that she was seeking love only holds for her first few flings. The pattern that Erickson sketches is that of someone in the grips of pathological behavior.

Tellingly, Erickson seems to embrace Catherine's explanations for each breakup - which invariably fault the male partner and not the love-starved monarch. Whether or not she was a nymphomaniac, Catherine's behavior was self-destructive. A more inquisitive biography would steer past melodramatic commentary about the monarch's poor impoverished heart and ask how the monarch's personal life impacted her statecraft.

This is a book that is overly obsessed with appearances. Catherine's radiant appearance and demeanor is discussed incessantly. After a while, I was willing to take it on faith that, yes, she was very charming and also happened to look good. Erickson seemingly cannot mention people without mentioning their physical features. The reader is repeatedly reminded how ugly Peter III's mistress was. A similar level of detail is lavished on pageantry, with one dinner or ball only more stunning than its predecessor. Again, the reader - starved of more substantive details - is willing to accept that, yes, the Russian court liked luxurious living.

Very little of the book is devoted to discussions of Catherine's rule as empress and none of that is at all analytical or insightful. As elsewhere, Erickson offers a basic defense of her protagonist. Major acts of policy are not dealt with in detail. Catherine's role in the destruction of the Polish state is covered in a few paragraphs that blandly note that this was commonly approved of at the time. Her policies toward the conquered Poles are not discussed. Nor is the contradiction between her earlier course of seating her favorite on the Polish throne and her later course of outright annexation discussed.

Similarly, the book fails to examine her two wars with the Ottomans in satisfying detail. What glimpses we do get of the wartime Catherine make her seem quite jingoistic and aggressive. How does this reconcile with the tender-hearted reader of philosophy portrayed elsewhere in the book? Moreover, the book never asks hard questions about her war policies - which are particularly important because the second war with the Ottomans dragged on far longer than Catherine would have liked, being complicated by a simultaneous war with Sweden. We do get the detail that bad news from the front impelled Catherine to retreat and read Plutarch in solitude. What a committed, capable monarch!

Another biographer might have at least dealt with Catherine's pivotal decision to confine Jews to the Pale of Settlement - a critical act of policy that set the stage for the pogroms of the following century. Her policy toward minorities is never discussed.

The book's overall examination of Catherine's policies is quite laudatory. This is odd, because it seemed that her efforts to reform the state were constantly frustrated by the nobles and by peasant rebellions. Why nobles and peasants opposed her so much is a question left unanswered. Where Catherine fails, Erickson attributes the failure to all other parties; never to the ambitious empress. If something went wrong, it could only have been the fault of backward peasantry or corrupt nobles. The long term impact of her policies is unexamined.

In sum, I think this is an unsatisfactory biography. It focuses on Catherine's personality at the expense of understanding her actions. At its heart is an unproductive infatuation with its subject that leads the author to skirt around serious questions in favor of endless and repetitive description. I am left convinced that Catherine was indeed a bright, cheery, intelligent woman, but it is left to other authors to determine her real historical significance. Catherine may have been great, but this biography certainly is not.

I was disappointed by Carolly Erickson's biography of Catherine II of Russia. Erickson's excellent biography of Mary Tudor, "Bloody Mary," led me to expect an equivalent level of research and writing for this opus. But Erickson has not duplicated her earlier success.

We are given few precise citations for any incidents, and the sources mentioned at the end are insultingly lean. Erickson has relied heavily on Catherine's own self-serving memoirs, and the resulting lack of objectivity has resulted in a book that should be filed under the category of 'historical fiction.'

Why does this bother me? Erickson's lax approach to footnotes and references is, to me, symptomatic of a growing trend toward carelessly researched and badly written history and biography. (For example: Ronald Reagan's official biographer wrote himself into the text of "Dutch," and invented non-existent characters.)

The Internet is rife with under-researched and inaccurate info-babble, and one often hears the complaint that modern readers are drowning in an ocean of untrustworthy data.

I think that if our technologically-based information age is to thrive, then we must demand a high standard of scholarship from our authors.

History can be both accurately documented and interesting --- one *can* truly instruct *and* delight, as Sir Philip Sidney suggested. (See Antonia Fraser's moving and well-researched biography, "Marie Antoinette: The Journey," for a prime example of a well-written, popular historical biography.)

So, Ms. Erickson, if you want to write historical fiction --- as is the case with "Great Catherine" --- please require your editor to promote your literature in that category. Don't sell your mushy prose under the moniker of 'history' or 'biography.'

I became interseted in Russian history in class and especially in Catherine because she is such an amazing figure. I thought the book was written splendidly, and I admired the work, however, it's focus was purely on her life before becoming empress, which is good, but there is very little about her life after becoming empress. This book seemed to be clearly written by a woman and I don't think that it talked enough about her faults. I do like how it is a very interesting to read, shares lots of small stories, and it doesn't dwell on her sex life like many other books do. Overall I think it is an excellent book, telling an excellent story excellently.

"Great Catherine" is a personal biography of one of the most impressive women of history. Its focus is personal. We learn much about Catherine and her court, but much less about the greater world of European statecraft.

Beginning with her life as a princess in a minor German state with its frequent visits to the Prussian Court in Berlin, we are introduced to a highly intelligent girl. The tale of her winter trip to Russia, "on consignment" as it were as a potential bride for the crown prince, makes us feel the incredibly harsh conditions of travel in those days. Though well received in the Court of the Empress Elizabeth, Catherine had to submit to insults which would not be tolerated in a conventional courtship. The Imperial Court, as described, is almost impossible to understand. It seems as if Court was, essentially, an endless party.

Catherine's relationship with her husband, Grand Duke Peter, is pretty well explained. Peter comes across as an uncouth dullard whom Catherine tolerates as much and for as long as necessary. Among other games, Catherine played the role of a soldier in Peter's toy army, standing at attention for hours, while putting up with Peter's flagrant flirtations with other women. Catherine's position remained in jeopardy while rumors of Peter's plan to divorce Catherine swirled throughout court.

For years Catherine's failure to bear an heir left unfulfilled the primary duty for which she was brought to Russia. Peter's apparent disinterest in his wife and alleged infertility led Empress Elizabeth to encourage Catherine to take an extramarital lover, a liaison which led to the birth of the "heir to the Romanov throne." It strikes me as incredible that the dynasty would be saved by transferring it to an heir who carried no Romanov blood. Such was the logic of the Romanov family.

As Empress Elizabeth's health deteriorated, rumors circulated that Catherine would rule, either as the power behind her husband or as his replacement. A coup which overthrew and killed Peter put Catherine firmly on the throne.

Much of the portion of the book dealing with Catherine's reign narrates her degeneration into an absolute nymphomaniac. The series of lovers is hard to comprehend. It always makes me wonder how the upper classes, who at least had the Christian message available to them, could regularly descend into such debauchery. In any event, Catherine's reputation declined along with her morals and her discretion. Her most prominent paramour, who employed his relationship to achieve personal power and privilege, was Potemkin who, even today, gives his name to sham fronts as "Potemkin Villages."

Catherine chose her role models well. Prominent among them were the Russian giant, Peter the Great, and an Earlier Queen, Elizabeth I of England. Like Peter, Catherine tried to modernize Russia through her correspondence with Russeau and other Enlightenment figures. Just as Peter modernized Russia through the importation of Western technology, Catherine cultivated the reputation as the Empress who put Enlightenment thought into practice. Like Elizabeth, Catherine ruled without a consort

During her reign, Catherine was successful in achieving the territorial extension of her empire.

Overall I enjoyed this introduction to this woman who clearly strode mightily across the stage of European statecraft during her era. Through her strength of character and intelligence, Catherine usurped a dynasty and won the heart of an Empire. The story is told in an interesting and informative way. Both Catherine the Great and this book deserve our attention.

Having read all of Carolly's books, when "Great Catherine" was released, I again was transported to another place and time by the writing of Ms. Erickson. The author has a gift for making history come alive. It's as if you are right there listening in on the political intrigue and court gossip of Catherine's day. She also strips away the unrealistic views of the great monarch passed down by those who observed her from afar. "Great Catherine" is a "great" book and worthy of your time - even if you know nothing of Russian history! Carolly continues to be one of the best historical biographers of our day

History buffs will love this book. The author goes into such detail that I could imagine everything about the characters. It was like reading a scandalous story about a scandalous woman but it happened to be a true story about one of the greatest leaders of our time.

Erickson approaches Catherine the Great as if Russian history were no more complex, scandalous, or mysterious than a Jane Austen novel. She seems to have decided that the empress is a modern woman with whom she would like to be friends, and in order to defend this view, she dismisses any unfriendly characteristic the ruler may have had. According to this book, Catherine the Great was humble, amiable, enlightened, and a welcome addition to any women's tea party whether as a precocious yet modest teenager of a grandmotherly autocrat. Catherine's legendary sexual appetite? An invention of anti-monarchist propaganda. Catherine's possible murder of her husband? Dismissed for lack of evidence. Catherine's oppression of the serfs? Forced on her by her cabinet. New interpretations of historical characters should be defended by arguments and documentation, not by one-sentence dismissals of opposing views.

I must admit to have read better biographies. That being said, I must admit to have enjoyed this one, warts and all. I got the feeling that Ms. Erickson had some sort of agenda throughout the book, but for the life of me, dull witted me, I missed it. I am not at all sure that the sexual romps described here are all that important to Russian History, per se, but hey, they did make interesting reading...sort of. I did give this one four stars as Ms. Erickson is certainly a gifted writer and was able to pull off at least 80 percent of the book. I do not feel that after reading it, one should try passing themselves off as an expert on Russian history, or even poor Catherine, for that matter.

Erickson writes with authority in the realm of history, with an impressive list of books, under her belt, including, but not limited to Bloody Mary, Great Harry, Mistress Anne, Bonnie Prince Charlie, The First Elizabeth as well as many others. She is well respected in her field and uses a variety of primary sources when ever possible. In Great Catherine, Erickson uses primary sources including, but not limited to, Catherine's own memoirs as well as other writings of Catherine. Erickson also took advantage of other sources such as letters as well as dispatches of visiting ambassadors, letters and memoirs of contemporaries, both Russian and European, and contemporary descriptions of Russian society and the Russian court travelers, as well as political and administrative documents. Catherine is presented in a very human light throughout the entire book. In the beginning she is presented as a precocious little girl in the court of King Frederick, saying for all to hear and much to her mother's embarrassment, "Why does the king have such a short jacket? He's rich enough to afford a longer one isn't he?"(p.1) Later, when she was fourteen, and once again in the Court of King Frederick, just before embarking for Russia, to be presented to the Empress Elizabeth to see if she was indeed a suitable bride for Peter the third, Princess Sophie made easy conversation with the King and "amazed the court". (p.32) During her stay in Russia, Sophie became gravely ill and was nursed back to health by the Empress herself. The two became quite close and Sophie soon became the Empress's favorite and upon her indoctrination into the Russian Orthodox Church, was renamed by the Empress after her own mother, and second wife to Peter the Great. She was no longer Princess Sophie, but Grand Duchess Catherine of Russia. The mother-daughter relationship did not last as long as Catherine had hoped, for the Empress the suffered from paranoia and was constantly in a state of anxiety in great fear of being overthrown just as she had overthrown her predecessor. She turned on Catherine and blamed her alone for not having provided an heir and became increasingly cruel to her. It seems that after two years the royal couple had not in fact consummated the marriage. It was rumored that Peter was impotent or sterile, perhaps from the severe bout with the pox that he had suffered. Regardless Catherine knew that an heir was necessary and if she did not provide one then she would become unnecessary and would be disposed of as easily as she was chosen. She became pregnant with a child and was once again in the good graces with Empress Elizabeth. The child was a product of her love affair, with Sergei Saltykov. (p.121) Once he had accomplished the deed, he was sent away from Catherine, just as her son Paul was taken away from her once he was born. It seemed to Catherine that the Empress took great pleasure in her power to arrange the lives of those in her court. Since Catherine and Peter were estranged and he treated her with the utmost cruelty, she felt no guilt in taking a lover. Saltykov was only the fist of many lovers for Catherine and she soon was in an impassioned affair with Gregory Orlov, "a handsome hero of Zorndoff" and a "lieutenant in the Ismailovsky guards", who had four brothers that were also well respected in their regiments, that had political sway with the men in their command.(p.188) It was the Orlov brothers that helped Catherine in a successful a coup de tat against Peter, soon after the death of the Empress Elizabeth. She and Gregory had a son, Alexis Gregorovich, which in Russian means, Alexis son of Gregory. Catherine had a unusually great appetite for the opposite sex, but managed a voracious sex life as well as managing the affairs of Russia both on a national level as well as an international level. She wanted to restore the splendor of the old Byzantine Empire. So single-minded was she that she named her first grandson after the city of Constantinople, she called this her "Greek project" and talked of it "incessantly". (p.335) Through her reading of Voltaire, Diderot as well Montesquieu she "acquired lofty idea's about reform and she did bring some reform to Russia, but was sure to not let it go unchecked. She was truly horrified by the Pugachev Rebellion and quickly put it down and laid aside some of her idea's about reform. Erickson writes in a chronological order that is clear and concise, allowing easy to understanding of the many "plot" changes and diverse "characters" that filled the life of the Princess that would become the Empress of Russia. Erickson's usage of quotes is quite smooth and helps to give the feel of a novel is being read instead of historical biography. Some biographers of Catherine's found her sex life to be a major topic throughout their biographies. While Erickson does explain Catherine's various liaisons' she does not make them her entire focus. Erickson emphasizes the various deeds that made Catherine become known as Catherine the Great, such as her victories over the long undefeated Turks and her ideas on reform. Erickson shows that while under the rule of Catherine the Great, Russia experienced economic abundance as well as political power and stability. Carolly Erickson's version of Great Catherine stands out as a balanced and well-researched book. She supports her work with primary sources, such as Catherine's own memoirs and letters of state. This book is well written in clearly organized fashion. It feels like a roller coaster of a novel with all the intrigue, death, torture, betrayal and power and sex that is required to gain and keep a reader's attention and the great thing about the book, Great Catherine, is that it is all true.

I got interested in Russian history after going to the Soviet Union when I was in 8th grade and then the Ukraine when I was in college. Then there is the fact that my husband is also of Russian descent. I picked Catherine the Great because she had such an influence and ruled for a long time. I can't wait to read Erickson's new book about another Russian royal family.

It is rare for an author of a biography to write such that you think you are reading a fiction romance story, but that is just what Carolly Erickson has done. I was drawn into the story of Catherine and her thoughts and feelings from the first page. From her mother's ambition, to her own ambition, to the murder of her husband, to her many lovers. The story just flows in an awesome fashion. The only dissappointment was that the book seemed to gloss over Catherine's many acomplishments as a ruler. It did seem like the book was mosty about her early life and not enough about her rule.

This book will take a while to get throught, it is not an easy read, but is well worth it to understand the history of a people who are such a mystery to most American people.