Customer Reviews

Nicholas II: Last of the Tsars

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

I found this book to be one of the worst I've read about Nicholas II. Blatant errors make it obvious the author didn't do his research, which in turn makes it difficult to take anything "new" he comes up with seriously. All in all, I'd say this book is *extremely* unreliable, and lacks any other special qualities to make it a worthwhile read. There have been any number of reliable, interesting, entertaining biographies of Nicholas II written-- I advise you don't waste your time with this one.

The fact that it was written by an "eminent historian" does not make up for the serious weak points this book possesses. Its description misleads the reader into believing the book will contain personal, detailed accounts of the last Tsar's family life, but all it contains are common general knowledge statements. What Ferro does seem to concentrate on is Nicholas's political life--particularly its failures. He seems to nitpick at the Tsar's every weak point, and the only thing Ferro does well is unfairly bash the character of this most noble emperor. This book is bland; it reads like a boorish supermarket tabloid--and just as trashy

Not only does the book have BIG print, few pages, and lots of fluff, it is both historically and culturally incorrect. It surmises that the Revoution was inevitable due to the actions of the ruling Tsar - WRONG. The Revolution occurred because of Lenin and WWI. In 1913, Russia's economy was fastest growing in Europe. She had liberalized and was coming into the modern world. Lenin's propaganda railed at military losses when in fact she was successful on 3 of the 4 fronts where she was engaged.

The section headings, "Rule by Rasputin", "Nicholas rejects the Russians", etc says a lot about the historicity of this work. It does not even explain the Revolution well and how a motley crew of foreign-trained malcontents took control of the vast Russian Empire. For a good work ont he subject of the Romanons get NICHOLAS and ALEXANDRA - excellent work.

If you think that Trotsky, Lenin and Stalin were the best products of the 20th Century, then this is the book for you. Those folk turned the world into hell but since Ferro is a "socialist" what they did was natural and good. NII's greatest failing was not liberalizing in time in WWI but Russia, and the world, did not deserve the incredible evil that replaced him. And, no, the peasants, workers and army did not benefit either, unless one thinks that the Russian civil war and the gulag were fun times and places.

A rather basic biography. Nothing terribly new. One major problem though. Page 27 says that Nicholas didn't want to marry Alexandra, but his parents wanted him to marry her. From Nicholas' own diaries we know this to be untrue. A (somewhat) redeeming quality is that it's the only book (besides the letters of Nicholas and his mother, Marie) that I have been able to find out anything about the Greek/Turkish conflict in. I need that information for my independent study.

It began with Nicholas II (for a paragraph) then went to his great-great grandfather, then to his great grandfather and then to his grandfather and then to his father. You get all this before they even mention anything about the guy the biography is about! I felt as if i was reading a fiction story - all the discription of each event (like the hunting.) There was no biographical facts - it's all stories.

This seems to be some sort of revolutionary/socialist polemic, which I guess is an interesting viewpoint. Yet, the facts are garbled and often blatantly incorrect and the writing style is less than engaging. Pass on this unless you find it in a garage sale for some loose change.