Well, I continue to follow the history of Russia as interpreted by Boris Akunin, contrary to the opinion of some acquaintances who think it’s not worth doing.
This volume is dedicated to two emperors—Alexander I and Nicholas I. It covers the time when Russia was already recognized as a superpower, claiming the right to shape the world’s destiny.
Unfortunately, the closer the author gets to modern times, the more superficial the narrative becomes. And it raises more and more questions.
Even the first chapter suffers from uneven storytelling. Alexander is portrayed with quick strokes from different angles, but before we even get a proper description of his reign. We haven’t been told in detail about the significant events of his time, yet those events (the War of 1812, Austerlitz, etc.) are constantly referenced. We are tossed back and forth across decades, and due to this lack of sequence, a full picture doesn’t quite come together.
Moreover, absolutely nothing is said about society at the time. From our school days, we remember that the entire nobility of that era spoke French. Many aristocratic offspring didn’t even know Russian. If I recall correctly, people admired Napoleon. Yet here, there’s not a single mention of this widespread “Frenchness.” And through this lens, many events would look completely different: a former idol suddenly becoming the enemy.
Very little is said about internal affairs. The Polish uprising is only briefly mentioned in the section on Nicholas I. In the earlier books, there was at least some information about the country and daily life, but now Boris Akunin has decided not to pay attention to this at all. The focus is solely on the personality of the tsar, a few of his close associates (very briefly), and the most significant conflict during his reign. But where’s the culture? Where’s Pushkin? Nothing is mentioned about science. The entire narrative is about the ruler and his politics, as if nothing else was happening in the country.
More and more, the author shifts from being a detached observer to a biased storyteller, discussing only what interests him. Of course, he draws parallels with the present day, but again, only where it aligns with his worldview. I have nothing against Boris Akunin’s beliefs, but from a historical work, one expects a deeper dive and greater objectivity.
Even the language has changed. While earlier, much could be forgiven thanks to the engaging and easy style, the book no longer feels as light.
And I still believe that the experiment with external links via a special app is highly questionable. Either include this information directly in the text or don’t complicate the reader’s experience.
Interest and trust in the series are rapidly declining.
Ma rating: 3/5
[…] The previous volume of The History of the Russian State deeply disappointed me with its superficiality and inconsistency in presenting the material. I even ended my review with the words, “Interest and trust in the series are rapidly declining.” However, I had no intention of stopping my reading of the series. And now, a new volume has been released, focusing on the last rulers of the Russian Empire in the 19th century—Alexander II and Alexander III. […]