Scan barcode
mahorn's review against another edition
3.0
Very interesting but I found myself disappointed in the second half. While Gregory Potemkin is an absolutely incredible person, the book gets too focused on his accomplishments and sidelines Catherine the last couple chapters. Much more could have been said about her life and achievements with that space.
mcbibliotecaria's review against another edition
4.0
This like other popular biographies, reads like a novel. It was easy to get in to, it shifted to a YA book to a romance to a political thriller, although it started to lose me at the end because it became too convoluted with all the switching of countries allegiances towards the end of the 18th century. I feel it focused on the woman, and not the legend. She had good motivations and has left an impression on the history of Russia not unlike Victoria's England, but her list of accomplishments seems to be simply to be well intentioned. She was disgusted by the serfdom that was still in place but once it was determined that it would leave her un popular she tossed the idea of human rights to the side. She overcame her witless husband to ascend the throne, but I feel Peter, her cuckold husband, has some serious mental deficiencies and this book was not at all sympathetic to his person. She craved power, always, and was very loose with her money and favorites. She brought culture to Russia, to pull it out of the shadow of an enlightened Europe, but in name only, not practice.
jkveen's review against another edition
3.0
Massie does a great job bringing Catherine the Great to life, at times I forgot it was non fiction.
forgottensecret's review against another edition
5.0
'My natural pride made the idea of being miserable intolerable to me. I used to say to myself that happiness and misery depend on ourselves. If you feel unhappy, rise above it and act so that your happiness may be independent of all outside events.'
Enmeshed in the monarchy of Russia, only 200 years after Ivan IV became the first Tsar of Russia (compare that to the longevity of King Aethelstan as the first king of England in 927 AD- that great Anglo-Saxon ruler), we have a Prussia born princess who would be perhaps Russia's greatest monarch and its longest reigning monarch. Why does she hold that title?
Born Sophie Friederike Auguste von Anhalt-Zerbst-Dornburg, she produced some of the greatest defeats for the Ottoman Empire, greatly expanded the Russia Empire through the partition of Poland, winning battles against the Ottomans and additionally created new cities. Inspired by her correspondences with Voltaire, Diderot - who came to visit her - she was indeed an Enlightened ruler. Although similar to Franklin D Roosevelt during his tenure as president where although morally he knew of the injustice that African Americans faced, he couldn't act due to needing to choose winnable battles with the Southern members of congress. Similarly, Catherine needed the support of the nobility, and serfdom could not recede in any real way because of this.
Tending towards needing companionship, again like FDR, she often had a favourite at court. The most important was Gregory Potemkin who was a great individual in his own right, but with who Catherine was unable to have stability due to his insecure temperament. Her letters to him are filled with attempts to sooth his ego, to reassure him of her love towards him. These are some of the most evocative letters I've had the chance to read, but yet he could not really believe it. Another man who was important, was Gregory Orlov, one of the brothers who helped to dethrone her husband Peter III, the Frederick II idoliser, who although was supposed to be the king of Russia, nevertheless maintained a deep love for all things Prussian and in particular Frederick who he eventually met. In parallel, another claimant to the throne was Ivan VI,
She first went to Russia when she was 14 along with her colourful mother Johanna, who in concert with Frederick II and Empress Elizabeth (the daughter of Peter the Great) arranged the match with another Prussian Peter III, whom she would marry. Unlike the congenial atmosphere in say Gilmore Girls, Johanna was eventually sent back to Prussia for acting as a spy for Frederick II and just interfering in Catherine's life.
Let's talk about Peter, Peter the Great's only surviving grandson. This is the type of gentleman that is so far removed from the seductions and suaveness of a royal, that it almost feels like he is some zitty American high school student with a tendency for ill-decision making. He played with toys in the bedroom rather than romance his new wife. This can be somewhat explained by his contact with Otto Brummer who interacted with him harshly, not offering the compassion of a teacher or as human being. This could be the reason for his immaturity and lack of growth. In contrast, Catherine had a strong work ethic, installing herself in Russia by studying the Russian language, 'she begged that her lessons be prolonged'. I again feel kinship with this Prussian for the desire to give everything to a task; although she supersedes me: 'She began rising from bed at night, taking a book and a candle, and walking barefoot on the cold stone floor, repeating and memorising Russian words' She won affection from the Russian people by persisting in this even when she was near death!
In the age of Western choices, where we seek fairy dust in finding 'the one', Catherine was much more restricted in that sense: 'As my wedding day came nearer, I became more melancholy, and very often I would weep without quite knowing why. My heart predicted little happiness, ambition alone sustained me. In my innermost soul there was something that never for a moment allowed me to doubt that soon or later I would become the sovereign Empress of Russia in my own right'. I suppose one can endure hardship if the reward is kept in the forefront of the mind, despite the disparity in personality: 'Never did two minds resemble each other less. We had nothing in common in our tastes or our ways of thinking.'
Elizabeth was a curious woman, who both acted as a mother figure to Catherine, took her first born then was inconsistent with her: 'She cared immensely about what she wore and refused to put on a gown more than once; on her death, fifteen thousand robes and dresses were supposedly discovered in her closets and wardrobes.'
Given their lack of intimacy, Sergei Saltykov, the first of her twelve lovers gave her a child, Peter. One of the reasons for Peter's lack of consummation of the marriage may be an undiagnosed phimosis condition, which is symptomatic of a tightening of the foreskin.
In 1762, Empress Elizabeth died and Peter came to power, where he poorly executed the role, as one would predict for a man so detached from Russian interests. Within six months, an alienated Imperial Guard revolted and proclaimed Catherine the Empress. Through this opportunity Catherine had her husband arrested, and he was killed by Alexei Orlov eight days later while imprisoned. The conclusion of the author is that Catherine had no participation in his death.
Catherine reigned until 1796 following Montesquieu’s “benevolent despot” ideal. She even wrote a document called the Nakas in French, which she worked on for two-three hours a day for two years.
This was her attempt at 'a set of guiding principles upon which she wished the new laws to be founded'. This document 'deals with an immense range of political, judicial, social and economic questions. It discusses what Russia was at that moment, and what it should be; how society ought to be organised and how government and the administration of justice ought to be conducted.'
It drew heavily on Montesquieu. During her 34 years reign, she dealt with wars against the Ottoman Empire and others, rebellions like the imitation of her dead husband by Pugachev, and the tearing up of Europe by the French Revolution.
For some of her letters to Potemkin, my heart leaped:
'Peace, my friend. I stretch out my hand to you. Do you take it?
'we both need peace so our thoughts can settle down and become bearable, or else we'll up like balls in a game of tennis.'
'My Lord and Dear Husband! Why do you give greater authority to your lively imagination than to the proof which speak in your wife's favour? ... Have I changed my tune, could you be unloved?'
I couldn't help but connect to the love in Catherine's heart for Potemkin; but to also see the deep-seated insecurity in Potemkin which you see smudged in posts on the internet.
Overall, this is one of my favourite biographies which glitters with nostalgia when I reflect on it.
Enmeshed in the monarchy of Russia, only 200 years after Ivan IV became the first Tsar of Russia (compare that to the longevity of King Aethelstan as the first king of England in 927 AD- that great Anglo-Saxon ruler), we have a Prussia born princess who would be perhaps Russia's greatest monarch and its longest reigning monarch. Why does she hold that title?
Born Sophie Friederike Auguste von Anhalt-Zerbst-Dornburg, she produced some of the greatest defeats for the Ottoman Empire, greatly expanded the Russia Empire through the partition of Poland, winning battles against the Ottomans and additionally created new cities. Inspired by her correspondences with Voltaire, Diderot - who came to visit her - she was indeed an Enlightened ruler. Although similar to Franklin D Roosevelt during his tenure as president where although morally he knew of the injustice that African Americans faced, he couldn't act due to needing to choose winnable battles with the Southern members of congress. Similarly, Catherine needed the support of the nobility, and serfdom could not recede in any real way because of this.
Tending towards needing companionship, again like FDR, she often had a favourite at court. The most important was Gregory Potemkin who was a great individual in his own right, but with who Catherine was unable to have stability due to his insecure temperament. Her letters to him are filled with attempts to sooth his ego, to reassure him of her love towards him. These are some of the most evocative letters I've had the chance to read, but yet he could not really believe it. Another man who was important, was Gregory Orlov, one of the brothers who helped to dethrone her husband Peter III, the Frederick II idoliser, who although was supposed to be the king of Russia, nevertheless maintained a deep love for all things Prussian and in particular Frederick who he eventually met. In parallel, another claimant to the throne was Ivan VI,
She first went to Russia when she was 14 along with her colourful mother Johanna, who in concert with Frederick II and Empress Elizabeth (the daughter of Peter the Great) arranged the match with another Prussian Peter III, whom she would marry. Unlike the congenial atmosphere in say Gilmore Girls, Johanna was eventually sent back to Prussia for acting as a spy for Frederick II and just interfering in Catherine's life.
Let's talk about Peter, Peter the Great's only surviving grandson. This is the type of gentleman that is so far removed from the seductions and suaveness of a royal, that it almost feels like he is some zitty American high school student with a tendency for ill-decision making. He played with toys in the bedroom rather than romance his new wife. This can be somewhat explained by his contact with Otto Brummer who interacted with him harshly, not offering the compassion of a teacher or as human being. This could be the reason for his immaturity and lack of growth. In contrast, Catherine had a strong work ethic, installing herself in Russia by studying the Russian language, 'she begged that her lessons be prolonged'. I again feel kinship with this Prussian for the desire to give everything to a task; although she supersedes me: 'She began rising from bed at night, taking a book and a candle, and walking barefoot on the cold stone floor, repeating and memorising Russian words' She won affection from the Russian people by persisting in this even when she was near death!
In the age of Western choices, where we seek fairy dust in finding 'the one', Catherine was much more restricted in that sense: 'As my wedding day came nearer, I became more melancholy, and very often I would weep without quite knowing why. My heart predicted little happiness, ambition alone sustained me. In my innermost soul there was something that never for a moment allowed me to doubt that soon or later I would become the sovereign Empress of Russia in my own right'. I suppose one can endure hardship if the reward is kept in the forefront of the mind, despite the disparity in personality: 'Never did two minds resemble each other less. We had nothing in common in our tastes or our ways of thinking.'
Elizabeth was a curious woman, who both acted as a mother figure to Catherine, took her first born then was inconsistent with her: 'She cared immensely about what she wore and refused to put on a gown more than once; on her death, fifteen thousand robes and dresses were supposedly discovered in her closets and wardrobes.'
Given their lack of intimacy, Sergei Saltykov, the first of her twelve lovers gave her a child, Peter. One of the reasons for Peter's lack of consummation of the marriage may be an undiagnosed phimosis condition, which is symptomatic of a tightening of the foreskin.
In 1762, Empress Elizabeth died and Peter came to power, where he poorly executed the role, as one would predict for a man so detached from Russian interests. Within six months, an alienated Imperial Guard revolted and proclaimed Catherine the Empress. Through this opportunity Catherine had her husband arrested, and he was killed by Alexei Orlov eight days later while imprisoned. The conclusion of the author is that Catherine had no participation in his death.
Catherine reigned until 1796 following Montesquieu’s “benevolent despot” ideal. She even wrote a document called the Nakas in French, which she worked on for two-three hours a day for two years.
This was her attempt at 'a set of guiding principles upon which she wished the new laws to be founded'. This document 'deals with an immense range of political, judicial, social and economic questions. It discusses what Russia was at that moment, and what it should be; how society ought to be organised and how government and the administration of justice ought to be conducted.'
It drew heavily on Montesquieu. During her 34 years reign, she dealt with wars against the Ottoman Empire and others, rebellions like the imitation of her dead husband by Pugachev, and the tearing up of Europe by the French Revolution.
For some of her letters to Potemkin, my heart leaped:
'Peace, my friend. I stretch out my hand to you. Do you take it?
'we both need peace so our thoughts can settle down and become bearable, or else we'll up like balls in a game of tennis.'
'My Lord and Dear Husband! Why do you give greater authority to your lively imagination than to the proof which speak in your wife's favour? ... Have I changed my tune, could you be unloved?'
I couldn't help but connect to the love in Catherine's heart for Potemkin; but to also see the deep-seated insecurity in Potemkin which you see smudged in posts on the internet.
Overall, this is one of my favourite biographies which glitters with nostalgia when I reflect on it.
musicsaves's review against another edition
5.0
FIRST LINE REVIEW: "Prince Christian Augustus of Anhalt-Zerbst was hardly distinguishable in the swarm of obscure, penurious noblemen who cluttered the landscape and society of politically fragmented eighteenth-century Germany." But the absolutely amazing woman he helped bring into this world eventually soared above that cluttered landscape to become the most distinguished of all European monarchs. And in Massie's masterful hands, her story plays out with us standing at her elbow, witnessing the fascinating events, intrigues, victories and challenges that come her (and our) way. I didn't want the journey to end and now want to return to Russia!
kshilvock's review against another edition
2.0
Okay book, wonderfully written. It was just so depressing to read! Everyone is screwing everyone over, no compassion, being completely selfish and ruled by the power of power itself. Just got really frustrated with the book and how the author seemed to agree with the characters' actions. Made him seem a little cynical and power-happy himself. Just an observation. Overall: wonderfully written with, alas, a deeply sickening history as the story.