The Prince of Princes: The Life of Potemkin

Rating:
Summary: Revises the standard view on Potemkin
Review: If all you knew about Potemkin was the fact that he built fake villages for Catherine the Great, then this book will tell you a lot more. In fact, the author goes into the origin of that particular myth, and shows it to be false, and propagated by enemies of Potemkin, and repeated, uncritically, by subsequent historians.

There is no question that Sebag-Montefiore is biassed in favor of his hero - this is not an objective biography, and doesn't try to be, or claim to be so. Some people might think that the author of a historical biography should be an invisible, impartial figure, but you don't get that with this book. You hear a lot about the author's travels to research his subject, which contrasts with the dry style of more "serious" historians, who never leave the library. Any author of a biography is likely to be biassed, so why not be upfront about it?

This is a very readable book - there are lots of anecdotes, and a lot of quotes directly from the correspondance between Potemkin and Catherine. The book makes a direct claim that the two were married, in a secret ceremony, and even describes the ceremony, even though the author cheerfully admits the lack of evidence for this.

The really good thing about this book is that most of it draws on primary sources, many of which have not been available before, and the author brings these, and their authors to life. This means that it is a ground-breaking historical account, and popular history at the same time. Like all good biographies, it teaches you a lot about the historical context, so you will learn a lot about how Catherine was able to defeat the Turks, and significantly expand the size of the Russian empire. Seeing Catherine through the eyes of her lover's biographer is a new slant on a subject who has had a lot written about her.

I really enjoyed this book. It's popular history that is both historical (in terms of its academic integrity, and its research) and popular (in terms of its interesting subject, and lively writing style).

Rating:
Summary: Great fun to read
Review: Potemkin was a Russian statesman who exercised power in the reign of Catherine the Great. He had a position of importance for about 17 years in the last part of the 17th Century.

He was associated with the "Southern Strategy". In the early years of the 17th Century Peter the Great had modernized the Russian army, organized society in such a way that it could support a standing army and run a centralized state in a modern way. Peter had defeated the Swedes and thrown them out of Russia. His campaigns in the south were not successful and he was forced to sign a humiliating peace with Persia.

Potemkin expanded Russia to the South. Detaching the Crimea from the Turkish Empire and making it an independent state was the first step. Later it was annexed as was some of the territories in the Caucasus and Besserabia. Not only did Potemkin add these territories to Russia but he made them what they are today. These areas had been largely pastoral areas dominated by the Turks and sparsely populated. Potemkin filled these areas with peasant farmers and they became some of the richest agricultural areas in Russia. He also designed and built cities such as Odessa and Sebastapool. One thing which was important to Russia's history over the next hundred years was that he developed good relationships with the Cossacks and in fact created the Kuban Cossacks. As a result the Cossacks became one of the pillars of Czarism.

In the 19th Century Russia was one of the largest and most successful empires. Potemkin is one of its architects and laid the basis for its relentless eastward expansion. He is remarkable in many ways. A good deal of what he achieved was through diplomacy. His skills and interests were greater than that of a normal military leader and involved setting up the infrastructure of a nation state.

This book is something that could not fail to be interesting because of its subject matter. The writer however tends to focus on the dramatic and scandalous parts of Potemkin's life to make a dramatic story somewhat at the expense of the historical narrative.

Catherine the Great was married to a Czar who was probably insane. It seems that her son was the product of an affair. Shortly after her husband came to the thrown she became fearful that she would be divorced. She conspired with two brothers called the Orlovs to overthrow her husband and later murder him and to make her the Czar.

In her forties Catherine had an affair with Potemkin who was a very minor noble in a guards restaurant. He had shown bravery in battle and continually flirted with Catherine and threw himself at her feet. She succumbed and they were lovers for a while and probably were married secretly. His power and office derive from her trust in him. After their affair ended he continued to exercise power in the South of Russia.

The book tends to push the romance between Potemkin and Catherine to the fore and to discuss the history as something of an afterthought. It seems designed at selling to a larger market than normal academic histories. Despite all this it is an interesting work both from the point of view of discussing Catherine and also documenting the rise of the Russian empire.

Rating:
Summary: Partisan Biography Runs Aground
Review: Unlike physics, writing biography or history is often an exercise in opinion. It gains credibility by being informed of the historical record, but affairs are frequently so complex, and knowledge so incomplete, that opinion may prevail by default. Unfortunately, opinion can also prevail in the presence of substantial fact, and this seems to be the case with Sebag Montefiore's "Prince of Princes: The Life of Potemkin." This prodigious work with over a hundred pages of references and notes, many citing sources never before seen, makes a contribution by bringing these to light. On the other hand, it shares with its useless 1938 predecessor, George Soloveytchik's "Potemkin: A Picture of Catherine's Russia", an overwhelming hero worship of its subject. This leads to an intolerant opinion and dismissal of material not supporting the author's love. Thus, unfavorable material on Potemkin is out of hand labeled, and often with some emotion, "untrustworthy," "prejudiced," "venomous," containing "weasel words," etc.

Sadly, Montefiore's efforts are compromised by incomplete and out-of-context quotations of Prince de Ligne that self-servingly change the meaning to the opposite of its original intent. For example, the author writes on page 382, "Ligne knew 'very well what legerdemain tricks are', but the achievements were real." However, the quotation he cites continues, "...for example, the empress, who cannot rush about on foot as we do, is made to believe that certain towns for which she has given money are finished; whereas they are often towns without streets, streets without houses, houses without roofs, doors, or windows." One hopes that this was a mere oversight, but the reader is helpless to tell and is inevitably left wondering about the reliability of other citations.

There is also confusion of the Lake Ladoga/Upper Volga cruise of 1785 with the celebrated 1787 inspection trip south. The author has the English Ambassador Fitzherbert composing on the Volga trip some tricky verse when in fact the incident took place two years later on the Dnieper River, and Count de Segur was the impromptu poet.

There are many sweeping statements presented as undisputed fact such as the French and Indian War "...set off the events that would lead to the Seven Years War..." (p. 35), the Russian army brought the Prussian army to the "very edge of destruction" during the Seven Years War (p. 40), the Black Sea fleet was well- made (p. 370) and then refutes himself in footnote 33 on page 589, etc. Most historians would take issue with every one of these statements and with dozens more as well.

The author seems to be confused about the issue behind the "Potemkin Villages" story. The Potemkin Village controversy was not over the achievements in the Crimea and lower Ukraine seen during the land portion of Catherine's 1787 journey (though these too were questioned) but over what was seen earlier during the Dnieper River float. It was the "villages" seen from the river that were alleged to be "fake," (though once again questions were raised about achievements elsewhere as well,) and contrary to advertising claims on the book's dust jacket, the work is completely unpersuasive in laying the Potemkin Village matter to rest.

The book also frequently seems to loose focus with numerous biographical asides of secondary characters, some quit lengthy.

There are just too many issues with this book from weak editing to questionable facts, injudicious hero worship, outright errors of fact, an almost Russia partisanship and defensiveness, a peculiar view of history, etc., to make it acceptable. Alas, a trustworthy biography of Gregory Potemkin remains yet to be written.

Rating:
Summary: Wisdom derived from a flawed work
Review: Yes, this biography is flawed. And anyone who abjures imperfect work should avoid this book. But if you care to learn how one man and one woman's passion enlightened and modernized the Russian empire, you should read this book and accept it for what it is--an insightful psychobiography rather than history.

Montefiore documents the frenetic and flawed love between Catherine, Tzarina of the Russian Empire and Potemkin. He shows how their love bound and locked their souls together in a dance played out through letters that left each no less desperate, but somehow more complete. Catherine tutored the younger Potemkin, mentored his fine mind, and then recognized her protege-lover first as her equal and then as unparalleled founder of the empire that she could adeptly run, but never of her own device create.

Also, Montefiore shows how Potemkin looms as freethinker over the feudal landscape of 18th century Russia. Not through courage or moral principle did he embrace new ideas and pariahs but rather through audaciousness. Potemkin thirsted for new experiences. He craved proximity to ancient truths, and to their exponents--whether they be Rabbis, Mullahs, ArchBishops or defrocked Priests. And his actions transformed that landscape as he built cities, ships, whole provinces seemingly with nothing but the power of his own will.

I am left with a question for the author. What role did self-preservation, and obsession to protect Catherine play in Potemkin's unbounded efforts to extend the Russian empire southward? Did his actions protect his sovereign from intrique and possible deposition? Was he driven by vision or necessity?