PDF Imperial Apocalypse: The Great War and the Destruction of the Russian Empire (The Greater War) by Joshua A. Sanborn in History

Review

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. Great Research on World War I Imperial Destruction; but the Main Argument of Decolonization Falls FlatBy B.C. BoothJoshua Sanborn’s Imperial Apocalypse is centered around World War I and the collapse of the Russian Empire. In this monograph; Sanborn attempts to accomplish two goals: to describe the lives of those on the World War I Russian front; and to study the way that the Russian Empire was “decolonized” (vii). Imperial Apocalypse is something of a hybrid of methodologies through its integration of military history with social and political history. Sanborn criticizes other authors for neglecting to identify the attributes of decolonization apparent in World War I; as well as for the lack of importance that has been placed on the Eastern front by English-speaking historians (vii; 3).The primary argument presented by Sanborn is that World War I was a war about European decolonization; and that the nation-states that emerged in Eastern Europe after the war should be categorized as postcolonial. According to Sanborn; decolonization occurs in four stages: Imperial Challenge; State Failure; Social Disaster; and State-Building (5-7). Imperial Challenge occurs when social movements gain the capacity to challenge the legitimacy and authority of the Imperial government. Sanborn provides an example of this through descriptions of the lives of nurses; doctors; firemen and POWs on the front during the Great Retreat of 1917; who were able to step “into the gap left by the inability of the government and military” (155). State Failure; the second phase of decolonization; is thoroughly developed by Sanborn. This failure is effectively described through his portrayal of the rise of the 1917 Russian Revolution:"Urban women had begun the revolution; and socialist activists had maintained and extended it; but the decisive moments came with the revolt of the garrisons on the streets of Petrograd and the quiet coup at Stavka. The Romanov dynasty had survived three centuries thanks in part to its ability to effectively control its armed forces. The war destroyed the bond between army and monarch. When revolution came; the withdrawal of military support for the throne brought the whole system crashing down." (193)In this passage; Sanborn describes how wartime events begin to undermine the traditional state; leading to its collapse. The third phase of decolonization is Social Disaster; which materializes when the fabrics of civilized society become torn and unrecognizable. Sanborn illustrates this most effectively through his description of the complete disregard of soldiers for civilian authority and norms. Many soldiers became publicly intoxicated and resorted to vulgar acts of theft; rape; and murder (174-75). State-Building; which is the final phase of decolonization; is merely glossed over because; as Sanborn states; it “deserves its own separate study” (258). Despite effectively demonstrating his first three phases of decolonization; Sanborn neglects to ever define the term "decolonization". The reader is left wondering precisely how the phases described relate to his main objective: to make the case that the rise of nation-states in Europe is a product of decolonization.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. This goes beyond most accounts of Russia's defeat and revolution ...By william mathewsThis goes beyond most accounts of Russia's defeat and revolution in 1917. Using notions of a failed state and a collapse of colonial empire; Sanborn shows that the defeat of the army joined an interrelated demise of civil society as retreat led to refugees flooding to the rear; call ups of recruits and labor led to protests; food shortages and inflation led to economic chaos and there was no stopping it in the war. One can only wonder how the Tsar and his entourage talked themselves into this demise; a repeat in many respects of 1905.6 of 6 people found the following review helpful. Military defeat and social chaos and its consequences in Eastern Europe and Russia. Depressing but a very interesting read.By lyndonbrechtThis is an intriguing book. Sanborn writes well; and theorizes in this book that the destruction of the Russian empire represents a kind of decolonialization akin to that of the British or French empires later in the century. One differences of course is that the Russian empire was continental and the colonial areas adjacent to the colonizing state (in 1914 Russian colonized areas included most or all of what is now Finland; Poland; Ukraine; Belarus; the Baltic nations; and a number of states in the Caucasus and Central Asia). I am not entirely convinced that the theory is important; but this is nonetheless a quite good read. A weakness is that the print is dense and not easy on the eyes; and the maps could be more useful--and no illustrations. The lack of illustrations is a bit of an issue because some of the places and events he discusses are not commonly covered in histories on this subject; such as the Muslim rebellion in Central Asia or the large numbers of forced laborers.Stresses and strains produced during the war built up and resulted in the social explosions of 1917 and 1918. Among these were defeats at the hands of Germany; large numbers of prisoners (3 million Russians taken prisoner; and they took 2 million Germans and Austrians); poor leadership; martial law behind the front and in occupied areas that can only be described as brutal; inflation; widespread disgust at the Imperial family; quite heavy casualties; malnutrition (and starvation); and political ineptness at the center. The book is quite good at discussing all of these; although some are mentioned in passing. The book also integrates all this with the ebb and flow of war; although not in great detail.Among other interesting detail is that Sanborn says a number of new social groups came into being. These include POWs (both sides took large numbers of prisoners and in camps these created a kind of society; plus POWs forced to work in industry or agriculture created new relationships with the enemy); refugees (on a very large scale); forced labor; camaraderie in military units and military medical personnel. One chapter looks at the medical personnel; well worth the read; as I have not seen it covered in detail anywhere else.Sanborn describes in some detail areas of near chaos and other important issues. Russian occupation of Austrian Galicia for example was characterized by the Russian assumption that Ukrainians were simply another variety of Russian; and the occupation attempted to force the population to speak Russian; to convert to Russian Orthodoxy (many were Uniate; essentially still Orthodox but agreeing with the Pope in Rome). Russian insensitivity created huge issues. The sections through the book that discuss chaos in areas are depressing--lynching of people with German names; extensive pogroms against Jews; quite large populations forced to migrate (that is; Russians forcing populations to migrate deeper into Russia); robbery; rape and murder rather widespread and gangs of deserters turning to crime. The society was in some ways disintegrating; which is the book's point.