I think, many will agree with me, that the History can hardly be called as the Science. First, a description of historical events depends on the feelings of a man who describes them. Even such fine items as the figures in the history can be interpreted in different ways (draw us to different conclusions). Secondly, these findings may be interpreted differently to those who study this history. Because each of us already have some beliefs that we were formed earlier. Nevertheless, when I am studying a topic, I try to explore different points of view. And only after that I make any conclusions for themselves. For those who do the same (exploring different points of view), I would like to mention one interesting modern Russian history - Mark Solonin. Why do I think interesting and worthwhile is he? Now Russia has printed a lot of different books about the WWII and Great Patriotic War. 90% of them in varying degrees are refuting Suvorov, or support him. «Anti-Suvorov», «Lies of Suvorov», «Suvorov's true», «The truest truth of Suvorov» - these are real titles of books, that now are sold in a bookshops. People, who really study the history, archives and documents, are very little. Solonin is the one of them. It is no exaggeration if I say that in Russia, the books of Solonin are discussesed as much as his time in the books of Suvorov. His conclusions are controversial. For example, he believes that the main reasons for the defeat in 1941 is the low morale of the Red Army and the unwillingness to fight for Communism and for Stalin. He has an interesting version of how Stalin was planning to start a war. He wrote a book about a little-known second Russo-Finnish War and etc. Total in Russia, he has published about 10 books. But most importantly - his books and articles contain actual information, taken from historical records. And this information are very much and it is useful for those, who really interested in history of this period. As far as I know at the moment books of Solonin translated and published in Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Czech Republic and Finland. There were some articles in German. I think that soon they will also appear in English. There is a link to the official website of the historian: http://www.solonin.org/ Unfortunately, there is only a small part in English (his biography and bibliography). Mark Solonin. Historian's personal webpage.Mark Solonin And some more - in German. Mark Solonin. Historiker. Personale Webseite.Solonin (de)
Hi IRu, I hate it too when people try to rewrite history to fit their own needs. This revisionist stuff makes my blood boil. Whats next/ are they going to slander Alexander Nevsky? Take care--Carl.
It is not so much people rewriting history as people trying to find the truth. Soviet historians, press, film makers, artist and so on had to portray the events of WW2 according to the official Party line. Most of what was written was a lot of BS. I’m not saying Suvorov, Solonin and others are 100% right, but they are closer to the truth than Communist Party version of events. I’m now reading Solonin’s book about destruction of Red Air Force in summer of 41. He rebuffs the official version that: “Germans beat us because our planes were old and made of wood and paper.”
The trouble is, is that if you say something long enough and often enough? the people will start to believe that that is the truth and nothing else.
I fully agree that even now some Russian historians describe the events of WWII is not objectively. The main reasons for this: 1. Stereotypes of the communist past. Many modern Russian historians have grown with the communist beliefs and continue to believe in them. 2. Replacement research to populism. These people do not work in the archives. They come up with all kinds of nonsense, or reprint them from each other. 3. Pressure or various limitations from the state and government. That's why I recommend Mark Solonin here. At least in my opinion he is deprived of the communist beliefs and he really works hard with archival documents. But the conclusions you still need to do yourself.
:rifl: Wiseacre ;-)) :lol::lol: Hey IRu/ Are you familiar with Alexander Pyl'Cyn? and his book: Penalty Strike. I got his book last year and thought it was marvelous to finally get to read something from a Soviet Officers point of view.
Hi, Carl Yes, I have heard about Aleksandr Pyltsyn. During the WWII he served as a career officer in a penal battalion and after war he has written several books about it. Yesterday I bought the book "Penalty Strike". I will read this book in the near future and, if you might be interested, I'll write my opinion about it. Thank you for reminding me about this author.
Hi Iru/ quite welcome and I think you will really enjoy that book. I am always interested in you opinions of movies and books. Also, if you know of some movies or books to recommend me reading or watching? please let me know. I currently forget the exact title of a 20 volumn series that is being put out that is about all Soviet Rifle Divisions from 1917 to 1957. I have the first 3 vols and thought the info they gave was about as good as any Westerner can get. If I ever get me a new laptop computer? ill gladly start posting the info in these books. Each volumn covers I think 25 Infantry Divisions. I ran into a snag or two when doing a bit of research between those books and somehting in Pyl'Cyns book. I dont remember what it was off-hand but, the info between both books did not even up. Oh and, if you know the names of the other books that Pyl'Cyn wrote? please let me know as I wouldnt mind reading them if any others are in English?
Carl; Thanks for the tip on Pyl'Cyn-on it's way right now. An ebook; Moscow 1941: A City and Its People ... - Google Books JEffinMNUSA
IRU; I look forward to Mark Solonin's English translations. We in the West grew up with our share of fairy tales about WWII also-ie. the chief among them being that the West could have defeated Hitler without the USSR. JeffinMNUSA
Hi Jeff, quite welcome. Im also looking forward to more translated books, especially any others by Pyl'cyn. Penalty Strike was so good that you felt like you were there experiancing what he did.
So Russia has it’s very own David Irving? Suvorov doesn’t just strike me as just revisionist, he seems like an outright traitor.
The same is in Russia, Jeffin Here few people know how many weapons and materials were delivered to us from the U.S. and the UK. I am myself very interested to learn about military operations in Africa, Italy, France and the Pacific Ocean. About Solonin. I wrote him a letter, which asked about the timing of the issuance of his books in English. He replied that it depends on the publisher. While, I can only give a link to his web-site. There are several articles wrote by him http://www.solonin.org/en/book_june-23-m-day
If a Historian is using the scientific 'method' (searching, watching, checking, objectivly resulting) then you can call History a 'Science'. On the other hand a Historian is a product of his family, his teachers, of his believings, generally of the society inside he grew up. So it is very difficult to be objective. An information also, can be read in 2-3 different and sometime opposite ways. For example Solonin is writing that 800 planes were destroyed from the existing 8.600 airplanes. Were the 800 planes the only well prepared for batlle and they tried to stop the intruder and the balance were the slow ones the old ones, the weak ones, so there was no meaning to be engaged? or the 800 airplanes were the old ones, the weak ones the slow ones and Russian for some reason kept the better planes for later action? In order to be closer to truth, the Historian should check the types of the planes destroyed and the types of the one remained so to try to figure out what was happened. Maybe one of the most important reasons of the Russian defeats in the beginning of the 'Barbarossa' was the lack of well trained and experience officers in the Red Army as the brilliant Tukhachevsky and 14 other generals from the total 16 ones and thousands other officers were executed 4 years before the war.
