What do you think?
Rate this book
Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century – And After
Covering all key Eastern European states and their history right up to the collapse of communism, this second edition of Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century – And After is a comprehensive political history of Eastern Europe taking in the whole of the century and the geographical area. Focusing on the attempt to create and maintain a functioning democracy, this new edition Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century – And After provides an accessible introduction to this key area which is invaluable to students of modern and political history.
552 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1994
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
October 23, 2026
Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century – and After adapts a university course by the area historian R.J. Crampton. It is based on an old-school approach to teaching that puts an emphasis on detailed knowledge combined with a general understanding of this troubled region. Intended for the Western public, it is useful also for readers from this region, where understanding is often limited by ideology and passion. I do recommend it to anyone interested in contemporary affairs.
With editions in 1994 and 1997, the factual synthesis achieved by R.J. Crampton is impressive. It even includes the famous 1969 hockey game between Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union, during the latter's invasion in response to the Prague Spring. I will focus this review on the period after the Second World War, to which half of the book is dedicated. After 1945, the Soviet Union imposed Communist regimes upon all Eastern Europe, except Yugoslavia and Albania where complex local conditions led to the same result.
The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 was compared to a flame that lightened the bleak field of totalitarianism by the philosopher Hannah Arendt, an assertion that humans have freedom against structural constraints. R.J. Crampton shows how a spontaneous and fast event led to the temporary collapse of a Stalinist system thought to be unbreakable and loyal to the Soviet Union. It was violently repressed: the AVH agents (the equivalent of KGB or Securitate) shot the protesters, some were killed in return, while the Soviet invasion led to intense street fighting in Budapest, and around 3,000 people died. The flirting with Moscow of the recently dismissed Orbán regime is difficult to comprehend with this background.
R.J. Crampton explains that the Romanian Communists benefited from the Soviet failures during the Hungarian Revolution. Moscow accepted some degree of local variation, as long as the regime was upheld, and the states remained in the Warsaw Pact. The Red Army withdrew in 1958, and the new leader since 1965, Nicolae Ceaușescu, deepened the politics of autonomy that eventually failed, due to the limits of the system in a small country. Contrary to many Eastern European countries, the 1989 Revolution was violent, yet the debate goes on about the perpetrators because the repressive apparatus mostly survived and some are holding positions today.
Nationalism defeated Communism in Eastern Europe, but it remained the region’s main weakness, making it vulnerable to outside interference and domestic poverty. R.J. Crampton defines this space by focusing on the satellite countries that lived under Soviet domination, this Cold War focus being the book’s main drawback. The Russian aggressions against Ukraine of 2014 and 2022 and other recent events have brought back Eastern Europe as a distinct area with an expanded sphere, so this history is relevant and useful. Thus the recurrent identarian and political question: does it have coherence or is it just a reflection of imperialism?
Additional sources
Hannah Arendt, “Epilogue, reflections on the Hungarian Revolution”, in The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1948/2001, (Humanitas, 2nd Romanian edition, 2006).
With editions in 1994 and 1997, the factual synthesis achieved by R.J. Crampton is impressive. It even includes the famous 1969 hockey game between Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union, during the latter's invasion in response to the Prague Spring. I will focus this review on the period after the Second World War, to which half of the book is dedicated. After 1945, the Soviet Union imposed Communist regimes upon all Eastern Europe, except Yugoslavia and Albania where complex local conditions led to the same result.
The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 was compared to a flame that lightened the bleak field of totalitarianism by the philosopher Hannah Arendt, an assertion that humans have freedom against structural constraints. R.J. Crampton shows how a spontaneous and fast event led to the temporary collapse of a Stalinist system thought to be unbreakable and loyal to the Soviet Union. It was violently repressed: the AVH agents (the equivalent of KGB or Securitate) shot the protesters, some were killed in return, while the Soviet invasion led to intense street fighting in Budapest, and around 3,000 people died. The flirting with Moscow of the recently dismissed Orbán regime is difficult to comprehend with this background.
R.J. Crampton explains that the Romanian Communists benefited from the Soviet failures during the Hungarian Revolution. Moscow accepted some degree of local variation, as long as the regime was upheld, and the states remained in the Warsaw Pact. The Red Army withdrew in 1958, and the new leader since 1965, Nicolae Ceaușescu, deepened the politics of autonomy that eventually failed, due to the limits of the system in a small country. Contrary to many Eastern European countries, the 1989 Revolution was violent, yet the debate goes on about the perpetrators because the repressive apparatus mostly survived and some are holding positions today.
Nationalism defeated Communism in Eastern Europe, but it remained the region’s main weakness, making it vulnerable to outside interference and domestic poverty. R.J. Crampton defines this space by focusing on the satellite countries that lived under Soviet domination, this Cold War focus being the book’s main drawback. The Russian aggressions against Ukraine of 2014 and 2022 and other recent events have brought back Eastern Europe as a distinct area with an expanded sphere, so this history is relevant and useful. Thus the recurrent identarian and political question: does it have coherence or is it just a reflection of imperialism?
Additional sources
Hannah Arendt, “Epilogue, reflections on the Hungarian Revolution”, in The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1948/2001, (Humanitas, 2nd Romanian edition, 2006).
June 4, 2013
This is an okay read. It is dense on the political parties (of which there are MANY), and therefore is not ideal for someone wishing for a broad introduction to the region. I used this as a text for a course on Nationalism in Central and Eastern Europe, and by the end was frustrated by the text, but then I always seem to get bogged down by details. If you are good at walking away with the 'gist' of what you've read then by all means this is a great source. If you are like me, keep looking. If there were perhaps some charts includes or even figures that outlined a lot of the juxtapositions of the region it may have been a bit more clear and a much easier read. Alas, it is assumed that the reader has some foresight/knowledge with regard to Central and Eastern European history.
November 11, 2020
I read this while studying European History. It does go into great detail and I found it hard work. I’m glad I did, but only as I was in study. I felt it lacked that broader sweep I was looking for. Also, I couldn’t spend hours with it. I don’t know if it was the typeface, but it did tire me. For a long while it became my bedtime read.
January 1, 2023
Very hard to rate. On the one hand, the other's writing is infuriating. I frequently needed a dictionary to understand verbs he chose. That's completely unnecessary. And there were common grammatical mistakes. It made me wonder if he was not a native English speaker. Or it could just be bad editing and writing.
On the other hand, the information and period covered is awesome and engaging (when you can remember the names of people and parties that the author does not help you with).
So 4/5 for information and analysis. 1 or 2 out of 5 for writing and editing.
On the other hand, the information and period covered is awesome and engaging (when you can remember the names of people and parties that the author does not help you with).
So 4/5 for information and analysis. 1 or 2 out of 5 for writing and editing.
February 20, 2025
For thesis research
January 16, 2016
A very detailed, very complex, very well written history book. I learned alot and understand much better this era of history after reading this book. If you are a history reader and are interested in this area of history I am gonna say Very recommended. If you are not a history lover then I will caution you to avoid this book due to the it's detailed complexity.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews