What do you think?
Rate this book
Who Killed Kirov?: The Kremlin's Greatest Mystery
Tackling the mystery of who killed Stalin's most prized orator, and one of the Soviet Union's most charismatic leaders, this lively biographical opens Cold War-era Soviet records to lay the matter to rest once and for all.
331 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1999
3 people are currently reading
99 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
August 18, 2012
The historian Amy Knight has chosen for herself an interesting niche in Russian history of the Soviet period: She is perhaps the most renowned chronicler of the secret police. Abd what greater mystery is there in Soviet history than determining who was responsible for the assassination of Sergei Kirov, the party chief of Leningrad and supposed friend of Stalin. On December 1, 1934, he was shot in the back of the neck just in front of his second floor office in the Smolny Institute.
As soon as he heard the news, Stalin rushed to Leningrad and personally took charge of the investigation. Surprisingly, Kirov's bodyguard, Borisov, died in a freak traffic accident on the way to be interrogated. (Hmmm.) Not surprisingly, Stalin claimed that the gunman, Leonid Nikolaev, was a tool of a conspiracy hatched by -- oh what a surprise! -- Stalin's main enemies, Lev Kamenev and Grigorii Zinoviev, who were forthwith arrested to be reserved for the first big show trial to kick off the infamous purges that peaked a couple of years later.
Although Stalin publicly treated Kirov as his best friend, Kirov was under no such misapprehensions. At the Seventeenth Party Congress, Kirov came within an ace of beating Stalin in a popularity contest in which the latter garnered a large number of negative votes, which, not surprisingly, have been lost. Knight concludes that Stalin used Kirov as a pretext to formulate a vast conspiracy (which was born suspiciously soon after Kirov's death) to be used for ridding the party of anyone whom he felt opposed him or could even conceivably oppose him. As Knight writes:
As soon as he heard the news, Stalin rushed to Leningrad and personally took charge of the investigation. Surprisingly, Kirov's bodyguard, Borisov, died in a freak traffic accident on the way to be interrogated. (Hmmm.) Not surprisingly, Stalin claimed that the gunman, Leonid Nikolaev, was a tool of a conspiracy hatched by -- oh what a surprise! -- Stalin's main enemies, Lev Kamenev and Grigorii Zinoviev, who were forthwith arrested to be reserved for the first big show trial to kick off the infamous purges that peaked a couple of years later.
Although Stalin publicly treated Kirov as his best friend, Kirov was under no such misapprehensions. At the Seventeenth Party Congress, Kirov came within an ace of beating Stalin in a popularity contest in which the latter garnered a large number of negative votes, which, not surprisingly, have been lost. Knight concludes that Stalin used Kirov as a pretext to formulate a vast conspiracy (which was born suspiciously soon after Kirov's death) to be used for ridding the party of anyone whom he felt opposed him or could even conceivably oppose him. As Knight writes:
The story of Kirov's murder did not end with the trials of January 1935. On the contrary, the murder and its aftermath marked the beginning of a nightmare that would consume the Soviet Union for the next four years. Some historians insist that the police terror that unfolded after Kirov's assassination was not the product of any grand strategy of Stalin's, but rather a haphazard, frenzied process that fed on itself. But when one considers how Stalin meticulously pored over transcripts of interrogations and indictments and how he systematically meted out retribution to his real or perceived enemies, a picture of a carefully planned vendetta emerges.I highly recommend Who Killed Kirov? The Kremlin's Greatest Mystery to anyone interested in the great purges that culminated some seventy-five years ago and more.
March 25, 2021
I wanted to award 3.5 stars but didn’t know how to do it so it’s a B- type of 4.
The murder of Sergei Kirov was the precursor to and the stated reason for Stalin’s purges which lasted for 4 years and led to the execution and/or internment in workcamps of over a million people.
Was this a reaction to the loss of a dear friend or the excuse Stalin needed to eliminate all internal opposition in the Soviet Union?
Author Amy Knight comes down clearly on the side of the latter and it is hard not to be impressed by her reasoning and dogged detective work examining the evidence that at the time (1999) was slowly being released from Government archives.
Like much that has been written since the fall of the Soviet Union the book tends to take for granted our dislike of the regime and, more problematically, the policies and beliefs it stood for. This means that a slightly conspiratorial nuance can be detected when Party actions or policies are outlined which I found a little distracting.
That said I feel I know a lot more about Sergei Kirov, his character, beliefs and principles. I also understand why he could have been seen as a potential rival, real or imagined, to Stalin and how that could have led to his murder.
The book is fast paced and very readable and, with the minor reservations I have outlined, I would recommend it.
The murder of Sergei Kirov was the precursor to and the stated reason for Stalin’s purges which lasted for 4 years and led to the execution and/or internment in workcamps of over a million people.
Was this a reaction to the loss of a dear friend or the excuse Stalin needed to eliminate all internal opposition in the Soviet Union?
Author Amy Knight comes down clearly on the side of the latter and it is hard not to be impressed by her reasoning and dogged detective work examining the evidence that at the time (1999) was slowly being released from Government archives.
Like much that has been written since the fall of the Soviet Union the book tends to take for granted our dislike of the regime and, more problematically, the policies and beliefs it stood for. This means that a slightly conspiratorial nuance can be detected when Party actions or policies are outlined which I found a little distracting.
That said I feel I know a lot more about Sergei Kirov, his character, beliefs and principles. I also understand why he could have been seen as a potential rival, real or imagined, to Stalin and how that could have led to his murder.
The book is fast paced and very readable and, with the minor reservations I have outlined, I would recommend it.
October 13, 2017
Great book. The author does a good job of doing as much investigation as possible, especially concerning the crime scene particularly. After so many years, memories can be faulty, but to the author's credit, she continually stresses this, and points out what scenarios would have been "possible", "probable", and makes sense, given the times. Excellent commentary on this horrible time in such a maligned country. I wouldn't read it with no background in Russian history but once you have even a rudimentary knowledge of the Revolution and Stalin's rise to power, this book is a terrific addition.
May 29, 2020
This is my second book on Russia by Amy Knight. This was miles better then the propaganda desperation of "Orders to Kill". Very detailed, distinct sections. However I would have liked to have had more detail on the night of his death. In terms of page length I felt it wasn't enough. Towards the end she delved once again into those blatant assumptions and opinionated statements which I hate. I didn't have much knowledge on the topic before reading this, but I certainly feel more educated now. Worth a read.
February 18, 2017
I would not say that this was the easiest book to read, but I did like it. I think that I should have kept a Soviet map with me the entire time and done a better job of writing down names of people and their party responsibilities as I became confused a few times with who was whom.
That being said, I'm particularly glad that I stuck with it as I learned quite a bit about Sergei Kirov, the one guy that might have turned Russia down a different path then the one Stalin chose. Sergei was a natural politician who got out and met the people and understood the workers. In a Stalinesque world he tried to make a difference and was appreciated and loved in Leningrad for his stewardship. At the same time though, to be clear, Kirov was no saint. He didn't approach Stalin's evil, but who could? Nevertheless, Kirov was cold where he chose to be. He even abandoned his family as he rose through the party ranks. It does not appear to be explored, but I speculate that perhaps he did that to keep them separate from him if he ended up a pariah. It was common practice to liquidate family members of 'diseased' party members.
A lot happened in 270 pages and perhaps while it is fresh in my mind I need to read some more Soviet history soon, particularly Arthur Koestler's 'Darkness At Noon' on the trial of Nikolai Bukharin and A. I. Rykov.
The deaths that are listed are mind boggling. Construction of the Balti-White Sea Canal cost 100,000 of the 280,000 prison laborers. The Seventeenth Party Congress of 1934 had 1,966 delegates, of that group, 1,108 would eventually be arrested by the secret police.
What an awful place and position to be in. Something that you believe fervently, but risk your life for either defending or not doing a good enough job. I wonder how I would have fit in if I had grown up in the Russia of that time.
That being said, I'm particularly glad that I stuck with it as I learned quite a bit about Sergei Kirov, the one guy that might have turned Russia down a different path then the one Stalin chose. Sergei was a natural politician who got out and met the people and understood the workers. In a Stalinesque world he tried to make a difference and was appreciated and loved in Leningrad for his stewardship. At the same time though, to be clear, Kirov was no saint. He didn't approach Stalin's evil, but who could? Nevertheless, Kirov was cold where he chose to be. He even abandoned his family as he rose through the party ranks. It does not appear to be explored, but I speculate that perhaps he did that to keep them separate from him if he ended up a pariah. It was common practice to liquidate family members of 'diseased' party members.
A lot happened in 270 pages and perhaps while it is fresh in my mind I need to read some more Soviet history soon, particularly Arthur Koestler's 'Darkness At Noon' on the trial of Nikolai Bukharin and A. I. Rykov.
The deaths that are listed are mind boggling. Construction of the Balti-White Sea Canal cost 100,000 of the 280,000 prison laborers. The Seventeenth Party Congress of 1934 had 1,966 delegates, of that group, 1,108 would eventually be arrested by the secret police.
What an awful place and position to be in. Something that you believe fervently, but risk your life for either defending or not doing a good enough job. I wonder how I would have fit in if I had grown up in the Russia of that time.
November 13, 2012
Confession: sometimes I pretend to be the kind of intellectual who doesn't read murder mysteries. Not that I don't love them, just that they're rarely worth the time. Amy Knight's done a rare and special thing here: she's crafted a beautifully researched, intricately detailed and historically sound overview of a curiously unsolved episode in the shadowy demise of soviet power. I imagine the draw is greatest for those (like myself) with some prior understanding of the historical context, but I think even a casual reader would enjoy deconstructing the mystery that is the Kirov murder.
July 21, 2009
Well told story about the incident and people involved that triggered the Stalinist purges in the 1930's Soviet Union.
February 1, 2016
Another great book by Amy Knight - it will help one being to understand the depths of Stalin's compex personality
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews