Some History. Mostly a Monarchy Tabloid Rag

I became very frustrated and cheated with this book because I thought is was a book about British History. Here is a list of pre-1603 events completely left out of this book. Anything between the building of Hadrians wall and William the Conquer. The 100 years war. The Spanish Armada. The War of the Roses. Again. THE WAR OF THE ROSES. Some how this book on the history of Britain left out some of the most formative events of the period. Not a single paragraph. Maybe a sentence.
In contract, half of this book is devoted to any juicy bit of Tudor gossip he could dig up. detail after detail about every little detail you could ever want to know about Henry VIII, Ann Bolyn, Blood Mary and Elizabeth.in this book about the history of Britain, there is more written in this book about Elizabeth's dog than there is the War of the Roses.
If you would like a Tudor tabloid, this is the book for you. If you want a History of Britain, look somewhere else.

33 people found this helpful

Very Entertaining History of Britain

I thought this was a very interesting and entertaining history. It was rarely dull. I enjoyed learning about the different roots and layers of Britain. Stephen Thorne's voice is well suited for this book. The retelling of the different revolts and the stories of the royals were great. I have only a few complaints. It's rather a lengthy time period to squeeze into 1 volume. I realize that we simply know more about modern history than we do about the middle ages and before that, but it still seems like this could have been a 4-volume series rather than 3. The final 2 volumes of the series cover only 4 centuries (and really only 3.5 since post-WWII is essentially skimmed over briefly); the first volume covers 47 centuries. Anyway, there were times when I felt like Schama glossed over periods which I would have liked to learn more about. At times events would be mentioned and then not expounded upon and this was frustrating. Also, if you went into this book hoping to learn about the structure of British nobility and government you are only going to be partly satisfied. You will learn plenty about nobles, royals, and non-royals. You'll also hear about the different ways that someone of non-noble blood could become noble. However, if you want to know the difference between, say, an Earl and a Duke, you won't find it here. Similarly, you'll learn a great deal about the different arguments and power struggles between Parliament and the royals, but you won't learn about the different houses or even how the Parliament works as far as voting and things like that. I definitely think it would be beneficial to read a book with a sort of "British society and government for dummies" feel before reading this book.

12 people found this helpful

History is fun and he makes it so

Before this book I didn't know a Stuart from a Tudor, now I do. The author's philosophy is that history should be as fun to listen to as possible. He does that with ease with this volume. He really gets most interesting when he is delving completely into some event or person such as the Battle of Hastings and William the Conqueror or the reign of Queen Elizabeth.

The book ends abruptly leaving me wanting for more. I'll probably use one more credit and get Volume II.

12 people found this helpful

Great story-telling, lovely voice

Good sense of character and plot. Sensitive to the significant detail. Informative without being dry or pedantic. Very enjoyable history! And the reader has a pleasant, resonant voice.

5 people found this helpful

A History of the English Monarchy from 1066-1603

Schama is a talented writer, and his narrative flows easily, but it is really just a popular history of the English Monarchy from William the Conqueror through Elizabeth 1. Even then, while he hits on all of the major points of that time frame, he obviously felt that there were really only a few Monarchs who deserved more than a cursory mention, leaving this very much a book in the Great Man of History tradition.

William I, Edward I, Henry II and Beckett, Henry III and Eleanor and the Tudors all get lots of press. Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Chaucer, Shakespeare, the War of the Roses, Richard III, the Crusades and many other aspects of British history are given scant mention.

Thorne does a fine job as narrator, and it is a well written book, with a sly wit, but the subtitle is a bit misleading.

10 people found this helpful

Intriguing introduction

Would you listen to A History of Britain: Volume 1 again? Why?

Yes. The information is so packed in there. I finished this a few months ago, and I am afraid I have retained probably less than a 10th of the information.

Who was your favorite character and why?

King Alfred the Great. Brilliant.

Any additional comments?

Probably written for a British audience. Had the feeling that I was pretending to know what was happening half the time because I got disoriented in time and eras.

3 people found this helpful

Informal and Magisterial

In a lifetime of reading history, I’ve noticed something about historians. After a certain age, they unbutton their waistcoats, put up their feet, and become chatty. Writing at the tender age of 55 (back in 2000), Simon Schama opens his second chapter with the words, “Historians tend to like the quiet life, and they usually get it…”

It’s one of the charms of this book. One gets the sense that you’re sitting with Schama over drinks, getting the benefit of his life of researching, reflecting on, and writing history. And that includes opinions on current academic fashions. For example:

Despite the trend of portraying Vikings as traders more than raiders, he thinks they really were as bad as their contemporaries testify.

1066 really was the watershed that past historians insisted upon—no matter how much the contemporary academy tends to downplay it.

The 19th Century’s desire to trace their institutions to Anglo-Saxon times “is not entirely wrong”. The shires established before the Conquest persisted until 1974.

Even more than 1215, 1258 deserves to be enshrined in Britain’s national memory as the year the barons, “abolished the absolute monarchy of the Anglo-Norman state”.

Most importantly, this volume traces the evolution of a dawning national consciousness, Welsh, Irish and Scottish as well as English, that in turn circumscribed the power of the throne and made it a servant of the nation rather than an instrument of the royal will. A telling counterweight to our popular notions of freedom as a strictly modern invention.

Unlike more formal history, the conversational tone of the writing makes this very easy listening. And Stephen Thorne’s deep, engaging, intelligent voice makes it even easier. With so many merits, one hardly notices the non-existent navigation.

2 people found this helpful

Very engaging

Although the narrator did a wonderful job, I was slightly disappointed that Mr. had not narrated. I enjoy his style!!

2 people found this helpful

Misleading Title

Downloaded this whole series thinking I was getting a real in depth history of Britain. When is described 3000BC I was expecting a real delve into ancient British history. To my disappointment there is less than a paragraph of this time then suddenly we are in Roman Britain. Within the first hour and a half we are at 600AD. Would not recommend.

1 person found this helpful

Masterpiece

Beautifully written and equally as well narrated,this detailed history of Britain keeps one eager to hear more as each chapter goes by.l cannot wait until the next two volumes become available on Audible.

1 person found this helpful