What do you think?
Rate this book
The History of England #1
Foundation: The History of England from Its Earliest Beginnings to the Tudors
Peter Ackroyd, whose work has always been underpinned by a profound interest in and understanding of England's history, now tells the epic story of England itself.
In Foundation, the chronicler of London and of its river, the Thames, takes us from the primeval forests of England's prehistory to the death, in 1509, of the first Tudor king, Henry VII. He guides us from the building of Stonehenge to the founding of the two great glories of medieval England: common law and the cathedrals. He shows us glimpses of the country's most distant past--a Neolithic stirrup found in a grave, a Roman fort, a Saxon tomb, a medieval manor house--and describes in rich prose the successive waves of invaders who made England English, despite being themselves Roman, Viking, Saxon, or Norman French.
With his extraordinary skill for evoking time and place and his acute eye for the telling detail, Ackroyd recounts the story of warring kings, of civil strife, and foreign wars. But he also gives us a vivid sense of how England's early people lived: the homes they built, the clothes the wore, the food they ate, even the jokes they told. All are brought vividly to life through the narrative mastery of one of Britain's finest writers.
In Foundation, the chronicler of London and of its river, the Thames, takes us from the primeval forests of England's prehistory to the death, in 1509, of the first Tudor king, Henry VII. He guides us from the building of Stonehenge to the founding of the two great glories of medieval England: common law and the cathedrals. He shows us glimpses of the country's most distant past--a Neolithic stirrup found in a grave, a Roman fort, a Saxon tomb, a medieval manor house--and describes in rich prose the successive waves of invaders who made England English, despite being themselves Roman, Viking, Saxon, or Norman French.
With his extraordinary skill for evoking time and place and his acute eye for the telling detail, Ackroyd recounts the story of warring kings, of civil strife, and foreign wars. But he also gives us a vivid sense of how England's early people lived: the homes they built, the clothes the wore, the food they ate, even the jokes they told. All are brought vividly to life through the narrative mastery of one of Britain's finest writers.
496 pages, Hardcover
First published September 1, 2011
About the author
Peter Ackroyd
183 books1,394 followersPeter Ackroyd CBE is an English novelist and biographer with a particular interest in the history and culture of London.
Peter Ackroyd's mother worked in the personnel department of an engineering firm, his father having left the family home when Ackroyd was a baby. He was reading newspapers by the age of 5 and, at 9, wrote a play about Guy Fawkes. Reputedly, he first realized he was gay at the age of 7.
Ackroyd was educated at St. Benedict's, Ealing and at Clare College, Cambridge, from which he graduated with a double first in English. In 1972, he was a Mellon Fellow at Yale University in the United States. The result of this fellowship was Ackroyd's Notes for a New Culture, written when he was only 22 and eventually published in 1976. The title, a playful echo of T. S. Eliot's Notes Towards the Definition of Culture (1948), was an early indication of Ackroyd's penchant for creatively exploring and reexamining the works of other London-based writers.
Ackroyd's literary career began with poetry, including such works as London Lickpenny (1973) and The Diversions of Purley (1987). He later moved into fiction and has become an acclaimed author, winning the 1998 James Tait Black Memorial Prize for the biography Thomas More and being shortlisted for the Booker Prize in 1987.
Ackroyd worked at The Spectator magazine between 1973 and 1977 and became joint managing editor in 1978. In 1982 he published The Great Fire of London, his first novel. This novel deals with one of Ackroyd's great heroes, Charles Dickens, and is a reworking of Little Dorrit. The novel set the stage for the long sequence of novels Ackroyd has produced since, all of which deal in some way with the complex interaction of time and space, and what Ackroyd calls "the spirit of place". It is also the first in a sequence of novels of London, through which he traces the changing, but curiously consistent nature of the city. Often this theme is explored through the city's artists, and especially its writers.
Ackroyd has always shown a great interest in the city of London, and one of his best known works, London: The Biography, is an extensive and thorough discussion of London through the ages.
His fascination with London literary and artistic figures is also displayed in the sequence of biographies he has produced of Ezra Pound (1980), T. S. Eliot (1984), Charles Dickens (1990), William Blake (1995), Thomas More (1998), Chaucer (2004), William Shakespeare (2005), and J. M. W. Turner. The city itself stands astride all these works, as it does in the fiction.
From 2003 to 2005, Ackroyd wrote a six-book non-fiction series (Voyages Through Time), intended for readers as young as eight. This was his first work for children. The critically acclaimed series is an extensive narrative of key periods in world history.
Early in his career, Ackroyd was nominated a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature in 1984 and, as well as producing fiction, biography and other literary works, is also a regular radio and television broadcaster and book critic.
In the New Year's honours list of 2003, Ackroyd was awarded the CBE.
Peter Ackroyd's mother worked in the personnel department of an engineering firm, his father having left the family home when Ackroyd was a baby. He was reading newspapers by the age of 5 and, at 9, wrote a play about Guy Fawkes. Reputedly, he first realized he was gay at the age of 7.
Ackroyd was educated at St. Benedict's, Ealing and at Clare College, Cambridge, from which he graduated with a double first in English. In 1972, he was a Mellon Fellow at Yale University in the United States. The result of this fellowship was Ackroyd's Notes for a New Culture, written when he was only 22 and eventually published in 1976. The title, a playful echo of T. S. Eliot's Notes Towards the Definition of Culture (1948), was an early indication of Ackroyd's penchant for creatively exploring and reexamining the works of other London-based writers.
Ackroyd's literary career began with poetry, including such works as London Lickpenny (1973) and The Diversions of Purley (1987). He later moved into fiction and has become an acclaimed author, winning the 1998 James Tait Black Memorial Prize for the biography Thomas More and being shortlisted for the Booker Prize in 1987.
Ackroyd worked at The Spectator magazine between 1973 and 1977 and became joint managing editor in 1978. In 1982 he published The Great Fire of London, his first novel. This novel deals with one of Ackroyd's great heroes, Charles Dickens, and is a reworking of Little Dorrit. The novel set the stage for the long sequence of novels Ackroyd has produced since, all of which deal in some way with the complex interaction of time and space, and what Ackroyd calls "the spirit of place". It is also the first in a sequence of novels of London, through which he traces the changing, but curiously consistent nature of the city. Often this theme is explored through the city's artists, and especially its writers.
Ackroyd has always shown a great interest in the city of London, and one of his best known works, London: The Biography, is an extensive and thorough discussion of London through the ages.
His fascination with London literary and artistic figures is also displayed in the sequence of biographies he has produced of Ezra Pound (1980), T. S. Eliot (1984), Charles Dickens (1990), William Blake (1995), Thomas More (1998), Chaucer (2004), William Shakespeare (2005), and J. M. W. Turner. The city itself stands astride all these works, as it does in the fiction.
From 2003 to 2005, Ackroyd wrote a six-book non-fiction series (Voyages Through Time), intended for readers as young as eight. This was his first work for children. The critically acclaimed series is an extensive narrative of key periods in world history.
Early in his career, Ackroyd was nominated a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature in 1984 and, as well as producing fiction, biography and other literary works, is also a regular radio and television broadcaster and book critic.
In the New Year's honours list of 2003, Ackroyd was awarded the CBE.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 546 reviews
July 6, 2020
(B+) 78% | Good
Notes: Very readable, but speeds too quickly through the middle ages and its antecedent eras in a rush to reach the Tudors.
Notes: Very readable, but speeds too quickly through the middle ages and its antecedent eras in a rush to reach the Tudors.
December 24, 2018
”The house of the Plantagenets, from Henry II to Richard III himself was brimming with blood. In their lust for power the members of the family turned upon one another. King John murdered, or caused to be murdered, his nephew Arthur; Richard II dispatched his uncle, Thomas of Gloucester; Richard II was in turn killed on the orders of his cousin, Henry Bolingbroke: Henry VI was killed in the Tower on the orders of his cousin, Edward IV; Edward IV murdered his brother, Clarence, just as his own two sons were murdered by their uncle. It is hard to imagine a family more steeped in slaughter and revenge, of which the Wars of the Roses were only one effusion. It might be thought that some curse had been laid upon the house of Plantagenets, except of course in the world of kings the palm of victory always goes to the most violent and the most ruthless. It could be said that the royal family was the begetter of organized crime.”
Well I didn’t really give much more thought to the Plantagenets than any other royal family until my cousin Nancy began researching our family history. It seems my ancestor James Ives (1775-1802) convinced (bamboozled) this rather wealthy girl from a well connected family in Boston to marry him. Her name was Anna Ashley (1782-1822). So far research has not brought to light exactly how James was in a position to marry so well. His livelihood is murky, so he must have been charming or attractive or at the very least a smooth talker. The interesting thing about this marriage is that it insured that at least a thimble-full of Plantagenet blood is circulating in my body.
Peter Ackroyd, who I have always thought of as a novelist, has probably written about as many nonfiction books as he has novels. I’ve enjoyed his books and tend to pick them up when I run across them. His latest project is a six-volume history of England of which this is the first volume. First thing to understand is that this is an overview, so if you are looking for a drill down into a particular time of English history that is not the purpose of this book. I knew a lot of what Ackroyd covers in this volume, but it was still nice to refresh my memory of the period. I also made several notes about a few people that I would like to read more about for instance Alfred the Great’s sons and grandsons. ”The descendants of Alfred, the sons of Woden, had ruled the country for 145 years. Not one of them was ever proclaimed to be a tyrant.” Athelstan, son of Alfred, in particular is of interest because he is considered the first King of England where Alfred was referred to as the King of the Angles and of the Saxons.
Bernard Cornwell has written a compelling series of books covering Alfred the Great’s reign and his battles and alliances with the influx of Dane incursions into England. Sure the Dane’s raped and pillaged, but after acquiring and keeping territory they started bringing their women and children with them and settled into what turned out to be an island with lands well suited for agriculture. This happened many centuries before the Romans conquered the island for the fertile lands to provide grain for a hungry citizenship back home.
Richard the III end of the Plantagenet line of kings
This book covers from Stonehenge to the end of the Plantagenet rule with the death of Richard III in 1485 at the Battle of Bosworth Field. I also had a relative that fought on the side of the Tudor usurpers (well how they are referred to in my household anyway) he was knighted on the battlefield by Henry VII for his role in helping to slay Richard.
”The houses of York and Lancaster were in fact two sides of the same ruling family. The house of Lancaster was descended from the fourth son of Edward III, John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster; the house of York was descended from the fifth son of the same king, Edmund, duke of York, whose youngest son had married the great-granddaughter of the third son. They are sometimes describes as the third and fourth sons respectively, but this omits one male child who lived for six months. Their closeness, however, bred only enmity and ferocity. Blue blood was often bad blood.
When I was a kid, you will find this shocking, I was always reading. I remember I was reading about William the Conqueror (1024-1087)one summer and mentioned to my grandfather that he was named after an English King. He looked at me with disinterest and then crammed a black banana in his mouth probably with the intent of making me nauseous and would save him the trouble of actually shooing me away. His name was not William, but Harold Ashley Ives. Notice the nod still given to the Ashley family in the 20th century. Harold was King in that fateful year 1066. ”His reign, lasting nine months and nine days, was one of the shortest in English history.” He was not a bad king nor was he a poor soldier. He just happened to be in the way of one of the most ambitious and best field commanders of the day William the Conqueror.
William the Conqueror
Now William had no claim to the throne, not even such a weak connection as Henry VII(1457-1509). Henry’s claim to the throne was that his paternal grandfather secretly married the widow of Henry V, Catherine of Valois. What he and Henry VII had in common was that they both took the crown at the point of their sword.
Now my ancestor Anna Ashley is descended from Henry I(1068-1135), fourth son of William the Conqueror. Unfortunately Henry I did not have a legitimate son. He had a very capable son named Robert (1100-1147) who would probably have made a great King, but he was illegitimate, and therefore; could not claim his birthright. The Plantagenets like most dynasties sowed the seeds of lust in many fields. Henry I made all of his supporters swear they would support his daughter Matilda to be the first crowned Queen of England. Matilda had an acerbic nature and was not well liked coupled with the fact that England wasn’t ready to follow a woman. This resulted in very little support for her to ascend to the throne. Cousin Stephen was crowned King and that touched off a war with Matilda that lasted from 1139-54 accomplishing little, but creating chaos among the peasant populations. In the end Stephen names Matilda’s son Henry II(1133-1189) to be his successor which puts my direct line of ancestors back in power.
John (1167-1216), the baby of the marriage between Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine outlasts his brothers and comes to the throne. So yes I do have to claim John as his son Henry III(1207-1272) is also a direct ancestor to Anna Ashley. Henry was the last of a line of king ancestors in my direct line of genealogy. We are descended from Henry's son Edmund Crouchback(1245-1296) the 1st Earl of Lancaster. He was the younger brother of King Edward I.
Edmund Crouchback brother to a King
So my cousins, female and male, that bear the name Ashley do not fully realize why that name has been so carefully passed from generation to generation, but I’ve noticed that they are also naming their children Ashley, so it is very probable that the name will stay attached to the Ives family for many more generations. Ashley was on the shortlist for my name, but my Aunt Shirley insisted that my name was supposed to be Jeffrey. In moments of fancy I think of myself as named after the ancestor Geoffrey V Count of Anjou (1113-1169) who had such a stormy relationship with Empress Matilda(1102-1169), but the makeup sex must have been superb because they sired three boys insuring a solid bedrock of claims to the English throne.
Geoffrey of Anjou
Ackroyd admits most of the history of this period that is available is the history of royalty. He does write vignettes between chapters that focus on the lives of the peasants, roads, crops, land, stone and brick building, and the growth of communities. This is a history steeped in blood, volume two will cover the Tudors, the usurping bastards :-), and I will discover if they do any better at controlling the hoards of power hungry dukes and lords, and tempering their own lusts for conquest and fame. I’ve taken a peek and it looks like a wild ride.
Well I didn’t really give much more thought to the Plantagenets than any other royal family until my cousin Nancy began researching our family history. It seems my ancestor James Ives (1775-1802) convinced (bamboozled) this rather wealthy girl from a well connected family in Boston to marry him. Her name was Anna Ashley (1782-1822). So far research has not brought to light exactly how James was in a position to marry so well. His livelihood is murky, so he must have been charming or attractive or at the very least a smooth talker. The interesting thing about this marriage is that it insured that at least a thimble-full of Plantagenet blood is circulating in my body.
Peter Ackroyd, who I have always thought of as a novelist, has probably written about as many nonfiction books as he has novels. I’ve enjoyed his books and tend to pick them up when I run across them. His latest project is a six-volume history of England of which this is the first volume. First thing to understand is that this is an overview, so if you are looking for a drill down into a particular time of English history that is not the purpose of this book. I knew a lot of what Ackroyd covers in this volume, but it was still nice to refresh my memory of the period. I also made several notes about a few people that I would like to read more about for instance Alfred the Great’s sons and grandsons. ”The descendants of Alfred, the sons of Woden, had ruled the country for 145 years. Not one of them was ever proclaimed to be a tyrant.” Athelstan, son of Alfred, in particular is of interest because he is considered the first King of England where Alfred was referred to as the King of the Angles and of the Saxons.
Bernard Cornwell has written a compelling series of books covering Alfred the Great’s reign and his battles and alliances with the influx of Dane incursions into England. Sure the Dane’s raped and pillaged, but after acquiring and keeping territory they started bringing their women and children with them and settled into what turned out to be an island with lands well suited for agriculture. This happened many centuries before the Romans conquered the island for the fertile lands to provide grain for a hungry citizenship back home.
Richard the III end of the Plantagenet line of kings
This book covers from Stonehenge to the end of the Plantagenet rule with the death of Richard III in 1485 at the Battle of Bosworth Field. I also had a relative that fought on the side of the Tudor usurpers (well how they are referred to in my household anyway) he was knighted on the battlefield by Henry VII for his role in helping to slay Richard.
”The houses of York and Lancaster were in fact two sides of the same ruling family. The house of Lancaster was descended from the fourth son of Edward III, John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster; the house of York was descended from the fifth son of the same king, Edmund, duke of York, whose youngest son had married the great-granddaughter of the third son. They are sometimes describes as the third and fourth sons respectively, but this omits one male child who lived for six months. Their closeness, however, bred only enmity and ferocity. Blue blood was often bad blood.
When I was a kid, you will find this shocking, I was always reading. I remember I was reading about William the Conqueror (1024-1087)one summer and mentioned to my grandfather that he was named after an English King. He looked at me with disinterest and then crammed a black banana in his mouth probably with the intent of making me nauseous and would save him the trouble of actually shooing me away. His name was not William, but Harold Ashley Ives. Notice the nod still given to the Ashley family in the 20th century. Harold was King in that fateful year 1066. ”His reign, lasting nine months and nine days, was one of the shortest in English history.” He was not a bad king nor was he a poor soldier. He just happened to be in the way of one of the most ambitious and best field commanders of the day William the Conqueror.
William the Conqueror
Now William had no claim to the throne, not even such a weak connection as Henry VII(1457-1509). Henry’s claim to the throne was that his paternal grandfather secretly married the widow of Henry V, Catherine of Valois. What he and Henry VII had in common was that they both took the crown at the point of their sword.
Now my ancestor Anna Ashley is descended from Henry I(1068-1135), fourth son of William the Conqueror. Unfortunately Henry I did not have a legitimate son. He had a very capable son named Robert (1100-1147) who would probably have made a great King, but he was illegitimate, and therefore; could not claim his birthright. The Plantagenets like most dynasties sowed the seeds of lust in many fields. Henry I made all of his supporters swear they would support his daughter Matilda to be the first crowned Queen of England. Matilda had an acerbic nature and was not well liked coupled with the fact that England wasn’t ready to follow a woman. This resulted in very little support for her to ascend to the throne. Cousin Stephen was crowned King and that touched off a war with Matilda that lasted from 1139-54 accomplishing little, but creating chaos among the peasant populations. In the end Stephen names Matilda’s son Henry II(1133-1189) to be his successor which puts my direct line of ancestors back in power.
John (1167-1216), the baby of the marriage between Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine outlasts his brothers and comes to the throne. So yes I do have to claim John as his son Henry III(1207-1272) is also a direct ancestor to Anna Ashley. Henry was the last of a line of king ancestors in my direct line of genealogy. We are descended from Henry's son Edmund Crouchback(1245-1296) the 1st Earl of Lancaster. He was the younger brother of King Edward I.
Edmund Crouchback brother to a King
So my cousins, female and male, that bear the name Ashley do not fully realize why that name has been so carefully passed from generation to generation, but I’ve noticed that they are also naming their children Ashley, so it is very probable that the name will stay attached to the Ives family for many more generations. Ashley was on the shortlist for my name, but my Aunt Shirley insisted that my name was supposed to be Jeffrey. In moments of fancy I think of myself as named after the ancestor Geoffrey V Count of Anjou (1113-1169) who had such a stormy relationship with Empress Matilda(1102-1169), but the makeup sex must have been superb because they sired three boys insuring a solid bedrock of claims to the English throne.
Geoffrey of Anjou
Ackroyd admits most of the history of this period that is available is the history of royalty. He does write vignettes between chapters that focus on the lives of the peasants, roads, crops, land, stone and brick building, and the growth of communities. This is a history steeped in blood, volume two will cover the Tudors, the usurping bastards :-), and I will discover if they do any better at controlling the hoards of power hungry dukes and lords, and tempering their own lusts for conquest and fame. I’ve taken a peek and it looks like a wild ride.
July 7, 2016
This is an incredible history book about England, starting with the earliest inhabitants thousands of years ago, moving briskly through the Roman invasion and the years leading up to William the Conqueror, and then wrapping up with the tenth through the fifteenth centuries. Most of the drama focuses on the kings and their political exploits, but the author does check in on the peasants every now and again.
This book is more than 400 pages and is dense with facts and stories. Ackroyd writes well and includes some dry humor, but I'll be honest that I started this book three different times before I finally powered through and finished. I find this kind of history fascinating, but I also had to take breaks and alternate my reading.
I enjoyed the author's style and I learned a lot about how England was formed. I plan to look up Ackroyd's other books the next time I want a history fix. Recommended for fans of world history.
Opening Paragraph
"When the first sarsen stone was raised in the circle of Stonehenge, the land we call England was already very ancient. Close to the village of Happisburgh, in Norfolk, seventy-eight flint artifacts have recently been found; they were scattered approximately 900,000 years ago. So the long story begins."
Favorite Quotes
"It was taken for granted that every man must have a lord. Lordship was no longer dependent upon tribal relations, but on the possession of land. Mastery was assumed by those who owned the most territory. No other test of secular leadership was necessary. Land was everything. It was in a literal sense the ground of being. Land granted you power and wealth; it allowed you to dispense gifts and to bend others to your will."
"Good men rarely make good kings."
This book is more than 400 pages and is dense with facts and stories. Ackroyd writes well and includes some dry humor, but I'll be honest that I started this book three different times before I finally powered through and finished. I find this kind of history fascinating, but I also had to take breaks and alternate my reading.
I enjoyed the author's style and I learned a lot about how England was formed. I plan to look up Ackroyd's other books the next time I want a history fix. Recommended for fans of world history.
Opening Paragraph
"When the first sarsen stone was raised in the circle of Stonehenge, the land we call England was already very ancient. Close to the village of Happisburgh, in Norfolk, seventy-eight flint artifacts have recently been found; they were scattered approximately 900,000 years ago. So the long story begins."
Favorite Quotes
"It was taken for granted that every man must have a lord. Lordship was no longer dependent upon tribal relations, but on the possession of land. Mastery was assumed by those who owned the most territory. No other test of secular leadership was necessary. Land was everything. It was in a literal sense the ground of being. Land granted you power and wealth; it allowed you to dispense gifts and to bend others to your will."
"Good men rarely make good kings."
February 6, 2017
I'm 100 pages in and mesmerized. This answers so many questions I've had for decades about who the English actually were, what tribes they were composed of, and how both the "royalty" and "nobility" came to be, and who they were. Amazing.
(I put those words in quotes because I think they're imaginary, foul concepts. Obviously, I recognize that such classes were created and had a monumental impact, and I'm fascinated by them, but I sure don't recognize them as "noble," much less royal.)
Obviously, this is a provisional review/rating. I hope to return to to fill in more as I progress. I actually like how these sites allow a person to communicate not just how they felt about the book after they were all finished, but a bit about how the experience unfolded.
UPDATE:
Well, I finished, and it had some problems. I'll try to return to lay it out.
2 years later (January 2017), I'm 300-plus pages into Robert Tombs' "The English and Their History," and highly recommend it. I think Tombs' approach is much better, even though it's the entire history in 1,000 pages, so a bit less room for this period.)
(I put those words in quotes because I think they're imaginary, foul concepts. Obviously, I recognize that such classes were created and had a monumental impact, and I'm fascinated by them, but I sure don't recognize them as "noble," much less royal.)
Obviously, this is a provisional review/rating. I hope to return to to fill in more as I progress. I actually like how these sites allow a person to communicate not just how they felt about the book after they were all finished, but a bit about how the experience unfolded.
UPDATE:
Well, I finished, and it had some problems. I'll try to return to lay it out.
2 years later (January 2017), I'm 300-plus pages into Robert Tombs' "The English and Their History," and highly recommend it. I think Tombs' approach is much better, even though it's the entire history in 1,000 pages, so a bit less room for this period.)
March 13, 2017
Ackroyd appears to have written this for people who don't read much history. His pop-journalistic style - 'Death was always at hand" - and selected themes - all kings are greedy and brutal, the ancient past underlies modern England combine with what seems to be superficial secondary research make it unsatisfying history, though many people enjoy his style.
In typical Ackroyd style, he interleaves his generalities with nuggets of detail. One I particularly liked, and so did he, obviously, because he refers to it at least twice, is that the measurement of the yard (0.9 meters) was declared to be 'the distance from the end of the king's nose to the end of his outstretched thumb'. The King at the time was Henry I. I wonder how they kept the measure constant after he died?
In typical Ackroyd style, he interleaves his generalities with nuggets of detail. One I particularly liked, and so did he, obviously, because he refers to it at least twice, is that the measurement of the yard (0.9 meters) was declared to be 'the distance from the end of the king's nose to the end of his outstretched thumb'. The King at the time was Henry I. I wonder how they kept the measure constant after he died?
January 1, 2017
The author writes on page 424 of my copy "The coffin was later used as a horse trough, and the bones of Richard III scattered." Well that turned out to be a bit of bad luck in terms of writing the subjective as historical fact.
Like all these historical overviews one always learns something new. I had never heard of the Gough Map for example. But that hardly makes up for a poorish book. I am disappointed as this should have been a very useful historical overview of England from the dawns of time up to the beginning of the Tudor dynasty, one that could be recommended to the newcomer, maybe the high school reader looking for something to bolster their knowledge. Sadly for me there was far to much speculation and with that unsubstantiated comment. No footnotes. If one is to speculate and make comment back it up with footnotes. The bibliography is interesting enough, though it seems to me the author has used too many sources that are a bit too far into the past considering the plethora of specialist historians at present churning out tomes about specifics.
I will read out the entire serious and hope they improve.
Like all these historical overviews one always learns something new. I had never heard of the Gough Map for example. But that hardly makes up for a poorish book. I am disappointed as this should have been a very useful historical overview of England from the dawns of time up to the beginning of the Tudor dynasty, one that could be recommended to the newcomer, maybe the high school reader looking for something to bolster their knowledge. Sadly for me there was far to much speculation and with that unsubstantiated comment. No footnotes. If one is to speculate and make comment back it up with footnotes. The bibliography is interesting enough, though it seems to me the author has used too many sources that are a bit too far into the past considering the plethora of specialist historians at present churning out tomes about specifics.
I will read out the entire serious and hope they improve.
Currently reading
April 9, 2019Well written, but sometimes his novelist's imagination seems to get away from him a little (as when he posits that English cattle raids inspired the Iliad, or compares William the Conqueror dedicating a daughter to a nunnery to Agamemnon and Iphigenia), which is when I really wish he'd cite his sources.
October 9, 2019
I'll give it a solid 3 Stars but it could have been more. I take away a higher rating as it had no maps whatsoever and also did not give any help in deciphering the intricate and confusing relationships among all the players-especially needed after 1066. I'm sure the native English, Scottish, Irish, and Welsh would not need any such guides but my colonial mind could not keep track of who begat who. And no maps when there are so many shires, counties, battles, marches, invasions, castles, palaces, etc. Come on, give us non-English some help!
Plenty of interesting information mixed in with the intrigues on who gets to be king. I gained a decent understanding of the progress from autocratic rule to various democratic structures. It's clear, the rise of democratic practices was more a result of short-term needs of the moment than any intentional actions. The big benefit of this book is I have a better idea of what books I should pull off my rather large European history shelf to read and in what order.
Plenty of interesting information mixed in with the intrigues on who gets to be king. I gained a decent understanding of the progress from autocratic rule to various democratic structures. It's clear, the rise of democratic practices was more a result of short-term needs of the moment than any intentional actions. The big benefit of this book is I have a better idea of what books I should pull off my rather large European history shelf to read and in what order.
January 12, 2018
This elegantly written and insightful introductory volume of Ackroyd's ( as-yet incomplete ) series, which takes the reader from the island's prehistoric beginnings to the present day, is as much an investigation as a history. Ackroyd's analysis and commentary on every aspect of English life and times including all the big feature attractions - the building of Stonehenge, the coming of the Norsemen, the Norman Conquest, the War of the Roses and the rise of the Tudor dynasty is compelling and wonderfully readable. No event is too insignificant and no detail too small for his penetrating gaze. Quirky, irresistible stuff - a people's history at its best.
February 18, 2013
This is a very ambitious book, covering the period from prehistory up to the death of Henry VII, and really it would be a good ideas to have some sort of computer programme such as Visio to hand while reading it, because the relationships between the main players becomes confusing. But this is not really a fault. I was prompted to read this book after reading the author's version of the Canterbury Tales, and I'm pleased I did.
It would be difficult to find a more informative and entertaining volume. You are drawn into the barbarity of much of English history and entertained by the more whimsical descriptions of life, particularly in the middle ages.
I am a native of the English county of Wiltshire which contains both the site of Stonehenge and the Avebury Ring. Every hilltop is occupied by a prehistoric fort and the Wansdyke winds across some miles of the countryside, possibly constructed by the Saxon settlers. Peter Ackroyd captures in his prose the feeling I had when standing on a Wiltshire hilltop looking at 2000 year old scars on the landscape.
If you want to know more about the English read this!
It would be difficult to find a more informative and entertaining volume. You are drawn into the barbarity of much of English history and entertained by the more whimsical descriptions of life, particularly in the middle ages.
I am a native of the English county of Wiltshire which contains both the site of Stonehenge and the Avebury Ring. Every hilltop is occupied by a prehistoric fort and the Wansdyke winds across some miles of the countryside, possibly constructed by the Saxon settlers. Peter Ackroyd captures in his prose the feeling I had when standing on a Wiltshire hilltop looking at 2000 year old scars on the landscape.
If you want to know more about the English read this!
February 28, 2019
Never Tell Your Foe that Your Foot Aches
This is one of the saws attributed to the medieval Hendyng, who must have been a quarry of proverbial wisdom and therefore very been popular in – and, of course, outside – schoolrooms, and I liked this adage so much that I chose it to introduce my review on Peter Ackroyd’s first volume of The History of England with because I think it sums up pretty much the spirit of the age.
In this first volume, Ackroyd presents the history of what was later to be called England from its dimmest beginnings to the death of Henry VII, the first of the Tudor monarchs. It is a book for those who maybe want to brush up their knowledge on pre-Tudor English history and still enjoy a fast-paced, intriguing narrative, and it is definitely not a cup of tea for readers who exclusively take a more serious and scholarly interest in history, mustering up the patience and determination to deal with structures, long developments and systematic comparisons. Ackroyd also does not seem to have any particular theory in mind when he presents these years of English history, i.e. there is neither the optimistic concept of “progress” at work, nor is there any more clear-cut question underlying the whole enterprise. The only thing Ackroyd points out is the aspect of continuity, but this often happens either on the basis of truisms – yes, even people of the Stonehenge age have lived in stratified and organized societies, and yes, we still use the streets our forebears built, and lots of modern towns and cities are standing on ancient settlement sites –, or they are a bit silly: I cannot count how often Ackroyd pointed out that medieval English people’s love for drink is something that still prevails. Everyone knows that love for drink is a timeless human factor, come on!
However, all these points I just mentioned should not be taken as an attempt to disparage the book. On the contrary, it is a highly enjoyable, fascinating and – it may be permitted to use this adjective – entertaining account of the origins of England, the early English kings, the Danish interlude and William the Conqueror plus all those Plantagenets who came after him. The author makes a lot of the usually internecine family relations between the Plantagenet monarchs, and in hindsight it is often difficult to tell all those power-hungry monarchs apart, but he also intersperses vignettes of everyday life, e.g. chapters on town life, on law and crime, on childhood and games people played, and so on. Altogether, it is a very vivid and remarkable portrait of the past that Ackroyd paints, and it is not to be doubted that the author draws on extensive knowledge although I think that I would have preferred for him to throw in some footnotes now and then. In between the lines of this monarch-centred account of English history, you can even glimpse that of Parliament, although you are obliged to diligently collect the pieces of the puzzle, and of a growing sense of English nationhood. What it all boils down to is the portrait of an epoch whose monarchs and noblemen were probably not any less power-hungry, vane, treacherous and egoistic than our present-day politicians are, but who were infinitely more interesting.
It is probably not easy to write an account of English history that would satisfy both the layman and the expert and that would cover all the aspects and choose the vantage point every potential reader could wish for, and so all I can say is that if you want to read a history focusing on the monarchy and its representatives and adding vignettes of everyday history in between, this is the right book for you.
I wish I had had the discipline to make some notes during the reading of this book in order not to forget the major information but now it is too late. Poor old scatterbrainy Tristram will eventually only remember some medieval jokes, like:
This is one of the saws attributed to the medieval Hendyng, who must have been a quarry of proverbial wisdom and therefore very been popular in – and, of course, outside – schoolrooms, and I liked this adage so much that I chose it to introduce my review on Peter Ackroyd’s first volume of The History of England with because I think it sums up pretty much the spirit of the age.
In this first volume, Ackroyd presents the history of what was later to be called England from its dimmest beginnings to the death of Henry VII, the first of the Tudor monarchs. It is a book for those who maybe want to brush up their knowledge on pre-Tudor English history and still enjoy a fast-paced, intriguing narrative, and it is definitely not a cup of tea for readers who exclusively take a more serious and scholarly interest in history, mustering up the patience and determination to deal with structures, long developments and systematic comparisons. Ackroyd also does not seem to have any particular theory in mind when he presents these years of English history, i.e. there is neither the optimistic concept of “progress” at work, nor is there any more clear-cut question underlying the whole enterprise. The only thing Ackroyd points out is the aspect of continuity, but this often happens either on the basis of truisms – yes, even people of the Stonehenge age have lived in stratified and organized societies, and yes, we still use the streets our forebears built, and lots of modern towns and cities are standing on ancient settlement sites –, or they are a bit silly: I cannot count how often Ackroyd pointed out that medieval English people’s love for drink is something that still prevails. Everyone knows that love for drink is a timeless human factor, come on!
However, all these points I just mentioned should not be taken as an attempt to disparage the book. On the contrary, it is a highly enjoyable, fascinating and – it may be permitted to use this adjective – entertaining account of the origins of England, the early English kings, the Danish interlude and William the Conqueror plus all those Plantagenets who came after him. The author makes a lot of the usually internecine family relations between the Plantagenet monarchs, and in hindsight it is often difficult to tell all those power-hungry monarchs apart, but he also intersperses vignettes of everyday life, e.g. chapters on town life, on law and crime, on childhood and games people played, and so on. Altogether, it is a very vivid and remarkable portrait of the past that Ackroyd paints, and it is not to be doubted that the author draws on extensive knowledge although I think that I would have preferred for him to throw in some footnotes now and then. In between the lines of this monarch-centred account of English history, you can even glimpse that of Parliament, although you are obliged to diligently collect the pieces of the puzzle, and of a growing sense of English nationhood. What it all boils down to is the portrait of an epoch whose monarchs and noblemen were probably not any less power-hungry, vane, treacherous and egoistic than our present-day politicians are, but who were infinitely more interesting.
It is probably not easy to write an account of English history that would satisfy both the layman and the expert and that would cover all the aspects and choose the vantage point every potential reader could wish for, and so all I can say is that if you want to read a history focusing on the monarchy and its representatives and adding vignettes of everyday history in between, this is the right book for you.
I wish I had had the discipline to make some notes during the reading of this book in order not to forget the major information but now it is too late. Poor old scatterbrainy Tristram will eventually only remember some medieval jokes, like:
”What is the broadest water and the least danger to walk over? The dew. What is the cleanest leaf among all other leaves? The holly leaf, for nobody will wipe his arse with it. How many calves’ tails can reach from the earth to the sky? No more than one, if it is long enough.”
June 27, 2012
I picked this up on a whim without hearing anything about it, unfamiliar with Ackroyd's other books but with a general enjoyment of British history (currently stronger now that I've forsaken my homeland for one of the colonies!). My knowledge of pre-Tudor history is patchy at best though. Problem solved.
We are led from the very early days of the native peoples right through a series of conquests and colonisation, wars, famous battles and rivalries, mythical figures and folklore, up until the end of Henry VII. Though he claims it's a history of England and the people, it more honestly a history of the Kings of England during this period, each chapter taking them one at a time. I have to say, that suits me fine but it seems to have annoyed some. We do start to get a sense of England as it develops, slowly, usually through inconsequential turns of events and chance occurrences but it's far from the main focus. Between the main chapters are shorter vignettes into various aspects of daily life, the food, agriculture, playthings etc. that make up life. They're good but over too soon.
I found the first few chapters too brief, almost listing events and changes without much sense of significance. However, it quickly improves probably reflecting the greater level of information surviving about the later eras. The writing is smooth and easy to follow though at times the sheer number of different names and people becomes a little overwhelming. Still, I really enjoyed it and have a greater understanding of that era of English history. For those with an interest but no real appreciation of these times it's well worth reading.
This is supposed to be the first of six volumes and I think the real challenge is ahead. Particularly the next volume on the reformation, a period already heavily documented and generally well known by many. If he can manage to steer away a little from the Monarchy, instead focusing on the development of the people and culture that make England in more detail, it will make a more engaging read. I will happily read the next.
We are led from the very early days of the native peoples right through a series of conquests and colonisation, wars, famous battles and rivalries, mythical figures and folklore, up until the end of Henry VII. Though he claims it's a history of England and the people, it more honestly a history of the Kings of England during this period, each chapter taking them one at a time. I have to say, that suits me fine but it seems to have annoyed some. We do start to get a sense of England as it develops, slowly, usually through inconsequential turns of events and chance occurrences but it's far from the main focus. Between the main chapters are shorter vignettes into various aspects of daily life, the food, agriculture, playthings etc. that make up life. They're good but over too soon.
I found the first few chapters too brief, almost listing events and changes without much sense of significance. However, it quickly improves probably reflecting the greater level of information surviving about the later eras. The writing is smooth and easy to follow though at times the sheer number of different names and people becomes a little overwhelming. Still, I really enjoyed it and have a greater understanding of that era of English history. For those with an interest but no real appreciation of these times it's well worth reading.
This is supposed to be the first of six volumes and I think the real challenge is ahead. Particularly the next volume on the reformation, a period already heavily documented and generally well known by many. If he can manage to steer away a little from the Monarchy, instead focusing on the development of the people and culture that make England in more detail, it will make a more engaging read. I will happily read the next.
June 16, 2015
I am not going to expect you to believe that I sat down and read this book from start to finish. Those who know me know that I read a lot of history and historical fiction. Hilary Mantel, Ian Mortimer, Bernard Cornwell, Ellis Peters and Patrick O'Brian are among my current favorites. Ackroyd's book is highly useful, particularly in its Kindle addition, to flesh out or clarify other author's references. I use the search feature with great abandon. Ackroyd's book it a great help because it is compact and covers a lot of the time periods I find most interesting. He has a point of view, but that doesn't get in my way. His coverage of the elements of daily life in most periods is of importance to me.
This book is four stars for me because of the rich musing on aspects of history that are included. Here is an example:
"Continuity, rather than change, is the measure of the country. It has been suggested that the cities and towns of England decayed at the end of the Roman occupation. But this is pure speculation. They may simply have changed their function while preserving their role as the centers of administration....."
This book is four stars for me because of the rich musing on aspects of history that are included. Here is an example:
"Continuity, rather than change, is the measure of the country. It has been suggested that the cities and towns of England decayed at the end of the Roman occupation. But this is pure speculation. They may simply have changed their function while preserving their role as the centers of administration....."
November 9, 2018
If you've wondered what the real precursor to Game of Thrones is, read this book.
The power plays as England pulled together and became a nation has enough intrigue and interesting historical facts to make even the non-history buff enjoy reading it.
The author writes with wit and great insight. I love the details of history and the amazing connections that if I made up in one of my novels readers would say I was over the top-- but in this book they're the real deal. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction.
It's not just about the history, it's also about the history which this history hinged on.
This is the first in a series of books on the history of England and highly recommended.
The power plays as England pulled together and became a nation has enough intrigue and interesting historical facts to make even the non-history buff enjoy reading it.
The author writes with wit and great insight. I love the details of history and the amazing connections that if I made up in one of my novels readers would say I was over the top-- but in this book they're the real deal. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction.
It's not just about the history, it's also about the history which this history hinged on.
This is the first in a series of books on the history of England and highly recommended.
February 18, 2013
Quit after 130 pages. Simply couldn't stand the unending gross and unsupported generalizations and the occasional outright error of fact. This may well improve as he moves beyond the Normans to better-documented eras, but there are no notes at all I have no confidence in the author's authority. I'm not the sort who reads every foot note, but when I have a question about a statement I do like to know how the author came by his information. And not a single map in the entire book! A history without a map is ridiculous. Too bad, because I've loved some of Ackroyd's fiction.
July 25, 2016
Superb. The best elements of Ackroyd's writing combine with his eccentricities to make this an unimpeachable history of the nation of England.
How is it unimpeachable? Ackroyd takes us from the earliest known elements of life on the English territory through to the reign of Henry VII, the moment it appears where more modern structures of English government emerged. In 448 pages, he accomplishes this by taking two critical approaches: he alternates his chapters in two styles. The first is a more straightforward linear tale of the reigns of monarchs and their dealing with their advisors, family, and citizens. These are the tales of the early rulers, the Norman Conquest, Stephen and Mathilda, Henry II and his sons Richard I and John, the Williams kings I-III, the depositions of Edward II and Richard II, Henry V, the Wars of the Roses, the emergence of Henry VII and peeks at the Tudor dynasty. Alternated with these perspectives from the top are smaller chapters in a style more familiar to readers of "London: A Biography" and "Thames" and "Albion". Ackroyd takes common elements of English life such as the town structure, mercantilism, play, school, religion, and marriage and gives a broader perspective of what it would feel like to live in England in each era. Full of small factoids, one gains an impression not unlike Seurat's pointillism, where each sentence seems random and diffuse but adds up to a larger "truth", much like reality itself. It's an impressive piece of work. Ackroyd thereby seems to cover everything to great depth in 448 pages without overwhelming the reader. I couldn't really put it down.
From Volume 2 onwards (6 projected as of this writing), Ackroyd will cover approximately a century per book, with 2 = 16th century, 3 = 17th, 4 = 18th, 5 = 19th, and 6 = 20th. This seems to be the project that Ackroyd truly was born to write. If you are an Anglophile as I am, an essential read.
How is it unimpeachable? Ackroyd takes us from the earliest known elements of life on the English territory through to the reign of Henry VII, the moment it appears where more modern structures of English government emerged. In 448 pages, he accomplishes this by taking two critical approaches: he alternates his chapters in two styles. The first is a more straightforward linear tale of the reigns of monarchs and their dealing with their advisors, family, and citizens. These are the tales of the early rulers, the Norman Conquest, Stephen and Mathilda, Henry II and his sons Richard I and John, the Williams kings I-III, the depositions of Edward II and Richard II, Henry V, the Wars of the Roses, the emergence of Henry VII and peeks at the Tudor dynasty. Alternated with these perspectives from the top are smaller chapters in a style more familiar to readers of "London: A Biography" and "Thames" and "Albion". Ackroyd takes common elements of English life such as the town structure, mercantilism, play, school, religion, and marriage and gives a broader perspective of what it would feel like to live in England in each era. Full of small factoids, one gains an impression not unlike Seurat's pointillism, where each sentence seems random and diffuse but adds up to a larger "truth", much like reality itself. It's an impressive piece of work. Ackroyd thereby seems to cover everything to great depth in 448 pages without overwhelming the reader. I couldn't really put it down.
From Volume 2 onwards (6 projected as of this writing), Ackroyd will cover approximately a century per book, with 2 = 16th century, 3 = 17th, 4 = 18th, 5 = 19th, and 6 = 20th. This seems to be the project that Ackroyd truly was born to write. If you are an Anglophile as I am, an essential read.
Read
August 29, 2017Ackroyd is always a funny one. What I like about his work is the way he moves between very large historical sweeps and patterns down to very close detail. (I am also a total sucker for pyschogeography. Sssh, don't tell me it's nonsense.)
This was really interesting on settlement patterns and waves of migration and population expansion and contraction, and had a good focus on ordinary people. Intensely readable, too.
This was really interesting on settlement patterns and waves of migration and population expansion and contraction, and had a good focus on ordinary people. Intensely readable, too.
August 8, 2022
This book runs down a comprehensive telling of early English history, but the book manages to go beyond the repetitive cycle of overtaxation followed by betrayal, followed by regicide. Ackroyd manages to weave in explanatory chapters that give a nice overview of what life was like for the average person during this tumultuous time. For example, what did people actually eat? How did they fall in love? What was the experience of daily life in a monastery? These really gave a nice context to how typical people actually lived.
June 21, 2019
Foundation is a good layman's introduction to English history. It is more of a survey book filled with cool historical minutiae from the origin of names to different cultural traditions to come from this period. It is written in a very easy to read format and is readily accessible to any reader. But this is not an in-depth historical work, but that might increase it's appeal to the average reader.
Each chapter about a ruler is interspaced with a small chapter about some cultural or historical concept- from climate change to house building. While not the most academic of books, it is a great little read. Ackroyd's history is a good "primer" and has an extensive bibliography that can lead more serious readers to do their own additional research.
Will this be considered a magnum opus of British history? No. But, it IS a very entertaining, easy to read and has historical tidbits that are fascinating. Recommend for anyone looking for a good introduction to English history.
Each chapter about a ruler is interspaced with a small chapter about some cultural or historical concept- from climate change to house building. While not the most academic of books, it is a great little read. Ackroyd's history is a good "primer" and has an extensive bibliography that can lead more serious readers to do their own additional research.
Will this be considered a magnum opus of British history? No. But, it IS a very entertaining, easy to read and has historical tidbits that are fascinating. Recommend for anyone looking for a good introduction to English history.
February 24, 2012
For someone like myself, who knows patches of English history but has never had an opportunity to grasp the wider picture, Foundation is the perfect remedy. It's a remarkable achievement of historical writing, somehow cramming in thousands of years of history without seeming overwhelming - creating a bold, enjoyable narrative from a complex and multi-faceted history. Ackryod carefully balances out his own enthusiasm and narrative flair with a solid respect for the history he's describing, and is careful to present multiple perspectives where possible. The usual trap of the popular historian is sensationalism - Ackroyd deftly avoids this, creating a history that is hugely enjoyable to read while also being a genuine education.
January 25, 2021
Peter Ackroyd begins his history of England with this volume of the series, as the subtitle states Ackroyd takes us to Henry VIII in this book which I enjoyed more as I went along in the work.
Because the period examined is so large it is a survey work that goes into more detail as Ackroyd reaches the 12th century as more archival sources are extant. It is mainly a history of Kings as the sources the author relies on concentrates on the monarchs. However there are small chapters that are scattered throughout the history where Ackroyd describes day to day life in a certain century, how the peasants lived and the make up of the towns and villages.
I will investigate the further volumes of the history as I enjoyed the writing style of the author.
Because the period examined is so large it is a survey work that goes into more detail as Ackroyd reaches the 12th century as more archival sources are extant. It is mainly a history of Kings as the sources the author relies on concentrates on the monarchs. However there are small chapters that are scattered throughout the history where Ackroyd describes day to day life in a certain century, how the peasants lived and the make up of the towns and villages.
I will investigate the further volumes of the history as I enjoyed the writing style of the author.
August 12, 2013
The author offers thoughtful new insights into age-old discussions of English history. I particularly enjoyed the way the chapters alternate between narratives about the people in power, and descriptions of everyday life.
Unfortunately, though, Ackroyd's slapdash style is annoying. Far too often, he tosses together facts and comments without drawing any meaningful connections. I suspect that if this manuscript had been submitted by a less famous author, it never would have been accepted for publication.
Unfortunately, though, Ackroyd's slapdash style is annoying. Far too often, he tosses together facts and comments without drawing any meaningful connections. I suspect that if this manuscript had been submitted by a less famous author, it never would have been accepted for publication.
April 5, 2012
I was looking for a crash course history book, an outline of the history of England. Ackroyd has written exactly that kind of book: crash course history. In the process however he makes English history sound like a dull succession of kings and bishops. Every now and then there's a brief 'intermission' in which Ackroyd describes the more ordinary parts of English life: roads, livestock, position of women, money etc. But these separate mini-chapters actually do damage to the idea that the English society can be described as a whole (which Ackroyd, according to his introduction, is trying to do) The structure of the book gives the false impression that there is a huge gap between the English aristocratic top layer and the lower echelons of English society. I get the impression that Ackroyd tries very hard to show that the English history is a history of all its inhabitants, but utterly fails. He approaches the course of events like a chronicle rather than a history.
Simon Schama's A History of Britain BBC documentary series first piqued my interest in British history. Knowing Ackroyd's reputation I assumed this would be a improvement on Schama's interesting but slightly out of date notions. Unfortunately Ackroyd's Foundation merely showed Schama's superb eye for suprising historical parallels and his inspired relay of events.
Moreover, Ackroyd, in my opinion, presents the English history a bit too much as a continuum towards the modern and early modern period. Time and again he stresses the continuity of old Anglo-Saxon habits or old-English customs, which have survived to this day. Of course there's a case to be made for many of these examples, but Ackroyd makes this point so often, it gives the impression that essentially nothing has changed. Anglo-Saxon invasions, Danish invasions, Viking invasions, Norman invasions, nothing could tarnish the ancient English culture. It's an English history, for the English. This emphasis on continuity is essentially ahistorical.
That said, I'd recommend this book to anyone unacquainted with British history. It gives a brief outline of 3000 years of the dynastic struggles, wars and economic change. It lacks a certain inspiration, but it gives the reader a sense of "interconnectedness" throughout the history of England.
Simon Schama's A History of Britain BBC documentary series first piqued my interest in British history. Knowing Ackroyd's reputation I assumed this would be a improvement on Schama's interesting but slightly out of date notions. Unfortunately Ackroyd's Foundation merely showed Schama's superb eye for suprising historical parallels and his inspired relay of events.
Moreover, Ackroyd, in my opinion, presents the English history a bit too much as a continuum towards the modern and early modern period. Time and again he stresses the continuity of old Anglo-Saxon habits or old-English customs, which have survived to this day. Of course there's a case to be made for many of these examples, but Ackroyd makes this point so often, it gives the impression that essentially nothing has changed. Anglo-Saxon invasions, Danish invasions, Viking invasions, Norman invasions, nothing could tarnish the ancient English culture. It's an English history, for the English. This emphasis on continuity is essentially ahistorical.
That said, I'd recommend this book to anyone unacquainted with British history. It gives a brief outline of 3000 years of the dynastic struggles, wars and economic change. It lacks a certain inspiration, but it gives the reader a sense of "interconnectedness" throughout the history of England.
July 15, 2016
A good overview of Britain's history that starts with the earliest evidence of human habitation on the island and moves chronologically through a vast amount of time. It covers the Neolithic Age, the Iron Age, Roman Britannia, Anglo-Saxon England, the Viking Age, the Norman Invasion, and the events during the succession of rulers during the Normans, Plantagenets, Lancastrians, Yorkists, and the beginning of the Tudors. It is a staggering amount to cover in one book, but the author does a good job of giving a general overview of each time frame and he always manages to keep the narrative interesting. I decided to read this one immediately after completing a Great Courses Lecture series covering the exact same topic - Jennifer Paxton's The Story of Medieval England. The two books complement each other very well and it was helpful to hear the same things covered in slightly different ways.
August 18, 2012
Very entertaining, easily read, romp through English history following the royal line.
April 24, 2021
general description of the history of England from prehistoric times to the advent of the Tudors
December 18, 2021
Ancient Britain was actually a peninsula until a tsunami flooded its land-links to Europe around 8,000 years ago. ... The water struck the north-east of Britain so forcefully that it travelled 25 miles inland, turning low-lying plains of Doggerland into what is now called the North Sea, and marshlands in the south simply became the Channel. Before that, even the Irish Sea had been dry land. It is believed that the “Storegga Slides” in Norway caused the massive tsunami. When the North Sea was still above the water, it was lakes and forests. This was a land of elephants, macaque monkeys and reindeer. The mysteries and the remains of the Mesolithic English lie beneath the waves. Truly, remains to be seen.
“The English were not originally ‘Anglo-Saxon’ or ‘Celtic’: they were a pre-historic people. “The English were a colonized people”; its settlers started coming 15,000 years ago. Thatcham village in Berkshire has been in place for 10,000 years. 9,000 years ago, the settlers were starting fires with iron pyrite in round houses with a hearth and used canoes. What we think of as Roman Roads were older: “the Romans simply made use of the prehistoric paths.” The Brits still move in the footsteps of their ancestors. Flint was mined to a depth of 50 feet and sent around the country. “The construction of Stonehenge itself would have entailed millions of hours of labor. Those massive bluestones were quarried from 200 miles away (Preseli Hills, Southwest Wales – check out the distance on a map). The Salisbury Plain setup was the largest and most protracted public works undertaking in English history. England largely agricultural population of 1 million in 1900 BC had risen to 2 million when Caesar arrives in 55 BC. In the Thames has been found 368 Neolithic axes. Stone Age > Bronze (tin + copper) Age > Iron Age.
It takes 2,000 years to go from Bronze Age to Iron Age. The Druids would put humans in wicker-work and set them on fire for human sacrifice. England’s population was 2,000,000 in the Iron Age and 3,000,000 at the end of Roman dominion. England’s prehistoric beginnings lie trapped under present day England.” “There is scarcely one spot in England that does not contain memorials of an ancient past.” Once Rome invades, English houses change from round to rectilinear. Hadrian’s Wall separated Romanized England from the tribes of Scotland. Rome governed England for 350 years. After the Romans, brick making won’t return until the fifteenth century, and the left behind Roman villas are neglected. Archaeologists found a blackened layer of earth later found to be “the residue of wattle and daub housing”. Britons migrated to Gaul and formed Brittany. England from the first to the thirteenth century “was subject to almost continual foreign occupation.” The Angles came from Schleswig, the Saxons from near the rive Elbe. The term Anglo-Saxons was invented in the sixth century. Life expectancy then was thirty-five years. The Angles and the Saxons used what was left of the Roman occupation. “England, as we understand it today, was created by the Christian Church.” One of the invading Norse was called “the children’s man” because unlike the others, this one “refused to impale children on the tip of his lance.” Now, that is what we call self-restraint. We see the Norse influence with their remaining words: sky, die, anger, skin, wing, law, bread, and eggs.
All English villages (except ones relating to the Industrial Revolution) were established by the 12th century. Some of these villages have existed for thousands of years. In the ninth and tenth century, you could be fined for pulling someone’s hair. Forcibly cutting someone’s hair was considered criminal, like cutting off an ear or nose. 50% of the English died before 30. 90% were dead by fifty. The Normans arrive in 1066, the Duke of Normandy’s only claim to the throne was through conquest. The English were used to foreign kings. In the 11th and 12th centuries, one’s bed was a bag of straw. There was no privacy, everyone slept in one room with others and their livestock. Floors were beaten-earth covered in rushes which quickly became moist and dirty. Spoons and dishes were made of wood. Glass became a thing in the fourteenth century when even glass urinals came into vogue. Back then people would examine urine through them for medical reasons. “The doctor would observe, smell and taste the urine.” Yum.
William the Conqueror takes power and then tries to pacify his new country (the harrowing of the North). 10,000 Normans controlling a foreign country of 4,000,000 – what could go wrong? It was five years of constant revolt. “England had become a militarized state, supporting an army of occupation.” The Normans introduce “forest law” where all products of the forest belong only to the King. But under Normans, traveling in England became safe. Under Normans Snotingham becomes Nottingham. New words that came from the Normans to England then were: master, servant, crime, treason, felony, money and payment. Thegns become knights. The deep structure of the country remained intact (an essential historical feature of England). By the 12th century, property gets bequeathed to a single heir and the rabbit is introduced to England. The manor arises with fealty to one’s lord. The archbishop was a stand-in for God, and was the most powerful man in England.
William Rufus (William II) begins English colonialism. The King’s highways were built to the width of two wagons side by side (thirty feet). Such was English hospitality at the time that when strangers came to your house. they got two free nights there and a free washing of their feet and hands, all for the trade-off of news of the outside world. When kings died, the realm seemed lawless until the next king was installed. The umbrella gets introduced to England. Before 1066, English had names like Leofwine, Aelfwine, Siward and Morcar. Now after Normans names became Robert, Walter, Henry and William. The majority of the country took to the new names. Surnames don’t become popular until the 14th century. Some indicated your profession like the last names of Cook, Barber, Sawyer, Miller, Smith, Brewer, and Carpenter. Other surnames described you: Fitzmorris meant bastard son of Morris. All the Kings from Henry II to Richard III were Plantagenet. The Plantagenet dynasty is replaced by the Tudors.
Henry II’s jester was named Roland the farter and “every Christmas he used to leap, whistle and fart before the king.” Finally, a Brit who could have been on America’s Got Talent. It was hard to be free in the country as a villein but if you lived in a town for a year and a day, you could claim freedom. “Those who lived in towns were by definition free.” A guilty wealthy man could buy freedom after having committed a crime. “Law was just another form of power.” Courtrooms filled with the smells of all sorts of unwashed people led judges to carry “a ball of linen soaked in aniseed and chamomile.” “There are more than 3,000 deserted villages in England.” Richard I was 6’5”. Kings had to be militant otherwise they’d be considered like Richard II and Henry VI to be failures, and those two were murdered. So, English Christian Kings that didn’t murder got murdered. What a country. Richard I ordered the murder of 3,000 prisoners at Acre by beheading. He became Richard the Lion because he never pardoned an offense. He gets captured on the way back from Jerusalem where he was being both a militant prick and a failure. King John was one of the few English kings in the 13th century who bathed. Woo Hoo! It’s John who signs the Magna Carta. His height was 5’ 5” This was a violent time; kids carried pocket-knives. Thieves were killed and blinded and castrated. Relatives of the victim could legally do the blinding and castration. Trial by water and fire were common: placing your hand in boiling water, trying to stay afloat in cold water while bound, or picking up glowing metal and walking with it for three steps before casting it down. Listed punishments go on for pages of this book, enough to think, “I get the picture, living in England back then would be hell.” Henry III replaces dead King John and is forced to agree with the Magna Carta. He rules for 56 years. In 1236, Henry III is the first king to call a parliament and you also have the beginnings of the House of Commons. There were 1,100 – 1,200 knights then. When you surrendered your knighthood, you became an esquire who still had lots of land. Many in England had tended the same land for centuries. “Land was the single most important cause of violence and social dissension.”
Next up is Edward Longshanks (Edward I) who invades Wales and puts up castles as tokens of brute force. Under Edward’s reign, England’s number of lawyers went from 10 to 200. Then comes William Wallace defeating the English army at Stirling Bridge in 1297. For the crime of wanting freedom for his people and being the threat of a good example, Wallace is “disemboweled while still alive and quartered.” This Foundation book is filled with the sadistic early punishments by the Brits. England, then under Edward I, had more people than it did under Elizabeth I and George II. Too many people for the land and a nasty militaristic bent means watch out next door neighbors: Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and the French provinces on the mainland. Jews arrived via William the Conqueror but were harassed and later expelled by Edward I. Back then, Anti-Semitism was rampant in England and in Europe in a game where Uppity Christians would first pretend to forget Christ was Jewish then call all Jews “killers of Christ” as though each one was all standing on the hillside centuries ago personally throwing stones at him. “It is a matter of record that England took the lead in the execration of the Jews.”
The Battle of Bannockburn, lost by Edward II, insures the independence of Scotland. In appreciation for his achievements, in 1327, Edward II dies with a red-hot poker shoved up his ass and his screams could be heard miles away. The Mongols never tortured; so, what’s up with these Brits? Replacement Edward III is great at war and thus, was the ideal monarch for this violent nation. Chaucer gets his start during Edward III’s reign. Legislation is passed that says the lower classes can’t eat meals with more than two courses. “Idleness, if proven, could be punished.” Nonetheless, feudal England was coming to an end. During Edward III, the Black Death arrives in England; once infected, you could die in three days.
Then comes those sadistic punishments for making a religious error against the one true Church during the time of Wycliffe and the Lollards. A London chaplain said that the bread during mass was merely bread. Fair enough, right? In 1401, “he was stuffed inside a wooden barrel at Smithfield and placed on the flames.” The average Brit then was orthodox and had no interest in change. “Crusaders were notorious for carrying back (from the Holy Land) venereal disease.” Make war against anyone, screw the poor, and don’t forget sex tourism; such a great grip on the New Testament those Brit Crusaders had. Henry IV killed a monarch and an archbishop. “War was considered to be the highest duty, and the greatest achievement, of any king.” Henry V wins Agincourt in 1415 and almost conquers France. He had done more than any other English king. The new king Henry VI takes over in 1429, “at barely the age of ten he was the only male monarch ever to be king of both England and France.” “Two kings, Henry VI and Charles VII were now claiming supremacy over the French people.” It stayed that way for twenty more years. “In truth a fifteenth century king had to be aggressive and brutal.” Henry VI’s worst swear word was saying Forsooth twice. Plug your ears, grandma. By 1450, English forces “had been expelled from most of the towns and cities of France.” The War of the Roses breaks out. When two people were in a close alliance back then it was said, “they s--- out of the same arse.” “Wool raw and finished was indeed the motor of the fifteenth century economy.” Schooling was six in the morning until six at night. Tennis was played against a wall and with your hand; “racquets were not introduced until the end of the fifteenth century.” Henry VI “like many gourmands, often vomited so that he might eat again.” Yum. He is killed in the Tower of London. This concludes the Lancastrian royal family from Henry IV to Henry VI. Clocks were not introduced until the 15th century. Richard III was not a hunchback, but he was the last Yorkist king before the Tudor Dynasty. “The house of Plantagenets, from Henry II to Richard III was brimming with blood.” “It is hard to imagine a family more steeped in slaughter and revenge.”
This was a very good book. Here’s an English joke from this time period to leave you with, just in time for the Holidays: “What is cleanest leaf among all the leaves? The Holly leaf, for no one will wipe his arse with it.”
“The English were not originally ‘Anglo-Saxon’ or ‘Celtic’: they were a pre-historic people. “The English were a colonized people”; its settlers started coming 15,000 years ago. Thatcham village in Berkshire has been in place for 10,000 years. 9,000 years ago, the settlers were starting fires with iron pyrite in round houses with a hearth and used canoes. What we think of as Roman Roads were older: “the Romans simply made use of the prehistoric paths.” The Brits still move in the footsteps of their ancestors. Flint was mined to a depth of 50 feet and sent around the country. “The construction of Stonehenge itself would have entailed millions of hours of labor. Those massive bluestones were quarried from 200 miles away (Preseli Hills, Southwest Wales – check out the distance on a map). The Salisbury Plain setup was the largest and most protracted public works undertaking in English history. England largely agricultural population of 1 million in 1900 BC had risen to 2 million when Caesar arrives in 55 BC. In the Thames has been found 368 Neolithic axes. Stone Age > Bronze (tin + copper) Age > Iron Age.
It takes 2,000 years to go from Bronze Age to Iron Age. The Druids would put humans in wicker-work and set them on fire for human sacrifice. England’s population was 2,000,000 in the Iron Age and 3,000,000 at the end of Roman dominion. England’s prehistoric beginnings lie trapped under present day England.” “There is scarcely one spot in England that does not contain memorials of an ancient past.” Once Rome invades, English houses change from round to rectilinear. Hadrian’s Wall separated Romanized England from the tribes of Scotland. Rome governed England for 350 years. After the Romans, brick making won’t return until the fifteenth century, and the left behind Roman villas are neglected. Archaeologists found a blackened layer of earth later found to be “the residue of wattle and daub housing”. Britons migrated to Gaul and formed Brittany. England from the first to the thirteenth century “was subject to almost continual foreign occupation.” The Angles came from Schleswig, the Saxons from near the rive Elbe. The term Anglo-Saxons was invented in the sixth century. Life expectancy then was thirty-five years. The Angles and the Saxons used what was left of the Roman occupation. “England, as we understand it today, was created by the Christian Church.” One of the invading Norse was called “the children’s man” because unlike the others, this one “refused to impale children on the tip of his lance.” Now, that is what we call self-restraint. We see the Norse influence with their remaining words: sky, die, anger, skin, wing, law, bread, and eggs.
All English villages (except ones relating to the Industrial Revolution) were established by the 12th century. Some of these villages have existed for thousands of years. In the ninth and tenth century, you could be fined for pulling someone’s hair. Forcibly cutting someone’s hair was considered criminal, like cutting off an ear or nose. 50% of the English died before 30. 90% were dead by fifty. The Normans arrive in 1066, the Duke of Normandy’s only claim to the throne was through conquest. The English were used to foreign kings. In the 11th and 12th centuries, one’s bed was a bag of straw. There was no privacy, everyone slept in one room with others and their livestock. Floors were beaten-earth covered in rushes which quickly became moist and dirty. Spoons and dishes were made of wood. Glass became a thing in the fourteenth century when even glass urinals came into vogue. Back then people would examine urine through them for medical reasons. “The doctor would observe, smell and taste the urine.” Yum.
William the Conqueror takes power and then tries to pacify his new country (the harrowing of the North). 10,000 Normans controlling a foreign country of 4,000,000 – what could go wrong? It was five years of constant revolt. “England had become a militarized state, supporting an army of occupation.” The Normans introduce “forest law” where all products of the forest belong only to the King. But under Normans, traveling in England became safe. Under Normans Snotingham becomes Nottingham. New words that came from the Normans to England then were: master, servant, crime, treason, felony, money and payment. Thegns become knights. The deep structure of the country remained intact (an essential historical feature of England). By the 12th century, property gets bequeathed to a single heir and the rabbit is introduced to England. The manor arises with fealty to one’s lord. The archbishop was a stand-in for God, and was the most powerful man in England.
William Rufus (William II) begins English colonialism. The King’s highways were built to the width of two wagons side by side (thirty feet). Such was English hospitality at the time that when strangers came to your house. they got two free nights there and a free washing of their feet and hands, all for the trade-off of news of the outside world. When kings died, the realm seemed lawless until the next king was installed. The umbrella gets introduced to England. Before 1066, English had names like Leofwine, Aelfwine, Siward and Morcar. Now after Normans names became Robert, Walter, Henry and William. The majority of the country took to the new names. Surnames don’t become popular until the 14th century. Some indicated your profession like the last names of Cook, Barber, Sawyer, Miller, Smith, Brewer, and Carpenter. Other surnames described you: Fitzmorris meant bastard son of Morris. All the Kings from Henry II to Richard III were Plantagenet. The Plantagenet dynasty is replaced by the Tudors.
Henry II’s jester was named Roland the farter and “every Christmas he used to leap, whistle and fart before the king.” Finally, a Brit who could have been on America’s Got Talent. It was hard to be free in the country as a villein but if you lived in a town for a year and a day, you could claim freedom. “Those who lived in towns were by definition free.” A guilty wealthy man could buy freedom after having committed a crime. “Law was just another form of power.” Courtrooms filled with the smells of all sorts of unwashed people led judges to carry “a ball of linen soaked in aniseed and chamomile.” “There are more than 3,000 deserted villages in England.” Richard I was 6’5”. Kings had to be militant otherwise they’d be considered like Richard II and Henry VI to be failures, and those two were murdered. So, English Christian Kings that didn’t murder got murdered. What a country. Richard I ordered the murder of 3,000 prisoners at Acre by beheading. He became Richard the Lion because he never pardoned an offense. He gets captured on the way back from Jerusalem where he was being both a militant prick and a failure. King John was one of the few English kings in the 13th century who bathed. Woo Hoo! It’s John who signs the Magna Carta. His height was 5’ 5” This was a violent time; kids carried pocket-knives. Thieves were killed and blinded and castrated. Relatives of the victim could legally do the blinding and castration. Trial by water and fire were common: placing your hand in boiling water, trying to stay afloat in cold water while bound, or picking up glowing metal and walking with it for three steps before casting it down. Listed punishments go on for pages of this book, enough to think, “I get the picture, living in England back then would be hell.” Henry III replaces dead King John and is forced to agree with the Magna Carta. He rules for 56 years. In 1236, Henry III is the first king to call a parliament and you also have the beginnings of the House of Commons. There were 1,100 – 1,200 knights then. When you surrendered your knighthood, you became an esquire who still had lots of land. Many in England had tended the same land for centuries. “Land was the single most important cause of violence and social dissension.”
Next up is Edward Longshanks (Edward I) who invades Wales and puts up castles as tokens of brute force. Under Edward’s reign, England’s number of lawyers went from 10 to 200. Then comes William Wallace defeating the English army at Stirling Bridge in 1297. For the crime of wanting freedom for his people and being the threat of a good example, Wallace is “disemboweled while still alive and quartered.” This Foundation book is filled with the sadistic early punishments by the Brits. England, then under Edward I, had more people than it did under Elizabeth I and George II. Too many people for the land and a nasty militaristic bent means watch out next door neighbors: Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and the French provinces on the mainland. Jews arrived via William the Conqueror but were harassed and later expelled by Edward I. Back then, Anti-Semitism was rampant in England and in Europe in a game where Uppity Christians would first pretend to forget Christ was Jewish then call all Jews “killers of Christ” as though each one was all standing on the hillside centuries ago personally throwing stones at him. “It is a matter of record that England took the lead in the execration of the Jews.”
The Battle of Bannockburn, lost by Edward II, insures the independence of Scotland. In appreciation for his achievements, in 1327, Edward II dies with a red-hot poker shoved up his ass and his screams could be heard miles away. The Mongols never tortured; so, what’s up with these Brits? Replacement Edward III is great at war and thus, was the ideal monarch for this violent nation. Chaucer gets his start during Edward III’s reign. Legislation is passed that says the lower classes can’t eat meals with more than two courses. “Idleness, if proven, could be punished.” Nonetheless, feudal England was coming to an end. During Edward III, the Black Death arrives in England; once infected, you could die in three days.
Then comes those sadistic punishments for making a religious error against the one true Church during the time of Wycliffe and the Lollards. A London chaplain said that the bread during mass was merely bread. Fair enough, right? In 1401, “he was stuffed inside a wooden barrel at Smithfield and placed on the flames.” The average Brit then was orthodox and had no interest in change. “Crusaders were notorious for carrying back (from the Holy Land) venereal disease.” Make war against anyone, screw the poor, and don’t forget sex tourism; such a great grip on the New Testament those Brit Crusaders had. Henry IV killed a monarch and an archbishop. “War was considered to be the highest duty, and the greatest achievement, of any king.” Henry V wins Agincourt in 1415 and almost conquers France. He had done more than any other English king. The new king Henry VI takes over in 1429, “at barely the age of ten he was the only male monarch ever to be king of both England and France.” “Two kings, Henry VI and Charles VII were now claiming supremacy over the French people.” It stayed that way for twenty more years. “In truth a fifteenth century king had to be aggressive and brutal.” Henry VI’s worst swear word was saying Forsooth twice. Plug your ears, grandma. By 1450, English forces “had been expelled from most of the towns and cities of France.” The War of the Roses breaks out. When two people were in a close alliance back then it was said, “they s--- out of the same arse.” “Wool raw and finished was indeed the motor of the fifteenth century economy.” Schooling was six in the morning until six at night. Tennis was played against a wall and with your hand; “racquets were not introduced until the end of the fifteenth century.” Henry VI “like many gourmands, often vomited so that he might eat again.” Yum. He is killed in the Tower of London. This concludes the Lancastrian royal family from Henry IV to Henry VI. Clocks were not introduced until the 15th century. Richard III was not a hunchback, but he was the last Yorkist king before the Tudor Dynasty. “The house of Plantagenets, from Henry II to Richard III was brimming with blood.” “It is hard to imagine a family more steeped in slaughter and revenge.”
This was a very good book. Here’s an English joke from this time period to leave you with, just in time for the Holidays: “What is cleanest leaf among all the leaves? The Holly leaf, for no one will wipe his arse with it.”
January 6, 2023
A boring history of "the great men of England".
No surprises: A king dies or is killed just to be replaced by another one and this goes on for centuries.
An abundance of Henrys, Richards and Edwards.
That was why I used to hate Ottoman History and history in general during high school.
The first couple of chapters about the pre-Roman England was interesting though.
Avoid if what you are looking for is more like a social history of England a-la The British Marxist Historians.
No surprises: A king dies or is killed just to be replaced by another one and this goes on for centuries.
An abundance of Henrys, Richards and Edwards.
That was why I used to hate Ottoman History and history in general during high school.
The first couple of chapters about the pre-Roman England was interesting though.
Avoid if what you are looking for is more like a social history of England a-la The British Marxist Historians.
August 29, 2012
While Ackroyd writes well and this book filled some gaping gaps in my knowledge of English medieaval history, I found it slightly lacking as a social history. There was too much focus on the power politics of the English plantagenet kings and not enough on the rest of society at large. Each individual story of the Kings is interesting in its own right and filled some gaps in my knowledge. But there are rather a lot of them and the book begins to feel like a procession of one damm King after another all of them fairly unpleasant and thuggish.
Ackroyd struggles to find a unifying thread through the whole history other than the "nothing really changes" since Stonehenge viewpoint and that development of Parliament in the medieval period happens very slowly and that there is a element of chaos in English history where much is decided by accident and that the course of history influenced by winning battles, for instance, involves a large degree of luck and chance. I'm sure that this last insight is true but the natural desire we have of historians is to find a pattern and a story that links up the years.
Ackroyd struggles to find a unifying thread through the whole history other than the "nothing really changes" since Stonehenge viewpoint and that development of Parliament in the medieval period happens very slowly and that there is a element of chaos in English history where much is decided by accident and that the course of history influenced by winning battles, for instance, involves a large degree of luck and chance. I'm sure that this last insight is true but the natural desire we have of historians is to find a pattern and a story that links up the years.
January 21, 2015
Well written, easy to understand and such an interesting read
Even being English, the vastness of the country's history makes it all too overwhelming and confusing to make all the connections between the multitude of names I've recognised since childhood. I remember switching off in history lessons at school -it was all just too much. Thank you Peter Ackroyd, you've helped me to finally see the whole picture and a more realistic one at that.
Even being English, the vastness of the country's history makes it all too overwhelming and confusing to make all the connections between the multitude of names I've recognised since childhood. I remember switching off in history lessons at school -it was all just too much. Thank you Peter Ackroyd, you've helped me to finally see the whole picture and a more realistic one at that.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 546 reviews