The Isles: A History

A couple of years ago I read The Fatal Shore, Robert Hughes’ brilliant account of Australia’s history as a British penal colony. After moving to Britain this year I became well aware that my own knowledge of British history is pretty hazy – it was only last year that I found out the British actually once executed their king and had a republic for twenty years. I’d heard of Oliver Cromwell and the “Commonwealth” and the “Restoration” and the English Civil War, but didn’t really know what those words entailed – I had no idea of the fascinating story of the king’s overthrow, and his nephew’s straight-from-a-fantasy-novel flight to safety in France. This happens to all of us, of course; we’re vaguely aware of show more thousands of concepts and phrases from history, society, science and the arts without really knowing the details.

So I wanted a British history book which pretty much tells the story of the nation from beginning to end – obviously a more daunting task than an Australian history book – and also, ideally, one which was well-regarded, entertainingly written and which didn’t make apologies for the horrors of the past. (More on that later.) There are plenty of gargantuan works out there, but I ended up going with Norman Davies’ single-issue The Isles: A History, which covers pretty much everything from prehistoric times to New Labour. Compared to the classic Oxford multi-volume saga, this is a “short” book, although it’s still a 1000-page brick that I’ve been reading on and off since August.

The Isles was specifically written by Davies to tackle what he saw as a confused approach to British history, to wit, the confusion between what’s English and what’s British, and the overlap between them. The title itself is derived from the least contentious terminology for the British Isles and throughout the book Davies makes a point of referring to each island and nation as it was called by its inhabitants – not the Anglicised version that came thereafter.

Another aspect of English history I was foggy on until recently was the Normans. I knew the word derived from Normandy in France, and that in the Middle Ages England had fought a series of protracted wars in France, but I assumed it was a case of England invading and claiming Normandy. It was quite the opposite: the Normans were French, and for a good three centuries after the Norman invasion, England’s king and nobles and knights all spoke French. (And even a thousand years later, those descended from the Normans are more likely to be well-off than those who aren’t.) Davies refers to William the Conqueror as “Guillaime,” as his people would have.

The second reason Davies wrote The Isles was to challenge the politicised view of British history taught in schools for much of the 20th century, a mindset Michael Gove attempted to return to in the 21st – a nationalistic perception which attempts to shore up the idea that there was always something fundamentally British uniting the peoples of the Isles. Davies regularly reminds the reader that the nation-state is mostly a modern invention, and that in feudal times people were far more likely to consider themselves as “belonging” to their local baron or to the pope than they were to the king of England. He acknowledges the British Empire as the product of unrestrained capitalism and exploitation, although – like many British scholars – still seems to consider it a “gentler” empire, as though just because Britain wasn’t as brutal as King Leopold in the Congo, or just because it left India with a pretty good railway system, all the crimes and horrors of the Empire can be summarily dismissed.

The Isles: A History is doubtless an important book and a critical addition to a historical canon which generally elevates the English to the most important strata while marginalising the Irish, Welsh, Scottish, Celts, Picts, Norseman and thousand other peoples who contributed to the long story of these islands. But for obvious reasons it wasn’t the best book for me to read. It’s a book which challenges historical assumptions amongst the British, or those well-versed in British history. For those people I can certainly recommend it. Outsiders like myself would be better off beginning elsewhere. You need to have your prejudices built before they can be challenged. show less

This book was a strange read in 2020.
Davies spends a fair amount of time lambasting other historians in the book, which both makes you wonder if it could have been about a third shorter, but also why he's right and they're all wrong - although I do have a lot of sympathy for many of his arguments.
He does give a lot of fascinating insights into a huge number of generally under-represented areas, at least in my relatively narrow sight and that's laudable but he also goes digging into some areas where a much more superficial survey would have sufficed and it's hard to know why he's dug so deep - it's almost like he's just found something interesting and gone for it, so maybe some judicial editing wouldn't have gone amiss.
The weird bit is show more reading his views on modern Europe and our place in it immediately after we've left the EU, all very strange no matter your views on the matter.
Anyway, a book worth reading, but you might find you can skip the odd bit or two. show less

The earlier part of the book emphasizes the confusing and misunderstood nature of the identity of the Isles. Is it the British Isles, Britain, England, the United Kingdom? Davies shows where and when each term arises and how they should be used without anachronism. He focuses on the European dimension of the British monarchy, providing a necessary corrective to the Anglocentric histories of the classroom. However, the book is seriously marred by a large number of factual errors and poor editorial choices. How can a serious history of these islands be written without any reference to the General Strike of 1926 or any serious discussion of the origins of the First World War? What does it say about an author's priorities when there is show more nothing about appeasement in the 1930s, yet the lyrics of a song by Elton John are reprinted at length?

The last section, supposedly dealing with the history of the entire 20th century, looks hurriedly written, in need of thorough fact-checking, and immersed in the priorities of the late 1990s. It already looks dated - reading it feels like flicking through the opinion pages of an old newspaper. A very disappointing book. show less

A fantastic panoramic review of the history of The Isles (from prehistory through the 20th century), with plenty of commentary about the field of history, historiography, and the like.

Highly recommended for those interested in history, the Isles, or any of the resident countries or peoples (Ireland, Scotland, Wales, England, UK, Great Britain, Celts, Picts, Bretons, etc.)

Norman Davies takes us on an exhaustive tour of the English Isles (primarily the one us Yanks call "England") in an attempt to answer a few questions: What is England? What is Brittain? What is the United Kingdom?
Davies begins with Cheddar Man and works his way right up to Margaret Thatcher. This history is laid out in chronolgical order, rather than grouping material by subject. I like this approach, as this allows the history to read like a story. That's what is really is anyway, right?
Davies brings a great sense of humor to what threatens to be a dry subject. At the end of each landmark era, Davies answers this three basic questions, as pertains to that point in time. As this history moves toward the present, the focus becomes more show more sharp, and Davies addresses this in his forward. Unfortunatley, I found the detail to be a bit much, and I gave up before the end of the 18th century, with quite a bit of book to go. Still, the first 1000 or so pages are well worth the effort.
This brings us to the final point. I began by calling this history "exhaustive." I do not think that was an exageration. This is simply an enourmous book, and will take quite a lot of time to read and digest.
In the end, I enjoyed Davies style enough to pick up "Europe," an equally monstrous popular history of even larger scope. I would strongly recommend this book for anglophiles, or to anyone with a passion for history, and a curiosity about the history of one of the world's great old nations. Fans of U.S. History ought to give this one a look as well. Remember, our founding fathers considered themselves Englishmen, first and formost. show less

I got this book cheaply (10 US dollars at a Half Price bookstore-list price was 19.99 pounds which is about 30 US dollars) without any idea of how good it was. I had no significant knowledge of the history of Britian or the Isles but hoped to learn. As I have read this book I have learned a significant amount but unfortunately for me this is a history book to "correct" what one has wrongly already learned-ie that which I had not learned. I am sure I missed a lot of what he was saying. So it is not a particularly good introduction to the topic if you have a week "history of britian" background such as I.

It was however very engaging and entertaining and had to be as long as it is. As a survey for that long it certainly leaves out a lot. show more It bills itself as a survey of the Isles, but it certainly seemed Ireland, the Welsh and Scotland could have been covered more. This is a secular history but religion is important and covered to some degree but I would have been interested in more about William Wilberforce and the abolition movement as well as Methodism and its roots.

Recommend-for those with a background of history of England/Great Britain or who want a broad overview. One point he nicely makes is that historians have become so focused and have such narrow fields of study that no one can look at a broad picture. It is important to study the trees in the forest, but it is important to study the forest as well.
While this book can be read in sections of time, the sections overlap and tie into each other.
Not recommended for a quick read or the faint of heart. show less

3465. The Isles: A History, by Norman Davies (read July 30, 2001) On Jan 7, 1998, I read Davies' great Europe: A History with much appreciation. This tome is a history of what is normally called the British Isles. It is a fascinating book, and especially the account of the period from 1066 to 1707 I found well done and absorbing. There are 90 pages of "Appendices" full of varied and interesting information, including the music and words of "Danny Boy"
which one has often heard but I had never read the actual text before. (I confess I copied out the whole 4 verses, just so I'd have them to hand to read anytime the mood seized me.) I approved of the author's view of some of the more controversial events in the history, and that always show more helps in enjoying a history book. This was a great book. show less