What do you think?
Rate this book
A Brief History of the Anglo-Saxons
Starting AD 400 (around the time of their invasion of England) and running through to the 1100s (the 'Aftermath'), historian Geoffrey Hindley shows the Anglo-Saxons as formative in the history not only of England but also of Europe. The society inspired by the warrior world of the Old English poem "Beowulf" saw England become the world's first nation state and Europe's first country to conduct affairs in its own language, and Bede and Boniface of Wessex establish the dating convention we still use today. Including all the latest research, this is a fascinating assessment of a vital historical period.
404 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2006
88 people are currently reading
585 people want to read
About the author
Geoffrey Hindley
49 books19 followersGeoffrey Hindley (1935-2014), educated at Kingswood School, Bath and University College Oxford, was a lecturer and writer. He was three times an invited participant at the International Congress on Medieval Studies, Western Michigan University; was visiting associate professor at the University of Florida, Gainesville; and lectured in Europe and America on European culture,
medieval social history and Magna Carta, and the history of music. From 1994 to 2000 he taught English civilization at the University of Le Havre. Right up until his death he was co-president of the Society for the History of Medieval Technology and Science of Oxford and London.
medieval social history and Magna Carta, and the history of music. From 1994 to 2000 he taught English civilization at the University of Le Havre. Right up until his death he was co-president of the Society for the History of Medieval Technology and Science of Oxford and London.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 81 reviews
February 3, 2021
Years ago I read the Hundred Years’ War book in this series and found it enjoyable and useful; this book was a letdown. I would echo what other reviewers have said, that the first third of the book contains a seemingly random level of detail while hopscotching through topics that leave the reader without a picture of what life was like in Anglo-Saxon England up until c. 800., while the next two chapters about foreign missions are better-written, but suited to being included in a different book. The second half of the book is much better as the brief history it’s supposed to be.
Numerous passages require rereading to understand. For example, on page 290 it says, “When the successful older son of King Edward was set upon and murdered at Corfe in Dorset in May 979, as he rode to visit his young brother Ethelred.” This is not only an incomplete sentence, but misleading. What the writer means to say is, “The successful older son, King Edward, was set upon and murdered at Corfe in Dorset in May 979, as he rode to visit his young brother Ethelred.” For someone unfamiliar with Anglo-Saxon history (i.e. probably most readers of this book, since it’s marketed as a brief history) these sorts of statements are not only confusing but can lead to misunderstandings.
On the page before the above quote, it is stated that Edgar is Edward the Elder’s son, rather than his grandson. Going back about twenty pages to where Edgar is introduced, I couldn’t find any reference to his parentage, meaning that readers will only spot this error if they check the family tree at the beginning of the book. This mistake could just be a typo (which are numerous throughout the book), as could the mistake on page 341 that states in 1068 Harold II’s brothers and son crossed to Ireland. By this time, Harold and all of his brothers except for the youngest, Wulfnoth, were dead.
Another example of the misleading statements throughout the book comes from page 352: “Edward was followed by his son Edward II and he by his son Edward III, who led England to victory against France in the Hundred Years War.” While technically correct, in that Edward III was victorious in some battles (most notably Crecy), the book makes it sound as though Edward III won the whole war against the French, when actually the Hundred Years’ War continued for more than seventy-five years after Edward’s death, and it was the French who were ultimately victorious.
The quote about the Edwards is only included in the last chapter because, while Anglo-Norman kings, they had English names. In the last chapter all pretence of objective historical study is dropped, and the book becomes viciously xenophobic. Norman architecture is referred to as “perpetual monuments to an historic act of cultural cleansing,” “for the henchmen of an alien warrior brigandage intent upon becoming a ‘nobility,’” “a constant menace,” “a standing humiliation,” and “the domain of torment and sewer rats, recall[ing] realities of the Conquest years that are rarely touched on.”
This extremely biased language appears despite the author having to include repeated acknowledgements that the Norman administration kept many Anglo-Saxon laws, political offices, and customs, as well as the paraphrased statement by Henry II’s treasurer that, within about a century of the Norman Conquest “he could no longer detect a difference between the king’s English and French subjects.” This quote from the book acknowledges the amazing process of mutually beneficial cultural integration that occurred while also oversimplifying and mischaracterizing the people involved as English and French (not Norman, as in the actual 12th century quote), at the end of a book that shows that Anglo-Saxon England had already been influenced by and was made up of significant numbers of Romano-Britons, Hiberno-Scots, Danes, and Norwegians, while the Anglo-Saxons themselves were a mix of many different Germanic tribes who had most recently been ruled by four Viking kings, two Anglo-Saxons, a half-Norman half-Anglo-Saxon (Edward the Confessor), and a half-Anglo-Saxon half-Dane (Harold II Godwinson) before the Normans (alternately referred to in the book as pirates [Vikings] and French [speaking]) arrived.
The book ends with the boast that the Old English of southern Anglo-Saxon England birthed today’s “global language,” beating out Latin and Norman French for use in English officialdom. This represents the biased nature of the book’s last chapter well, as it leaves completely unacknowledged the contributions to the English language from Greek and Latin, the simplified grammar that comes from the desire of better trade and community relations between Anglo-Saxon and Viking neighbours, and the fact that approximately one third of today’s English words have a French root thanks to the Anglo-Normans. English, England, and its cultures were not destroyed by the Viking raids or the Norman Conquest but were added to and changed. Celebrating Anglo-Saxon culture should not include characterizing its development into Anglo-Norman and ultimately English culture as “cultural cleansing.” Various cultures coming together and sharing and integrating ways of thinking should not be characterized as a blanket negative.
Overall, I would call this book confusing and misleading, culminating in a final chapter that is overtly biased in a way that is unsupported and ignores a great deal of historical evidence. I would not recommend this for readers interested in an introduction to Anglo-Saxon history.
Numerous passages require rereading to understand. For example, on page 290 it says, “When the successful older son of King Edward was set upon and murdered at Corfe in Dorset in May 979, as he rode to visit his young brother Ethelred.” This is not only an incomplete sentence, but misleading. What the writer means to say is, “The successful older son, King Edward, was set upon and murdered at Corfe in Dorset in May 979, as he rode to visit his young brother Ethelred.” For someone unfamiliar with Anglo-Saxon history (i.e. probably most readers of this book, since it’s marketed as a brief history) these sorts of statements are not only confusing but can lead to misunderstandings.
On the page before the above quote, it is stated that Edgar is Edward the Elder’s son, rather than his grandson. Going back about twenty pages to where Edgar is introduced, I couldn’t find any reference to his parentage, meaning that readers will only spot this error if they check the family tree at the beginning of the book. This mistake could just be a typo (which are numerous throughout the book), as could the mistake on page 341 that states in 1068 Harold II’s brothers and son crossed to Ireland. By this time, Harold and all of his brothers except for the youngest, Wulfnoth, were dead.
Another example of the misleading statements throughout the book comes from page 352: “Edward was followed by his son Edward II and he by his son Edward III, who led England to victory against France in the Hundred Years War.” While technically correct, in that Edward III was victorious in some battles (most notably Crecy), the book makes it sound as though Edward III won the whole war against the French, when actually the Hundred Years’ War continued for more than seventy-five years after Edward’s death, and it was the French who were ultimately victorious.
The quote about the Edwards is only included in the last chapter because, while Anglo-Norman kings, they had English names. In the last chapter all pretence of objective historical study is dropped, and the book becomes viciously xenophobic. Norman architecture is referred to as “perpetual monuments to an historic act of cultural cleansing,” “for the henchmen of an alien warrior brigandage intent upon becoming a ‘nobility,’” “a constant menace,” “a standing humiliation,” and “the domain of torment and sewer rats, recall[ing] realities of the Conquest years that are rarely touched on.”
This extremely biased language appears despite the author having to include repeated acknowledgements that the Norman administration kept many Anglo-Saxon laws, political offices, and customs, as well as the paraphrased statement by Henry II’s treasurer that, within about a century of the Norman Conquest “he could no longer detect a difference between the king’s English and French subjects.” This quote from the book acknowledges the amazing process of mutually beneficial cultural integration that occurred while also oversimplifying and mischaracterizing the people involved as English and French (not Norman, as in the actual 12th century quote), at the end of a book that shows that Anglo-Saxon England had already been influenced by and was made up of significant numbers of Romano-Britons, Hiberno-Scots, Danes, and Norwegians, while the Anglo-Saxons themselves were a mix of many different Germanic tribes who had most recently been ruled by four Viking kings, two Anglo-Saxons, a half-Norman half-Anglo-Saxon (Edward the Confessor), and a half-Anglo-Saxon half-Dane (Harold II Godwinson) before the Normans (alternately referred to in the book as pirates [Vikings] and French [speaking]) arrived.
The book ends with the boast that the Old English of southern Anglo-Saxon England birthed today’s “global language,” beating out Latin and Norman French for use in English officialdom. This represents the biased nature of the book’s last chapter well, as it leaves completely unacknowledged the contributions to the English language from Greek and Latin, the simplified grammar that comes from the desire of better trade and community relations between Anglo-Saxon and Viking neighbours, and the fact that approximately one third of today’s English words have a French root thanks to the Anglo-Normans. English, England, and its cultures were not destroyed by the Viking raids or the Norman Conquest but were added to and changed. Celebrating Anglo-Saxon culture should not include characterizing its development into Anglo-Norman and ultimately English culture as “cultural cleansing.” Various cultures coming together and sharing and integrating ways of thinking should not be characterized as a blanket negative.
Overall, I would call this book confusing and misleading, culminating in a final chapter that is overtly biased in a way that is unsupported and ignores a great deal of historical evidence. I would not recommend this for readers interested in an introduction to Anglo-Saxon history.
April 15, 2010
Where to begin on this book... I guess I learned things. I shouldn't imply that it wasn't educational.
Unfortunately, the book just attempted to do too much. It covers the history of England from about 450 AD to 1066 AD. It does this in about 330 exceptionally dense pages.
It reads more like the Bibles's begetting section. You know... "Tim beget Jim and Jim beget Susan and Susan beget Thurstan, etc etc"
If the book is covering a major event, there's so-so explanations, but most times it never exactly covers the WHY ... only the what. In other words, it's a bunch of "this happened and then this happened and then this happened." What's the usefulness of knowing there was a war between, say, Mercia and Wessex in the 700s if you don't know why it was fought?
Here's a passage, maybe it'll help explain what I'm getting at:
"In a reign of eight years Oswald so dominated affairs throughout Britain south of Pictland that, in Bede's view, he achieved the imperium. He annexed the kingdom of Lindsey, where Mercia also had an interest, and married the daughter of Cynegils of Wessex on the condition that her father convert to Christianity. Oswald stood godfather and, as we have seen, is named as joint donor when Cynegils confers Dorchester-upon-Thames on Birinus, first bishop of Wessex, as the seat of his diocese: a practical exercise of the kind of authority implicit in the word imperium."
And it goes on to talk about how he became a saint and his body parts seen as holy relics: "The cult was to become widespread on the continent. In one version a raven is mysteriously involved and the pagan Germanic associations are echoed in other ways."
I suppose the book just isn't a good read when one knows so little about English history.
Unfortunately, the book just attempted to do too much. It covers the history of England from about 450 AD to 1066 AD. It does this in about 330 exceptionally dense pages.
It reads more like the Bibles's begetting section. You know... "Tim beget Jim and Jim beget Susan and Susan beget Thurstan, etc etc"
If the book is covering a major event, there's so-so explanations, but most times it never exactly covers the WHY ... only the what. In other words, it's a bunch of "this happened and then this happened and then this happened." What's the usefulness of knowing there was a war between, say, Mercia and Wessex in the 700s if you don't know why it was fought?
Here's a passage, maybe it'll help explain what I'm getting at:
"In a reign of eight years Oswald so dominated affairs throughout Britain south of Pictland that, in Bede's view, he achieved the imperium. He annexed the kingdom of Lindsey, where Mercia also had an interest, and married the daughter of Cynegils of Wessex on the condition that her father convert to Christianity. Oswald stood godfather and, as we have seen, is named as joint donor when Cynegils confers Dorchester-upon-Thames on Birinus, first bishop of Wessex, as the seat of his diocese: a practical exercise of the kind of authority implicit in the word imperium."
And it goes on to talk about how he became a saint and his body parts seen as holy relics: "The cult was to become widespread on the continent. In one version a raven is mysteriously involved and the pagan Germanic associations are echoed in other ways."
I suppose the book just isn't a good read when one knows so little about English history.
August 26, 2022
‘A Brief History of the Anglo-Saxons’ by Geoffrey the Digressor *ahem*, I mean Geoffrey Hindley. I persisted with this book for a while and finally gave up on page 272. I regret to conclude, that this is an onerous and most inscrutable text. There is nothing ‘brief’ about it: nearly each page felt like drudgery - and as another reviewer noted, you feel compelled to reread entire sections in order to grasp what is being said. The dry and convoluted writing style entirely negates any enjoyment or erudition one could glean from it.
Each chapter is punctuated by a series of subheadings, which seems to denote a degree of structure and coherency at first glance - this is an illusion. A good three-quaters of this book’s content is akin to an inextricably tangled ball of string - it lacks any chronology, presupposes a great deal of knowledge on behalf of the reader, and is generally all over the place. Hindley fills most chapters with obscure details which invariably digress from the topic at hand, leaving you feeling perplexed. Little regard has been given to the intelligibility from the reader’s perspective.
This is certainly not an ‘introductory text’ to the Anglo-Saxons as it is packaged. Moreover, I fear anyone who seeks out this book on that basis will be dissapointed, and could even be dissuaded from the topic altogether. There are a smattering of passages throughout that contain pertinent information, but you really have to go digging for them. Ultimately, I am sure there are far better introductory books on the Anglo-Saxons that are not as arduous as this one to wade through. Disappointing.
Each chapter is punctuated by a series of subheadings, which seems to denote a degree of structure and coherency at first glance - this is an illusion. A good three-quaters of this book’s content is akin to an inextricably tangled ball of string - it lacks any chronology, presupposes a great deal of knowledge on behalf of the reader, and is generally all over the place. Hindley fills most chapters with obscure details which invariably digress from the topic at hand, leaving you feeling perplexed. Little regard has been given to the intelligibility from the reader’s perspective.
This is certainly not an ‘introductory text’ to the Anglo-Saxons as it is packaged. Moreover, I fear anyone who seeks out this book on that basis will be dissapointed, and could even be dissuaded from the topic altogether. There are a smattering of passages throughout that contain pertinent information, but you really have to go digging for them. Ultimately, I am sure there are far better introductory books on the Anglo-Saxons that are not as arduous as this one to wade through. Disappointing.
December 12, 2024
This is a brief history of the Anglo-Saxons from 500 - 1066, mainly centred in the country we'd call England today. The book is 364 pages of wonderful information plus notes, select bibliography, and a useful index. At the beginning there are maps and a chronology.
What comes across is how insecure life was in that time period for almost everyone. On a regular basis, people working in the fields would either have to sign up for service in someone's army or be slaughtered by marauding bands of Vikings / Danes / an army from a neighbouring area. East Anglia, Mercia, Wessex, Northumbria, all had their periods of importance but all of them came tumbling down eventually, especially when The Normans invaded and established the basis for modern-day England.
The other item of note for me was how much travelling the nobles did across The English Channel, visiting France and Scandanavia, and going on pilgrimmages to Rome to see The Pope.
There were strange characters such as King Eadwig. Churchmen had to drag the recently consecrated king back to his coronation feast from a bedroom session with mother and daughter. Eadwig was followed by Edgar who created many of the shires counties of England during his reign and did this so well that when British local government was reorganised in 1974 (over 1,000 years later) just three of the historic shires were dissolved.
The most famous people of the times such as Alfred the Great, Athelstan, and Cnut are covered in detail. The famous battles such as Edington and Brunanburh are also mentioned but not in great detail.
This is a book to keep as a reference and is recommended.
What comes across is how insecure life was in that time period for almost everyone. On a regular basis, people working in the fields would either have to sign up for service in someone's army or be slaughtered by marauding bands of Vikings / Danes / an army from a neighbouring area. East Anglia, Mercia, Wessex, Northumbria, all had their periods of importance but all of them came tumbling down eventually, especially when The Normans invaded and established the basis for modern-day England.
The other item of note for me was how much travelling the nobles did across The English Channel, visiting France and Scandanavia, and going on pilgrimmages to Rome to see The Pope.
There were strange characters such as King Eadwig. Churchmen had to drag the recently consecrated king back to his coronation feast from a bedroom session with mother and daughter. Eadwig was followed by Edgar who created many of the shires counties of England during his reign and did this so well that when British local government was reorganised in 1974 (over 1,000 years later) just three of the historic shires were dissolved.
The most famous people of the times such as Alfred the Great, Athelstan, and Cnut are covered in detail. The famous battles such as Edington and Brunanburh are also mentioned but not in great detail.
This is a book to keep as a reference and is recommended.
January 9, 2022
This book was extremely boring.
This book was so boring that was a pain reading it. And I love History.
First, I did not read it entirely and thoroughly. It was impossible.
Here a brief list of what I didn't like of this book:
- Not able to keep a unity of sense of the story; too many examples, to many references, at some
point I couldn't remember who was father to whom and etc.
- The main aim has not been achieved: a too wide time parenthesis to be pushed and crushed into
353 pages. So, everything was superficially narrated and nothing seems important.
- Speaking of important: if you decide to dedicate a chapter to Alfred the Great or to Edward the
Confessor, please, PLEASE, make it enjoyable. We are talking about two of the few British kings
that really shaped the kingdom.
- A comparison between Alfred The Great and Charlemagne is simply ridiculous. Calm down, there
is a reason why Charlemagne is called Father of Europe still nowadays or a historical and cultural
period has been called after him.
-Two lines dedicated to Aethelflaed. just two lines. I should have quitted this book before just for
this reason.
Dunno, I think I have been robbed of my time.
This book was so boring that was a pain reading it. And I love History.
First, I did not read it entirely and thoroughly. It was impossible.
Here a brief list of what I didn't like of this book:
- Not able to keep a unity of sense of the story; too many examples, to many references, at some
point I couldn't remember who was father to whom and etc.
- The main aim has not been achieved: a too wide time parenthesis to be pushed and crushed into
353 pages. So, everything was superficially narrated and nothing seems important.
- Speaking of important: if you decide to dedicate a chapter to Alfred the Great or to Edward the
Confessor, please, PLEASE, make it enjoyable. We are talking about two of the few British kings
that really shaped the kingdom.
- A comparison between Alfred The Great and Charlemagne is simply ridiculous. Calm down, there
is a reason why Charlemagne is called Father of Europe still nowadays or a historical and cultural
period has been called after him.
-Two lines dedicated to Aethelflaed. just two lines. I should have quitted this book before just for
this reason.
Dunno, I think I have been robbed of my time.
May 20, 2018
Couldn't finish this as it was just too inaccessible and dry. It's probably a very interesting read if you have some knowledge of the Anglo-Saxons and want to build on that but as an absolute beginner on the subject I really could not get into this.
October 29, 2018
This was confused--he jumped around sometimes in time. I didn't feel any narrative while reading it except for a bit at the end.
March 17, 2021
Similar to the Charlemagne book I read a while ago, this book also made me want to try reading some of the mythologically-inspired and not-overly-concerned-with-accuracy historical writings of and about that era. I read more recent history stuff to be transported to the world those books write about, but the writing about this part of history is more detached (and less illustrative) because there's less we really *know* about what life looked like then.
September 24, 2011
This book is essentially an overview of the period and as such is a starting point for wider reading. People wanting a more 'enjoyable' read should try Michael Wodd's In Search of the Dark Ages
August 26, 2022
A decent little read if you're wanting a general overview of the period. Unfortunately this doesn't go far beyond the established narrative which is quite similar to Michael Wood's book about the same period. Its just a little bit too focused on the 'big picture' that a lot of small and interesting events or less well known figures get put on the side line a bit.
May 31, 2020
A good discussion on the Anglo-Saxons and the early history of England. There were good insights into the origins of English identity, the English language, the contribution of Anglo-Saxon England to wider European culture - who would've thought that Northumbria was once one of the key intellectual and cultural centres of Western Christendom?
As history books are known to do, it felt quite dry. Perhaps too detailed for a general history book aimed at a popular audience. There were several references to aspects of culture and history that were passed down through history at much later dates, or references to more recent historical analysis and archaeological discoveries. These were good, but I think more writing should've been devoted to putting the different aspects of the history into their context and relating them to our own, or to later facets of English society and identity. This is far from necessary, but as someone who dropped history at 15 it would've helped me get more out of the book.
I perhaps got the most out of the end, discussing 1066 and the events and personalities surrounding that, but perhaps that's because like anyone educated in this country, I already had some knowledge of these events. It's much easier to get something from a book when you can already frame it and already have some starting knowledge.
In summary, a good resource with some helpful discussion, but perhaps too dry for the casual reader.
As history books are known to do, it felt quite dry. Perhaps too detailed for a general history book aimed at a popular audience. There were several references to aspects of culture and history that were passed down through history at much later dates, or references to more recent historical analysis and archaeological discoveries. These were good, but I think more writing should've been devoted to putting the different aspects of the history into their context and relating them to our own, or to later facets of English society and identity. This is far from necessary, but as someone who dropped history at 15 it would've helped me get more out of the book.
I perhaps got the most out of the end, discussing 1066 and the events and personalities surrounding that, but perhaps that's because like anyone educated in this country, I already had some knowledge of these events. It's much easier to get something from a book when you can already frame it and already have some starting knowledge.
In summary, a good resource with some helpful discussion, but perhaps too dry for the casual reader.
September 16, 2019
The narrative is all over the place for the first half of the book but does get better as it goes along. Being called a ‘brief history’ probably isn’t the best title as it assumes you have a pretty good knowledge of Anglo-Saxon England but also continental Europe after the collapse of the western Roman Empire. I enjoyed the book for the most part but the messy nature and slight ignorance did make me think about not finishing
April 8, 2016
The Anglo-Saxons have possibly had a bad press over the centuries. However, I find them fascinating, because of their enigmatic aura, and the period is stimulating, partly because it is so fragmented, nebulous and confusing.
In this book, the author makes allowances for scenarios other than those which have achieved something of a consensus. He often sets the Anglo-Saxon phenomenon in the wider context of Medieval Europe, and the formation of the "post-Roman" landscape. There is necessarily a heavy emphasis on the relations of the new arrivals with the Church, and indeed on how they themselves helped to shape the future of the Church. Some light is also shed on the contributions of Anglo-Saxons to broader European affairs.
From a purely personal viewpoint, I found the passages about Northumbria (and its "golden age") informative and enlightening. This region, certainly in its "English" incarnation, is not always allocated the same amount of popular attention as, say, Wessex, but its importance is underlined here. These sections, as with much of the book, are written in a breezy style, with the occasional slice of humour.
I liked how the notion of an "imperium", or a ruler recognized by the other kingdoms, was developed. Also, people think of "international relations" in those epochs as fuzzy and vague, but Hindley highlights how this was not necessarily so. The way it is documented in "A Brief History...." suggests that it had the appearance of something more coherent and structured.
The role of English clergy in converting the pagans is also explored in some detail, and we are reminded of the sometimes violent means by which the conversion was accomplished. The social structures which linked rulers, warriors and the churchmen have to be understood in order for the nature of the times to be grasped, and this is another area covered by the book.
Needless to say, the years of Alfred The Great are given due prominence, in terms of his role in preserving "England", and the encouragement of the use of the vernacular. I would have liked more about Athelstan, to be honest.
The dynastic manoeuvrings and intrigues which unfolded prior to the Norman Conquest are examined. I got the impression that the author was not a big fan of the Normans!
I don't think that much of the book's content is startlingly original, but it is told in an entertaining and digestible form. A lot of ground is covered in a limited space, but it is still worth a read.
In this book, the author makes allowances for scenarios other than those which have achieved something of a consensus. He often sets the Anglo-Saxon phenomenon in the wider context of Medieval Europe, and the formation of the "post-Roman" landscape. There is necessarily a heavy emphasis on the relations of the new arrivals with the Church, and indeed on how they themselves helped to shape the future of the Church. Some light is also shed on the contributions of Anglo-Saxons to broader European affairs.
From a purely personal viewpoint, I found the passages about Northumbria (and its "golden age") informative and enlightening. This region, certainly in its "English" incarnation, is not always allocated the same amount of popular attention as, say, Wessex, but its importance is underlined here. These sections, as with much of the book, are written in a breezy style, with the occasional slice of humour.
I liked how the notion of an "imperium", or a ruler recognized by the other kingdoms, was developed. Also, people think of "international relations" in those epochs as fuzzy and vague, but Hindley highlights how this was not necessarily so. The way it is documented in "A Brief History...." suggests that it had the appearance of something more coherent and structured.
The role of English clergy in converting the pagans is also explored in some detail, and we are reminded of the sometimes violent means by which the conversion was accomplished. The social structures which linked rulers, warriors and the churchmen have to be understood in order for the nature of the times to be grasped, and this is another area covered by the book.
Needless to say, the years of Alfred The Great are given due prominence, in terms of his role in preserving "England", and the encouragement of the use of the vernacular. I would have liked more about Athelstan, to be honest.
The dynastic manoeuvrings and intrigues which unfolded prior to the Norman Conquest are examined. I got the impression that the author was not a big fan of the Normans!
I don't think that much of the book's content is startlingly original, but it is told in an entertaining and digestible form. A lot of ground is covered in a limited space, but it is still worth a read.
December 17, 2022
A detailed account containing so much information that I felt the need to either have had some background knowledge or to have made notes during my progress with this book. A cast of characters and a timeline would have been most useful. A worthwhile read for anyone interested in early English history.
January 20, 2009
Honestly the first half of the book is a bit of a drag until you get to Alcuin of York and Alfred the Great .... the vikings and the norman conquest of 1066. The appendices are helpful too.
December 5, 2017
OK...but what did I expect from history lite?
July 30, 2017
Lots of good information but no "life" to the narrative. I felt it read like a string of facts and dates with no reason for me to feel attachment for any of the players.
June 4, 2021
Personally I feel like it jumps around to much. I did enjoy the latter half however.
December 20, 2022
A good general history, though very church focused (though of course that is the main source of written records).
December 19, 2025
The lifestyle of Anglo-Saxons—the original Anglo-Saxons—has always fascinated me, even though I never understood it completely. Half-way through this book I realize why. We are limited in our sources for the Anglo-Saxon period (roughly 500-1066). We have a few key histories, most importantly Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English Peoples, completed in 735, and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, first commissioned by Alfred of Wessex around 800 and which covers the years 494 to 1154. To these must be added mentions in writings from the Continent, where many of the clergy of the period were English, as well as that inexhaustible source of legend, Beowulf. These are supplemented by evidence from archeology, especially the Sutton Hoo burial. It is not an insignificant body of material. But almost all of it deals with the aristocracy, including the histories and travels of clergy, who came from the ruling classes. Little is known about the life of Jenny in Kent, an imagined sheepherder and mother of six, or Wilfred of Essex, who fished the seas off Britain’s south coast nearly every day of his short life.
What interests me is how their society worked, and their experiences.
The preponderance of upper-class sources is not a unique problem. Historians need to read between the lines and rely extensively on archeology. I’m frustrated, though, by the thinnest of material. A recent visit to the British Museum revealed much more material about life in Roman Britain (roughly 43-410) than it did the Anglo-Saxon period, which was focused exclusively on Sutton Hoo artifacts.
In the end what we possess most clearly, a point emphasized by the author, is our language. For a multitude of reasons it survives and thrives, against the odds (most languages disappear with time). Maybe the language is the proper place to start understanding pre-Norman Anglo-Saxon culture. Old Saxon, English’s core, does not survive in the modern language, except as a shadow. And it was itself an amalgam of various Germanic dialects spoken on the continent. English, in contrast, has never ceased to absorb and reform, vacuuming up elements of Danish, French, Greek, Latin and multiple colonial-era borrowings. But the spread of Anglo-Saxon language throughout most of England (only partially in Wales, Scotland, Ireland) shows that the pre-Saxon inhabitants, Britons and Romano-Britons, also adopted the newcomer’s language. Anglo-Saxon social forms also came to dominated life. By the time of the Danish invasions, around 800, a recognizable culture had formed.
Hindley’s account takes off when he moves into the period of Viking attacks and Alfred the Great. Alfred is, perhaps inevitably, given center place. His reign is described as a program of cultural reinvention that set the stage for a single state, England, with a dominant language and legal code. Alfred himself was active in literature, having translated works by Pope Gregory, Augustine, and Boethius. Indeed he was one of the few literate rulers in a period where literacy was optional—Emperor Charlemagne was notably illiterate. Based solely on the literary evidence we have of his translations into English, and not on the flattering portrait found in other accounts, we can conclude that Alfred was indeed a scholar-ruler, with a keen sense of history and the role of religion. He also knew fighting; the burgh system he put in place, along with his establishment of a standing army and a navy, ensured Wessex’ ability to withstand future Viking attacks.
Alfred’s death in 899 initiated a period of gradual decline in governance until the Danes resurfaced in 981. This second Danish period ended with Cnut’s death in 1035 and Edward the Confessor’s long rule between 1042 and 1066, the final flush of Anglo=Saxon independence. It is tempting to blame the English for letting their guard down and allowing the Normans to trounce the army of Harold in 1066. Hindley makes it clear that despite the “cultural genocide” practiced by the Normans, mainly the theft of land-holdings and the reorientation of the Anglo-Saxon Church (plus no doubt the usual amount of plunder), the invaders, whether Danish or Norman, eventually gave in to Anglo-Saxon culture. By the early 1200s it appears that English was dominant in most communications, with the possible exception of court and church records—officials were expected to know English. The degree to which everyday English culture overall was modified by Norman conquest is not discussed. But in terms of language there is no doubt that English prevailed. Our language is the great legacy of the Anglo-Saxons.
What interests me is how their society worked, and their experiences.
The preponderance of upper-class sources is not a unique problem. Historians need to read between the lines and rely extensively on archeology. I’m frustrated, though, by the thinnest of material. A recent visit to the British Museum revealed much more material about life in Roman Britain (roughly 43-410) than it did the Anglo-Saxon period, which was focused exclusively on Sutton Hoo artifacts.
In the end what we possess most clearly, a point emphasized by the author, is our language. For a multitude of reasons it survives and thrives, against the odds (most languages disappear with time). Maybe the language is the proper place to start understanding pre-Norman Anglo-Saxon culture. Old Saxon, English’s core, does not survive in the modern language, except as a shadow. And it was itself an amalgam of various Germanic dialects spoken on the continent. English, in contrast, has never ceased to absorb and reform, vacuuming up elements of Danish, French, Greek, Latin and multiple colonial-era borrowings. But the spread of Anglo-Saxon language throughout most of England (only partially in Wales, Scotland, Ireland) shows that the pre-Saxon inhabitants, Britons and Romano-Britons, also adopted the newcomer’s language. Anglo-Saxon social forms also came to dominated life. By the time of the Danish invasions, around 800, a recognizable culture had formed.
Hindley’s account takes off when he moves into the period of Viking attacks and Alfred the Great. Alfred is, perhaps inevitably, given center place. His reign is described as a program of cultural reinvention that set the stage for a single state, England, with a dominant language and legal code. Alfred himself was active in literature, having translated works by Pope Gregory, Augustine, and Boethius. Indeed he was one of the few literate rulers in a period where literacy was optional—Emperor Charlemagne was notably illiterate. Based solely on the literary evidence we have of his translations into English, and not on the flattering portrait found in other accounts, we can conclude that Alfred was indeed a scholar-ruler, with a keen sense of history and the role of religion. He also knew fighting; the burgh system he put in place, along with his establishment of a standing army and a navy, ensured Wessex’ ability to withstand future Viking attacks.
Alfred’s death in 899 initiated a period of gradual decline in governance until the Danes resurfaced in 981. This second Danish period ended with Cnut’s death in 1035 and Edward the Confessor’s long rule between 1042 and 1066, the final flush of Anglo=Saxon independence. It is tempting to blame the English for letting their guard down and allowing the Normans to trounce the army of Harold in 1066. Hindley makes it clear that despite the “cultural genocide” practiced by the Normans, mainly the theft of land-holdings and the reorientation of the Anglo-Saxon Church (plus no doubt the usual amount of plunder), the invaders, whether Danish or Norman, eventually gave in to Anglo-Saxon culture. By the early 1200s it appears that English was dominant in most communications, with the possible exception of court and church records—officials were expected to know English. The degree to which everyday English culture overall was modified by Norman conquest is not discussed. But in terms of language there is no doubt that English prevailed. Our language is the great legacy of the Anglo-Saxons.
February 28, 2021
My interest in the Anglo-Saxon's was sharpened by watching the Netflix series 'The Last Kingdom', taken from the Bernard Cornwell novels and set in the time of Alfred the Great and his successors. Though fictional, many real characters (including Alfred himself) are incorporated into the story, and I was left wondering how close to the reality it was.
Surprisingly close, it seems, and many of the characters and events of real history were as colorful - and as violent - as the fictional versions. The entire tumultuous period between the end of Roman rule and the Norman Conquest is fascinating, but it is also crucial in both British and European history. This is the period when the concept of England as one nation became reality, when government was carried out in the native language and foundations of administration, literature and law were laid down that would carry the Anglo-Saxon influence far beyond the time of their rule.
Hindley does an excellent job of showing us the highlights and chief characters of this period. I did find some problems with the structure in some places: in particular the earlier parts of the period were dealt with by region (Northumbria, Mercia, etc.) rather than chronologically, which I found made it hard to follow the sequence of events. Some sort of chronological overview (perhaps in a diagrammatic form?) would have been a helpful addition.
It is very much a 'traditional' history, by which I mean it focuses almost exclusively on the great persons and events of the times. Which is good by itself, but the addition of some sections on the typical lives of the bulk of the population would have added interest and context. Of course, it is a 'Brief' history, and some detail has obviously been sacrificed to keep to that, but a bit more could perhaps have been added without violating that too greatly.
I would also have appreciated a less concise summing up at the end. The legacy of the Anglo-Saxon's is dealt with in just one final paragraph, which felt a bit abrupt. There was surely more that could be said on that, and it would have been of great interest to trace the long term effects of the period up into recent history, even if only in outline.
Notwithstanding these caveats, this was still a fascinating account of an amazing period of history.
Surprisingly close, it seems, and many of the characters and events of real history were as colorful - and as violent - as the fictional versions. The entire tumultuous period between the end of Roman rule and the Norman Conquest is fascinating, but it is also crucial in both British and European history. This is the period when the concept of England as one nation became reality, when government was carried out in the native language and foundations of administration, literature and law were laid down that would carry the Anglo-Saxon influence far beyond the time of their rule.
Hindley does an excellent job of showing us the highlights and chief characters of this period. I did find some problems with the structure in some places: in particular the earlier parts of the period were dealt with by region (Northumbria, Mercia, etc.) rather than chronologically, which I found made it hard to follow the sequence of events. Some sort of chronological overview (perhaps in a diagrammatic form?) would have been a helpful addition.
It is very much a 'traditional' history, by which I mean it focuses almost exclusively on the great persons and events of the times. Which is good by itself, but the addition of some sections on the typical lives of the bulk of the population would have added interest and context. Of course, it is a 'Brief' history, and some detail has obviously been sacrificed to keep to that, but a bit more could perhaps have been added without violating that too greatly.
I would also have appreciated a less concise summing up at the end. The legacy of the Anglo-Saxon's is dealt with in just one final paragraph, which felt a bit abrupt. There was surely more that could be said on that, and it would have been of great interest to trace the long term effects of the period up into recent history, even if only in outline.
Notwithstanding these caveats, this was still a fascinating account of an amazing period of history.
February 15, 2021
Hindley is clearly a master of his domain. This work demonstrates the scope of his knowledge on the Anglo-Saxon world. He gives thoughtful analysis to the historical and cultural contributions of Anglo-Saxon society to the world. His basic thesis is to demonstrate how this society provided the environment in which the modern world’s “lingua franca”, English, was initially developed. In this work, he solidly supports his thesis. However, in doing so, his narrative at times seems to stray to the ponderous. In evaluating the diaspora of Anglo-Saxon clerics and church leaders throughout Western Europe, it seems these sometimes overpower the overarching focus on Anglo-Saxon societal development in England itself. This does seem to be out of necessity, to support his claims regarding the English language, but the disruption of internal “national” development makes it difficult to read. Even as a relative academic, I struggled with engagement. However, once the shift in the book returned to England itself, then incorporated all societal elements(politics, religion, military, and social living) into a cohesive narrative, I found it to move more quickly and organically. Overall, I highly recommend the work, as I learned a great deal about Anglo-Saxon history. I simply caution any potential readers to prepare themselves for sometimes feeling the work is a bit of a “slog”, rather than a clean, concise, cohesive read.
July 1, 2021
This book is great start for people that are someway familiar with the Anglo Saxon age of dominance on Britain.
It covers the dark and foggy origins on the Third century AD, the first migrations about when Roman were leaving the island meanwhile celtice tribes fight themselves for supremacy. On this i will say, that the author does a great work on gathering and summarizing the scarce information about these years.
Later on AD 600 we will see the rising of some kingdoms such as Northumbria, Mercia and finally the infamous Wessex, which his King Alfred the Great had the great idea to be a leader for all anglosaxon peoples on the island (called the Angelcynn). His descendants will provide further assitance in making his idea real and finally a grandson can finally be known as King of the English people. After some time there is a decline on anglosaxon dynasties and finally, Normans will continue leading the island and its people beyond.
A great book, not so brief and that comprises almost everything you want/need to know of the Anglosaxon period on UK's History. As a non native to english, some wording was unfamiliar so I had to go slowly but even so, it is a great and necessary read.
It covers the dark and foggy origins on the Third century AD, the first migrations about when Roman were leaving the island meanwhile celtice tribes fight themselves for supremacy. On this i will say, that the author does a great work on gathering and summarizing the scarce information about these years.
Later on AD 600 we will see the rising of some kingdoms such as Northumbria, Mercia and finally the infamous Wessex, which his King Alfred the Great had the great idea to be a leader for all anglosaxon peoples on the island (called the Angelcynn). His descendants will provide further assitance in making his idea real and finally a grandson can finally be known as King of the English people. After some time there is a decline on anglosaxon dynasties and finally, Normans will continue leading the island and its people beyond.
A great book, not so brief and that comprises almost everything you want/need to know of the Anglosaxon period on UK's History. As a non native to english, some wording was unfamiliar so I had to go slowly but even so, it is a great and necessary read.
January 25, 2024
Lots of interesting content told like a history book. It didn't focus on the details of war as much as I expected it might. Instead, a large portion of it is religious history, which makes sense. I had no idea the Anglo-Saxons played such a pivotal role in the conversion of the Germans on the continent (a whole chapter is devoted to this). It was also interesting to learn about how much back and forth their was between the dominance of pagan and Christian kings early on before Christians finally came out on top in England, and just how close they came to being overrun by vikings centuries later.
I enjoyed the regular callbacks and comparisons to Beowulf, that such and such was a ring giving leader. Or pointing out shared details, like that someone was given or would take an amount of land the same as what Beowulf was rewarded in the epic.
It isn't as brief as the title claims either. There are many instances of the author going into great detail about topics that aren't entirely nessisary or very relevant.
The narrator was decent.
Overall, I recommend it.
I enjoyed the regular callbacks and comparisons to Beowulf, that such and such was a ring giving leader. Or pointing out shared details, like that someone was given or would take an amount of land the same as what Beowulf was rewarded in the epic.
It isn't as brief as the title claims either. There are many instances of the author going into great detail about topics that aren't entirely nessisary or very relevant.
The narrator was decent.
Overall, I recommend it.
May 5, 2017
A Brief History of the Anglo-Saxons covers the Anglo-Saxon history from A.D. 400 (around the time of their invasion of England) through to the 1100s (the ‘Aftermath' of the Norman invasion). Geoffrey Hindley not only includes the Anglo-Saxon influence on the British Isles but also how they influenced mainland Europe. Despite being a "brief" history, this book covers a wealth of information, including culture, religion, and literature as well as military aspects. Geoffrey Hindley has a scholarly writing style that none the less manages to convey the history of the Anglo-Saxons in an interesting and informative manner. Maps, photographs and genealogical tables are included in this book.
I much preferred this book by Geoffrey Hindley in comparison to The Anglo-Saxon Age by Martin Wall, which has a more informal writing style, but leaves out mainland Europe completely and ignores the Anglo-Saxon cultural history in favour of a simplified military history.
I much preferred this book by Geoffrey Hindley in comparison to The Anglo-Saxon Age by Martin Wall, which has a more informal writing style, but leaves out mainland Europe completely and ignores the Anglo-Saxon cultural history in favour of a simplified military history.
March 2, 2023
I read this to get a background in English history in preparation for a more thorough understanding of Shakespeare. This went back a ways further than I expected, but then again, I had no knowledge of English history. This book corrected that.
It was a bit of an interwoven narrative with multiple discussions of the same people from different viewpoints. I kept getting confused about who was who and what timescale we were dealing with, but I would think that is to be expected considering that we're dealing with 700 or 800 years of history and a lot of geography that I have scant knowledge of. Still I kept at it over a long period of time and by the end I was getting a better understanding of what was being discussed.
I would only recommend this to someone who is really interested in getting into some detailed knowledge of English history. There are so many kings, queens, bishops, and instances of interfamilial intrigue that confusion can only be the order of the day.
It was a bit of an interwoven narrative with multiple discussions of the same people from different viewpoints. I kept getting confused about who was who and what timescale we were dealing with, but I would think that is to be expected considering that we're dealing with 700 or 800 years of history and a lot of geography that I have scant knowledge of. Still I kept at it over a long period of time and by the end I was getting a better understanding of what was being discussed.
I would only recommend this to someone who is really interested in getting into some detailed knowledge of English history. There are so many kings, queens, bishops, and instances of interfamilial intrigue that confusion can only be the order of the day.
August 2, 2024
An academic treatment of the Anglo-Saxon period of British history, beginning in the late 4th century and concluding with the Norman Conquest in 1066. It goes into a fair amount of detail for the various kingdoms, rulers, and shires in the British Isles in addition to covering some of the main Saxon figures who emigrated to the continent such as Alcuin and various evangelists. While I enjoyed the relatively academic treatment of the book (since I regularly read academically written history books), the casual reader will need to make efforts to get into the subject matter. This would be better, though, if the book did not dip into confusing syntax on occasion which sometimes muddles the facts surrounding the events being described.
December 1, 2020
I suppose you can't have everything. If you want names and dates and history as a sort of literary trainspotting or stamp-collecting activity, this is probably for you. But if you want the stories and the characters, a little of the human element, it might just leave you... well, wanting more I suppose. Specifically, a little 'how' and 'why' to go along with all the 'what'. It's not all Geoffrey Hindley's fault, of course. Anglo-Saxon history's primary sources are scarcely more than shopping lists of names and dates and battles. But isn't that why we have historians? Isn't that why they write books? Obviously not, at least in this case.
November 14, 2023
There's a number of bad reviews about this book and I don't see why?! It's not a page turner I will grant, yes it can be a little difficult at times keeping up with names, places etc (but they are Anglo-Saxon names so what do you expect!) but overall I thought it was a very interesting and concise history of a little known part of our history as a nation. If you're looking for not wanting to read a semi-academic book then this isn't for you, but if you want to a book that covers a lot of ground in a simple understandable way then this is perfect!
January 28, 2024
If you know a little of the history already, and don't mind being in the company of an erudite, yet slightly curmudgeonly, companion in the shape of Geoffrey Hindley, then this is an interesting and oftentimes illuminating book. But it isn't, by any stretch of the imagination "a brief history of" the Anglo-Saxons - given the number of textual errors in it, one wonders if the editors at Robinson / Little, Brown actually read it all in the first place. But I enjoyed it (hence the rating), although whether or not I'd recommend it is another matter...
Displaying 1 - 30 of 81 reviews