The Oxford History of Britain

by Kenneth O. Morgan (Editor)

With over a half-million copies already sold, The Oxford History of Britain is considered the classic single-volume history of the British Isles. Covering two thousand years of British history, the book tells the story of Britain and her peoples from the coming of the Roman legions to the
present day. Here ten distinguished contributors including Peter Salway, John Blair, John S. Morrill, and Paul Langford, offer essays on everything from the Anglo-Saxon period to the Stuarts to the Liberal Age and the twentieth century, producing a volume that is all-embracing in scope and
scholarship.
Edited by the distinguished historian Kenneth O. Morgan, this acclaimed history has been updated for this revised edition, and now includes a new chapter that features a chronology, genealogies of royal lines, and coverage of prime ministers.
From the general reader to the serious history buff, anyone interested in any aspect of British history can satisfy their curiosity with this fact-filled volume.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Reference, British Literature, European History, Historical, Ancient History

800 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1984

About the author

Kenneth O. Morgan, Research Professor, University of Wales, Aberystwyth, and Honorary Fellow, Queen's College, Oxford.

Reviews

[Kathryn · Rating 3 out of 5]

British history is one of my weak points, so I'm reading up on it. This book was of varying use as a broad overview of the subject. Each chapter is written by a different author, and they all seem to have been writing to different audiences, such that each chapter assumes a different level of familiarity with the subject matter on the part of the reader. Also, each chapter seems to have a slightly different purpose; some do serve as overviews of the historical period in question, while some seem to be attempting to provide new information to an already-educated reader. Because of this wide variance, several chapters were fascinating, quick reads, while others were confusing slogs that kept referring to events I didn't know anything about.

Overall, I'd say this book is a good starting point for the beginning student of British history, but that's more because it provides enough basic information to identify topics of research than because it educates the (uneducated) reader. I really can't guess how someone with more knowledge of the subject matter would feel about it.

[Janelle · Rating 2 out of 5]

Oh dear, I think I'll be staying away from any more Oxford history books after this one. It was incredibly dry and really discussed more of the historical economics than anything else. I finished it, but it was through sheer willpower alone.

[Debi Emerson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book covers Britain from 55 B.C. to 1983 A.D. It is divided into chapters written by different people covering the different eras. It is a great book through the Tudors. I learned a great deal of the history of Britain, which was the whole idea. But it falls apart starting with section on the Stuarts. From then on, it barely mentions the monarchs, and one has to know British history to know what the different authors are talking about. If I knew British history, I wouldn't have read this book! Starting with the Stuart section, it becomes very dry & boring. I kept reading, hoping it would become better, but it didn't. For example, the 18th century chapter starts talking about Walpool, but never discusses how Britain became a constitutional monarchy or when. Nor did it tell us how the office of Prime Minister came to be. All in all, ultimately disappointing.

[Douglas · Rating 1 out of 5]

Crap. Surely there is a one-volume history of Britain that is less tedious than this. I got this stinker, I think, in a YMCA used book sale where I paid something like $1 or $5 or $10 for a bag of books. So I paid maybe a quarter for this. I was robbed.

My copy's back cover has a blurb from my old Political Institutions tutor Vernon Bogdanor that this work is "essential . . . something which every educated person will be expected to have read." Don't get me wrong--Vernon Bogdanor was frighteningly smarter than me. My tutorials consisted of me doing a ton of reading, writing an essay, reading the essay to him, arguing, losing miserably and humiliatingly, and then repeating the next week. But at least this one time I am right, and Professor Bogdanor is wrong. I can't even get Half Price Books to take this clunker off my hands.

[Tanel-Enn Reiman · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this for a university course as well as to gain a general overview of British history.
As expected, most of it was very dry although I must admit some parts were surprisingly captivating.

Since each chapter is written by a different author (10 in total), they vary from each other in style, density and focus. Some wrote in a reader-friendly fashion while others presumed prior knowledge from the reader - I had to google certain events to understand their significance.

The best way to get through dry books like this is to underline important events/people and make a simple mind map in the end of each chapter.

All in all, I'd say the book is nothing spectacular but offers a nice beginner frame of understanding for the reader to continue adding knowledge to in the future.

[Tiger Lily · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'd say this is 'OK'. It really is nothing spectacular. Every time I've tried to look up something it hasn't helped me much. It contains too little information on each topic and especially on specific characters in the history of Britain. A bit of a let down, really.

[Laura · Rating 3 out of 5]

Had to read partly for a university course - very informative!

[Tex-49 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ho letto l'inizio fino all'VIII secolo, in parallelo con la saga dei Re Sassoni di Bernard Cornwell, lo riprenderò in futuro!

Pagine lette finora: 98

[Tobi · Rating 2 out of 5]

10 authors and not a single female Historian? Really you couldn't manage to find one? Not just that, but four of the authors are called John! Different, separate John's. Still no woman to be found?
For the most part a reasonably interesting read.
However, a few things, first off the women...it's not just the authorship, there is very little mentioned about women in general, Queen's Anne and Victoria get very brief mentions and they were the rulers of their individual times.
Mostly politico-economic history and it can be dry on occasion. Very little social history. I just feel that they missed out on several opportunities to make a really interesting baseline history book. Far too many things left out and others alluded to, so unless you already know...good luck.

[Peter S · Rating 2 out of 5]

Informative enough, but dry. The chapters on the post-war era were particularly underwhelming. Wanted more on Tony Benn, Aneurin Bevan, and more on NHS and NI.

[Destiny · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is the densest, most boring book I have ever had to read for a class. I enjoyed the topics covered since they are all important to English history, but why do the authors have to go into boring details about everything? I give it a 4.0 out of 5.0 and that is pushing it a little.

[Barawe · Rating 2 out of 5]

Pro mě konec na straně 371. Chtěla jsem si udělat jasno v dějinách Británie, přečíst si plynulý sled jejího života. Místo toho tu mám kapitoly od různých autorů kteří jsou pravda vzdělaní a znalí věci, ale co na plat, když kapitoly obsahem nejsou vyvážené a témata místo jasného obrazu vypadají jako moje rozbředlé malůvky. Autoři často podají rozsáhlou zprávu o ekonomické situaci, vývoji soudů či válkách různých politických stran, ale to podle mě není potřeba, pokudže píšete knihu pro širokou veřejnost. Důležité je vykreslit atmosféru daného období, ukázat na největší problémy a přidat postavy, kterých se to týkalo. K tomu se hodí okořenit vyprávění nějakým zajímavým detailem a psát věci co nejprostším jazykem, možná dokonce někde vyjádřit svůj názor, aby člověk měl pocit, že kniha není jen studeným výčtem událostí, ale něčím osobnějším. Když to má tyto prvky, člověk si zapamatuje. Možná ne všechno, možná ne úplně. Takhle je snad lepší, abych se proklikávala wikipedií...

[Nadine · Rating 2 out of 5]

I really haven't really finished this book, but I don't think I will. The first 3 or 4 chapters were very good. They covered the socio-economic (really not my cup of tea) history as well as battles, kings, conquests, etc. It was an enjoyable read up until that point. Then I encountered probably the most boring chapter I've read on Tudor England. And it got worse from there. The chapter on the Stuarts was passable, but barely. It didn't cover much of the change in government which was pretty major. After that it just flat out became socio-economic-political history. Needless to say I started skipping whole pages. When I got to the chapter on the 20th century it just didn't seem worth it to even finish.

[Gail · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is very detailed, but not that well written. It assumes background knowledge and is often difficult to figure out who or what is being referred to. Aside from that it does give a lot of detailed info for the the time of the Tudors that I've been exploring. Will re-read parts of that section, now that I've read "The Other Boleyn Girl" which was terrific.

Took back to the library. Not a book to read in entirety.

[Joe · Rating 2 out of 5]

Quit at page 400. The earlier chapters are better. For the later chapters, I felt like I was reading a book that was a corrective to what British students are taught about British history in grade school or high school. I wanted something more basic.

[Ostap Bender · Rating 1 out of 5]

Scholarly but dull and dry. Even when I've used it as a reference for point topics, I've never found it to be of great help or insight. I know it flies in the face of many who are far more versed in history than I, but it's one of my least favorite history books.

[Cristina · Rating 2 out of 5]

Very dry and dense making it hard to get through. Some parts drew me in only to move onto a less interesting topic (such as economics and intricacies regarding politics)

[SalvatoreBe Balls · Rating 2 out of 5]

Needlessly dense and confusingly laid out. But I finished the fucker

[Harry Gardner · Rating 5 out of 5]

An interesting survey history of the British isles (although predominantly the English perspective) from the times of the Roman invasion up until Brexit, that although lacking in depth makes up for it in breadth and challenges some of prior held assumptions about course of British (english history). My prior assumption, that the march of parliamentary sovereignty was a fairly linear process after the early 17th century (with a brief, mostly symbolic explosion in 1215 with the Magna Carta and a limited Plantagenet monarchy) was shifted upon the book's discussion of the relatively peacefulness of Charles I' long period without a parliament--only to be brought down by inconsistent religious policy (tolerance for the Scottish dissenter, not for the English) and personal foibles--and the marked lack of an effect of the Republican period on English governance beyond Oliver Cromwell's lifetime. Even after the Glorious Revolution of 1688, it doesn't seem that the rise of an independent parliamentary government really occurs till George III--but even then the interaction of the heir with various power brokers and the ability of the King to promote different factions (Whigs for most of the early Hanoverians, then the Tories were rehabilitated under George III) seems to be in dissonance with my naive prior beliefs on the matter (that is, that the Glorious Revolution by effectively granting the parliament the ability to determine the inheritance had subordinated the monarchy to the parliament).

The other interesting elements that this book promotes have to do with the pace at which governance grew in England. Early on, it appears that England had a precocious legal structure--with land necessary to support a household (a hide) (apparent in the writing of Bede in the 700s) allowing for the form of taxation and conscription that undergirded the resurgence of Wessex against the Danelaw (in the Burghal Hidage of 9th/10th century provenance). Even in the latter part of the Anglo-Saxon period (that is ~500/600-1066), there appeared to be a growing amount of legal writing in the form of the charter, which was represented and surpassed by that great work of the first Norman conquerors--the Domesday Book (1086).

Perhaps the greatest surprise in this book was its presentation of King Henry VIII, who in popular imagination is known for being a bit of a shit. In the reckoning of this book however, he is evaluated rather by the notable bureaucratic reform--spearheaded by men like Thomas Cromwell and Archbishop Wolsey--who helped create an effective fiscal state that was to wilt under the Elizabethan and early Stuart monarchs. It is undoubtable that his greatest legacy would be the English reformation, a strange process that led to some largescale infusions of land and cash in the great dissolution of the monasteries as well as religious divides that would see both Protestants and Catholics suffer severe punishment (both under his reign, the former under the first of his daughter's reigns and the latter under the second of his daughter's reigns).

I'd recommend this book to anyone curious about British history or feel that there is a large gap in their understanding of it. I certainly felt that to be the case and still do, but the gap is at least smaller!

[iceberg · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent as a scholarly overview of British history, with clear chapters that delineate its various periods. I started this book with an aversion towards simplistic popular histories that focus too much on the political sphere, and within that sphere on a few “great” individuals. This book satisfied my expectations by considering economic and social currents in British history and paying less attention to detailed personal biographies, an aspect which I suppose turned off writers of bad reviews here in Goodreads. When I finished this book, I was left with the necessary background knowledge for better understanding the historical context of great British works of literature, from Chaucer to Forster. If this is the equivalent kind or depth of information on British history one is looking for, this book is a fantastic aid.

I only have two main criticisms. First, although with the editor’s express intent of being more inclusive towards Scotland, Ireland, and Wales, the book was still heavily England-centric. The longstanding relative wealth and power of only one out of the four British nations notwithstanding, the same level of detail being extended to the politics and culture of these Celtic nations would have been much appreciated. (Perhaps I should search for a British history with an explicit four-nation framework next).

Second, mention of the British empire was a little wanting. Although I am also averse to repetitive waxing on the (nevertheless historically well-founded) cruelty of British conquests around the world, this book had little analysis of the significant economic and social contributions of British imperialism on the British isles and the rest of the world. Although, in general, the contributions of Britain to world history as a whole was also lacking in the book’s overall insular focus. In the end, a more forthright discussion of such would have made this book a truly essential read on British history.

[Zhelana · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book in 1000ish pages told the history of Britain from Rome to Brexit. Considering that the us history textbook took 1700 pages to tell the history of America from 1600 to 2000, I'm impressed, but of course I got less information on each part. The writing was uneven with each chapter written by a different person. The chapter on Rome was brilliant, but then after that they started going through British history king by king, and it was hard to keep them separated. Also, they completely brushed past the Magna Carta, which simply existed at some point with no hint of when it was signed. And stranger than that, they completely brushed past colonialism all together. There was a one sentence mention of "The American War" but no sense that America had been their colony, and there was almost no mention at all of any other colonies or colonial wars that Britain fought (except I think something briefly mentioned about South Africa and the Dutch?). Anyway, it seems weird not to mention colonialism at all never mind not mentioning the history happening in any of those colonies as a part of British history. Fortunately, at some point they stopped doing king by king descriptions of wars, and started talking about other political events. Still, I would have liked to see other non political events and things that actually affected normal people. But I guess that comes from a much longer book.

[Krasimir · Rating 1 out of 5]

When I started reading this book I thought it was the right book I was needed. The chapters "Roman Britain"(Peter Salway), "The Anglo-Saxon Period"(John Blair) and "The Early Middle Ages"(John Gillingham) are chronologically exposed, with strong analysis of the historical evidences convincingly leading to the logical conclusions, while at the same time the accompanying financial, economic and political events are clearly explained following the chronological development of the events. They properly finish with short public, economical and political summaries.
But the following two chapters - "The later Middle Ages"(Ralph A. Griffiths), and "The Tudor Age"(John Guy) spoil the good impress which the previous chapters has formed. The chaos is everywhere - in the events, in the explanations, finally in all thoughts of the authors of those chapters.
Now I am finishing reading of "England under the Tudors"(Arthur D. Innes) to get the possibility to continue reading of this book. When I read the entire book I will complete my review.

[YITING · Rating 4 out of 5]

這本我給3.5分，要是Goodreads也像博客來書評一樣可以評到0.5分這種細緻程度就好。

這本雖然標榜「入門級」、「通識」，但是是對於英國人而言的通識！如果對於英國史比較不熟悉的台灣人，我覺得不是很好入門的書，讀起來比較枯燥，而且這本書也蠻厚的，我就是被入門級這個字眼給吸引了，我先前讀過一本英國通史，還是覺得這本讀起來很痛苦。

這本書每一章都是由不同歷史學者寫的，所以風格迥異，有些篇章作者依時代順序敘述各個歷史層面，有些人分成政治經濟文化等主題講述。另外有些章節的翻譯句子讀起來我覺得不是很順，有些英式中文，但從脈絡推敲，還算可以知道在說什麼；但是如果是不熟悉的內容，讀起來就有點痛苦了，像是18世紀那章。

前半部分還算讀得下去，會引用一些考古史料，敘述比較客觀。然後在台灣應該大家最熟悉的都鐸王朝部分，作者算是寫得蠻平實的，或是說是客觀吧，並沒有一直讚頌伊莉莎白女王英明。而我出乎意料地最喜歡斯圖亞特王朝那一章，讀起來真的蠻流暢，又不會太枯燥，而後面光榮革命的部分，我原本期待也能多講，好像也是就講講帶過去了，那部分我記得也有點看不懂，英式中文翻譯也有影響。至於18世紀那章，真要我形容的話: a real pain in the ass... 這章的翻譯感覺特別英式中文，不知所云。雖然這章有不少內容應該是台灣人蠻熟悉的部分，像是英國工業革命，但是更多藝術文化建築音樂方面的名詞，都不熟悉，學校歷史課本不會說這麼細，這些東西沒有圖片，只靠文字敘述建築風格的變革，不知道有多少人能想像?這部可惜的地方也是沒什麼圖片，如果有地理圖或是適時穿插一些圖片就更好了。這章還有很多人物也都沒聽過，當然像是狄更斯這類的就聽過，但更多的是學校歷史課本沒提過的人物，有點不知道在說什麼。也許這些人名對英國大學生都是很熟悉的人物，但是引進中文版，中文世界的讀者不一定就熟悉這些了，要是譯者能夠為讀者註解就好了，或是能夠註明一下原文名詞，這樣也好方便大家google查詢一下，但是這本都沒有，查了google，有些政治、議會人物看起來根本中文也查不到什麼資料，就算查到也不能確定是否是在講同一個歷史人物，這點比較可惜。這一章我卡了非常非常久，讀了又放棄，隔一段時間又再重新看，斷斷續續好幾次。

整體上讀完這本，我還是有對英國史更了解了啦，而且這本立場蠻客觀的，我在想，也許通史真的比較無聊吧，什麼時代都提到了但又好像什麼都沒說一樣，這本我推薦給對不列顛史有基礎的人閱讀，要入門不列顛史的人就不推薦了，先找別本書吧。另外雖然說英文書名是The Oxford History of Britain，不過這本我覺得主要還是在講英格蘭的部分，主要想要看蘇格蘭、威爾士、北愛爾蘭的部分的話，要再找別的書。

[Andrea Ratti · Rating 3 out of 5]

Libro sulla storia dell'Inghilterra, scritto da più autori, uno per macro periodo storico. Non sono un esperto di storia inglese, ed effettivamente il testo è abbastanza indigesto. Ad esempio, viene dato per scontato il fatto che il lettore sia a conoscenza delle dinastie che si sono susseguite alla guida dell'Inghilterra, senza riportare un albero genealogico o per lo meno un elenco dei nomi dei regnanti in ordine cronologico. Per i non esperti è davvero impegnativo. In aggiunta, per avere un manuale compatto, molti eventi vengono solo accennati e non approfonditi.
In generale, sebbene i diversi autori adottino approcci diversi, il punto di vista della trattazione storica è quasi sempre economico-politica. I capitoli dedicati alla Britannia Romana e ai Normanni affrontano in maniera seria il problema della mancanza di fonti storiche.

Testo assolutamente da consultazione, da affrontarsi avendo a disposizione un elenco dei regnanti in ordine cronologico.

[Sara · Rating 1 out of 5]

Libro incredibilmente ed inutilmente prolisso. Per nulla scorrevole, l'autore scrive la storia con un po'troppa saccenza, buttando la pochi aneddoti interessanti, citando persone ed eventi da approfondire senza poi farlo. Un discreto nervoso, riassumibile per esempio quando liquida le 6 mogli di enrico VIII i 2 righe dicendo una cosa del tipo: "le vicende di enrico e delle sue mogli sono anche troppo note ai più, posso sorvolare".....ma come?!?! Mi aspettavo più un "england for dummies" che avrebbe potuto essere aneddotico e coinvolgente, invece è riuscito ad annoiare anche un'albionica convinta come me. Colpa mia che avevo altre aspettative.

[Francis Kennedy · Rating 4 out of 5]

For someone who thinks they know British history, this is an excellent resource, fast paced yet full of interesting detail, revealing how little I did in fact know! Although primarily covering political history, the authors, to varying degrees, discuss social, economic, cultural and artistic features as well. The attention is mainly on England, with a bit on Wales (including some Welsh perspectives) and relatively little on Scotland. The illustrations, maps, charts and photographs, are all interesting and helpful. Where there is debate, the authors give their opinion. It’s obviously dated (published 1984) but still feels relevant today.

[Anne Cupero · Rating 3 out of 5]

I wanted to really get a lot out of this book, as it was one of my first in terms of "learning about British history" but it already presupposed a lot of knowledge about Britain. The illustrations needed to be more pervasive, and there needed to be some balance between social history and monarchical history. I am now moving on to the Oxford Illustrated History of the British Monarchy and I am liking it better because it sticks purely with its defined subject matter.

[Jeff · Rating 3 out of 5]

There’s a lot I liked about this book. It had great detail about the branches and sequels that led over centuries to the Britain that we know and to which we relate. But they made odd choices on things to basically skip over (eg if you blinked you missed the Magna Charta).

[Sharon · Rating 3 out of 5]

Britain from 55 AD to the year of 1983. It talks more about socio-economy rather then the monarch.
Took me 2 months to finished the 588 pages.

There is another book specially about Monarchy. Which i would like to lay my hands on.

[Andrea Wall · Rating 4 out of 5]

A long, slow read, but thorough and comprehensive. A nice overview that surprisingly never bored me or lost me on long explanations.