What do you think?
Rate this book
The History of England #4
Revolution: The History of England from the Battle of the Boyne to the Battle of Waterloo
The fourth volume of Peter Ackroyd's enthralling History of England begins in 1688 with a revolution and ends in 1815 with a famous victory.
In it, Ackroyd takes readers from William of Orange's accession following the Glorious Revolution to the Regency, when the flamboyant Prince of Wales ruled in the stead of his mad father, George III, and England was - again - at war with France, a war that would end with the defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo.
Late Stuart and Georgian England marked the creation of the great pillars of the English state. The Bank of England was founded, as was the stock exchange, the Church of England was fully established as the guardian of the spiritual life of the nation and parliament became the sovereign body of the nation with responsibilities and duties far beyond those of the monarch. It was a revolutionary era in English letters, too, a time in which newspapers first flourished and the English novel was born. It was an era in which coffee houses and playhouses boomed, gin flowed freely and in which shops, as we know them today, began to proliferate in our towns and villages. But it was also a time of extraordinary and unprecedented technological innovation, which saw England utterly and irrevocably transformed from a country of blue skies and farmland to one of soot and steel and coal.
In it, Ackroyd takes readers from William of Orange's accession following the Glorious Revolution to the Regency, when the flamboyant Prince of Wales ruled in the stead of his mad father, George III, and England was - again - at war with France, a war that would end with the defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo.
Late Stuart and Georgian England marked the creation of the great pillars of the English state. The Bank of England was founded, as was the stock exchange, the Church of England was fully established as the guardian of the spiritual life of the nation and parliament became the sovereign body of the nation with responsibilities and duties far beyond those of the monarch. It was a revolutionary era in English letters, too, a time in which newspapers first flourished and the English novel was born. It was an era in which coffee houses and playhouses boomed, gin flowed freely and in which shops, as we know them today, began to proliferate in our towns and villages. But it was also a time of extraordinary and unprecedented technological innovation, which saw England utterly and irrevocably transformed from a country of blue skies and farmland to one of soot and steel and coal.
431 pages, Kindle Edition
First published September 22, 2016
262 people are currently reading
2092 people want to read
About the author
Peter Ackroyd
184 books1,493 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 109 reviews
April 14, 2020
This is a rollicking narrative history (i.e. no footnotes) of England in the long eighteenth century, from the Glorious Revolution of 1688 to the Napoleonic Wars. As the title suggests, Ackroyd follows tradition in seeing the period as revolutionary in general, taking in the American Revolution of 1776, the French Revolution of 1789, and the ongoing Industrial and Scientific Revolutions to boot.
Revolution never actually spread to England itself, of course (excluding 1688, which anyway barely counts), and Ackroyd is quick to adduce some wishy-washy reasons for this, such as Englishmen's ‘generally equivocal attitude towards authority that encouraged revolts but not revolution’. Like a lot of his comments, this is quite useful as a way of getting a handle on lots of material, and may even have some truth in it, but at the same time appears to be floating in space without any data or citations, or even a clear idea of what those might look like.
Obviously, Ackroyd didn't set out to write an academic sourcebook – this is a re-constitution of a huge heap of secondary and tertiary histories into one overarching coherent narrative. On the whole, he does a pretty good job on this level, although the scope of such a project can be a little dizzying at times: six pages on Methodism are followed by four-and-a-half on the slave trade, which is followed by a chapter on chamber music and the viola. Depending on your mood, these hairpin bends can be stimulating or frustrating.
I feel like I'm damning it with faint praise, but Ackroyd writes really well and has clearly read very widely, so as an overall introduction to the period, this does what it says on the tin. If you want a grounding in the eighteenth century, this must be a good option. It's apparently volume IV of Peter Ackroyd's complete history of England, and since it starts and ends in medias res, you imagine that he set aside the two hundred books he was using for this, wheeled in the two hundred he would use for the next volume, massaged his aching hand, and just kept on writing. This is probably enough for me right now though.
He has a novelist's eye for the telling detail or fragment of direct speech. One example of a hundred that I underlined:
Which might be the most French quote I've ever seen.
Revolution never actually spread to England itself, of course (excluding 1688, which anyway barely counts), and Ackroyd is quick to adduce some wishy-washy reasons for this, such as Englishmen's ‘generally equivocal attitude towards authority that encouraged revolts but not revolution’. Like a lot of his comments, this is quite useful as a way of getting a handle on lots of material, and may even have some truth in it, but at the same time appears to be floating in space without any data or citations, or even a clear idea of what those might look like.
Obviously, Ackroyd didn't set out to write an academic sourcebook – this is a re-constitution of a huge heap of secondary and tertiary histories into one overarching coherent narrative. On the whole, he does a pretty good job on this level, although the scope of such a project can be a little dizzying at times: six pages on Methodism are followed by four-and-a-half on the slave trade, which is followed by a chapter on chamber music and the viola. Depending on your mood, these hairpin bends can be stimulating or frustrating.
I feel like I'm damning it with faint praise, but Ackroyd writes really well and has clearly read very widely, so as an overall introduction to the period, this does what it says on the tin. If you want a grounding in the eighteenth century, this must be a good option. It's apparently volume IV of Peter Ackroyd's complete history of England, and since it starts and ends in medias res, you imagine that he set aside the two hundred books he was using for this, wheeled in the two hundred he would use for the next volume, massaged his aching hand, and just kept on writing. This is probably enough for me right now though.
He has a novelist's eye for the telling detail or fragment of direct speech. One example of a hundred that I underlined:
Much of the French success may be credited to Napoleon who, abandoning his army in Egypt, made his way back to Paris and named himself First Consul. To the stranded army in Egypt it seemed like an act of betrayal. One of his generals, Jean-Baptiste Kléber, told his colleagues: ‘That bastard has left us with his breeches full of shit. We will go back to Europe and rub them in his face.’
Which might be the most French quote I've ever seen.
November 2, 2019
Definitely gonna read the rest of this series at some point, and the 19C volume next year (but after his novel on the proto-Romantic poet Chatterton, Chatterton).
Mr. A. can write, and though a scholarly tome this ain't (nary a footnote to be found), that wasn't the ride I signed up for anyhow--I just wanted someone who could weave a compelling Grand Narrative (without too many traces of any covert meta-) from the threads of politics, culture and social history, and the author did not disappoint. Biases, whatever they are, were held firmly in check. Recommended for those reading novels from the period, in need of coherent context and desiring the synoptic view from Olympus, with a ring in the air of the ever-elusive sub specie aeternitatis.
Mr. A. can write, and though a scholarly tome this ain't (nary a footnote to be found), that wasn't the ride I signed up for anyhow--I just wanted someone who could weave a compelling Grand Narrative (without too many traces of any covert meta-) from the threads of politics, culture and social history, and the author did not disappoint. Biases, whatever they are, were held firmly in check. Recommended for those reading novels from the period, in need of coherent context and desiring the synoptic view from Olympus, with a ring in the air of the ever-elusive sub specie aeternitatis.
August 13, 2017
Hmmm!
Good points in this book: a (generally) reasonably fluently written guide to this period - and quite an important part of British history: the impact of the "glorious revolution," a change of ruling dynasty, the start of the industrial revolution, the growing power of Britain in Europe (and, of course, the loss of the United Staes war of independence), the act of union with Scotland and, around 100 years later, the incorporation of Ireland into the United Kingdom, and the impact of the Napoleonic wars.
As with previous volumes, Ackroyd's critical analysis is lacking (and it seems to get ever less volume after volume). For example, there is little explanation about how the absorption of Ireland into the United Kingdom without any attention paid to the impact on religious sensitivities, simply at the whim of the monarch, was addressed at the time: given the impact on our more recent history, this does seem to be a major omission. I wish it were the only one.
On the other hand, the repetition in the coverage of the industrial revolution - important as it was for the wealth and status of the country - starts to get tedious. It goes well beyond the timescale of this particular period of history and confusion reigned in my mind as to when innovation and wealth-creation became exploitation - a new kind of slavery. A lot more focus and analysis would have been good.
I'm afraid that Ackroyd (an author I usually greatly admire) is showing increasing signs of laziness through his "History of England" project and I really did not feel much enlightened at the end of this book. He can do so much better.
Good points in this book: a (generally) reasonably fluently written guide to this period - and quite an important part of British history: the impact of the "glorious revolution," a change of ruling dynasty, the start of the industrial revolution, the growing power of Britain in Europe (and, of course, the loss of the United Staes war of independence), the act of union with Scotland and, around 100 years later, the incorporation of Ireland into the United Kingdom, and the impact of the Napoleonic wars.
As with previous volumes, Ackroyd's critical analysis is lacking (and it seems to get ever less volume after volume). For example, there is little explanation about how the absorption of Ireland into the United Kingdom without any attention paid to the impact on religious sensitivities, simply at the whim of the monarch, was addressed at the time: given the impact on our more recent history, this does seem to be a major omission. I wish it were the only one.
On the other hand, the repetition in the coverage of the industrial revolution - important as it was for the wealth and status of the country - starts to get tedious. It goes well beyond the timescale of this particular period of history and confusion reigned in my mind as to when innovation and wealth-creation became exploitation - a new kind of slavery. A lot more focus and analysis would have been good.
I'm afraid that Ackroyd (an author I usually greatly admire) is showing increasing signs of laziness through his "History of England" project and I really did not feel much enlightened at the end of this book. He can do so much better.
July 23, 2017
This volume of the history of England covers many revolutions: the Glorious Revolution, the American Revolution, the French Revolution. However, it also covers less sudden changes as well: the Industrial Revolution, the information revolution with the emergence of broadly distributed and mass printed broadsheets, newspapers, and magazines, as well as the immense social revolutions that coincided with the clubs, pubs, and coffee houses. In addition, it covers the years where England came to dominate world trade and waterways, becoming the first truly global empire. Coinciding with this emergence was the development of a banking revolution, when banks and speculation created the wealth of loan and interest that we now come to take for granted. Because of this expansion of commerce and fluid capital, the state began to tax every product and transaction, eventually leading to the riots within England and the revolution in North America. Nonetheless, England establishment held firm, reacting mostly with horror at the events of the French Revolution, and finally rallying against the expansive ambitions of Napoleon Buonaparte. At the end of the volume, England stands in control of the waterways of the world, yet desperately in need of a social revolution at home to stave off the catastrophic toll of the Industrial Revolution on the social contract with its citizens' wellbeing. I love this stretch of history and Ackroyd is in fine form here, telling a vastly important stretch of history (1689-1815) with verve and style. He clearly has set up the Victorian era of history, which will occupy his fifth volume in fall 2018. I would be hard pressed to find a book telling this story in 371 pages with more incisiveness. Great stuff.
January 20, 2018
I love this entire series. Ackroyd has a flair for writing in a beautiful narrative style that makes reading about the history of England fun! I am definitely a huge fan.
February 12, 2023
British revolution was unlike other and blood of the tyrants wasn't at stake. The industrial revolution unfolded over the course of a century bringing unprecedented political, economic, social and cultural change. Capitalism as we know it was it's baby. Peter Ackroyd makes a clear case that the revolution wasn't just about steam machines and productivity. A new way of life was born with it. Government, warfare, business, entertainment, newsmaking have acquired traits which are familiar to us and incomprehensible to a medieval man. A certain frontier was crossed.
Peter Ackroyd does justice to the era by capturing change from all available sources: gossip, memoirs, parliamentary proceedings, literature. The talk in the coffee houses is as familiar to him as the book-keeping records of trading houses. Small change at the periphery of an Empire triggers greater transformation. He likes connecting the dots this way and enriches our understanding of things past and present. So far, volume IV of the History of England is the best of the series.
Peter Ackroyd does justice to the era by capturing change from all available sources: gossip, memoirs, parliamentary proceedings, literature. The talk in the coffee houses is as familiar to him as the book-keeping records of trading houses. Small change at the periphery of an Empire triggers greater transformation. He likes connecting the dots this way and enriches our understanding of things past and present. So far, volume IV of the History of England is the best of the series.
November 9, 2023
A strange narrative. Highly detailed, lots of quotes. Not cohesive. Varied, with lots of interesting asides.
December 21, 2021
James II had been an authoritarian Catholic leading Protestant England. The Irish had called him “James the s---“. Being Catholic didn’t go over well with Protestants which led to William of Orange taking over when elites asked him. “The divine right of kings had come to an end”. As comedienne Nikki Glaser has said, in those days, the funny word “Rodgering” meant f---ing. A poem back then about a potentially gay member of the court went: Let’s pray for the good of our state and his soul, that he’s put his Roger in the right Hole.” Queen Anne takes over after the death of William. Anne had despised William and as she had such a bad case of gout, she was usually in bandages. “She was neither clever nor witty.” England was moving from wood to coal. In 1698, the first steam engine of Thomas Savery, is patented. Newcomen makes it better. James Watt improves it yet again and students are only taught about Watt. The steam engine had converted thermal energy into kinetic energy. Swift, Pope, and Defoe were the big authors of Queen Anne’s time.
Anne dies in 1714 and George I takes over. Trade becomes the most important English activity. Towns become the “temples of trade”. “Commerce was, essentially, power gained without war.” In the course of the 18th century, imports and exports increased by five-fold. In the 1730’s, oil-burning street-lamps became a thing for thoroughfares. Writing and card tables became expected in homes. The well-to-do had two female servants and a boy. The upper and middle classes would go on promenade while the lower classes worked. “There was nothing so snobbish as the country town.” At country dances you’d be watched like a hawk and gossiped about by your local Gladys Kravitz. Few went bathing in the ocean but instead would promenade slowly while talking like George Sanders. The biggest English profits came from the West Indies. The amount of sugar consumed in the 18th century increased 15x over the previous century. Sugar existed only through “back breaking labor of slaves.” The tunes Rule Britannia and God Save the King both start to become popular. “Many of England’s overseas possessions were no more than penal colonies rivalling any of those in Stalinist Russia.” Before the English take over Canada, it is called New France. King George II manages to hurt himself in the Royal Commode and soon dies. His valet de chambre knew something had gone astray when he heard a sound coming from the chamber that was “louder than the royal wind.” Indeed. His replacement George III was the first Hanoverian king to speak with an English accent and he hated William Pitt. George III is known today for his madness (starting 1788), losing the American Revolution, and being king of England during the French Revolution.
When I was studying at Sarah Lawrence College in the 70’s, on the library bathroom stall were the words, “Chance favors the prepared mind.” I found in this book where that great saying comes from: “Louis Pasteur once remarked that ‘chance favors only the mind that is prepared.” Most English homes have clocks by this point. The Industrial revolution is in full swing, England has moved from wood to coal. The skies go from blue to grey and black. Mass manufacture of pottery pipes drastically helps with sanitation. The roads weren’t great. “Many of the roads had not been repaired for fourteen centuries, ever since the Romans built them.” After repairs, though, what was then a three-day journey, will become a 12-hour trip. On page 231, the author says, America had become a haven for “all” nations. I would say, not if you were from an indigenous nation. Hessian soldiers fighting for the British in 1776 came from George’s Hanover connection to Germany. I always had wondered as a child, why did Hessians get the job? While the colonists were complaining about, “no taxation without representation”, half the towns in England also had no voice in parliament. “Nabobs” were Englishmen who returned rich from service during the brutal occupation of India. William Pitt made brave speeches against slavery. But at the same time, Pitt had no problem with English children starting to work at age four or five. The parents of those children could not complain because once you depended on parish relief, they could send your kid off to a factory. There were “many reports” of children losing fingers, having limbs crushed at work. “The food was often rancid.” “Some of the children had to raid dust bins or fight with the pigs to get into their troughs.” “One factory in Manchester was known as Hell’s Gate”. One slave-owner from the West Indies said he and other owners could not believe how cruel the Brits were to children.
Life expectancy was twenty-five in 1726 and by 1820 had risen to forty-one. England becomes the largest iron producer in Europe. During the French Revolution, English dissenters and reformers took the side of the revolutionaries, while English Catholics, Royalists, and those who liked dressing up in their wife’s clothing chose the King. Disputes over low wages and unskilled labor led the Luddites to destroy over 1,000 weaving frames in eleven months. Thomas Paine’s “Rights of Man” was saying stuff Pitt couldn’t believe: children should go to school until age 14, and actual money should go to the poor. Good gracious. “Pitt’s carriage was surrounded by a jeering crowd shouting ‘No Pitt! No War! Bread! Bread! Peace! Peace’!” In 1804, Napoleon becomes Emperor of France. Cicero wrote, “The sinews of war are infinite money.” British victory at Trafalgar “confirmed the naval superiority of the British” and ended Napoleon’s dream of invading England. Cool fact: Napoleon clothes his men in textiles from northern England. The Congress of Vienna is in 1814; there, attending nations mapped out their future together.
In 1771, writer Arthur Young explains the unsung credo of the US Republican and Libertarian Parties for the past fifty years: “Everybody but an idiot knows that the lower classes must be kept poor or they will never be industrious.” Ben Franklin in 1748 coins the phrase “time is money” two centuries later Jerry Ragovoy coins the phrase “time is on my side”. And it will take another twenty years after that for Jim Croce to think of putting “time in a bottle”.
To illustrate the warmth of the English: “There is the story of the man who had eaten at the same tavern for twenty-five years. Over those years he and his neighbor in the next cubicle had never spoken. Eventually the man plucked up the courage to call out: ‘Sir, for twenty-five years we have been neighbors at dinner and yet we have never spoken. May I enquire your name, sir?’ He replied, ‘Sir, you are impertinent’.”
A good fun book, but it’s sad that a book this length of England doesn’t mention two critical English events: The Royal Proclamation of 1763, and the Somerset Decision of 1772. These were two of the biggest real reasons for the American Revolution. The Proclamation directly threatened future settler-colonialism (and ex-surveyor Washington’s $$$ real estate plans) while the Somerset Decision directly threatened future racial capitalism (Washington and Jefferson’s large slaveholding stake). Unchecked settler-colonialism and racial capitalism for centuries were of course the two main pillars of US economic growth, yet laughably knowing the critical significance of the Somerset Decision and the Royal Proclamation today is limited to those who have read Gerald Horne, Noam Chomsky and a handful of others.
Anne dies in 1714 and George I takes over. Trade becomes the most important English activity. Towns become the “temples of trade”. “Commerce was, essentially, power gained without war.” In the course of the 18th century, imports and exports increased by five-fold. In the 1730’s, oil-burning street-lamps became a thing for thoroughfares. Writing and card tables became expected in homes. The well-to-do had two female servants and a boy. The upper and middle classes would go on promenade while the lower classes worked. “There was nothing so snobbish as the country town.” At country dances you’d be watched like a hawk and gossiped about by your local Gladys Kravitz. Few went bathing in the ocean but instead would promenade slowly while talking like George Sanders. The biggest English profits came from the West Indies. The amount of sugar consumed in the 18th century increased 15x over the previous century. Sugar existed only through “back breaking labor of slaves.” The tunes Rule Britannia and God Save the King both start to become popular. “Many of England’s overseas possessions were no more than penal colonies rivalling any of those in Stalinist Russia.” Before the English take over Canada, it is called New France. King George II manages to hurt himself in the Royal Commode and soon dies. His valet de chambre knew something had gone astray when he heard a sound coming from the chamber that was “louder than the royal wind.” Indeed. His replacement George III was the first Hanoverian king to speak with an English accent and he hated William Pitt. George III is known today for his madness (starting 1788), losing the American Revolution, and being king of England during the French Revolution.
When I was studying at Sarah Lawrence College in the 70’s, on the library bathroom stall were the words, “Chance favors the prepared mind.” I found in this book where that great saying comes from: “Louis Pasteur once remarked that ‘chance favors only the mind that is prepared.” Most English homes have clocks by this point. The Industrial revolution is in full swing, England has moved from wood to coal. The skies go from blue to grey and black. Mass manufacture of pottery pipes drastically helps with sanitation. The roads weren’t great. “Many of the roads had not been repaired for fourteen centuries, ever since the Romans built them.” After repairs, though, what was then a three-day journey, will become a 12-hour trip. On page 231, the author says, America had become a haven for “all” nations. I would say, not if you were from an indigenous nation. Hessian soldiers fighting for the British in 1776 came from George’s Hanover connection to Germany. I always had wondered as a child, why did Hessians get the job? While the colonists were complaining about, “no taxation without representation”, half the towns in England also had no voice in parliament. “Nabobs” were Englishmen who returned rich from service during the brutal occupation of India. William Pitt made brave speeches against slavery. But at the same time, Pitt had no problem with English children starting to work at age four or five. The parents of those children could not complain because once you depended on parish relief, they could send your kid off to a factory. There were “many reports” of children losing fingers, having limbs crushed at work. “The food was often rancid.” “Some of the children had to raid dust bins or fight with the pigs to get into their troughs.” “One factory in Manchester was known as Hell’s Gate”. One slave-owner from the West Indies said he and other owners could not believe how cruel the Brits were to children.
Life expectancy was twenty-five in 1726 and by 1820 had risen to forty-one. England becomes the largest iron producer in Europe. During the French Revolution, English dissenters and reformers took the side of the revolutionaries, while English Catholics, Royalists, and those who liked dressing up in their wife’s clothing chose the King. Disputes over low wages and unskilled labor led the Luddites to destroy over 1,000 weaving frames in eleven months. Thomas Paine’s “Rights of Man” was saying stuff Pitt couldn’t believe: children should go to school until age 14, and actual money should go to the poor. Good gracious. “Pitt’s carriage was surrounded by a jeering crowd shouting ‘No Pitt! No War! Bread! Bread! Peace! Peace’!” In 1804, Napoleon becomes Emperor of France. Cicero wrote, “The sinews of war are infinite money.” British victory at Trafalgar “confirmed the naval superiority of the British” and ended Napoleon’s dream of invading England. Cool fact: Napoleon clothes his men in textiles from northern England. The Congress of Vienna is in 1814; there, attending nations mapped out their future together.
In 1771, writer Arthur Young explains the unsung credo of the US Republican and Libertarian Parties for the past fifty years: “Everybody but an idiot knows that the lower classes must be kept poor or they will never be industrious.” Ben Franklin in 1748 coins the phrase “time is money” two centuries later Jerry Ragovoy coins the phrase “time is on my side”. And it will take another twenty years after that for Jim Croce to think of putting “time in a bottle”.
To illustrate the warmth of the English: “There is the story of the man who had eaten at the same tavern for twenty-five years. Over those years he and his neighbor in the next cubicle had never spoken. Eventually the man plucked up the courage to call out: ‘Sir, for twenty-five years we have been neighbors at dinner and yet we have never spoken. May I enquire your name, sir?’ He replied, ‘Sir, you are impertinent’.”
A good fun book, but it’s sad that a book this length of England doesn’t mention two critical English events: The Royal Proclamation of 1763, and the Somerset Decision of 1772. These were two of the biggest real reasons for the American Revolution. The Proclamation directly threatened future settler-colonialism (and ex-surveyor Washington’s $$$ real estate plans) while the Somerset Decision directly threatened future racial capitalism (Washington and Jefferson’s large slaveholding stake). Unchecked settler-colonialism and racial capitalism for centuries were of course the two main pillars of US economic growth, yet laughably knowing the critical significance of the Somerset Decision and the Royal Proclamation today is limited to those who have read Gerald Horne, Noam Chomsky and a handful of others.
August 11, 2022
Short but sweet. Ackroyd does a great job with survey history. I respect that he peppers in chapters solely about economics, technology and so forth in between the historical narrative. However, as I’ve gone through this series I find I’m like each one a little less. I understand you cannot write about the 18th century without talking about industry, but some of the industrial and economic chapters got a bit tedious for me. If that’s more of your thing, you may enjoy this more than I did. I’m plan to finish the full series regardless.
October 15, 2018
The 18th century was an exciting time for Britain and Ackroyd has written a very readable account of it. Beginning with the Duke of Marlborough’s spanking of Louis XIV and ending with Wellington’s spanking of Napoleon, Revolution is ultimately about Britain’s attempts to deal with a variety of revolutions including the American, the French and the Industrial.
The more of this series I read, the more I like of it. The is my third volume (I’m reading them out of order) and it’s my favorite so far. Ackroyd does a fantastic job of bringing this time period to life, and not only the wars and politics, but also the culture and personalities.
The more of this series I read, the more I like of it. The is my third volume (I’m reading them out of order) and it’s my favorite so far. Ackroyd does a fantastic job of bringing this time period to life, and not only the wars and politics, but also the culture and personalities.
May 3, 2018
I have long been a fan of Peter Ackroyd, and I've loved his History of England books so far. Volume four in the series is no exception. In Revolution, Ackroyd covers my favourite historical period with panache, reflecting on everything from literature to military history and social progress. His writing style is always highly accessible, and he offers sufficient facts without disrupting a compelling story. History buffs will certainly find something to appreciate in this book, and I look forward to the final two volumes in the series.
November 11, 2018
I haven’t read the previous three books in this History of England series, but having read this book, I really want to.
This book covers the events spanning from the Glorious Revolution to the end of the Napoleonic Wars, which is some of my favourite parts of British history.
Ackroyd takes you on this long twisting journey at breakneck speed, and it was actually really enjoyable as a book, rather than just informative. I did really struggle to get into this book at the beginning, but once I settled into it, I couldn’t put it down. I thought that Ackroyd’s writing style was pretty good, and I quite liked the really small chapters, only two or three pages long that were a bit like interludes in the narrative that concerned painters, musicians and special social events. I also liked that he had chapters alternating between the Monarch and Parliament and the ordinary people, the entrepreneurs and the workforce driving the economy.
It does feel like it was missing quite a bit, and the book could easily have been double the size, but when writing a history of England, there’s always going to be things that have to be left out due to time and size constraints.
This book covers the events spanning from the Glorious Revolution to the end of the Napoleonic Wars, which is some of my favourite parts of British history.
Ackroyd takes you on this long twisting journey at breakneck speed, and it was actually really enjoyable as a book, rather than just informative. I did really struggle to get into this book at the beginning, but once I settled into it, I couldn’t put it down. I thought that Ackroyd’s writing style was pretty good, and I quite liked the really small chapters, only two or three pages long that were a bit like interludes in the narrative that concerned painters, musicians and special social events. I also liked that he had chapters alternating between the Monarch and Parliament and the ordinary people, the entrepreneurs and the workforce driving the economy.
It does feel like it was missing quite a bit, and the book could easily have been double the size, but when writing a history of England, there’s always going to be things that have to be left out due to time and size constraints.
November 11, 2023
This book was used as a textbook for a history class of mine. I really enjoyed it for being non traditional in a sense that it was written by a novelist, read like a novel, but still had a ton of historical information packed into it. It was a little all over the place at points but I enjoyed the narrative voice and retained a lot of information from it being presented this way. Highly recommend for history buffs.
March 9, 2018
I have found myself an enthusiastic follower of Ackroyd's prodigious writings, having completed over ten of his publications, including the previous three volumes of his History of England series.
'Revolution' continues the chronicle from the Glorious Revolution of 1688 to the final end of the Napoleonic wars with the allied victory at Waterloo in 1815.
Peter Ackroyd CBE is a rightly celebrated writer. I have enjoyed the historical and biographical publications that I have previously read and can recommend all that I have sampled so far. There is no doubt that he is very centred on the capital city, with 'London: The Biography', 'Thames: Sacred River', 'Illustrated London', 'London Under: The Secret History Beneath the Streets', 'Dickens' London', 'The Lambs of London' and various biographies such as those of Shakespeare and Thomas Moore. Volume Four of this History series is also very much 'under the smoke' until the beginnings of industrial innovations bring the focus of attention to the dark satanic mill towns north of Watford. However the author has a very pleasing and light touch of informative narrative that has never failed to generate a four star rating from me.
'Revolution' continues the chronicle from the Glorious Revolution of 1688 to the final end of the Napoleonic wars with the allied victory at Waterloo in 1815.
Peter Ackroyd CBE is a rightly celebrated writer. I have enjoyed the historical and biographical publications that I have previously read and can recommend all that I have sampled so far. There is no doubt that he is very centred on the capital city, with 'London: The Biography', 'Thames: Sacred River', 'Illustrated London', 'London Under: The Secret History Beneath the Streets', 'Dickens' London', 'The Lambs of London' and various biographies such as those of Shakespeare and Thomas Moore. Volume Four of this History series is also very much 'under the smoke' until the beginnings of industrial innovations bring the focus of attention to the dark satanic mill towns north of Watford. However the author has a very pleasing and light touch of informative narrative that has never failed to generate a four star rating from me.
March 8, 2019
A joy to read Ackroyd’s books on English history. While not academic, they are informative and well written. You get a good sense of the period without getting bogged down into pedantic details. Well worth your time.
January 25, 2017
More breakneck history with Ackroyd's eye for a choice quote ("The people in London, Manchester and Birmingham are steam-mill mad").
May 30, 2021
I bought this book about when it came out, and I’m pretty sure it was in the wake of having my brain explode after reading ‘A Place of Greater Safety’ and ‘Quicksilver’ in quick succession. I was in need of some serious historical satiation, but all I had access to was an Eason’s, and, therefore, this. Between the various historical fiction I’ve read and watched, and cursory googling afterwards to clear up confusion (particularly in the wake of ‘The Favourite’), I was already pretty well versed in the time period covered by this book. It added a few tidbits to my store, but nothing completely new.
The writing style is very akin to reading a Wikipedia entry, which, when Wikipedia exists, is probably something you need to aim above. There’s also flashes of some really dodgy (read: capital-C conservative) thinking coming through, concerningly disguised in most cases as obvious derivations from the preceding facts. I don’t know anything about Peter Ackroyd, except that this book is number four in a series of English histories, but I didn’t come out of it trusting his scholarship or opinions very much.
There’s also the fact that this is attempting to be a comprehensive history, not just a political or military one. So it jumps back and forth in time, following the career of a politician to his death, then retreating to look at the evolution of a particular invention or industrial process or sociological phenomenon. This doesn’t really work for me (again, Wikipedia has you covered). I would far rather read in detail about one of these things.
“[The Whigs] feared for [William III]’s his health in a land of rain and fog.”
The land they’re talking about is Ireland. The opinion is given by an English person. Sure, Jan. There’s no rain or fog where you come from.
“William seems to have taking a relatively forgiving view of those grandees who still dabbled in the intrigues of the Stuart dynasty. He had a low opinion of human nature.”
Er, isn’t forgiveness suggestive of having a high opinion of human nature? Or of your own, at least?
Of George I, described in eulogy as of sound brain and goodhearted, Ackroyd says: “These are the familiar marmoreal words used to embalm mediocrity, or at least sovereigns who avoided catastrophe.”
So if you don’t cause the slaughter of foreigners and the collapse of your own economy, you are ‘mediocre’. Duly noted.
“It is perhaps not surprising that Wesley, who professed himself to be a Tory and a devout Anglican, should gather together a motley congregation of whom many were radical and anti-authoritarian in tendency.”
Excuse me, WHAT is this assertion? What is anti-authoritarian about being a Tory?!
“The slaves could not breed in these torrid conditions, so even more had to be transported.”
Not a quote. I repeat, ‘breed’ is not a quote. Ackroyd’s own choice of words, in 2016.
“The calls for [John Wilkes]’s arrest were predictable but, perhaps unfortunately, the government issued a ‘general warrant’ that could be used against anyone the authorities deemed to be deserving of it.”
PERHAPS?
“[…] the British form of industrial protest had none of the proto-socialist shrillness of the agitators of France and Germany. It was more formal, more measured and more pragmatic; it relied to a certain extent upon humour and sarcasm, and was maintained by a deep deference for national institutions.”
… shrill?
“The ties of history and tradition had been cut through; the sanctions of custom and time were abandoned.”
This quote refers to the French Revolution. It was written by a man writing in, I cannot stress this enough, 2016. Hello Edmund Burke, how’s the afterlife treating you?
“In the summer of 1799 William Pitt introduced the Workmen’s Combination Bill which forbade any working men to come together for the purpose of seeking higher wages or shorter hours, with a minimum penalty of three months’ imprisonment or two months of hard labour.”
Gross. Thank you next.
“Lord Byron, in his maiden speech, was moved to declare that ‘when a proposal is made to emancipate or relieve you hesitate, you deliberate for years, you temporize and tamper with the minds of men; but a death-bill must be passed off hand, without a thought of the consequences’.”
This refers to frame-making being a capital crime. Be still, my beating heart. Can you blame Caroline Lambe?
Some lulzy facts:
Wedgewood called himself ‘Vase Maker to the Universe’.
“Napoleon: ‘I don’t see in religion the mystery of incarnation but the mystery of the social order. It ties up to heaven an idea of equality which prevents the rich from being massacred by the poor.’”
“[…] he was told by one householder that ‘I’d rather vote for the devil’. ‘Naturally,’ Wilkes replied, but if your friend is not standing, may I hope for your support?’”
The writing style is very akin to reading a Wikipedia entry, which, when Wikipedia exists, is probably something you need to aim above. There’s also flashes of some really dodgy (read: capital-C conservative) thinking coming through, concerningly disguised in most cases as obvious derivations from the preceding facts. I don’t know anything about Peter Ackroyd, except that this book is number four in a series of English histories, but I didn’t come out of it trusting his scholarship or opinions very much.
There’s also the fact that this is attempting to be a comprehensive history, not just a political or military one. So it jumps back and forth in time, following the career of a politician to his death, then retreating to look at the evolution of a particular invention or industrial process or sociological phenomenon. This doesn’t really work for me (again, Wikipedia has you covered). I would far rather read in detail about one of these things.
“[The Whigs] feared for [William III]’s his health in a land of rain and fog.”
The land they’re talking about is Ireland. The opinion is given by an English person. Sure, Jan. There’s no rain or fog where you come from.
“William seems to have taking a relatively forgiving view of those grandees who still dabbled in the intrigues of the Stuart dynasty. He had a low opinion of human nature.”
Er, isn’t forgiveness suggestive of having a high opinion of human nature? Or of your own, at least?
Of George I, described in eulogy as of sound brain and goodhearted, Ackroyd says: “These are the familiar marmoreal words used to embalm mediocrity, or at least sovereigns who avoided catastrophe.”
So if you don’t cause the slaughter of foreigners and the collapse of your own economy, you are ‘mediocre’. Duly noted.
“It is perhaps not surprising that Wesley, who professed himself to be a Tory and a devout Anglican, should gather together a motley congregation of whom many were radical and anti-authoritarian in tendency.”
Excuse me, WHAT is this assertion? What is anti-authoritarian about being a Tory?!
“The slaves could not breed in these torrid conditions, so even more had to be transported.”
Not a quote. I repeat, ‘breed’ is not a quote. Ackroyd’s own choice of words, in 2016.
“The calls for [John Wilkes]’s arrest were predictable but, perhaps unfortunately, the government issued a ‘general warrant’ that could be used against anyone the authorities deemed to be deserving of it.”
PERHAPS?
“[…] the British form of industrial protest had none of the proto-socialist shrillness of the agitators of France and Germany. It was more formal, more measured and more pragmatic; it relied to a certain extent upon humour and sarcasm, and was maintained by a deep deference for national institutions.”
… shrill?
“The ties of history and tradition had been cut through; the sanctions of custom and time were abandoned.”
This quote refers to the French Revolution. It was written by a man writing in, I cannot stress this enough, 2016. Hello Edmund Burke, how’s the afterlife treating you?
“In the summer of 1799 William Pitt introduced the Workmen’s Combination Bill which forbade any working men to come together for the purpose of seeking higher wages or shorter hours, with a minimum penalty of three months’ imprisonment or two months of hard labour.”
Gross. Thank you next.
“Lord Byron, in his maiden speech, was moved to declare that ‘when a proposal is made to emancipate or relieve you hesitate, you deliberate for years, you temporize and tamper with the minds of men; but a death-bill must be passed off hand, without a thought of the consequences’.”
This refers to frame-making being a capital crime. Be still, my beating heart. Can you blame Caroline Lambe?
Some lulzy facts:
Wedgewood called himself ‘Vase Maker to the Universe’.
“Napoleon: ‘I don’t see in religion the mystery of incarnation but the mystery of the social order. It ties up to heaven an idea of equality which prevents the rich from being massacred by the poor.’”
“[…] he was told by one householder that ‘I’d rather vote for the devil’. ‘Naturally,’ Wilkes replied, but if your friend is not standing, may I hope for your support?’”
July 9, 2018
I have been looking for an English history book to span the years between the Glorious Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars. Mission accomplished. Revolution covers precisely the desired period. Usually I am satisfied with the politico-military aspects of a given period. However, Revolution covers so much more. The War Of Austrian Succession, the Seven Years War, our Revolution, the Industrial Revolution and much more are brought cleverly into the discussion. Mary and William of Orange, Queen Anne, and the Hanoverian dynasty with the Stuart threat lurking on the continent properly receive ample discourse. The culmination is of course England’s victory over Napoleon and his final defeat at Waterloo. A great book, Revolution answered many of my questions.
May 20, 2020
Ackroyd offers an erudite, readable, and comprehensive look and English society in the Eighteenth Century. This work is focused mainly on England; Ireland and Scotland are not the focus. What sets it apart from other histories is Ackroyd's even-handed treatment of controversial moments and his ability to sustain a narrative history that also serves as an intellectual and literary history. A very good work and primer for anyone interested in a modern analog of Churchill's History of the English Speaking Peoples.
October 4, 2021
For those like me who doesn't quite know the nitty-gritty details or even just heard about the names of famous events, this book fitted me well. The richness of details was immense (in a good way) for me, but I have to admit that the read is remarkably dense, and hence, I easily zoned out sometimes. Nervertheless, the book fulfilled my expectations and I learned a whole lot more about English history from that period at least :). By the way, it's a great book to boost your vocabulary, there are several tricky words.
June 23, 2019
Peter Ackroyd, according to the dust jacket, is a novelist who has written a series of books on British history. I jumped into the middle by reading this book, which is number 4 in the series and deals with basically the 18th century. This is a book for people who are interested in British history, but don't want to get lost in the weeds of a particular event or personage. Ackroyd gives the reader a novelist's narrative which rolls along smoothly while describing various aspects of 18th century Britain. There are no footnotes. Ackroyd is not discovering any novel interpretations of the meaning of 18th century British century or tracing any root causes of the situation in which we find ourselves in the 21st century, but he is doing a good job of outlining what was happening in the England of the time period being covered. As an American, I was slightly offended that he gave much more attention to Napoleon than to George Washington, but I have gotten over it.
July 19, 2021
Ketvirtas Ackroydo Anglijos istorijos tomas.
Žvelgiant per dinastijas galima trumpai periodą įvardinti taip – Stiuartai išpašalvoninami, vokiečiai ateina. Viljamas Oranietis ir jo žmona Ana – tarsi toks pertepimas tarp tų dviejų torto sluoksnių (žinau, žinau, kad Ana vis dėlto iš Stiuartų).
Anglai negana, kad prašiko Amerikas, bet dar ir įsivelia į ilgamečius karo žaidimus su anapus Lamanšo įsisiautėjusiu Boniu. Žodžiu, įvykių nestinga, nors bene daugiausiai dėmesio šiame tome skiriama pramoninei revoliucijai, neišvengiamai keičiančiai pasaulio veidą.
Keturi iš penkių.
Žvelgiant per dinastijas galima trumpai periodą įvardinti taip – Stiuartai išpašalvoninami, vokiečiai ateina. Viljamas Oranietis ir jo žmona Ana – tarsi toks pertepimas tarp tų dviejų torto sluoksnių (žinau, žinau, kad Ana vis dėlto iš Stiuartų).
Anglai negana, kad prašiko Amerikas, bet dar ir įsivelia į ilgamečius karo žaidimus su anapus Lamanšo įsisiautėjusiu Boniu. Žodžiu, įvykių nestinga, nors bene daugiausiai dėmesio šiame tome skiriama pramoninei revoliucijai, neišvengiamai keičiančiai pasaulio veidą.
Keturi iš penkių.
March 21, 2024
I'll push this to 3.5 stars...it's a very easy read, but there is so much covered here that reading it all in one go tends to make the head spin. It's much more useful as a series of bite-sized, concise historical chunks...excellent for research purposes.
July 29, 2019
Review to come
August 29, 2018
I read this as a biography of the William, Anne and Hanoverian years in England that saw the growth of Great Britain as a colonial and commercial world centre. Ackroyd shows an incredible knowledge of the everyday, the quirky and the historical to build a portrait of the final rout of the Stuarts and the decline of the last of the Jacobites with their long and divisive influence. He shows how modern capitalist society begins to dominate politics and keeps alive the reader’s interest even when the most boring details of Whigs and Tories are addressed. His knowledge of their permutations made them able to be understood: something I had long found impossible.
The influence of the City of London and the growth of modern parliament is traced starting with a house under King William wherein ‘the permutations of individual members were endless’ (13). Similarly, Ackroyd makes the growth of modern banking and commercial practices interesting: quite a coup for this reader.
Throughout, Ackroyd’s deep scholarship, thinking and reading is shown through his references, quotes and bringing together what might be seen as disparate elements of history. The section heads show Ackroyd’s capacity to organise the details of the through line of the history of this period in an accessible and interesting way.
London itself is a character that Ackroyd describes in detail following both literature (Humphrey Clinker), journalism (Addison) and art (Hogarth) to show that ‘crime and violence belonged to its streets as much as flints and stones’ (147). At the same time he asserts that ‘London was power and money’. As the largest industrial city in the world it transformed what it was to live by trade and under the influence of gin.
Ackroyd captures the temper of the times with wonderful yet relentless detail. Commerce, politics, power and social change are brought before us. Above all, he brings the reasons for war to the fore. In this regard, he shows the machinations of Pitt the elder’s ‘vision, of global supremacy’ (169) on the continent as well as in the colonies. This involves also insights into slavery and commercialisation of people as well as success in Canada and the Indies.
Nor does he ignore throughout the influence of religion; not only the Catholicism of the Jacobites nor the Anglican establishment, but also the importance of dissenters such as John Wesley. He is described as ‘a man whose optimism was matched only by his energy’ (165).
Ackroyd’s depth and breadth of knowledge ranges throughout from trade to literature, art and music and to the scientific establishment. He also covers this period in which whilst the French revolution overturned their monarchy, England began its long period of constitutional democracy under the crown. In this, he succeeds in showing the English as ‘a practical and pragmatic race’ (319).
Social changes are central of course in this fourth volume subtitled ‘Revolution’. Under Queen Anne, the nobility are beginning to give way to trade, and the middle class is developing strength and influence although ‘wealth was essential but not necessarily enough. Blood lineage was equally, if not more important’ (19). The conservative Church of England is also under fire from ‘dissenters and non-conformists’ (21). As ever, the poor labour and are held in disdain as only just above ‘the miserable, the abject, the worthless’ of the massed unemployed (23).
Ackroyd pays attention to the importance of harvests and the cost of bread. He shows how the land enclosures made the rich even richer and the poor of course even poorer. These clear insights into social conditions and the pursuit of power clarify how the face of England changed as modern capitalist imperatives began to develop.
Perhaps the most significant social change Ackroyd identifies is the growth of the media that so dominates today’s affairs. He records how the ‘fourth estate’ emerged and participated in the growth of what today we know as capitalism (25). Under Queen Anne London became dominated as ‘a world of news’(37) in the coffee houses and publications of political journalism. Much of this, Ackroyd shows, is based upon satire.
Social order changes under King William and then Queen Anne are shown to prepare society for the Hanoverians. William, says Ackroyd, ‘had been, for many, the least bad alternative’ (31), and the unprepossessing Queen Anne is described well as not only a ‘woman without an heir’ (having suffered 12 miscarriages) but also as both shy, cautious and ‘addicted to protocol’ (33).
Of course, the poor suffered as England marched triumphantly towards world power. These changes were brought about by experimentation and progress: it was a history of continual, almost inexorable, development’ (46). Ackroyd provides fascinating details of this from sheep breeding to mining, from machinery then to interesting comparisons to present day computerization. All show how the poor are exploited and powerless.
It is under Walpole that the Jacobite influence finally wanes and stutters to a halt. The Hanoverians resist war as George 1 is ‘assisted by Walpole who above all else hated war. It was bad for business and wrecked the economy’ (93). It is now that trade comes to dominate England. Ackroyd describes England’s premier position as built on trade and colonies. When Walpole falters under George 2, Ackroyd summarises again pithily: ‘Walpole had miscalculated. His native optimism had triumphed over his natural caution’ (135).
Whilst provincial English towns emulated the trade of London, the poor remain largely ignored. Ackroyd notes how the popular ‘low’ play ‘The Beggar’s Opera’ made political and social comment on this. It was set in Newgate Prison ‘filled with pimps, thieves, whores and all the other inhabitants of contemporary low life’ (127).
Society was changing and one aspect of this was the development of commercial enterprises indicated in each village and hamlet by the establishment of the local shop, and the idea of a customer/consumer. As George II took the throne, Ackroyd shows how trade encouraged equality as money dominated acceptance and class: the market dominated society. He notes how at the same time parliament itself became more party driven and controlled.
As George III was the first of the Hanoverian kings to be born and educated in England, change is bound to occur with his accession in 1760. Ackroyd is on to this of course. He develops our knowledge of trade as power when he shows how ‘England took its place at the centre of what was rapidly becoming a vast trading network from Canada to Bengal’ (185). He shows how trade, tax and mechanisation continued to place England as the most developed nation in the world. At the same time he shows the terrible injustices and imbalances of actual slavery and economic slavery that supported this dominance.
This book begins with a deceptively laconic style that sets a tone of interest and involvement rather than didactic factual analysis. He is a master of the contrapuntal as in this description of the Duke of Marlborough early in the book: ‘He was inclined to support whatever and whoever indulged his interests, whether for power, money, or further honours, while all the time remaining tactful, modest and obliging’ (11). Throughout too he makes use of contemporary literary references such as ‘Gulliver’s Travels’, Macauley’s ‘History of England’, and Defoe’s ‘Robinson Crusoe’.
This contrapuntal style continues to contribute to his insights into apparent contradictions as he acknowledges: ‘Walpole had his own share of luck, an indispensable requirement for a successful politician’ (91). Ackroyd has a sharp eye and an even sharper pen with short sentences that are quite pert as when he speaks of the death of King William’s wife Queen Mary: ‘She was widely, and perhaps sincerely, mourned’ (23).
There is, too, his appealing and stylish vocabulary as in his description of Marlborough’s acquisitiveness: ‘Blenheim Palace and Marlborough House were only two of the stone baubles he had collected’ (52). He also said to suffer from ‘vertiginous ambiguity’ (65) in his dealings with the Hanoverians and the Jacobites in the matter of succession after Queen Annes’ death.
The single often short and always pointed sentence is used to great impact: ‘It was better to trade with the Americans than to attempt to rule them’ (247); and ‘trade could not be separated from power’ (248). Or, in detailing Pitt the younger’s persona: ‘Pitt relied upon tranquillity at home and abroad’ (252).
Character insights abound in this book. From the first Ackroyd builds a lively portrait of the historical figures with a few words from himself and quotes from the period. His wry character assessment of King William shows his insightfulness and also his capacity to make a pen portrait with a few restrained strokes: ‘He had a low opinion of human nature’ (12). In a similar vein he brings down to earth such historical heroes as Marlborough.
He also illustrates the character of the times. Under George ‘the gambler was king’ as ‘gaming affected all classes’ (85). This is shown to be based on a society where avarice, panics and money bubbles were in control: much like today? Ackroyd’s humorous description of Robert Walpole illustrates his stabilising character influencing England after the crash of the South Sea Bubble. He shows again his capacity to introduce splendid quotes and to elucidate historical data with pointed comments. Walpole: ‘knew the price of every man’ and thus he ‘held the state in his hands’ (88.). In all ways he demonstrates the qualities of modern politicians and politics, and Ackroyd devotes useful time to him and his ability to stabilise the complex social impact of political power.
When describing William Pitt, Ackroyd again triumphs with his insights into historical characters’ actions and interactions, particularly in regard to war. It is in this period that Bonny Prince Charlie makes a final inevitably unsuccessful thrust to take the throne. His loss led to ‘a deliberate policy of cultural genocide’ in the Scottish highlands. Butcher Cumberland was allowed to destroy the Highlanders.
The delicious descriptions and character assassinations continue with Ackroyd’s description of George III as: ‘He seems to have inherited a strain of obstinate self-righteousness from his Hanoverian predecessors; he had the deficiencies of a closed mind, including overweening self-confidence combined with long spells of resentment and sullenness’ (179). He is allowed some better attributes as a worker and a King who loved the land: ‘farmer George’ who was strongly against Pitt’s war policy and for peace.
Invention, mechanization, science and the use of coal for machinery become strong indicators of the changing nature of industry. It is the inventiveness of this change that he captures as he details the influences of the theatre, art, literature and above all the fourth estate and emphasises the importance of the spread of literacy in the development of power. In showing that the 18th century was ‘a great age for political excitement’ (209), he indicates the historical importance of the American Revolution.
George III’s reign seemed peaceful and hopeful: but as French revolutionaries were storming the Bastille and Europe was in chaos, something as happening to the King. England escaped revolution, but George III could not escape madness.
At the same time wars with France continued and the revolution there was terrifying to the constitutional monarchy. Emerging on to this scene was the future emperor Napoleon Buonaparte. The Napoleonic wars were beginning and King George 3 was mad! He was replaced by his son as Prince Regent. The stability of England was under threat.
Throughout Ackroyd succeeds in making the information flow into a narrative that is non-didactic. At no time does he seem to push a particular point of view. Rather he introduces ideas and looks at them from multiple angles. Interestingly this included perceptive insights into the working and lowest classes. His retrospective analyses demonstrates the role of the historian: a novelist would use his data in a different narrative style. His is a broad view whereas the narrative could also be micro-told with more specificity. There are so many stories in this history. Sometimes he stirs this with his discussion of the American colonies that fought for freedom: ‘for the first time a group of people had advanced the cause of a nation without a king, without an aristocracy and without a national church’ (243).
The social control that is made available through industrialisation is considered alongside the growth of workers’ combinations or unions. Working conditions are shown in all of their commercialised savagery. Poor children are seen as subject to industrialized slavery. Women are employed as cheaper labour than men. Progress was the catchcry. While ‘employees were obliged to work in conditions that were compared to those of Hades’ (275) employees were setting up price and wage fixing rings and people were drifting to where this grinding labour existed.
In this volume IV, Ackroyd demonstrates the great change that occurred as ‘England was no longer predominately an agricultural society, a state in which it had remained for approximately 10,000 years’ (290). He describes this as an apocalypse driven by science and industry. At the same time he shows the threats to the worker and the resultant anti-machinery Luddites.
Whilst in many ways a typical political history dominated by rulers, their ministers and their generals, this book also has many interesting nuances about the periods of British History it covers. These include the arts, business and the lives of ordinary citizens as well as insights into active and class-based slavery. It provides multiple points of interest to the reader and multiple narratives that could be expanded for the historical novelist too. I enjoyed reading it.
This review by Professor Josie Arnold has featured in the Swinburne Journal 'Backstory', Issue 2.
The influence of the City of London and the growth of modern parliament is traced starting with a house under King William wherein ‘the permutations of individual members were endless’ (13). Similarly, Ackroyd makes the growth of modern banking and commercial practices interesting: quite a coup for this reader.
Throughout, Ackroyd’s deep scholarship, thinking and reading is shown through his references, quotes and bringing together what might be seen as disparate elements of history. The section heads show Ackroyd’s capacity to organise the details of the through line of the history of this period in an accessible and interesting way.
London itself is a character that Ackroyd describes in detail following both literature (Humphrey Clinker), journalism (Addison) and art (Hogarth) to show that ‘crime and violence belonged to its streets as much as flints and stones’ (147). At the same time he asserts that ‘London was power and money’. As the largest industrial city in the world it transformed what it was to live by trade and under the influence of gin.
Ackroyd captures the temper of the times with wonderful yet relentless detail. Commerce, politics, power and social change are brought before us. Above all, he brings the reasons for war to the fore. In this regard, he shows the machinations of Pitt the elder’s ‘vision, of global supremacy’ (169) on the continent as well as in the colonies. This involves also insights into slavery and commercialisation of people as well as success in Canada and the Indies.
Nor does he ignore throughout the influence of religion; not only the Catholicism of the Jacobites nor the Anglican establishment, but also the importance of dissenters such as John Wesley. He is described as ‘a man whose optimism was matched only by his energy’ (165).
Ackroyd’s depth and breadth of knowledge ranges throughout from trade to literature, art and music and to the scientific establishment. He also covers this period in which whilst the French revolution overturned their monarchy, England began its long period of constitutional democracy under the crown. In this, he succeeds in showing the English as ‘a practical and pragmatic race’ (319).
Social changes are central of course in this fourth volume subtitled ‘Revolution’. Under Queen Anne, the nobility are beginning to give way to trade, and the middle class is developing strength and influence although ‘wealth was essential but not necessarily enough. Blood lineage was equally, if not more important’ (19). The conservative Church of England is also under fire from ‘dissenters and non-conformists’ (21). As ever, the poor labour and are held in disdain as only just above ‘the miserable, the abject, the worthless’ of the massed unemployed (23).
Ackroyd pays attention to the importance of harvests and the cost of bread. He shows how the land enclosures made the rich even richer and the poor of course even poorer. These clear insights into social conditions and the pursuit of power clarify how the face of England changed as modern capitalist imperatives began to develop.
Perhaps the most significant social change Ackroyd identifies is the growth of the media that so dominates today’s affairs. He records how the ‘fourth estate’ emerged and participated in the growth of what today we know as capitalism (25). Under Queen Anne London became dominated as ‘a world of news’(37) in the coffee houses and publications of political journalism. Much of this, Ackroyd shows, is based upon satire.
Social order changes under King William and then Queen Anne are shown to prepare society for the Hanoverians. William, says Ackroyd, ‘had been, for many, the least bad alternative’ (31), and the unprepossessing Queen Anne is described well as not only a ‘woman without an heir’ (having suffered 12 miscarriages) but also as both shy, cautious and ‘addicted to protocol’ (33).
Of course, the poor suffered as England marched triumphantly towards world power. These changes were brought about by experimentation and progress: it was a history of continual, almost inexorable, development’ (46). Ackroyd provides fascinating details of this from sheep breeding to mining, from machinery then to interesting comparisons to present day computerization. All show how the poor are exploited and powerless.
It is under Walpole that the Jacobite influence finally wanes and stutters to a halt. The Hanoverians resist war as George 1 is ‘assisted by Walpole who above all else hated war. It was bad for business and wrecked the economy’ (93). It is now that trade comes to dominate England. Ackroyd describes England’s premier position as built on trade and colonies. When Walpole falters under George 2, Ackroyd summarises again pithily: ‘Walpole had miscalculated. His native optimism had triumphed over his natural caution’ (135).
Whilst provincial English towns emulated the trade of London, the poor remain largely ignored. Ackroyd notes how the popular ‘low’ play ‘The Beggar’s Opera’ made political and social comment on this. It was set in Newgate Prison ‘filled with pimps, thieves, whores and all the other inhabitants of contemporary low life’ (127).
Society was changing and one aspect of this was the development of commercial enterprises indicated in each village and hamlet by the establishment of the local shop, and the idea of a customer/consumer. As George II took the throne, Ackroyd shows how trade encouraged equality as money dominated acceptance and class: the market dominated society. He notes how at the same time parliament itself became more party driven and controlled.
As George III was the first of the Hanoverian kings to be born and educated in England, change is bound to occur with his accession in 1760. Ackroyd is on to this of course. He develops our knowledge of trade as power when he shows how ‘England took its place at the centre of what was rapidly becoming a vast trading network from Canada to Bengal’ (185). He shows how trade, tax and mechanisation continued to place England as the most developed nation in the world. At the same time he shows the terrible injustices and imbalances of actual slavery and economic slavery that supported this dominance.
This book begins with a deceptively laconic style that sets a tone of interest and involvement rather than didactic factual analysis. He is a master of the contrapuntal as in this description of the Duke of Marlborough early in the book: ‘He was inclined to support whatever and whoever indulged his interests, whether for power, money, or further honours, while all the time remaining tactful, modest and obliging’ (11). Throughout too he makes use of contemporary literary references such as ‘Gulliver’s Travels’, Macauley’s ‘History of England’, and Defoe’s ‘Robinson Crusoe’.
This contrapuntal style continues to contribute to his insights into apparent contradictions as he acknowledges: ‘Walpole had his own share of luck, an indispensable requirement for a successful politician’ (91). Ackroyd has a sharp eye and an even sharper pen with short sentences that are quite pert as when he speaks of the death of King William’s wife Queen Mary: ‘She was widely, and perhaps sincerely, mourned’ (23).
There is, too, his appealing and stylish vocabulary as in his description of Marlborough’s acquisitiveness: ‘Blenheim Palace and Marlborough House were only two of the stone baubles he had collected’ (52). He also said to suffer from ‘vertiginous ambiguity’ (65) in his dealings with the Hanoverians and the Jacobites in the matter of succession after Queen Annes’ death.
The single often short and always pointed sentence is used to great impact: ‘It was better to trade with the Americans than to attempt to rule them’ (247); and ‘trade could not be separated from power’ (248). Or, in detailing Pitt the younger’s persona: ‘Pitt relied upon tranquillity at home and abroad’ (252).
Character insights abound in this book. From the first Ackroyd builds a lively portrait of the historical figures with a few words from himself and quotes from the period. His wry character assessment of King William shows his insightfulness and also his capacity to make a pen portrait with a few restrained strokes: ‘He had a low opinion of human nature’ (12). In a similar vein he brings down to earth such historical heroes as Marlborough.
He also illustrates the character of the times. Under George ‘the gambler was king’ as ‘gaming affected all classes’ (85). This is shown to be based on a society where avarice, panics and money bubbles were in control: much like today? Ackroyd’s humorous description of Robert Walpole illustrates his stabilising character influencing England after the crash of the South Sea Bubble. He shows again his capacity to introduce splendid quotes and to elucidate historical data with pointed comments. Walpole: ‘knew the price of every man’ and thus he ‘held the state in his hands’ (88.). In all ways he demonstrates the qualities of modern politicians and politics, and Ackroyd devotes useful time to him and his ability to stabilise the complex social impact of political power.
When describing William Pitt, Ackroyd again triumphs with his insights into historical characters’ actions and interactions, particularly in regard to war. It is in this period that Bonny Prince Charlie makes a final inevitably unsuccessful thrust to take the throne. His loss led to ‘a deliberate policy of cultural genocide’ in the Scottish highlands. Butcher Cumberland was allowed to destroy the Highlanders.
The delicious descriptions and character assassinations continue with Ackroyd’s description of George III as: ‘He seems to have inherited a strain of obstinate self-righteousness from his Hanoverian predecessors; he had the deficiencies of a closed mind, including overweening self-confidence combined with long spells of resentment and sullenness’ (179). He is allowed some better attributes as a worker and a King who loved the land: ‘farmer George’ who was strongly against Pitt’s war policy and for peace.
Invention, mechanization, science and the use of coal for machinery become strong indicators of the changing nature of industry. It is the inventiveness of this change that he captures as he details the influences of the theatre, art, literature and above all the fourth estate and emphasises the importance of the spread of literacy in the development of power. In showing that the 18th century was ‘a great age for political excitement’ (209), he indicates the historical importance of the American Revolution.
George III’s reign seemed peaceful and hopeful: but as French revolutionaries were storming the Bastille and Europe was in chaos, something as happening to the King. England escaped revolution, but George III could not escape madness.
At the same time wars with France continued and the revolution there was terrifying to the constitutional monarchy. Emerging on to this scene was the future emperor Napoleon Buonaparte. The Napoleonic wars were beginning and King George 3 was mad! He was replaced by his son as Prince Regent. The stability of England was under threat.
Throughout Ackroyd succeeds in making the information flow into a narrative that is non-didactic. At no time does he seem to push a particular point of view. Rather he introduces ideas and looks at them from multiple angles. Interestingly this included perceptive insights into the working and lowest classes. His retrospective analyses demonstrates the role of the historian: a novelist would use his data in a different narrative style. His is a broad view whereas the narrative could also be micro-told with more specificity. There are so many stories in this history. Sometimes he stirs this with his discussion of the American colonies that fought for freedom: ‘for the first time a group of people had advanced the cause of a nation without a king, without an aristocracy and without a national church’ (243).
The social control that is made available through industrialisation is considered alongside the growth of workers’ combinations or unions. Working conditions are shown in all of their commercialised savagery. Poor children are seen as subject to industrialized slavery. Women are employed as cheaper labour than men. Progress was the catchcry. While ‘employees were obliged to work in conditions that were compared to those of Hades’ (275) employees were setting up price and wage fixing rings and people were drifting to where this grinding labour existed.
In this volume IV, Ackroyd demonstrates the great change that occurred as ‘England was no longer predominately an agricultural society, a state in which it had remained for approximately 10,000 years’ (290). He describes this as an apocalypse driven by science and industry. At the same time he shows the threats to the worker and the resultant anti-machinery Luddites.
Whilst in many ways a typical political history dominated by rulers, their ministers and their generals, this book also has many interesting nuances about the periods of British History it covers. These include the arts, business and the lives of ordinary citizens as well as insights into active and class-based slavery. It provides multiple points of interest to the reader and multiple narratives that could be expanded for the historical novelist too. I enjoyed reading it.
This review by Professor Josie Arnold has featured in the Swinburne Journal 'Backstory', Issue 2.
May 3, 2021
The fourth part of Ackroyd's glorious HISTORY OF ENGLAND series and one of the best yet. In fact, he really seems in his element in this one as the history just flies off the page and the material on the horrors of the Industrial Revolution is perhaps the best and most enthusiastic thing I've read from him yet. Elsewhere, it offers a huge scope, concentrating on the kings and queens but also getting into the nitty-gritty of the politics of the times (Whigs vs. Tories), Britain's increasing global role, culture, the economy, and of course the ever-present wars. The closing chapters on the French Revolution and the rise of Napoleon are particularly enthralling, leaving me wanting more.
January 3, 2018
A useful overview of the 18th century in what had become Great Britain: maybe it was just me, but it felt as though Ackroyd was rushing through this material, trying to get to the Victorian Age. I feel that this book could easily have been 50% bigger, without showing any strain.
November 29, 2016
Working my way through this series as it comes out, and found this one particularly readable, perhaps because the time covered had a sense of being a period rather than a dynasty, if that makes sense. There also seemed to be more on how people lived and thought during this time, perhaps because the 'lower orders' and 'middling sort' are finding a voice. My only quibble is Ackroyd's almost pretentious use of words so obscure you have to look them up (sometimes, overusing the same word such as 'quietus'), when there are perfectly adequate substitutes - they jar.
February 1, 2023
Peter's books are a fantastic introduction to English history. This is the 4th in the series and focuses on the 18th century from the William of Orange's battle of the Boyne to the French revolution. After reading 4 of these I am getting a bit lost in the dates and details at this point.
The influence of the monarchs waned during this time, as the house of commons began to establish itself as the main force in the country. We hear less and less about their exploits and influence more and more as the book develops as the crown passes to the German family the Hanoverians. They were put in power to keep Catholic ancestors of the Stuarts off the throne but the Hanoverian kings barely spent time in England letting the country be run by the likes of Robert Walpole and William Pitt.
The Tories and the Whigs were the 2 political parties of the time with the Whigs being the foremost political power of the century. As set out in the previous book the Tories were the royalist party of landowners. The Whigs meanwhile were more republican, vehemently supported the protestant way of life and were more comprised of city merchants and other businessmen.
In saying that, their positions over time were fluid as suited them at the specific time, with factions in the same party often taking divergent views on matters. People did not yet have the right to vote and many towns were not represented at all.
With the Whigs at the helm, this was a very enterprising century as international trade flourished. The establishment of the Bank of England finance overseas imperial expeditions and further established nascent financial markets in the city of London.
Scientific developments led to the industrial revolution which saw British entrepreneurs use capital to invest in machinery. They further developed this machinery to improve the production process and create scale with production being moved from houses to factories. There was no invention less noteworthy than the steam engine, for which Thomas Watt was credited with, which powered the Industrial Revolution.
The standard of living increased for many which saw a big growth in the middle classes as factory and business owners wanted to segregate themselves from their employees. There were improvements in sanitation and the number of goods that could be exchanged for cash.
Living standards did not improve for all as the conditions in factories around the country were hellish. Without any employment regulations, unscrupulous factory owners had free reign to make as much profit as they could. Employment practices at the time included working 16 hour days, and children working in factories from 4 years old in abysmal conditions that led to sickness and death.
This led to the establishment of trade union movements which were outlawed and put down by various Whig and Tory governments.
Besides the Industrial revolution, this was a time for bloodier revolutions. The first was the American revolution which started when the British government was trying to extract taxes on tea imported into America. Amongst the first acts of rebellion was the Boston tea party which saw revolutionaries pour tea from ships into the sea in Boston harbour in 1776.
At height of the British Empire, its naval force was the most successful of any and used to winning battles. One issue with that was that this was a war fought on land and a land far away from Britain. In the end the pilgrims won out as the British government grew tired with the cost of fighting a war on difficult terrain. George Washington became the first president of an independent America.
The French learned from the American revolution and they staged a coup and overthrew the monarchy. Libertie, egaliti and freterntie they cried as they stormed Paris. This created a lot of fear that a similar revolution would take place in England but as with most other times in history, nothing materialised.
The French revolution did land Napolean in power who was always looking to expand his power base. He had lots of success defeating most other powers (Russia, Prussia, Austria) in Europe as the British stayed mainly out of it. He pushed his army all the way to near Moscow before eventually being defeated by forces led by the Duke of Wellington.
During the 18th century, the British became the preeminent global military force and began converting this into dominance over trade routes and embedded its empire in its far-flung corners of the world. This book covers this period of British expansionist history well.
At times I feel the author is drifting off a little after 4 books and flitters from topic to topic quite quickly. He definitely indulges himself in the literary and thespian figures of the time. After 4 books in I am beginning to feel a little bit confused myself. Nonetheless a great account of 18the century England and the people who shaped it.
The influence of the monarchs waned during this time, as the house of commons began to establish itself as the main force in the country. We hear less and less about their exploits and influence more and more as the book develops as the crown passes to the German family the Hanoverians. They were put in power to keep Catholic ancestors of the Stuarts off the throne but the Hanoverian kings barely spent time in England letting the country be run by the likes of Robert Walpole and William Pitt.
The Tories and the Whigs were the 2 political parties of the time with the Whigs being the foremost political power of the century. As set out in the previous book the Tories were the royalist party of landowners. The Whigs meanwhile were more republican, vehemently supported the protestant way of life and were more comprised of city merchants and other businessmen.
In saying that, their positions over time were fluid as suited them at the specific time, with factions in the same party often taking divergent views on matters. People did not yet have the right to vote and many towns were not represented at all.
With the Whigs at the helm, this was a very enterprising century as international trade flourished. The establishment of the Bank of England finance overseas imperial expeditions and further established nascent financial markets in the city of London.
Scientific developments led to the industrial revolution which saw British entrepreneurs use capital to invest in machinery. They further developed this machinery to improve the production process and create scale with production being moved from houses to factories. There was no invention less noteworthy than the steam engine, for which Thomas Watt was credited with, which powered the Industrial Revolution.
The standard of living increased for many which saw a big growth in the middle classes as factory and business owners wanted to segregate themselves from their employees. There were improvements in sanitation and the number of goods that could be exchanged for cash.
Living standards did not improve for all as the conditions in factories around the country were hellish. Without any employment regulations, unscrupulous factory owners had free reign to make as much profit as they could. Employment practices at the time included working 16 hour days, and children working in factories from 4 years old in abysmal conditions that led to sickness and death.
This led to the establishment of trade union movements which were outlawed and put down by various Whig and Tory governments.
Besides the Industrial revolution, this was a time for bloodier revolutions. The first was the American revolution which started when the British government was trying to extract taxes on tea imported into America. Amongst the first acts of rebellion was the Boston tea party which saw revolutionaries pour tea from ships into the sea in Boston harbour in 1776.
At height of the British Empire, its naval force was the most successful of any and used to winning battles. One issue with that was that this was a war fought on land and a land far away from Britain. In the end the pilgrims won out as the British government grew tired with the cost of fighting a war on difficult terrain. George Washington became the first president of an independent America.
The French learned from the American revolution and they staged a coup and overthrew the monarchy. Libertie, egaliti and freterntie they cried as they stormed Paris. This created a lot of fear that a similar revolution would take place in England but as with most other times in history, nothing materialised.
The French revolution did land Napolean in power who was always looking to expand his power base. He had lots of success defeating most other powers (Russia, Prussia, Austria) in Europe as the British stayed mainly out of it. He pushed his army all the way to near Moscow before eventually being defeated by forces led by the Duke of Wellington.
During the 18th century, the British became the preeminent global military force and began converting this into dominance over trade routes and embedded its empire in its far-flung corners of the world. This book covers this period of British expansionist history well.
At times I feel the author is drifting off a little after 4 books and flitters from topic to topic quite quickly. He definitely indulges himself in the literary and thespian figures of the time. After 4 books in I am beginning to feel a little bit confused myself. Nonetheless a great account of 18the century England and the people who shaped it.
December 25, 2022
The fourth installment of Peter Ackroyd’s meticulous account of the history of England. This book takes place from about 1689 to around 1815; or as the subtitle states: From the Battle of the Boyne to the Battle of Waterloo. As magnificent as Ackroyd’s writing is, this book was a bit of a letdown compared to the first three volumes. The main reason is that there isn’t nearly enough history here, and the book focuses too much on the culture during the time period. I guess this is o.k. if that is what the reader is wanting, and Ackroyd has included these diversions in his other volumes. The ratio here, though, seemed high at about 50/50. For a lover of history such as myself, one felt a bit underwhelmed.
My speculation is that once Ackroyd decided on how many volumes he would need (there would eventually be six), he then had to figure where to make his breaks in each book. How do you divide six historical accounts and have them fairly similar in length? Not surprisingly, the later the time period, the less overall time is covered. My guess is because, as we progress through the years, we have much more historical recordings of what actually occurred. You would have thought there would have been tons of historical stuff during the timeframe where the events of this book takes place, but that didn’t really seem to be the case here.
Yes, the main historical figures and events are covered here, but I would have liked more. For example, the American Revolution seems almost a sidebar, and I had always considered it one of the most significant episodes of history. There simply isn’t a ton of page space devoted to it in this book. I suppose this might have something to do with the fact that I am an American, and my education of the American revolution has always been studied from the viewpoint of the rebellious colonialists. Since Ackroyd is English, maybe the sentiments he puts forward is more reflective of how Mother England perceives the conflict? In short, the author portrays the adversaries that now resided in North America as more of an annoyance than any sort of serious threat, so the English didn’t feel they needed to spend too much time and money with keeping America under its mighty wing. They have other problems and adversaries that demand much more attention, such as the French.
Ah. The French. There’s an awful lot of conflict here between England and France, and at this point in history, this had pretty much always been the case. So we read much more about the battles and travails between these two nations; including Napoleon Bonaparte. Bonaparte gets an awful lot of attention devoted to him here, even though he isn’t English. Ackroyd’s feeling (as shared by most) is that Bonaparte’s influence and comings and goings were radically important to the entire continent of Europe, so much of his exploits are featured here including his famous defeat at Waterloo. This was great reading, so no complaints here. Since this event culminating in 1815, I must again address the fact that almost nothing is featured here about the second conflict with America – the War of 1812. Again, maybe England just looked at this as a minor inconvenience, and the “real” history of England demands more focus elsewhere.
Speaking of “complaints”, as I mentioned, there’s too much of the “culture” of England in this book for my taste. What gets an abnormal amount of focus here is the literature, poetry, plays, and styles of journalism. At times I felt I was reading a book about literature and not history. I confess I skimmed much of these chapters. Perhaps other readers enjoyed these huge chunks of “non” history, and Ackroyd is, in fact, a great writer.
So a bit disappointed with this one. It will be interesting to see how the next two works are presented in terms of content. I’m hoping more history and less reflections of theatre productions during the time period.
My speculation is that once Ackroyd decided on how many volumes he would need (there would eventually be six), he then had to figure where to make his breaks in each book. How do you divide six historical accounts and have them fairly similar in length? Not surprisingly, the later the time period, the less overall time is covered. My guess is because, as we progress through the years, we have much more historical recordings of what actually occurred. You would have thought there would have been tons of historical stuff during the timeframe where the events of this book takes place, but that didn’t really seem to be the case here.
Yes, the main historical figures and events are covered here, but I would have liked more. For example, the American Revolution seems almost a sidebar, and I had always considered it one of the most significant episodes of history. There simply isn’t a ton of page space devoted to it in this book. I suppose this might have something to do with the fact that I am an American, and my education of the American revolution has always been studied from the viewpoint of the rebellious colonialists. Since Ackroyd is English, maybe the sentiments he puts forward is more reflective of how Mother England perceives the conflict? In short, the author portrays the adversaries that now resided in North America as more of an annoyance than any sort of serious threat, so the English didn’t feel they needed to spend too much time and money with keeping America under its mighty wing. They have other problems and adversaries that demand much more attention, such as the French.
Ah. The French. There’s an awful lot of conflict here between England and France, and at this point in history, this had pretty much always been the case. So we read much more about the battles and travails between these two nations; including Napoleon Bonaparte. Bonaparte gets an awful lot of attention devoted to him here, even though he isn’t English. Ackroyd’s feeling (as shared by most) is that Bonaparte’s influence and comings and goings were radically important to the entire continent of Europe, so much of his exploits are featured here including his famous defeat at Waterloo. This was great reading, so no complaints here. Since this event culminating in 1815, I must again address the fact that almost nothing is featured here about the second conflict with America – the War of 1812. Again, maybe England just looked at this as a minor inconvenience, and the “real” history of England demands more focus elsewhere.
Speaking of “complaints”, as I mentioned, there’s too much of the “culture” of England in this book for my taste. What gets an abnormal amount of focus here is the literature, poetry, plays, and styles of journalism. At times I felt I was reading a book about literature and not history. I confess I skimmed much of these chapters. Perhaps other readers enjoyed these huge chunks of “non” history, and Ackroyd is, in fact, a great writer.
So a bit disappointed with this one. It will be interesting to see how the next two works are presented in terms of content. I’m hoping more history and less reflections of theatre productions during the time period.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 109 reviews