What do you think?
Rate this book
Disraeli
Robert Blake's masterly biography of Benjamin Disraeli, the great British Prime Minister, Conservative leader, and man of letters. Benjamin Disraeli (1804-81), Earl of Beaconsfield, Prime Minister of England (1868 and 1874-80), and Conservative leader, was one of the greatest and most colorful political figures in British history. A confidante of Queen Victoria, tireless champion of England, parliamentarian of genius, Disraeli was also a superb and enduring novelist and correspondent. This monumental portrait by Robert Blake is considered by many to be one of the finest political biographies ever written. Lord Blake is former Pro-Vice-Chancellor of Oxford University, Provost of The Queen's College, Oxford, and Editor of the Dictionary of National Biography. 850 pp 5 x 8
819 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1966
61 people are currently reading
1015 people want to read
About the author
Robert Blake
169 books16 followersRobert Norman William Blake, Baron Blake was an English historian. He is best known for his 1966 biography of Benjamin Disraeli, 1st Earl of Beaconsfield, and for The Conservative Party from Peel to Churchill, which grew out of his 1968 Ford lectures. He was created a life peer as Baron Blake, of Braydeston in the County of Norfolk.
Lord Blake was editor of the Dictionary of National Biography, a Trustee of the British Museum, and Chairman of the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts.
Lord Blake was editor of the Dictionary of National Biography, a Trustee of the British Museum, and Chairman of the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
April 11, 2019
I was trying to choose which biography of Disraeli to read. I settled on this book by Blake as it is considered the seminal biography of Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881).
This book is well written and meticulously researched. I like having the documentation at the end of every chapter instead of it at the end of the book. Blake cover in depth Disraeli’s writing career as well as his life as a politician. The author discussed Disraeli’s faults as well as his strengths. I think Blake did a fairly good job of presenting a neutral view of Disraeli.
I have wanted to read about Disraeli for years because I was constantly coming across him in other biographers such as that of Queen Victoria, Peele and Gladstone. I find this period of British history most interesting.
I read this as an e-book downloaded from Amazon to my Kindle app on my iPad. The book is 860 pages originally published by Faber and Fare in 1966.
This book is well written and meticulously researched. I like having the documentation at the end of every chapter instead of it at the end of the book. Blake cover in depth Disraeli’s writing career as well as his life as a politician. The author discussed Disraeli’s faults as well as his strengths. I think Blake did a fairly good job of presenting a neutral view of Disraeli.
I have wanted to read about Disraeli for years because I was constantly coming across him in other biographers such as that of Queen Victoria, Peele and Gladstone. I find this period of British history most interesting.
I read this as an e-book downloaded from Amazon to my Kindle app on my iPad. The book is 860 pages originally published by Faber and Fare in 1966.
March 28, 2015
Few prime ministers in British history have been as memorable as Benjamin Disraeli. The son of a prominent literary scholar, he enjoyed success as a novelist before turning to a career in politics, Though elected to the House of Commons at a relatively late age, the split in the Conservative Party over the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846 (a split resulting in part from Disraeli’s active campaigning against the measure) catapulted him to the front rank of the party. After several brief periods in office during the 1850s and 1860s, he became the leader of the party in 1868 and served twice as prime minister, where he spearheaded the acquisition of the Suez Canal and won admiration for his role at the Congress of Berlin in 1878.
Disraeli has not wanted for biographers, yet Robert Blake’s work has long been the standard by which they were judged. A renowned historian, his book offers an engaging and insightful look at Disraeli and his times. He presents Disraeli as a Romantic figure whose career was guided by his idolization of the monarchy and an aristocratic order that had long shunned him. While such views may have been more fitting for the political world of the 18th century rather than that of the 19th, his belief in the continuing relevance of these institutions in an increasingly democratic age eventually won the social parvenu the gratitude of the nobility and the devotion of his queen, who mourned his passing when he died in 1881.
In reading Blake’s book, it is easy to understand why it endures as a study of Disraeli’s life and career. Though some of his interpretations have been superseded by subsequent work, Blake’s success in conveying the flamboyance and political ability of his subject makes this a book a rewarding and enjoyable read today for anyone seeking to learn about this unique and fascinating figure. Nearly a half century after its publication, this remains the best single book on Disraeli and continues to serve as an excellent study of the politics of Victorian Britain, one that is essential reading for anyone interested in its subject.
Disraeli has not wanted for biographers, yet Robert Blake’s work has long been the standard by which they were judged. A renowned historian, his book offers an engaging and insightful look at Disraeli and his times. He presents Disraeli as a Romantic figure whose career was guided by his idolization of the monarchy and an aristocratic order that had long shunned him. While such views may have been more fitting for the political world of the 18th century rather than that of the 19th, his belief in the continuing relevance of these institutions in an increasingly democratic age eventually won the social parvenu the gratitude of the nobility and the devotion of his queen, who mourned his passing when he died in 1881.
In reading Blake’s book, it is easy to understand why it endures as a study of Disraeli’s life and career. Though some of his interpretations have been superseded by subsequent work, Blake’s success in conveying the flamboyance and political ability of his subject makes this a book a rewarding and enjoyable read today for anyone seeking to learn about this unique and fascinating figure. Nearly a half century after its publication, this remains the best single book on Disraeli and continues to serve as an excellent study of the politics of Victorian Britain, one that is essential reading for anyone interested in its subject.
January 28, 2009
Blake is not too much in love with his subject, as David Cecil was with Melbourne; not too nasty/snarky, either, as Lytton Strachey was with Queen Victoria. Robert Blake's book is spectacular read, the kind of book that left me as interested in the author as in the subject.
June 2, 2015
The seminal biography of Disraeli. I read it on publication in parallel with Moneypenny and Buckle as part of my first degree work on politics in the Age of Gladstone and I was most impressed then by Blake's scholarship and judgement of an exotic figure in British political life in the 19th century. I don't think it has been supplanted by any subsequent biographies which need to be read in conjunction with Blake's book.
March 31, 2019
This is far more entertaining than a biography of a Victorian prime minister has any right to be, enlivened by both the subject -- Disraeli was quite the character -- and the dry wit of the writer. I am almost provoked to pick up one of Disraeli's novels, but since I've barely scratched the surface of Trollope that project may have to wait.
February 14, 2011
Robert Blake's biography of the brilliant Conservative prime minister (several times, in competition with Gladstone) has remained the best one (hefty) volume of that master politician. Before the U.S. had Reagan or FDR, the U.K. had Disraeli. One can learn a great deal about Victorian politics and also about writing from this marvelous book.
Read
July 25, 2011I bought this book around 1970 and never hsd thr time to read it but now that i am retired and only working as a casual I have read it . It is a heavy book to hold up when you have OA in your C. Spine but I did it . Did you know that it weights 3 lbs ? I may put it up for sale if the price is right .
February 1, 2013
If you want to understand how great prose is written, read Robert Blake.
April 27, 2023
Benjamin Disraeli was a fascinating individual. Accounts of Britain in the second half of the 19th century invariably focus on the Disraeli - Gladstone battles as defining England's Political landscape of the period. And yet it is Disraeli's Character which is much the more interesting.
Robert Blake has written an outstanding biography, fair in its judgments, and remarkably comprehensive; he seems to have some affection for his subject, although also an x-ray penetration into his inner workings. Disraeli is 773 pages long, before the bibliography and index, and I must say that I found the thorough accounts of Disraeli’s Party and Parliamentary policy debates in the second half to be excessive for my needs. It did provide, though, an interesting insight into the way factions developed, and fought each other, and eventually dissolved, within both parties in this period; and I acknowledge that the great detail would be valuable for other readers.
Benjamin was born in 1804, his father “a volatile, kindly, sceptical literary man of comfortable private means and of Italian Sephardi Jewish origin. Benjamin’s mother was Maria (Miriam) Basevi, whose family was of the same origin and equally prosperous.” He had an elder sister who, after losing her fiancé, became devoted to Benjamin.
Blake explains that Jews were not systematically persecuted but, along with Catholics and dissenters, were excluded from taking out an Oxbridge degree, and from taking a seat in parliament. Disraeli's father had a dispute with his synagogue and as a result he and his wife withdrew from Judaism. He was advised to have his children baptised, and he sent Benjamin to a small non-conformist Christian school, although two younger brothers were subsequently sent to Winchester. Benjamin never practised as a Jew, continuing with a rather loose and undogmatic alliance with the Church of England. However, he retained some sort of pride in the Jewish importance in world history.
Benjamin’s wife was apparently undemonstrative; “All his life he seems to be searching for a substitute for the mother who was somehow missing. His wife, his mistresses, his friends were almost always older women… Disraeli with his intense vanity, his supreme egoism, craved from his mother a degree of admiration and adulation which was never forthcoming.”
“The young Disraeli when we begin to know anything about him, from the age of twenty onwards, is a youth of immense ambition consumed with an almost insolent determination to make his mark. The conquest of a hostile or indifferent world – military metaphors recur constantly when he writes about politics and society – is the theme of his life, and it remained so till in his old age he had finally triumphed.”
Benjamin left school at 15 or 16 and did not attend university. One can see that his exotic name, his Jewish background, the ordinariness of his education, and his middle class status could all have frustrated his ambitions, as could any personal sense of inferiority arising from them.
He attempted variously, classical scholarship, the law, novel-writing, share speculation, and newspaper proprietorship, all with remarkable confidence, but none with notable success, other than alienating people who in the future could have been useful allies. Blake's judgement is equivocal: “Disraeli was proud, vain, flamboyant, quick-witted, generous, emotional, quarrelsome, extravagant, theatrical, addicted to conspiracy, fond of backstairs intrigue… financially incompetent to a high degree.”
As a young man, Disraeli started dressing ostentatiously, in very loud colours, and in contrast to the sombre fashion. He used some income from his writing for a trip to the Near East, during which he apparently considered joining the Turkish army as it crushed an Albanian revolt. (This presaged a life-long sympathy for establishment authority over the oppressed minority.)
Over the next few years, he spent most of his time entering society, although rarely at the elite level. He had several unsuccessful attempts to enter the House of Commons, and a number of affairs. (The accounts of his sexual liaisons rather prove the error of our impression of the Victorian era being strait-laced in comparison with our own.) His political alignment was apparently inconsistent; Blake describes him as “mild Tory”, like his father, and opposed to the Whigs’ Reform Bill; however, he was rebellious and at one point he allied with the Radicals whom Blake describes as, “an erratic, frivolous, colourful and picturesque collection of independent MPs with no coherent political philosophy and counting as adherents a large quota of cranks and eccentrics of every kind.”
During one of several more attempts to become an MP, Disraeli crossed swords with the Irish Nationalist, Daniel O’Connell who, Blake writes, “let himself go in one of the most ferocious pieces of invective which the annals of British politics can furnish”. Disraeli sought a duel but was refused, and writes in his diary, “Row with O’Connell in which I greatly distinguished myself.” His tendency to describe a conflict, in diary, letter, or journal, in terms of his own splendid victory, regardless of the actual outcome, is encountered in numerous later clashes.
He finally gained a seat in Parliament in 1837 and, in 1839, married a widow, twelve years his senior.
Blake judges his achievements as of the 1845 session, “He had been in Parliament for seven years, and he had done nothing of real importance. It is true that people listened to him with attention, and sometimes took what he said seriously. But they found many of his ideas eccentric and incomprehensible. Above all, they did not trust him personally. And no wonder. Here was an insolent, mysterious, half-foreign adventurer with a libertine past and a load of debt, who had married a rich widow for money.” And he had made many powerful enemies. “He was forty, old in those days for first entry into office. A whole group of able, hard-working and younger men were ahead of him in the official hierarchy, Oxonians – mostly products of Eton and Christchurch.”
So, his background and his nature were combining to deprive him of the recognition, promotions and rewards that he felt ought to be available for him. He decided to adjust his image, first with more sober clothing, and secondly, “he spoke in a more weighty manner, avoiding the extravagance, the vituperation and the imagery of his great philippics. Of course, he could never be wholly dull: his speeches still make far better reading than those of his contemporaries.” At around the same time, he openly opposed his Tory Party leader, Robert Peel, primarily over the free trade issues that arose over the Corn Laws. Disraeli gradually started to progress through the ranks, Leader of the Opposition in the Commons (The Prime Minister, Lord Derby was in the Lords, providing one of many indications of how aristocratically elitist the British parliament was at that time, despite vaunting its “democratic” credentials); Chancellor of the Exchequer (his lack of relevant experience evidently not a disadvantage), and finally Prime Minister alternating with Leadership of the Opposition.
Blake points out, though, that his taste of power was relatively short: “Disraeli’s Parliamentary career lasted for forty-four years. During the whole of that period the Conservatives had a majority for only eleven years, and of these Disraeli was at their head for only six – at the end of his life.”
One of Blake’s major points is that, while Disraeli ultimately chose to make his name in politics, he did not have a particular set of policies which he wanted to implement. His excitement seems, rather, to have been stimulated by the fight and the pursuit of victory, and his particular skills were strategic.
This is not to say that Disraeli had no political thinking. Blake quotes a letter from him to Lord Derby defining the task of a Conservative leader as: “' to uphold the aristocratic settlement of this country'”. Blake further explains, “He did not equate aristocracy with oligarchy: that, in Disraeli's View, was the sin of the great Whig families who, having installed themselves by what he liked to call a coup d’état in 1832, had preserved their power by an alliance with anti-national and basically anti-aristocratic forces such as the Irish, the ' Scotch', the dissenting shopkeepers and the Manchester manufacturers.” “He had in mind, rather, the whole ordered hierarchy of rural England… a wealthy Tory residential squirearchy whose substantial estates covered the country. This was the class which, in alliance with the clergy as junior partners, effectively governed a great part of England. They constituted at quarter sessions the legislature and judiciary of the county.” Diisraeli’s was an arcane perspective which had few other proponents. However, combined with a prejudice favouring the international status quo, and derogating nationalist movements, it was the foundation from which he developed his attitude to proposed legislation and government action.
In Disraeli, Robert Blake brings together vast quantities of germane facts about the man and his times, and intersperses these with sound commentary. This very fine study is brought to a superb conclusion, replete with the unresolved questions necessarily attached to such an enigma, in the Epilogue:
Was he an insincere charlatan, a dreamer, an opportunistic adventurer, a sphynx without a riddle – like Louis Napoleon? Or was he a patient far-sighted political genius who purged his party of the aridities of Peelism and in the end brought it to grips with the new world of empire and democracy? Was his rise due to luck or was it the result of extraordinary talents? What if anything did he really believe?”
“It is very hard to discern any consistent purpose in his political activities from 1832 to 1846, indeed beyond save an unrelenting, though by no means unerring determination to get to the top.”
“There was an ornate effrontery about him, which provoked intense dislike among opponents and much mistrust among his supporters.”
“Disraeli became, even as Peel had been, the leader around whom moderate opinion began to crystallise. The analogy should not be pressed too far. There was something about Disraeli, which those who constitute that mysterious but nevertheless recognisable entity,' the establishment', could never quite countenance, whereas they were usually happy with Peel. Perhaps they sensed Disraeli’s deep inner scepticism about their own values. Probably they were disconcerted by his foreign manner and his rococo language. Certainly they distrusted his levity and doubted his sincerity. But there can be no doubt that to the majority of 'society', of the upper, and of the middle class, he seemed a pillar of commonsensical, if slightly cynical, moderation, a much- needed contrast to the strenuous, relentless, moralistic rhetoric of his great rival.”
And Queen Victoria became devoted to him, whereas she execrated Gladstone.
Robert Blake has written an outstanding biography, fair in its judgments, and remarkably comprehensive; he seems to have some affection for his subject, although also an x-ray penetration into his inner workings. Disraeli is 773 pages long, before the bibliography and index, and I must say that I found the thorough accounts of Disraeli’s Party and Parliamentary policy debates in the second half to be excessive for my needs. It did provide, though, an interesting insight into the way factions developed, and fought each other, and eventually dissolved, within both parties in this period; and I acknowledge that the great detail would be valuable for other readers.
Benjamin was born in 1804, his father “a volatile, kindly, sceptical literary man of comfortable private means and of Italian Sephardi Jewish origin. Benjamin’s mother was Maria (Miriam) Basevi, whose family was of the same origin and equally prosperous.” He had an elder sister who, after losing her fiancé, became devoted to Benjamin.
Blake explains that Jews were not systematically persecuted but, along with Catholics and dissenters, were excluded from taking out an Oxbridge degree, and from taking a seat in parliament. Disraeli's father had a dispute with his synagogue and as a result he and his wife withdrew from Judaism. He was advised to have his children baptised, and he sent Benjamin to a small non-conformist Christian school, although two younger brothers were subsequently sent to Winchester. Benjamin never practised as a Jew, continuing with a rather loose and undogmatic alliance with the Church of England. However, he retained some sort of pride in the Jewish importance in world history.
Benjamin’s wife was apparently undemonstrative; “All his life he seems to be searching for a substitute for the mother who was somehow missing. His wife, his mistresses, his friends were almost always older women… Disraeli with his intense vanity, his supreme egoism, craved from his mother a degree of admiration and adulation which was never forthcoming.”
“The young Disraeli when we begin to know anything about him, from the age of twenty onwards, is a youth of immense ambition consumed with an almost insolent determination to make his mark. The conquest of a hostile or indifferent world – military metaphors recur constantly when he writes about politics and society – is the theme of his life, and it remained so till in his old age he had finally triumphed.”
Benjamin left school at 15 or 16 and did not attend university. One can see that his exotic name, his Jewish background, the ordinariness of his education, and his middle class status could all have frustrated his ambitions, as could any personal sense of inferiority arising from them.
He attempted variously, classical scholarship, the law, novel-writing, share speculation, and newspaper proprietorship, all with remarkable confidence, but none with notable success, other than alienating people who in the future could have been useful allies. Blake's judgement is equivocal: “Disraeli was proud, vain, flamboyant, quick-witted, generous, emotional, quarrelsome, extravagant, theatrical, addicted to conspiracy, fond of backstairs intrigue… financially incompetent to a high degree.”
As a young man, Disraeli started dressing ostentatiously, in very loud colours, and in contrast to the sombre fashion. He used some income from his writing for a trip to the Near East, during which he apparently considered joining the Turkish army as it crushed an Albanian revolt. (This presaged a life-long sympathy for establishment authority over the oppressed minority.)
Over the next few years, he spent most of his time entering society, although rarely at the elite level. He had several unsuccessful attempts to enter the House of Commons, and a number of affairs. (The accounts of his sexual liaisons rather prove the error of our impression of the Victorian era being strait-laced in comparison with our own.) His political alignment was apparently inconsistent; Blake describes him as “mild Tory”, like his father, and opposed to the Whigs’ Reform Bill; however, he was rebellious and at one point he allied with the Radicals whom Blake describes as, “an erratic, frivolous, colourful and picturesque collection of independent MPs with no coherent political philosophy and counting as adherents a large quota of cranks and eccentrics of every kind.”
During one of several more attempts to become an MP, Disraeli crossed swords with the Irish Nationalist, Daniel O’Connell who, Blake writes, “let himself go in one of the most ferocious pieces of invective which the annals of British politics can furnish”. Disraeli sought a duel but was refused, and writes in his diary, “Row with O’Connell in which I greatly distinguished myself.” His tendency to describe a conflict, in diary, letter, or journal, in terms of his own splendid victory, regardless of the actual outcome, is encountered in numerous later clashes.
He finally gained a seat in Parliament in 1837 and, in 1839, married a widow, twelve years his senior.
Blake judges his achievements as of the 1845 session, “He had been in Parliament for seven years, and he had done nothing of real importance. It is true that people listened to him with attention, and sometimes took what he said seriously. But they found many of his ideas eccentric and incomprehensible. Above all, they did not trust him personally. And no wonder. Here was an insolent, mysterious, half-foreign adventurer with a libertine past and a load of debt, who had married a rich widow for money.” And he had made many powerful enemies. “He was forty, old in those days for first entry into office. A whole group of able, hard-working and younger men were ahead of him in the official hierarchy, Oxonians – mostly products of Eton and Christchurch.”
So, his background and his nature were combining to deprive him of the recognition, promotions and rewards that he felt ought to be available for him. He decided to adjust his image, first with more sober clothing, and secondly, “he spoke in a more weighty manner, avoiding the extravagance, the vituperation and the imagery of his great philippics. Of course, he could never be wholly dull: his speeches still make far better reading than those of his contemporaries.” At around the same time, he openly opposed his Tory Party leader, Robert Peel, primarily over the free trade issues that arose over the Corn Laws. Disraeli gradually started to progress through the ranks, Leader of the Opposition in the Commons (The Prime Minister, Lord Derby was in the Lords, providing one of many indications of how aristocratically elitist the British parliament was at that time, despite vaunting its “democratic” credentials); Chancellor of the Exchequer (his lack of relevant experience evidently not a disadvantage), and finally Prime Minister alternating with Leadership of the Opposition.
Blake points out, though, that his taste of power was relatively short: “Disraeli’s Parliamentary career lasted for forty-four years. During the whole of that period the Conservatives had a majority for only eleven years, and of these Disraeli was at their head for only six – at the end of his life.”
One of Blake’s major points is that, while Disraeli ultimately chose to make his name in politics, he did not have a particular set of policies which he wanted to implement. His excitement seems, rather, to have been stimulated by the fight and the pursuit of victory, and his particular skills were strategic.
This is not to say that Disraeli had no political thinking. Blake quotes a letter from him to Lord Derby defining the task of a Conservative leader as: “' to uphold the aristocratic settlement of this country'”. Blake further explains, “He did not equate aristocracy with oligarchy: that, in Disraeli's View, was the sin of the great Whig families who, having installed themselves by what he liked to call a coup d’état in 1832, had preserved their power by an alliance with anti-national and basically anti-aristocratic forces such as the Irish, the ' Scotch', the dissenting shopkeepers and the Manchester manufacturers.” “He had in mind, rather, the whole ordered hierarchy of rural England… a wealthy Tory residential squirearchy whose substantial estates covered the country. This was the class which, in alliance with the clergy as junior partners, effectively governed a great part of England. They constituted at quarter sessions the legislature and judiciary of the county.” Diisraeli’s was an arcane perspective which had few other proponents. However, combined with a prejudice favouring the international status quo, and derogating nationalist movements, it was the foundation from which he developed his attitude to proposed legislation and government action.
In Disraeli, Robert Blake brings together vast quantities of germane facts about the man and his times, and intersperses these with sound commentary. This very fine study is brought to a superb conclusion, replete with the unresolved questions necessarily attached to such an enigma, in the Epilogue:
Was he an insincere charlatan, a dreamer, an opportunistic adventurer, a sphynx without a riddle – like Louis Napoleon? Or was he a patient far-sighted political genius who purged his party of the aridities of Peelism and in the end brought it to grips with the new world of empire and democracy? Was his rise due to luck or was it the result of extraordinary talents? What if anything did he really believe?”
“It is very hard to discern any consistent purpose in his political activities from 1832 to 1846, indeed beyond save an unrelenting, though by no means unerring determination to get to the top.”
“There was an ornate effrontery about him, which provoked intense dislike among opponents and much mistrust among his supporters.”
“Disraeli became, even as Peel had been, the leader around whom moderate opinion began to crystallise. The analogy should not be pressed too far. There was something about Disraeli, which those who constitute that mysterious but nevertheless recognisable entity,' the establishment', could never quite countenance, whereas they were usually happy with Peel. Perhaps they sensed Disraeli’s deep inner scepticism about their own values. Probably they were disconcerted by his foreign manner and his rococo language. Certainly they distrusted his levity and doubted his sincerity. But there can be no doubt that to the majority of 'society', of the upper, and of the middle class, he seemed a pillar of commonsensical, if slightly cynical, moderation, a much- needed contrast to the strenuous, relentless, moralistic rhetoric of his great rival.”
And Queen Victoria became devoted to him, whereas she execrated Gladstone.
May 27, 2021
A magisterial biography of the great Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli. I read the 1967 edition and it is packed with all the wit and charm of Disraeli. Blake shows complete control over all the main sources of information and keeps it all moving in a coherent narrative. He splits up the big political issues in Disraeli main premiership and devotes separate chapters to domestic and foreign policy, and then the congress of Berlin gets it own chapter too. All these decisions make sense and help provide a good overview of these big events. Blake does a great job of connecting things from young Disraeli’s life to his late career.
The lone criticism I have is Blake undersell’s Disraeli’s domestic political program (downplaying the Tory democracy / One nation aspects). That’s open to interpretation. The foreign policy areas are superb and aptly covered, from pros to criticisms. I don’t see these differences as enough to dock it a star. It’s still a well written and well executed biography and deserving of the praise it receives.
The lone criticism I have is Blake undersell’s Disraeli’s domestic political program (downplaying the Tory democracy / One nation aspects). That’s open to interpretation. The foreign policy areas are superb and aptly covered, from pros to criticisms. I don’t see these differences as enough to dock it a star. It’s still a well written and well executed biography and deserving of the praise it receives.
April 8, 2021
This is probably the best biography of Disraeli that I’ve ever read. Considering that it’s still considered the seminal biography of Disraeli, having been published in 1966, followed by plenty of works on Disraeli and various aspects of his life and career, I consider that I’m not alone in my opinion.
April 29, 2017
Robert Blake's Disraeli has been a wonderful reading experience for me. For the most part it is an extremely well-written biography. Blake wrote a compelling narrative, researched his topic exhaustively, rigorously cited his sources, and avoided excessive bias. The text is thoroughly footnoted -- something of a passe practice that I heartily wish would return. As a result of Blake's efforts I have learned so much about Victorian British history, world history, and obviously about Benjamin Disraeli himself. I also learned some new vocabulary words.
Blake tells a good story. He is perhaps not as engaging in this aspect as some of my favorite biographers (e.g. Jean Edward Smith, William Manchester, and David McCullough), but he is by no means a hack in the story telling department. I was completely engaged throughout the entire volume. Part of that, of course, is the subject, but maybe that is an essential skill of a great biographer -- picking a really fascinating person about whom to write.
Blake was a renowned historian and academic. This is reflected in his research. In fact, Disraeli is one of the most extensively researched, footnoted, and cited biographies I have ever read. As a reader, I knew deep in my bones that even if Blake's interpretations are inevitably flawed [as every human endeavor is to a greater or lesser degree(Disraeli definitely falls into the lesser degree category)], his work is based on superb sources and a vast knowledge base.
One of my favorite things about Disraeli is Blake's effort to avoid personal bias and application of modern moral sensibilities to historical personages. I really get tired of historians writing didactic political and moral diatribes while calling their work relatively objective history (e.g Howard Zinn & Joseph Ellis). Blake really avoids this. As I was reading this volume, I guessed that Blake leaned slightly left in his politics, but it turns out -- according to that fount of all knowledge, Wikipedia -- Blake was a Conservative. I love it when one cannot guess a historian's political perspective from his or her political historical writing.
Understanding Disraeli and his times has really increased my understanding of so many events in the world. I was particularly fascinated with the impact of the Eastern Question on the geopolitics that would ignite World War I a generation later.
On a side note, Blake's vocabulary is awesome! I learned so many new words. On page 764 alone I encountered adumbrate, lapidary, and rhodomontade. Look them up -- great words.
There are a couple of weaknesses. For one, Blake includes several quotes in languages other than English without footnoted translation. Apparently this is common in mid-Twentieth Century academic writing, but it was a real drawback for me -- time consuming to google translate extensive passages. It is worth it though, particularly in understanding the relationship between Disraeli and Bismark. The other weakness for me is the extensive analysis of Disraeli's novels as a way of understanding Disraeli as a private citizen and a politician. This is appropriate analysis, of course, but there was just too much of it for my taste.
Over all, Disraeli is superb history.
Blake tells a good story. He is perhaps not as engaging in this aspect as some of my favorite biographers (e.g. Jean Edward Smith, William Manchester, and David McCullough), but he is by no means a hack in the story telling department. I was completely engaged throughout the entire volume. Part of that, of course, is the subject, but maybe that is an essential skill of a great biographer -- picking a really fascinating person about whom to write.
Blake was a renowned historian and academic. This is reflected in his research. In fact, Disraeli is one of the most extensively researched, footnoted, and cited biographies I have ever read. As a reader, I knew deep in my bones that even if Blake's interpretations are inevitably flawed [as every human endeavor is to a greater or lesser degree(Disraeli definitely falls into the lesser degree category)], his work is based on superb sources and a vast knowledge base.
One of my favorite things about Disraeli is Blake's effort to avoid personal bias and application of modern moral sensibilities to historical personages. I really get tired of historians writing didactic political and moral diatribes while calling their work relatively objective history (e.g Howard Zinn & Joseph Ellis). Blake really avoids this. As I was reading this volume, I guessed that Blake leaned slightly left in his politics, but it turns out -- according to that fount of all knowledge, Wikipedia -- Blake was a Conservative. I love it when one cannot guess a historian's political perspective from his or her political historical writing.
Understanding Disraeli and his times has really increased my understanding of so many events in the world. I was particularly fascinated with the impact of the Eastern Question on the geopolitics that would ignite World War I a generation later.
On a side note, Blake's vocabulary is awesome! I learned so many new words. On page 764 alone I encountered adumbrate, lapidary, and rhodomontade. Look them up -- great words.
There are a couple of weaknesses. For one, Blake includes several quotes in languages other than English without footnoted translation. Apparently this is common in mid-Twentieth Century academic writing, but it was a real drawback for me -- time consuming to google translate extensive passages. It is worth it though, particularly in understanding the relationship between Disraeli and Bismark. The other weakness for me is the extensive analysis of Disraeli's novels as a way of understanding Disraeli as a private citizen and a politician. This is appropriate analysis, of course, but there was just too much of it for my taste.
Over all, Disraeli is superb history.
October 18, 2008
Primarily a political biography. Sets out to answer the question "Was Disraeli just a chancer?", but never comes to a firm conclusion.
October 31, 2008
Brilliant but personally troubled man very interesting and pivotal in English history
December 1, 2008
I remember reading this in high school, and really enjoying it.
September 30, 2024
It is no exaggeration that this book is the best political biography I have read so far, though I have not read many. As an orthodoxy biography, I cannot find any fault with it. With sufficient and diverse sources, fair judgment, extensive knowledge, and some sense of humor, it properly covers every aspect of Dizzy: politics, literature, philosophy, character, and private life.
I enjoyed reading the description of Dizzy's private life, where the author successfully interwove general comments, curious details, and original materials. The flow of the narrative is quite smooth. "His extravagant appearance, his mordant wit, his arrogant demeanour and his flamboyant conversation" were vividly conveyed through his incredible remark, "Allah is great," "and his blunt reply to Lord Melbourne's question, "I want to be Prime Minister." There is a lot of spicy gossip about Dizzy's early life, which certainly adds some amusement during reading. A personal note that I want to make is about Blake's comment on Lord Lyndhurst, which is quite fair and comprehensive. For such an enigmatic character, Blake was prudent in that controversy but, at the same time, presented concrete historical facts to cast light on his disposition.
The most interesting aspect is about Dizzy's political philosophy. One part that impressed me a lot was the Young England. Comparing it with the Fourth Party, Blake reasonably acknowledged that despite its limited political significance, Young England has a more profound influence on political philosophy. Its "romantic Toryism," which instantly reminds me of Russell Kirk's "imaginative conservatism," is the political version of Newman's Oxford Movement. "The reaction of a defeated class to a sense of its own defeat – a sort of nostalgic escape from the disagreeable present to the agreeable but imaginary past" is not flattering, and yet the author also argued that it did not harm for young aristocrats to care for the poor under the Benthamism. Although it is impossible to determine whether or not Dizzy really took these ideas seriously, he shared their anti-liberal, anti-progressive views as a romantic. Indeed, romance and imagination might be the two distinct characteristics of Dizzy. How could one, immersed in utilitarianism and totally infertile of imagination, conceive an alliance between the country gentry and the working class and view the identity of Jew as the most aristocratic element?
Finally, I want to touch upon its language. "Britannia continued to rule the waves owed nothing to Benjamin Disraeli." "All periods of history are periods of transition, but some are more transitional than others." While presenting his protagonist and other colorful characters in this historical drama, the author also illustrated his own wit, thoughts, and liveliness.
As the last review, I hope to write less about those "cliches," like Dizzy's fanciful relationship with Her Majesty, his dramatic rivalry with GOM, and his Eastern policies. This biography does not reverse my former impression of these aspects but still gives me a refreshing and exciting experience.
I enjoyed reading the description of Dizzy's private life, where the author successfully interwove general comments, curious details, and original materials. The flow of the narrative is quite smooth. "His extravagant appearance, his mordant wit, his arrogant demeanour and his flamboyant conversation" were vividly conveyed through his incredible remark, "Allah is great," "and his blunt reply to Lord Melbourne's question, "I want to be Prime Minister." There is a lot of spicy gossip about Dizzy's early life, which certainly adds some amusement during reading. A personal note that I want to make is about Blake's comment on Lord Lyndhurst, which is quite fair and comprehensive. For such an enigmatic character, Blake was prudent in that controversy but, at the same time, presented concrete historical facts to cast light on his disposition.
The most interesting aspect is about Dizzy's political philosophy. One part that impressed me a lot was the Young England. Comparing it with the Fourth Party, Blake reasonably acknowledged that despite its limited political significance, Young England has a more profound influence on political philosophy. Its "romantic Toryism," which instantly reminds me of Russell Kirk's "imaginative conservatism," is the political version of Newman's Oxford Movement. "The reaction of a defeated class to a sense of its own defeat – a sort of nostalgic escape from the disagreeable present to the agreeable but imaginary past" is not flattering, and yet the author also argued that it did not harm for young aristocrats to care for the poor under the Benthamism. Although it is impossible to determine whether or not Dizzy really took these ideas seriously, he shared their anti-liberal, anti-progressive views as a romantic. Indeed, romance and imagination might be the two distinct characteristics of Dizzy. How could one, immersed in utilitarianism and totally infertile of imagination, conceive an alliance between the country gentry and the working class and view the identity of Jew as the most aristocratic element?
Finally, I want to touch upon its language. "Britannia continued to rule the waves owed nothing to Benjamin Disraeli." "All periods of history are periods of transition, but some are more transitional than others." While presenting his protagonist and other colorful characters in this historical drama, the author also illustrated his own wit, thoughts, and liveliness.
As the last review, I hope to write less about those "cliches," like Dizzy's fanciful relationship with Her Majesty, his dramatic rivalry with GOM, and his Eastern policies. This biography does not reverse my former impression of these aspects but still gives me a refreshing and exciting experience.
July 25, 2021
The best popular biographies are those that maintain a neutral attitude towards their subjects throughout, celebrating what is good and deploring what is bad with equal and even-tempered vigor. On this account, Blake delivers in spades, but what makes Disraeli truly an enjoyable read is that Blake also writes with excellent prose and provides his reader with just enough detail and information to tell Lord Beaconsfield's story in a tractable and interesting way without providing too much so as to bog down the reader in minutia - give the portrait of Disraeli himself that emerges in the end, I cannot help but think that this is the sort of biography he would have wanted from himself, even if it is unsparing in its criticism of its subject when such criticism is warranted.
On top of that, the subject - both Disraeli himself and the political world he inhabited - is a fascinating one. Politics simply isn't this entertaining anymore, now that true statesmanship has become such a lost art. If anyone can recommend a good biography of Palmerston, Canning, or Castlereagh, I would be very appreciative, and I'm pretty sure I'm going to check out Coningsby at some point in the near future.
On top of that, the subject - both Disraeli himself and the political world he inhabited - is a fascinating one. Politics simply isn't this entertaining anymore, now that true statesmanship has become such a lost art. If anyone can recommend a good biography of Palmerston, Canning, or Castlereagh, I would be very appreciative, and I'm pretty sure I'm going to check out Coningsby at some point in the near future.
July 22, 2024
This is an excellent biography of a famous man about whom I admit I knew very little. My understanding 19th century of British history and politics was much improved by reading this book. I do not think I would like Benjamin Disraeli, a novelist as well as an inveterate politician, very much, but he was truly unique. He and Edward Stanley, 14th Earl of Derby, an odd political couple if there ever was one, were the powers behind the conservative party in the middle of the 19th century. It was a period in which the conservatives were not often in power. Stanley was a three-time prime minister but held office a total of less than 4 years, while Disraeli was prime minister twice and held office less than seven years, during which a substantial amount of social legislation was passed. This book, published in 1967, is easy to read, entertaining and even witty, but full of facts which bring to life an era, now long past.
August 2, 2022
This book is all the preview makes it out to be. Disraeli is a fascinating character defying easy categorization . The biography presupposes a working knowledge of Victorian politics which I didn’t have so parts of the book were difficult territory for me. The chapters on the eastern question and the Congress of Berlin are fascinating. One of the better biographies .
March 13, 2024
A very detailed biography of one of the most fascinating political figures anywhere, let alone Victorian England. Spends a lot of space on Dizzy’s extensive literary career as well as politics not least because the novels influenced his suppleness as a speaker and politician. While it’s hard to know exactly what Gladstone’s program was, D was a classic conservative: the Squirearchy and the virtues of rural England and a Great England internationally. He was great in opposition, less so in power. That the Queen, not adverse to anti semitism, came to dote on him (enraging Gladstone - and his biographer!) is emblematic of an incredible career.
August 31, 2020
Far too long
Albeit the copious detail, I did not get a feel about who Disraeli was.
Imho this is because of the detail which blinds the reader to the big picture. Highly disappointing
Albeit the copious detail, I did not get a feel about who Disraeli was.
Imho this is because of the detail which blinds the reader to the big picture. Highly disappointing
July 24, 2022
This is a very well-rounded, “warts and all” biography of the great Conservative politician and author, with a generous helping of information on the novels. Cleverly written, with many a felicitous phrase that would have probably pleased his subject.
March 31, 2023
What a book! Truly great! Second only to Andrew Roberts’s Churchill! Disraeli floats off the pages and is as timeless as Churchill himself! A truly amazing book! A truly amazing author! A truly amazing politician! Benjamin Disraeli, a name time will not forget!
December 31, 2018
Excellent
Cleverly and impartially written account of Benjamin Disraeli. A talented and complex man whose very human frailties endear him to the reader.
Cleverly and impartially written account of Benjamin Disraeli. A talented and complex man whose very human frailties endear him to the reader.
March 8, 2021
must read for fans of historical biographies
September 8, 2022
An excellent biography of a fascinating Victorian political giant.
September 14, 2022
good stuff,
March 23, 2024
I really enjoyed this book after the first 200 pages or so.
February 19, 2018
The positive: I learned a lot about Disraeli and his times. The negative: I had to slog through this book!
This is an exhaustive biography of Disraeli, and it is exhausting to read! Blake clearly loves Disraeli and everything that Disraeli wrote, and he quotes just about everything that Disraeli wrote at very great length. I found this book too long and repetitive, and the writing was often arcane. I also found the book difficult to appreciate at times since I do not have a good background in British history. Sometimes Blake explained events, sometimes he did not, so I had to go to other sources.
If you have extensive knowledge of British history and want to know everything about Disraeli, then this is the book for you. If not, look elsewhere.
This is an exhaustive biography of Disraeli, and it is exhausting to read! Blake clearly loves Disraeli and everything that Disraeli wrote, and he quotes just about everything that Disraeli wrote at very great length. I found this book too long and repetitive, and the writing was often arcane. I also found the book difficult to appreciate at times since I do not have a good background in British history. Sometimes Blake explained events, sometimes he did not, so I had to go to other sources.
If you have extensive knowledge of British history and want to know everything about Disraeli, then this is the book for you. If not, look elsewhere.
January 18, 2017
Extremely factual in an eminently readable fashion. The book gives a steady progress of the boy to manhood, and his intimate relationship with the Queen. A real window into a romantic, historical time.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews