What do you think?
Rate this book
The Story of Britain: From the Romans to the Present: A Narrative History
A sparkling anecdotal account with the pace of an epic, about the men and women who created turning points in history. Rebecca Fraser's dramatic portrayal of the scientists, statesmen, explorers, soldiers, traders, and artists who forged Britain's national institutions is the perfect introduction to British history.
Just as much as kings and queens, battles and empire, Britain's great themes have been the liberty of the individual, the rule of law, and the parliamentary democracy invented to protect them. Ever since Caractacus and Boudicca surprised the Romans with the bravery of their resistance, Britain has stood out as the home of freedom. From Thomas More to William Wilberforce, from Gladstone to Churchill, Britain's history is studded with heroic figures who have resisted tyranny in all its guises, whether it be the Stuart kings' belief in divine right, the institution of slavery, or the ambitions of Napoleon and Hitler.
Just as much as kings and queens, battles and empire, Britain's great themes have been the liberty of the individual, the rule of law, and the parliamentary democracy invented to protect them. Ever since Caractacus and Boudicca surprised the Romans with the bravery of their resistance, Britain has stood out as the home of freedom. From Thomas More to William Wilberforce, from Gladstone to Churchill, Britain's history is studded with heroic figures who have resisted tyranny in all its guises, whether it be the Stuart kings' belief in divine right, the institution of slavery, or the ambitions of Napoleon and Hitler.
848 pages, Paperback
Published November 17, 2006
224 people are currently reading
1467 people want to read
About the author
Rebecca Fraser
14 books13 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Rebecca Fraser has worked as a researcher, an editor, and a journalist, and has written for many publications, including Tatler, Vogue, The Times, and The Spectator. She is a former president of the Bronte Society. She is the author of the introductions to the Everyman's Library editions of Shirley and The Professor. She is the author of Charlotte Brontë and lives in England.
Rebecca Fraser has worked as a researcher, an editor, and a journalist, and has written for many publications, including Tatler, Vogue, The Times, and The Spectator. She is a former president of the Bronte Society. She is the author of the introductions to the Everyman's Library editions of Shirley and The Professor. She is the author of Charlotte Brontë and lives in England.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 80 reviews
March 6, 2024
Well, that was fun!! Our Island Story for grownups!!
January 15, 2010
This is a very good book. Fraser has a difficult task, covering the history of Britain from the Roman invasion to 2003. She passes with flying colors. This book gives you an excellent overview of British history. You will learn who mattered, what mattered, and why. You will gain an understanding of the British, particularly English, psyche. This book does a good job explaining the evolution of Britain over the years and the various influences on this important nation. It does not cover everything in minute detail, but given the breadth and complexity of the topic, this would be an unrealistic expectation. However, at 785 pages of text it provides sufficient detail for a book of its breadth. If you are looking for a single book to learn about British history this is a very good choice.
November 6, 2009
Superb narrative, occasional typos aside; not deep or particularly original and with a clear top down view of history, but a page turner that reads like a novel and gives a good outline of British history; highly recommended as popular history at its best
March 3, 2013
This book is certainly not an easy or short read. With the ancient history and culture of Britain, the story is vast and rich. However, because of this fact, the reader must be attentive to the many, often complicated details of the past. For this reason, I felt myself losing the ability to attend to those details on a prolonged basis. At times, I felt I was reading a text book from a history course in college. Perhaps the title is misleading. In placing the word "Story" in the title, it led me to believe that the book would read like a story. This is where the book fell short for me because it was not written in as interesting a way as I had hoped. The book is big and rich on details that is equal to Britain's history. The drawback and irony is because of this rich, ancient history, the reader must devote her attention wholly and patiently to all those details if she is to get the whole "story". Because of the size and scope of the book, I felt I did not sustain the appropriate attention that would lead me to give the book anything more than 3 stars.
May 28, 2009
I thought the Story of Britain was a fabulous, comprehensive history, reminding me of what I loved about the study of history as an undergraduate. Though my personal interest is social history, so I didn't always follow or enjoy the political stuff, I liked how Fraser made this book something to everyone. It's a good, intelligent narrative that weaves together little stories about politics, war, social history, religion, the lives of the monarchy, and technology. Nothing is covered so exhaustively as to get bored - I was especially happy that we didn't spend thirty pages in the WWI trenches - and she miraculously manages to keep the book moving through 785 pages, covering Roman Britain all the way to 2002.
May 14, 2014
"Wait. You're reviewing a history book? Like, a textbook?"
Yes, I am. This is not what it seems. "The Story of Britain" is a narrative history, making it far more enthralling than some clunky giant that you had to carry around between classes in high school. Granted, I have an avid interest in history. I always tell people that if I hadn't gone to school to major in English, I would have studied history. But I digress. On to the book.
Although I haven't finished it yet (seventy-some percentages finished), I have enough to work with. I would recommend this text for anybody who has even the slightest interest in history, especially the history of England with all of its kings and queens and wonderfully bloody civil wars. This book contains something which most history texts do not: human depth. Although there IS a tiresome amount of political jargon and information (if you happen to enjoy that sort of thing, you're in luck!), the majority of this book is a straightforward, thoughtful, and smoothly chronological (which can be hard to achieve while writing intricate histories) creation. Fraser does an especially decent job of introducing a human element. She doesn't just record what has happened. Throughout this book, there are mentions behind the foundation of a certain name or place, behavioral aspects of many kings, and some colorful myths and legends that, as an American with limited knowledge of England, was never made aware of. I mean, I would much rather hear about how crazy King George the Third was during his illness than to hear about the fifty million laws drawn up by Parliament to limit the power of the king. Not that the book does not contain the latter, but still. There's a bit of everything for everybody.
Now, if you're looking for a detailed history of Great Britain in its entirety, look elsewhere. Although there are some mentions of Scotland, Ireland, etc., this text primarily focuses on England and its relationship to lands that will (eventually) become part of the United Kingdom. Still, Fraser presents enough information for the reader to have a decent grasp on how the UK came to be. I also find the text lacking in what I believe is essential to a historical analysis: the general condition of life for the common man and woman. Although Fraser briefly describes, say, the poor working conditions of the eighteenth century, she tends to focus more so on the wealthy class, the politicians, and the kings (and queens) themselves. But, once again, this is only to an extent. I can't say that there is a single element totally excluded from this particular text.
One last thing. You're probably wondering, "Is it biased? History books are infamous for being biased." Well, not really. If you're like me and you analyze the usage of language to an overwhelming extent, you may be irked when Fraser describes the French as "meddlesome" or when she insists that the Irish were once again stirring "mischief" over their poor and virtually nonexistent representation in London. I'd say that some things seem to be downplayed to a certain extent. However, I believe that Fraser is educated enough to distance herself from the English opinion. Her writing insists that she is fully aware of the brutality, injustice, and morally ambiguous nature of early English life and politics. And, as an American, I was pleased to discover that she didn't have any negative words to associate with the American Revolution (she believed it was justified). Although there was a poor choice of presentation when she mentioned the Boston Massacre, downplaying the "massacre" bit. Yes, she used quotes around it, since apparently the death of three innocent people is in no way a massacre. That's just me being whiny. Do I penalize her for any of this? No. I think it's just Fraser being Fraser. And let's face it: not a single nation in the world is innocent of having spilled innocent blood.
Four stars. Another star would be warranted had Fraser toned down on the political intrigue and told me something about daily life for the average man and woman throughout the centuries she covers (Romans to the present). Anyway, go read it. You'll learn stuff.
Yes, I am. This is not what it seems. "The Story of Britain" is a narrative history, making it far more enthralling than some clunky giant that you had to carry around between classes in high school. Granted, I have an avid interest in history. I always tell people that if I hadn't gone to school to major in English, I would have studied history. But I digress. On to the book.
Although I haven't finished it yet (seventy-some percentages finished), I have enough to work with. I would recommend this text for anybody who has even the slightest interest in history, especially the history of England with all of its kings and queens and wonderfully bloody civil wars. This book contains something which most history texts do not: human depth. Although there IS a tiresome amount of political jargon and information (if you happen to enjoy that sort of thing, you're in luck!), the majority of this book is a straightforward, thoughtful, and smoothly chronological (which can be hard to achieve while writing intricate histories) creation. Fraser does an especially decent job of introducing a human element. She doesn't just record what has happened. Throughout this book, there are mentions behind the foundation of a certain name or place, behavioral aspects of many kings, and some colorful myths and legends that, as an American with limited knowledge of England, was never made aware of. I mean, I would much rather hear about how crazy King George the Third was during his illness than to hear about the fifty million laws drawn up by Parliament to limit the power of the king. Not that the book does not contain the latter, but still. There's a bit of everything for everybody.
Now, if you're looking for a detailed history of Great Britain in its entirety, look elsewhere. Although there are some mentions of Scotland, Ireland, etc., this text primarily focuses on England and its relationship to lands that will (eventually) become part of the United Kingdom. Still, Fraser presents enough information for the reader to have a decent grasp on how the UK came to be. I also find the text lacking in what I believe is essential to a historical analysis: the general condition of life for the common man and woman. Although Fraser briefly describes, say, the poor working conditions of the eighteenth century, she tends to focus more so on the wealthy class, the politicians, and the kings (and queens) themselves. But, once again, this is only to an extent. I can't say that there is a single element totally excluded from this particular text.
One last thing. You're probably wondering, "Is it biased? History books are infamous for being biased." Well, not really. If you're like me and you analyze the usage of language to an overwhelming extent, you may be irked when Fraser describes the French as "meddlesome" or when she insists that the Irish were once again stirring "mischief" over their poor and virtually nonexistent representation in London. I'd say that some things seem to be downplayed to a certain extent. However, I believe that Fraser is educated enough to distance herself from the English opinion. Her writing insists that she is fully aware of the brutality, injustice, and morally ambiguous nature of early English life and politics. And, as an American, I was pleased to discover that she didn't have any negative words to associate with the American Revolution (she believed it was justified). Although there was a poor choice of presentation when she mentioned the Boston Massacre, downplaying the "massacre" bit. Yes, she used quotes around it, since apparently the death of three innocent people is in no way a massacre. That's just me being whiny. Do I penalize her for any of this? No. I think it's just Fraser being Fraser. And let's face it: not a single nation in the world is innocent of having spilled innocent blood.
Four stars. Another star would be warranted had Fraser toned down on the political intrigue and told me something about daily life for the average man and woman throughout the centuries she covers (Romans to the present). Anyway, go read it. You'll learn stuff.
November 20, 2018
Every church and town had a Magna Carta copy so that citizens could know what their rights were. The never barbaric English end the life of their Edward II by sodomy with a red-hot poker iron that apparently produced screams that could be heard for more than a mile. On the battlefield, the English longbow’s rate of fire clearly outguns the French crossbow. Ash trees, used for arrows, and geese, for arrow feathers were then completely protected by the state. The two-fingered British gesture of defiance can be traced to the days of Agincourt when French knights attempted to chop off the archer’s two arrow hand fingers to stop them. Boldly flashing one’s two fingers at the retreating enemy soon became a timeless gesture of defiance revived in the fabulous 1960’s. Anyway, by 1453, the vaunted longbow’s days are already over as the English lost badly to French artillery. That ends the Hundred Year’s War and leaves England with only Calais on French soil. The War of the Roses is between two Plantagenet Kings.
The Protestant Revolution was clearly fueled by greed and lust for property because many became wealthy during the property grab of monastery land. In Tolkien, we see the lighting of beacons along mountains in the Lord of the Rings. That comes from real history when they were used just so to warn the English that the Spanish Armada had entered the English Channel Later on, douchebag Cromwell gets in power, puts down the Levellers for daring to want the right for ALL men to vote. Many were also upset at Cromwell & Company because of their killing of both the monarchy and Charles I. Then Scotland and Ireland get uppity at him wanting something called freedom. After 1707, England, Scotland and Wales become known as Great Britain. It was not British high culture, but Hanoverian King George’s obvious German background that brought the composer Handel to England. Tory at this time means Catholic. Walpole was the first Prime Minister and first to live at 10 Downing Street. If you were a Scottish Highlander at the time, you were screwed: how could you meet the ladies if you couldn’t wear your tartan? Or show any sign of Highland life unless you wanted to be thrown off your land and branded a Jacobite?
American colonists use John Locke’s sanctioning of rebellion against unjust rulers as moral justification for their Revolutionary War. Rebecca Fraser implies what Noam Chomsky and Gerald Horne now openly say, that the British Somerset Decision of 1772, which forbade slavery in England, was a direct threat to the revolting colonists bent on continuing slavery and expanding into foreign native held lands. Anyway, the British hired 18,000 Hessians to fight the colonists. But after Saratoga, France helps the colonists. During these 10 years of heavy colonial war costs, and boycotting colonial goods, England would have gone under but for its role in the Industrial Revolution with James Watt et al. In 1807, Britain becomes the first European country to outlaw the slave trade, while the structurally racist US (Land of Freedom) would have to wait until 1862. British police carried no guns because Peel in 1829 determined that alone would silence the critics of police misusing power. The Suez Canal cut the travel time to India by six weeks. Khakis were created as a battle uniform to blend into the African bush during battles of conquest. WWI destroyed the hegemony of Britain and also France. More Australians died in WWI than US soldiers died in Vietnam. WWI killed 1/3 of Europe’s young men – a new Black Death. A woman couldn’t vote in Britain until 1928, in France it was 1944, in Switzerland it was 1971. Wow… Hitler moved into the Rhineland when he saw that Mussolini’s move into Ethiopia brought no moral concern by other major powers. Rebecca gets very conservative about history after WWII and overestimates Stalin’s threat and those of Nationalists like Nassar to US/UK interests. Otherwise, a very good, easy to read book…
The Protestant Revolution was clearly fueled by greed and lust for property because many became wealthy during the property grab of monastery land. In Tolkien, we see the lighting of beacons along mountains in the Lord of the Rings. That comes from real history when they were used just so to warn the English that the Spanish Armada had entered the English Channel Later on, douchebag Cromwell gets in power, puts down the Levellers for daring to want the right for ALL men to vote. Many were also upset at Cromwell & Company because of their killing of both the monarchy and Charles I. Then Scotland and Ireland get uppity at him wanting something called freedom. After 1707, England, Scotland and Wales become known as Great Britain. It was not British high culture, but Hanoverian King George’s obvious German background that brought the composer Handel to England. Tory at this time means Catholic. Walpole was the first Prime Minister and first to live at 10 Downing Street. If you were a Scottish Highlander at the time, you were screwed: how could you meet the ladies if you couldn’t wear your tartan? Or show any sign of Highland life unless you wanted to be thrown off your land and branded a Jacobite?
American colonists use John Locke’s sanctioning of rebellion against unjust rulers as moral justification for their Revolutionary War. Rebecca Fraser implies what Noam Chomsky and Gerald Horne now openly say, that the British Somerset Decision of 1772, which forbade slavery in England, was a direct threat to the revolting colonists bent on continuing slavery and expanding into foreign native held lands. Anyway, the British hired 18,000 Hessians to fight the colonists. But after Saratoga, France helps the colonists. During these 10 years of heavy colonial war costs, and boycotting colonial goods, England would have gone under but for its role in the Industrial Revolution with James Watt et al. In 1807, Britain becomes the first European country to outlaw the slave trade, while the structurally racist US (Land of Freedom) would have to wait until 1862. British police carried no guns because Peel in 1829 determined that alone would silence the critics of police misusing power. The Suez Canal cut the travel time to India by six weeks. Khakis were created as a battle uniform to blend into the African bush during battles of conquest. WWI destroyed the hegemony of Britain and also France. More Australians died in WWI than US soldiers died in Vietnam. WWI killed 1/3 of Europe’s young men – a new Black Death. A woman couldn’t vote in Britain until 1928, in France it was 1944, in Switzerland it was 1971. Wow… Hitler moved into the Rhineland when he saw that Mussolini’s move into Ethiopia brought no moral concern by other major powers. Rebecca gets very conservative about history after WWII and overestimates Stalin’s threat and those of Nationalists like Nassar to US/UK interests. Otherwise, a very good, easy to read book…
November 3, 2013
First, it's not a history of Britain; it's "A History of England, plus the Scots and Welsh when they complicate life for the English." Second, it's a history of the elites - the kings, cardinals, prime ministers, queens, generals and mistresses, who plan and plot, go to war or choose peace. The plagues, the invention of the printing press, the industrial revolution all get short shrift in this book; history, in the author's telling, depends on the brilliance of a general or the arrogance of a king.
Still, I am reading this before I go to England. I didn't want to sit in a museum thinking, "now, who were the Stuarts? Were they before or after the Tudors?" So in that it was helpful. But now I'm looking for a deeper view of English history.
Still, I am reading this before I go to England. I didn't want to sit in a museum thinking, "now, who were the Stuarts? Were they before or after the Tudors?" So in that it was helpful. But now I'm looking for a deeper view of English history.
February 17, 2012
I really liked this overall. It's a sweeping narrative of the last two millennia of British history, from Boudicca to Blair, and it's written with crisp preciseness and a dash of dry wit. It does not delve as deep as one might hope, but given the sheer scale of the book, that is understandable. However, I did feel that cultural achievements were barely touched on and deserved greater play. And I disagreed with some of her assessments of the Margaret Thatcher era. Still, it was an excellent read and one I would recommend to any European history buff.
June 15, 2017
This was a very enjoyable experience. I learned so much more history than from my recent reading of THE OXFORD ILLUSTRATED HISTORY OF BRITAIN.
July 17, 2018
Pretty straightforward history of Britain written in an engaging and accessible way. I appreciated the mix of factual information (names, dates, etc.) and legends/rumors about particular figures our situations.
March 18, 2018
although i haven´t found yet what i would consider the perfect history book on britain, this would be my closest pick.
having read around 850 pages, i can conclude this book has one big strength and one big flaw. its strength is the author's ability to summarise large chunks of information in a couple of sentences, leaving only what she probably considered were the most important facts. its biggest flaw is no one's fault but my own, assuming by some silly misconception that, because this book was written by a woman, it would give a greater sense of protagonism to some historical female figures that tend to be overlooked with time. yet, this preconception of mine--and its subsequent failure within the text--can only be my fault for the book never says it is a feminist story of britain. i just assumed things and, in the end, i was a tiny bit disappointed.
nonetheless, for anyone looking for an extensive (but comprehensive) read unto the story of england, i would absolutely recommend this in a heartbeat.
having read around 850 pages, i can conclude this book has one big strength and one big flaw. its strength is the author's ability to summarise large chunks of information in a couple of sentences, leaving only what she probably considered were the most important facts. its biggest flaw is no one's fault but my own, assuming by some silly misconception that, because this book was written by a woman, it would give a greater sense of protagonism to some historical female figures that tend to be overlooked with time. yet, this preconception of mine--and its subsequent failure within the text--can only be my fault for the book never says it is a feminist story of britain. i just assumed things and, in the end, i was a tiny bit disappointed.
nonetheless, for anyone looking for an extensive (but comprehensive) read unto the story of england, i would absolutely recommend this in a heartbeat.
May 9, 2018
In under 800 pages, Fraser covers the history of the British Isles from Roman times to the Golden Jubilee of Elizabeth II in 2002. This is impressive. However, Fraser's way (presumably the British way) of narrating is frustrating. This American dummy had to re-read more than a few passages thanks to a lack of punctuation. Commas are your friends, Ms. Fraser! Set off those parenthetical phrases and relative clauses so we can understand what you're saying.
Also, I had to trust Ms. Fraser to tell me accurately what happened, but when she says that the Soviet Union put a man into space in 1957 with Sputnik (uh, no), she loses credibility.
Also, I had to trust Ms. Fraser to tell me accurately what happened, but when she says that the Soviet Union put a man into space in 1957 with Sputnik (uh, no), she loses credibility.
March 31, 2014
A thorough and enjoyable read covering the history of the major political events and cultural trends of England since the first kings of England (approximately 500 CE). It shows the transition from a nearly omnipotent monarchy to the set of political institutions we see in the UK today - Parliament, the union of England/Wales/Scotland/Northern Ireland, political parties, and a ceremonial monarchy. Sprinkled with narratives, it served as a nice complement to histories of everyday life of the ordinary man, such as "1000."
March 31, 2014
I've always love British history and Britain herself, so I'm glad I finally got around to reading a comprehensive history. I knew much of this history already, having read so much of it in individual pieces, but it was great to see it all together in one long timeline. It was a fast read at first, but once it hit more modern times, around World War 1, it really slowed down for me and became less interesting, but that's most likely just because I find modern times relatively uninteresting.
June 29, 2020
I really enjoyed this book even though it took quite a while for me to finish. It was exactly what I was looking for. It gave me a basic framework of British History and I really didn't know much before I started reading it. It will also be an excellent reference work in the future.
October 3, 2012
Another Fraser to read!! This is the daughter of the great, Antonia Fraser!! I enjoyed this thoroughly and will continue to use it as a reference book. I have actually already looked back over the Roman history again to get a better understanding. Straightforward and concise. Great read!
December 26, 2014
Read my review of
The Story of Britain
.
October 10, 2011
I have recently become a huge anglophile so I am pretty jazzed to read this book.
October 26, 2021
This is not history; it a Tory fever dream. The story of Britain it is most certainly not. A better title would be something along the lines of Nationalistic Fairytales of England.
October 4, 2025
Props for ambition, but as others have said it's more like "The Story of What Most Concerned the Westminster Bubble, 43 AD to 2002 AD". Great in the Middle, a bit rubbish at the beginning, fairly dire at the end.
Red flags went up early on as she claims that Emperor Constantine was half English through his mother Helena - big if true as the pair basically created Christianity as we know it... but this is a fairly obvious myth / local legend in parts of England, bafflingly presented here as fact (she was very likely Greek).
From there, get used to Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Cornwall, and the North of England only really getting a mention when there's major warfare or a serious revolt of some kind occurring there... for the most part each chapter concerns the reign of a monarch or prime minister and what occupied their attention during their term, so from Tudors onwards it's really only London and distant theatres of war where things happen in the "Story of Britain".
Pretty impressive that it's done ALL of them from up to Elizabeth II / Blair - a lot of my knowledge gaps in the "dark ages", and the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries are now filled when it comes to order of events, but a criminal amount of material is skirted past or ignored.
Having read the two Andrew Marr books (Making of Modern Britain and History of Modern Britain) covering 1901-2016, the 20th century chapters here read like underdeveloped Wikipedia pages in comparison.
The Cold War stuff especially reads like GCSE overview, and criminally... the Americans' intervention in Korea (which the UK was barely involved in) gets a higher word count than THE CREATION OF THE NHS. Borderline treason, and that's what knocked it down from a 4 star to a 3, for me (not author's fault but Audiobook narrator pronounced it "Uh-new-rinn Bevan" - for shame).
Author can barely hide her admiration for Thatcher's triumph over the working class in the 1980s, but does concede she "antagonised some parts of the population". She sure did. Oddly forgets to mention 9/11 in its final "Modern life is good-ish" conclusion at the time of the Golden Jubilee - leaves the reader feeling very confused about the author's priorities.
Knowing almost anything about British history means it's probable this book will annoy you on at least one occasion - not BAD though.
Red flags went up early on as she claims that Emperor Constantine was half English through his mother Helena - big if true as the pair basically created Christianity as we know it... but this is a fairly obvious myth / local legend in parts of England, bafflingly presented here as fact (she was very likely Greek).
From there, get used to Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Cornwall, and the North of England only really getting a mention when there's major warfare or a serious revolt of some kind occurring there... for the most part each chapter concerns the reign of a monarch or prime minister and what occupied their attention during their term, so from Tudors onwards it's really only London and distant theatres of war where things happen in the "Story of Britain".
Pretty impressive that it's done ALL of them from up to Elizabeth II / Blair - a lot of my knowledge gaps in the "dark ages", and the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries are now filled when it comes to order of events, but a criminal amount of material is skirted past or ignored.
Having read the two Andrew Marr books (Making of Modern Britain and History of Modern Britain) covering 1901-2016, the 20th century chapters here read like underdeveloped Wikipedia pages in comparison.
The Cold War stuff especially reads like GCSE overview, and criminally... the Americans' intervention in Korea (which the UK was barely involved in) gets a higher word count than THE CREATION OF THE NHS. Borderline treason, and that's what knocked it down from a 4 star to a 3, for me (not author's fault but Audiobook narrator pronounced it "Uh-new-rinn Bevan" - for shame).
Author can barely hide her admiration for Thatcher's triumph over the working class in the 1980s, but does concede she "antagonised some parts of the population". She sure did. Oddly forgets to mention 9/11 in its final "Modern life is good-ish" conclusion at the time of the Golden Jubilee - leaves the reader feeling very confused about the author's priorities.
Knowing almost anything about British history means it's probable this book will annoy you on at least one occasion - not BAD though.
March 18, 2025
Couldn’t put it down.
So accessible and well written. Can’t recommend it highly enough! This book is a gem and became a daily ritual for me until I finished it.
So accessible and well written. Can’t recommend it highly enough! This book is a gem and became a daily ritual for me until I finished it.
February 6, 2023
As an Anglophile I have long desired to read a comprehensive history of England that would help me to better understand all the things I love about England. Shakespeare’s history plays, the Crown on Netflix, Charles Dickens’ orphans - all of these things have found a large audience, but wouldn’t their enjoyment be greatly enhanced if you understood more about the House of Tudor and the House of York, the House of Windsor, and what London life was like in the 1800s for children? If you want to learn the backstory of the history and culture of the island nation, then this is the book for you.
Supplemented by numerous family trees of the many families who have ruled England, a list of Prime Ministers, a few historical maps, and a thorough index, Rebecca Fraser’s 800+ page history of Britain starts out in 55 BCE with the arrival of the Romans on the shores of England, bringing with them the written history that makes her book possible. From then up until 2002 she covers the government, monarchy, literature, religion, industry, military, naval, and cultural history of England in a manner that is concisely comprehensive. She never stops to dwell overly long on any period or personality, but keeps the story moving so she can cover the whole 2000 years in a reasonable length of time and text. This book is not for readers who want an in depth look at a particular aspect of English history, it’s for those who just want the whole story from the start to see it all in its full context.
Along the way Fraser gives us both the big picture and a rich collection of anecdotes and personalities, many of which should be familiar to anyone brought up with at least some instruction in Western European history but here you see it in the full context of the history of Britain. She covers the origins of words like Bobbie for policemen, Anglo-Saxon, Britain, England, and, one of my favourites from childhood when I believed it to be the longest word in the English language, Disestablishmentarianism. Fraser also covers the Tudors, the Stuarts, the Jacobites, and the Plantagenets, telling who they were, how long they reigned, and which other royal families throughout Europe they married into or made war on (or both, as was quite common indeed). As the monarchy waned in power and Parliament took up its modern role in the governing of England, Fraser explains the way it happened and then gives a flavour of the many debates in Parliament stretching over the past few hundred years.
If there’s any negative aspect to this book it’s that there are so many topics that it could have explored much further to give an even greater understanding of British history. But if Fraser had followed even a few of those rabbit holes then she wouldn’t have done the objective of her book justice because it wouldn’t have been the concisely comprehensive history that it is. So don’t pick this up looking for a comprehensive look at the Tudors but do pick it up because it will have the full outline of the Tudors situated in the context of all the other monarchical families that have ruled Britain. I judge this to be an excellent outline of English history that could serve as a permanent reference to the past. Keep it around and you can always dip into it to refresh your memory of 1400s England, or use it to review the Battle of Waterloo and see where that fits into the history of the nation.
Whether you intend to use this as a reference that you consult from time to time, never reading cover to cover, or whether you intend to read it straight through, this is an excellent history of Britain that is complete, thorough, and a joy to read.
Supplemented by numerous family trees of the many families who have ruled England, a list of Prime Ministers, a few historical maps, and a thorough index, Rebecca Fraser’s 800+ page history of Britain starts out in 55 BCE with the arrival of the Romans on the shores of England, bringing with them the written history that makes her book possible. From then up until 2002 she covers the government, monarchy, literature, religion, industry, military, naval, and cultural history of England in a manner that is concisely comprehensive. She never stops to dwell overly long on any period or personality, but keeps the story moving so she can cover the whole 2000 years in a reasonable length of time and text. This book is not for readers who want an in depth look at a particular aspect of English history, it’s for those who just want the whole story from the start to see it all in its full context.
Along the way Fraser gives us both the big picture and a rich collection of anecdotes and personalities, many of which should be familiar to anyone brought up with at least some instruction in Western European history but here you see it in the full context of the history of Britain. She covers the origins of words like Bobbie for policemen, Anglo-Saxon, Britain, England, and, one of my favourites from childhood when I believed it to be the longest word in the English language, Disestablishmentarianism. Fraser also covers the Tudors, the Stuarts, the Jacobites, and the Plantagenets, telling who they were, how long they reigned, and which other royal families throughout Europe they married into or made war on (or both, as was quite common indeed). As the monarchy waned in power and Parliament took up its modern role in the governing of England, Fraser explains the way it happened and then gives a flavour of the many debates in Parliament stretching over the past few hundred years.
If there’s any negative aspect to this book it’s that there are so many topics that it could have explored much further to give an even greater understanding of British history. But if Fraser had followed even a few of those rabbit holes then she wouldn’t have done the objective of her book justice because it wouldn’t have been the concisely comprehensive history that it is. So don’t pick this up looking for a comprehensive look at the Tudors but do pick it up because it will have the full outline of the Tudors situated in the context of all the other monarchical families that have ruled Britain. I judge this to be an excellent outline of English history that could serve as a permanent reference to the past. Keep it around and you can always dip into it to refresh your memory of 1400s England, or use it to review the Battle of Waterloo and see where that fits into the history of the nation.
Whether you intend to use this as a reference that you consult from time to time, never reading cover to cover, or whether you intend to read it straight through, this is an excellent history of Britain that is complete, thorough, and a joy to read.
June 12, 2018
I love British culture and literature, but apparently reading the story of one of the oldest, most enduring civilizations the world has ever seen takes some time! It took me nearly two months, much longer than most books, but it was worth it. From Celtic, Roman, Anglo-Saxon, Viking, and Norman times through the empire and now to the Commonwealth, Britain truly has had a long, strange journey, especially for such a small island with poor weather. A book like this, which is written in clear, simple prose yet is detailed enough to be similar to a textbook, is not always a page-turner. Some historical eras were more interesting in others. Occasionally, monarchs and ministers were difficult to keep straight. Yet there was also great moments: Boudicca’s rebellion; the tale of Henry II and Thomas Beckett; the enduring, and bloody, conflict between Protestantism and Catholicism; England’s complicated (to say the least) relationship with the kingdoms of Scotland, Wales, and Ireland; the rise and fall of the empire, especially some of the Indian rebellions; the British perspective on the American Revolution; the 20th century experiments in progressivism and socialism; the transformation of the monarchy, from autocrats to symbols; and Thatcher’s unique brand of capitalism and conservatism. Ultimately, there’s no way I will retain all of the information from this book, but it did help me get a better sense of this odd, independent, stubborn, tolerant, tiny, and fascinating nation.
August 27, 2012
To my great surprise, I simply cannot put this book down. It's an amazing page-turner. Fraser does a superb job of picking the juiciest and most interesting personal stories while also showing the broad arc of British history and the gradual changes in the societies of the various constituent states.
For an American who had zero education in British history, this is an excellent place to start. In order to understand our culture, legal system, and national history, one must understand the nation from which the core of our culture was adopted. This book makes it fun, easy, and engrossing.
The one criticism I have is that in the early part she focuses a little heavily on the monarchs. I understand that the earlier kings and queens were the focus of British society and largely defined the course of history within their reins. I think, though, that Fraser could have replaced a few personal anecdotes about the monarchs with other stories relating to the common people and emerging middle classes.
That is not to detract from the accomplishment of the book, or the pleasure of reading it. It's fabulous so far.
--
Finished: Really engaging. After the Glorious Revolution, Fraser moves away from the monarchs and to the prime ministers and cabinets - and to the people. Just what I wanted.
For an American who had zero education in British history, this is an excellent place to start. In order to understand our culture, legal system, and national history, one must understand the nation from which the core of our culture was adopted. This book makes it fun, easy, and engrossing.
The one criticism I have is that in the early part she focuses a little heavily on the monarchs. I understand that the earlier kings and queens were the focus of British society and largely defined the course of history within their reins. I think, though, that Fraser could have replaced a few personal anecdotes about the monarchs with other stories relating to the common people and emerging middle classes.
That is not to detract from the accomplishment of the book, or the pleasure of reading it. It's fabulous so far.
--
Finished: Really engaging. After the Glorious Revolution, Fraser moves away from the monarchs and to the prime ministers and cabinets - and to the people. Just what I wanted.
August 11, 2014
I read this tome before visiting England, and it helped a lot. It's written by Antonia Fraser's daughter Rebecca, so it has a good provenance, although that type of genealogy also makes me nervous, given that nepotism isn't always a good indicator of quality.
This book hits all the major points and then some. We get chapters on each king, and a nice little summary of each one's personal traits, as well, which was nice. Looking into this history, I was struck by how much certain historical characters had contradictions in their personalities, which reflects my belief that real people are larger than the broad strokes. So, then, Henry V wasn't always a hero, Henry VIII started out with extraordinary promise, and Oliver Cromwell didn't hate the Irish per se.
Fraser goes into great detail, so much detail that I sometimes skimmed. Sometimes, Fraser got lost in the details and neglected the larger picture, as she did with the Disraeli-Gladstone relationship. In fact, the whole political crawl through the 1800s was rather tedious. In addition, I wondered if there were a different explanation for her anti-union interpretation of the 1970s - '90s. I'll have to read a liberal interpretation to get the lowdown on that.
All in all, it was readable, respectable, and solid.
This book hits all the major points and then some. We get chapters on each king, and a nice little summary of each one's personal traits, as well, which was nice. Looking into this history, I was struck by how much certain historical characters had contradictions in their personalities, which reflects my belief that real people are larger than the broad strokes. So, then, Henry V wasn't always a hero, Henry VIII started out with extraordinary promise, and Oliver Cromwell didn't hate the Irish per se.
Fraser goes into great detail, so much detail that I sometimes skimmed. Sometimes, Fraser got lost in the details and neglected the larger picture, as she did with the Disraeli-Gladstone relationship. In fact, the whole political crawl through the 1800s was rather tedious. In addition, I wondered if there were a different explanation for her anti-union interpretation of the 1970s - '90s. I'll have to read a liberal interpretation to get the lowdown on that.
All in all, it was readable, respectable, and solid.
June 19, 2011
This is a good introduction to British history that ends around 2002. The narrative form allows for easy reading of its 800+ pages. Many historical events are presented in a dramatic fashion, but the book many times appears to ignore different viewpoints or disputed facts for the sake of clarity or narrative flow (I found this out by exploring some events further online - I am no scholar of British history).
Unless you have a much a better memory than I do, it is difficult to remember the details of so many names and events over such a long period of time with just one reading. Some of the facts that did impress me were how advanced the Romans were (in some aspects England did not reach the same level of civilization until the nineteenth century), the waves of foreign influence that occurred, the discrimination against Catholics that was present until fairly recently (even today a Catholic or a person married to a Catholic cannot succeed to the British throne), and the dismal place England appears to have been in the 1970s.
Unless you have a much a better memory than I do, it is difficult to remember the details of so many names and events over such a long period of time with just one reading. Some of the facts that did impress me were how advanced the Romans were (in some aspects England did not reach the same level of civilization until the nineteenth century), the waves of foreign influence that occurred, the discrimination against Catholics that was present until fairly recently (even today a Catholic or a person married to a Catholic cannot succeed to the British throne), and the dismal place England appears to have been in the 1970s.
December 19, 2019
What a great book! It was exactly what I was looking for.
The Story of Britain quickly went though British history from Roman times until about 2002. The author went into more or less detail depending on who she was discussing and usually kept most topics to about a chapter or less. A few topics like wwi and wwii were covered in more detail as they were larger events.
My only issues were;
1. There are not enough maps
2. It felt like reading Game of Thrones. Lots of people, places, and names all covered very quickly. Also, many of the Kings and queens have the same or similar names and it gets confusing at points. Additionally, there were times when influential people would appear and disappear without much intro.
This wasn't always the case, but happened enough to be noticeable.
It's s great primer if you don't know a lot about British history and touches on many other European countries as well.
It moves quickly and is easy to read, where it could have been a dry read.
I would definitely recommend it.
The Story of Britain quickly went though British history from Roman times until about 2002. The author went into more or less detail depending on who she was discussing and usually kept most topics to about a chapter or less. A few topics like wwi and wwii were covered in more detail as they were larger events.
My only issues were;
1. There are not enough maps
2. It felt like reading Game of Thrones. Lots of people, places, and names all covered very quickly. Also, many of the Kings and queens have the same or similar names and it gets confusing at points. Additionally, there were times when influential people would appear and disappear without much intro.
This wasn't always the case, but happened enough to be noticeable.
It's s great primer if you don't know a lot about British history and touches on many other European countries as well.
It moves quickly and is easy to read, where it could have been a dry read.
I would definitely recommend it.
September 25, 2012
If someone is looking for a decent introduction to British history in a single volume, I might recommend this book. Often times the book tends to follow a Wikipedia version of history. Events are connected, but don't seem to blend into a well thought out historical narrative. Instead, you get the highlights and that is it. The intricacies of parliamentary democracy are also difficult to follow as the different parties vie for control of Parliament. Although the title indicates that it is a history of Britain, England is the focal point, with other parts of the Union only becoming important as they relate to what is going on within the country. Several professional reviewers have also noted that the book is a good introduction for American readers, however, the author at times misinterprets the history of the U.S. as it relates to Britain.
September 2, 2009
For anyone with an interest in British history - this book is a must. It is not one of your dry and uninteresting repetitions of dates etc.
Rebecca Fraser's ability to draw you into such an extensive period of history and have the ability to relate the events, with such readable prose is remarkable. Her description of events although brief in some aspects, is thorough and inspires this reader to seek further reading on numerous subjects, periods and characters that are found to be of interest. I can only hope that the author will venture into British history yet again and expand on particular periods, in more details and depth. I note that she has another tome which addresses some of the renowned characters of British society, through the same time frame. (A People's History of Britain)
Rebecca Fraser's ability to draw you into such an extensive period of history and have the ability to relate the events, with such readable prose is remarkable. Her description of events although brief in some aspects, is thorough and inspires this reader to seek further reading on numerous subjects, periods and characters that are found to be of interest. I can only hope that the author will venture into British history yet again and expand on particular periods, in more details and depth. I note that she has another tome which addresses some of the renowned characters of British society, through the same time frame. (A People's History of Britain)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 80 reviews