What do you think?
Rate this book
A History of the English-Speaking Peoples #1
The Birth of Britain
"This history will endure; not only because Sir Winston has written it, but also because of its own inherent virtues - its narrative power, its fine judgment of war and politics, of soldiers and statesmen, and even more because it reflects a tradition of what Englishmen in the hey-day of their empire thought and felt about their country's past." The Daily Telegraph
Spanning four volumes and many centuries of history, from Caesar's invasion of Britain to the start of World War I, A History of the English-Speaking Peoples stands as one of Winston S. Churchill's most magnificent literary works. Begun during Churchill's 'wilderness years' when he was out of government, first published in 1956 after his leadership through the darkest days of World War II had cemented his place in history and completed when Churchill was in his 80s, it remains to this day a compelling and vivid history.
The first volume - The Birth of Britain - tells the story of the formation of the British state, from the arrival of Julius Caesar and the Roman Empire through the invasions of the Vikings and the Normans, the signing of the Magna Carta and establishment of the mother of parliaments to the War of the Roses.
Spanning four volumes and many centuries of history, from Caesar's invasion of Britain to the start of World War I, A History of the English-Speaking Peoples stands as one of Winston S. Churchill's most magnificent literary works. Begun during Churchill's 'wilderness years' when he was out of government, first published in 1956 after his leadership through the darkest days of World War II had cemented his place in history and completed when Churchill was in his 80s, it remains to this day a compelling and vivid history.
The first volume - The Birth of Britain - tells the story of the formation of the British state, from the arrival of Julius Caesar and the Roman Empire through the invasions of the Vikings and the Normans, the signing of the Magna Carta and establishment of the mother of parliaments to the War of the Roses.
448 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1956
1718 people are currently reading
5300 people want to read
About the author
Winston S. Churchill
1,372 books2,449 followersSir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill, politician and writer, as prime minister from 1940 to 1945 and from 1951 to 1955 led Great Britain, published several works, including
The Second World War
from 1948 to 1953, and then won the Nobel Prize for literature.
William Maxwell Aitken, first baron Beaverbrook, held many cabinet positions during the 1940s as a confidant of Churchill.
Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, FRS, PC (Can), served the United Kingdom again. A noted statesman, orator and strategist, Churchill also served as an officer in the Army. This prolific author "for his mastery of historical and biographical description as well as for brilliant oratory in defending exalted human values."
Out of respect for Winston_Churchill, the well-known American author, Winston S. Churchill offered to use his middle initial as an author.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston...
William Maxwell Aitken, first baron Beaverbrook, held many cabinet positions during the 1940s as a confidant of Churchill.
Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, FRS, PC (Can), served the United Kingdom again. A noted statesman, orator and strategist, Churchill also served as an officer in the Army. This prolific author "for his mastery of historical and biographical description as well as for brilliant oratory in defending exalted human values."
Out of respect for Winston_Churchill, the well-known American author, Winston S. Churchill offered to use his middle initial as an author.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 320 reviews
December 23, 2010
I originally picked this book up because I read that Churchill was inspired by Gibbon, whose Decline and Fall is one of the most amazing works I've ever read. I have to say that, so far (this the first volume) I can definitely see a similarity between the two works, both in terms of the history itself and the writing style.
I can also see how Churchill received a Nobel Prize in literature. Like Gibbon, Churchill's prose, while always engaging and expansive becomes, when he reaches a subject or a moment that he's particularly passionate about, epic, powerful, and moving. In those moments you have absolutely no trouble picturing him delivering the speeches he's so famous for; thundering in front parliament or great armies, and swaying world events. It's really this aspect of both authors that I find so enjoyable, that they're philosophers as well as historians, and are as interested in and have as much to say about the human nature driving great events as they do about the events themselves.
I can also see how Churchill received a Nobel Prize in literature. Like Gibbon, Churchill's prose, while always engaging and expansive becomes, when he reaches a subject or a moment that he's particularly passionate about, epic, powerful, and moving. In those moments you have absolutely no trouble picturing him delivering the speeches he's so famous for; thundering in front parliament or great armies, and swaying world events. It's really this aspect of both authors that I find so enjoyable, that they're philosophers as well as historians, and are as interested in and have as much to say about the human nature driving great events as they do about the events themselves.
February 14, 2020
It's like having a survey course in Britain's early history taught by Winston Churchill. What's not to like? The asides alone which he draws from the main narrative and applies to men in general are worth the read.
October 26, 2017
Churchill could really write. The sentences roll on, and the pages, tiny print and all, also roll on by. This is the first volume of a four volume history of the English-Speaking, and it covers the misty and mysterious beginnings of "Britannia" (about 55 years before Christ), up through Richard III looking for his horse at the battle of Bosworth. (Actually, that Shakespearean detail is not in Churchill's account of the battle.) In his introduction, Churchill cautions that his history is not to be viewed as the effort of a professional historian, but is more a"personal view" on historical matters he finds significant. I'm not sure what to make of that, but it probably explains why Churchill didn't bother much with notes (there are hardly any). I'm not complaining, but I did get the sense that Churchill probably was following the story-telling arc of other historians. That said, I would give Sir Winston his honorary doctorate. The man was walking, talking, and thinking History itself.
Not being a professional does allow Churchill to emphasize historical moments that might not seem as important in other histories. I certainly enjoyed his considerations regarding the impact on the English longbow, which was something of a secret weapon when used in France in a series of stunning victories. But overall Churchill is diligent. He methodically works his way through all the rulers (and their personalities, all of the wars, the interesting development of English Christianity (as opposed to the Roman version, the establishment of Parliament, feudalism, etc. He also, in a minor miracle of compression, does a fine job untangling the incredibly complicated War of the Roses. Churchill's ending indictment of Richard III's villainy, which relies primarily on contemporary views of Richard, seems quite solid. Shakespeare may have taken poetic and historical license in his creation, but he knew his man, his dark heart, those savage times.
Not being a professional does allow Churchill to emphasize historical moments that might not seem as important in other histories. I certainly enjoyed his considerations regarding the impact on the English longbow, which was something of a secret weapon when used in France in a series of stunning victories. But overall Churchill is diligent. He methodically works his way through all the rulers (and their personalities, all of the wars, the interesting development of English Christianity (as opposed to the Roman version, the establishment of Parliament, feudalism, etc. He also, in a minor miracle of compression, does a fine job untangling the incredibly complicated War of the Roses. Churchill's ending indictment of Richard III's villainy, which relies primarily on contemporary views of Richard, seems quite solid. Shakespeare may have taken poetic and historical license in his creation, but he knew his man, his dark heart, those savage times.
Want to read
December 29, 2010Normally I am all pissy about nonfiction, because the prose is watery and/or in bad taste, and the content density is low and/or obscured by the stupid author's stupid agenda. (Fiction mainly pisses me off when the author can actually write, and then decides to write endlessly about his sexual dysfunction, D H LAWRENCE.) This is probably because I choose to read nonfiction by alive people, instead of awesome people from the greatest generation, who are awesome and not stupid, and love their subject and write vigorously on it, and who are, in short, Winston Churchill, whom I think I fell in love with between paragraphs three and four.
The Romans are invading Britain, and I'm crying because it's so good. I am honestly four paragraphs in, so we'll see how long the infatuation lasts.
"The salt water was now a path and not a barrier. Apart from the accidents of weather and the tides and currents, about which he admits he could not obtain trustworthy information, Julius Caesar saw no difficulty in invading the Island. There was not then that far-off line of storm-beaten ships which about two thousand years later stood between the great Corsican conqueror and the dominion of the world. All that mattered was to choose a good day in the fine August weather, throw a few legions on to the nearest shore, and see what there was in this strange Island after all."
The Romans are invading Britain, and I'm crying because it's so good. I am honestly four paragraphs in, so we'll see how long the infatuation lasts.
"The salt water was now a path and not a barrier. Apart from the accidents of weather and the tides and currents, about which he admits he could not obtain trustworthy information, Julius Caesar saw no difficulty in invading the Island. There was not then that far-off line of storm-beaten ships which about two thousand years later stood between the great Corsican conqueror and the dominion of the world. All that mattered was to choose a good day in the fine August weather, throw a few legions on to the nearest shore, and see what there was in this strange Island after all."
March 27, 2024
WE DID IT. My 8th grader and I worked through this together this year. I’m thankful to have a little deeper understanding of the scope of English history from Julius Caesar’s invasion through the end of the Wars of the Roses. This was definitely a stretching book for my son and at times I thought he would be better served by the simpler “A History of England” by Arnold-Foster, but he wanted to persevere, and I’m glad we did. I’m excited for the next book in the series, which I have read once before.
Churchill’s writing is lovely, though complex. And he often assumes that his reader knows things that this reader does not. But that’s on me.
Churchill’s writing is lovely, though complex. And he often assumes that his reader knows things that this reader does not. But that’s on me.
November 19, 2024
I appreciated not only the lively style of this history, but also how it is written as the history of the English speaking peoples, with an eye to how these events shaped the culture and political systems of these peoples today.
December 8, 2023
Having previously read Winston Churchill's WWII series, I knew I wouldn't be disappointed in his broader history of the "English Speaking Peoples", the first book of which covers pre-Roman Britain to the end of the War of Roses with the dawn of Tudor England.
Churchill definitely has a flair for weaving good story-telling into this extensive, epic history. Perhaps my only complaint is that, being of a more rigorously detailed age where a good grounding in British history was basically expected of readers, he sometimes assumes everyone can follow or knows the essentials of these immense details than may be expected for a reader of our age. Nonetheless, as a beginner's survey course of English history, you can't go wrong with Britain's most famous prime minister. This first book has filled many gaps in my knowledge of the royal lines of the medieval ages.
One thing that stands out is how often brothers rather than sons inherited the throne of England, especially in the medieval times where death lurked around every corner, and the reluctance to include daughters in the royal ascension. The English seemed plagued by civil wars due to the confusion around the rightful heir: Stephen vs Matilda, Richard II, the War of Roses, it goes on and on...
Despite all the details of thousands of names and events, Churchill makes the unfolding story of our English history come alive.
Churchill definitely has a flair for weaving good story-telling into this extensive, epic history. Perhaps my only complaint is that, being of a more rigorously detailed age where a good grounding in British history was basically expected of readers, he sometimes assumes everyone can follow or knows the essentials of these immense details than may be expected for a reader of our age. Nonetheless, as a beginner's survey course of English history, you can't go wrong with Britain's most famous prime minister. This first book has filled many gaps in my knowledge of the royal lines of the medieval ages.
One thing that stands out is how often brothers rather than sons inherited the throne of England, especially in the medieval times where death lurked around every corner, and the reluctance to include daughters in the royal ascension. The English seemed plagued by civil wars due to the confusion around the rightful heir: Stephen vs Matilda, Richard II, the War of Roses, it goes on and on...
Despite all the details of thousands of names and events, Churchill makes the unfolding story of our English history come alive.
June 6, 2017
This is sweeping national history told with verve and dash. It is as much an insight into Churchill as it is into Britain's past. One forgets that this inspiring orator, proud statesman and defender of the realm was also a great writer who spent the "alone" years before World War II drafting this history of the English-speaking peoples. Churchill's Latinate prose recalls Gibbon, but his own striking personality shines through in passage after passage. "The Second World War" may be his most important work, but stylistically he could just as easily have received the Nobel Prize for Literature for this great history.
December 4, 2024
I'm so glad I had this on audio! It was easy to get bogged down in the details and want to quit, but listening to a chapter while sitting with the boys at bedtime helped me get thought it. (AmblesideOnline Year 7)
August 21, 2022
it begins...
April 19, 2019
Read for school better than a textbook and we start with America's history in Albion.
May 20, 2012
For a glimpse into Britain’s past, I recently selected “A History of the English Speaking Peoples: The Birth of Britain.” This book, the first in a series of four, comes from the pen of Winston Churchill. Authored intermittently during periods of relative inactivity, before and after World War II, this first volume offers a chronologically sequenced history of the British Isles. Most of the text summarizes the reigns of the known British rulers prior to the Norman Conquest and expansively retells the activities of later English monarchs. The tale begins in the Stone Age, moves rapidly through the isles’ early years, touches the Celts and Romans, and latter approaches the Dark Ages with brief descriptions of Angles, Saxons, and Vikings. The book culminates with the beginning of the Tudor dynasty, after surveying the Normans and several other subsequent English ruling families.
Considering the topics and personalities chosen for the book, as well as those left out, this work reveals curious clues about the late Prime Minister’s specific interests in history. The volume suggests he was primarily attracted to the lives of rulers, the balance of political power, and the conflicts fought. The typically fast pace narrative often slows for detailed depictions of battles, even those over 1000 years old. Accordingly, accounts of the 100 Years War, the War of the Roses, and the Norman Conquest, consume more pages than most other topics. As leadership and warfare appears to have been his focus, he mostly disregarded social issues, culture, and economics. This deficit occasionally compels the reader into a false perception that entire centuries of British history were a rather monochromatic saga solely defined by monarchs and struggles for the crown and French territory.
Perhaps not obvious about Churchill’s character, these pages indicate a fascination for the legend of King Arthur and deep respect for the leadership of France’s Joan of Arc. Separately, Churchill employed the term “race,” which he perceived not as a question of skin color, but one of nationality, culture, and language. This reminds a contemporary reader about the ever-shifting way we choose to approach the nominally divisive issue of race. More obvious, his writing is yet another indicator of the high esteem he held for both the British monarchy and the empire. Also of note, the book’s list-like narrative of British rulers can’t help but highlight multiple Kings who spoke little or no English, lived most of their lives off the island, and ruled a vast empire that stretched from southern France to Scotland.
Considering the topics and personalities chosen for the book, as well as those left out, this work reveals curious clues about the late Prime Minister’s specific interests in history. The volume suggests he was primarily attracted to the lives of rulers, the balance of political power, and the conflicts fought. The typically fast pace narrative often slows for detailed depictions of battles, even those over 1000 years old. Accordingly, accounts of the 100 Years War, the War of the Roses, and the Norman Conquest, consume more pages than most other topics. As leadership and warfare appears to have been his focus, he mostly disregarded social issues, culture, and economics. This deficit occasionally compels the reader into a false perception that entire centuries of British history were a rather monochromatic saga solely defined by monarchs and struggles for the crown and French territory.
Perhaps not obvious about Churchill’s character, these pages indicate a fascination for the legend of King Arthur and deep respect for the leadership of France’s Joan of Arc. Separately, Churchill employed the term “race,” which he perceived not as a question of skin color, but one of nationality, culture, and language. This reminds a contemporary reader about the ever-shifting way we choose to approach the nominally divisive issue of race. More obvious, his writing is yet another indicator of the high esteem he held for both the British monarchy and the empire. Also of note, the book’s list-like narrative of British rulers can’t help but highlight multiple Kings who spoke little or no English, lived most of their lives off the island, and ruled a vast empire that stretched from southern France to Scotland.
January 27, 2023
With his characteristic cleverness, Churchill gives the story of England from Caesar to Richard III. I loved the storytelling approach that Churchill takes to the history. He was able to present the lives and times of some of the greatest figures in medieval history and make them fascinating and memorable. He also was hilarious throughout the book. I feel like I have a bearing in English history now which I lacked before I read this book and so I would highly rate it to anyone who wants to learn about the English people.
August 16, 2025
This feels like a fantastic overview.
I’ve never seen a history book cover so much from end to end. It gave me a much better sense of how events relate to each other--years and numbers have never been my strong suit.
Now, the author does have some serious bias. But if you treat the book as a starting place and supplement it with a bit of your own study, it’s an excellent resource. It doesn't have the time to flesh out each individual event, but it's strength is showing how all of history is interwoven.
(Shout out to my favorite character: "St. Edwin's Bones.")
I’ve never seen a history book cover so much from end to end. It gave me a much better sense of how events relate to each other--years and numbers have never been my strong suit.
Now, the author does have some serious bias. But if you treat the book as a starting place and supplement it with a bit of your own study, it’s an excellent resource. It doesn't have the time to flesh out each individual event, but it's strength is showing how all of history is interwoven.
(Shout out to my favorite character: "St. Edwin's Bones.")
June 11, 2010
This is a beautifully written popular history of England from Roman times to the end of the end of the War of the Roses. The last half of the book is pretty much all about court intrigue and problems of royal succession. The primary value of the book is Churchill's explanation of English character based on various historical trends. For example, English political behaviors and love of liberty can be traced to a landed class of Danish warriors that settled most the country in the 9th Century.
January 14, 2024
I enjoy Churchill’s writing style. This was a thorough but approachable history of ancient and Medieval Britain. It was fun to read this alongside Our Island Story. Looking forward to another Churchill next year.
April 15, 2017
4.0 stars.
In reference to the period of the Roman invasion to Britain and the following invasions of saxxons, vikings and normans up to the end of 12th century, I have been looking for trustworthy and summarized information about this period.
So far, I have read confusing and contradicting informatión.
W. Churchil was an acute politician and a formidable strategist in warfares and I thought he might be a reliable source of information and facts.
Reading this book, certainly clarified many misinformation and knowledge I had.
His writing and prose easy to follow and I might say, enjoyble. The Intrigues and events that followed in this period of british histiry, reminded me the books of Games of Throne of GRR Martín.
In reference to the period of the Roman invasion to Britain and the following invasions of saxxons, vikings and normans up to the end of 12th century, I have been looking for trustworthy and summarized information about this period.
So far, I have read confusing and contradicting informatión.
W. Churchil was an acute politician and a formidable strategist in warfares and I thought he might be a reliable source of information and facts.
Reading this book, certainly clarified many misinformation and knowledge I had.
His writing and prose easy to follow and I might say, enjoyble. The Intrigues and events that followed in this period of british histiry, reminded me the books of Games of Throne of GRR Martín.
October 6, 2020
Winston Churchill was heavily influenced by gibbons. Language is where one would see the influence of gibbons the most. He makes hasty generalizations. It was okay in gibbons’ time but not in his time. He swapped through nearly a millennia of history in just a book. It was hard to follow this book being an Indian. Many facts and even chronology of events is required to be known by the reader before hand. I had to go through hume’s history of England vol 1 and Dan jones’ Plantagenets before I could complete this book. Only thing I liked about this book is that it’s full of additional tidbits like contemporary rumors, prevalent fabled etc. For non English folks, this is not a place to start with English History. Look for more contemporary writers.
February 27, 2018
The life of a history book is a strange thing: written with the sensibilities of their own age, they may flourish in their time only to be overtaken by changes of outlook, or by research which overturns the facts they purport as truth. The more pedestrian works will then themselves become part of history, whilst those whose other qualities recommend them become classics - read more for entertainment than education.
The life of Churchill's books are curious even by those standards: coloured by the history of their author, they are read as much for the man as their literary value. Like other histories they have been overtaken by events - much of the writing on Saxon England has been overturned by new research - and when one looks at, for example, the handling of Edward II they definitely display a judgemental attitude which jars with modern sensibilities (particularly when you contrast Edward's treatment with that of Joan of Arc). Despite these factors, however, the books are highly readable and it is easy to believe that had Churchill remained in the wilderness they would have still be as well regarded as, for example, Walter Scott's Tales of a Grandfather. Whilst it would be unreasonable to expect a whole book to be written with the rhetorical flourish of the great man's speeches, much of the writing is elegant rather than functional, making it a joy to read.
This first volume spans from prehistory to the Battle of Bosworth and is thus rather more affected by the march of historical change than later installments. Churchill was clearly writing for an audience who were expected to have some degree of historical education, so there are places where he alludes to well-known tales (such as The Bruce and the spider) in such a way where he assumes he will be understood. This may make the book harder for today's younger generation, raised on Henry VIII and Hitler, but presents no difficulty for those with a broad interest in history (who, let's be honest, are more likely to read the books now). What's slightly more difficult is the judgemental tone: aside from Edward II, the handling of Richard III goes somewhat beyond historical reportage, openly condemning those who have tried to resurrect the man's reputation since his death. Of course, all historians are prone to judge (one thinks of Schama's handling of Cromwell) but something about Churchill's writing jars in this regard more than others.
There are also places where the writing lacks a little clarity. Churchill explains that most historians avoid the Wars of the Roses due to their confusing nature, but his narrative does little to render the conflicts less confusing (although, to be fair, you'd probably have to rename half the protagonists to make it totally clear). All in all, however, the book is a worthwhile read for those curious about how history used to be written, probably less so for those coming at English history with just what they've learned in school.
The life of Churchill's books are curious even by those standards: coloured by the history of their author, they are read as much for the man as their literary value. Like other histories they have been overtaken by events - much of the writing on Saxon England has been overturned by new research - and when one looks at, for example, the handling of Edward II they definitely display a judgemental attitude which jars with modern sensibilities (particularly when you contrast Edward's treatment with that of Joan of Arc). Despite these factors, however, the books are highly readable and it is easy to believe that had Churchill remained in the wilderness they would have still be as well regarded as, for example, Walter Scott's Tales of a Grandfather. Whilst it would be unreasonable to expect a whole book to be written with the rhetorical flourish of the great man's speeches, much of the writing is elegant rather than functional, making it a joy to read.
This first volume spans from prehistory to the Battle of Bosworth and is thus rather more affected by the march of historical change than later installments. Churchill was clearly writing for an audience who were expected to have some degree of historical education, so there are places where he alludes to well-known tales (such as The Bruce and the spider) in such a way where he assumes he will be understood. This may make the book harder for today's younger generation, raised on Henry VIII and Hitler, but presents no difficulty for those with a broad interest in history (who, let's be honest, are more likely to read the books now). What's slightly more difficult is the judgemental tone: aside from Edward II, the handling of Richard III goes somewhat beyond historical reportage, openly condemning those who have tried to resurrect the man's reputation since his death. Of course, all historians are prone to judge (one thinks of Schama's handling of Cromwell) but something about Churchill's writing jars in this regard more than others.
There are also places where the writing lacks a little clarity. Churchill explains that most historians avoid the Wars of the Roses due to their confusing nature, but his narrative does little to render the conflicts less confusing (although, to be fair, you'd probably have to rename half the protagonists to make it totally clear). All in all, however, the book is a worthwhile read for those curious about how history used to be written, probably less so for those coming at English history with just what they've learned in school.
February 15, 2022
I listened to this book on Audible.
I have read many books on the history of Britain with a favourite period, the War of the Roses. So I thought this book might be a bit repetitive and tell me nothing new. I wanted to listen to it purely because it was written by Winston Churchill. I was rewarded for my efforts by a delightful, insightful narrative. Well researched, Churchill not only told the story of the rulers of England (and to a much lesser extent, Scotland Wales and Ireland), he also wrote about the evolution of English institutions, the law, Parliament, foreign affairs, local government and so on. There was much I did not know, especially about the evolution of juries, how Magna Carta actually made a difference, and how Parliament developed. I thought I knew, but it turned out that I still have much to learn. He did not limit himself to these shores, taking us to English affairs in France, the Netherlands and even the Holy Land when applicable. Thus, I feel I have a better understanding of certain events, especially the Hundred Years War. He also wrote about what it meant to be ordinary people through the various ages, although, I feel maybe other historians have done more work in this area. Still, I came away feeling a sense of history as being alive, not a dead thing on a parchment roll.
I feel that modern historians, always keen to show how progressive they are, have lost a sense of pride in English history. But there is much to be proud of. The sense of fair play, the checks and balances between the monarchy and the people and the church, the development of the freedoms we enjoy today. It is important that we are reminded of this, especially at a time when our freedoms are being curtailed and history is being erased. What Winston Churchill would make of Britain today I dread to think. All the more reason to listen to his words again.
I have read many books on the history of Britain with a favourite period, the War of the Roses. So I thought this book might be a bit repetitive and tell me nothing new. I wanted to listen to it purely because it was written by Winston Churchill. I was rewarded for my efforts by a delightful, insightful narrative. Well researched, Churchill not only told the story of the rulers of England (and to a much lesser extent, Scotland Wales and Ireland), he also wrote about the evolution of English institutions, the law, Parliament, foreign affairs, local government and so on. There was much I did not know, especially about the evolution of juries, how Magna Carta actually made a difference, and how Parliament developed. I thought I knew, but it turned out that I still have much to learn. He did not limit himself to these shores, taking us to English affairs in France, the Netherlands and even the Holy Land when applicable. Thus, I feel I have a better understanding of certain events, especially the Hundred Years War. He also wrote about what it meant to be ordinary people through the various ages, although, I feel maybe other historians have done more work in this area. Still, I came away feeling a sense of history as being alive, not a dead thing on a parchment roll.
I feel that modern historians, always keen to show how progressive they are, have lost a sense of pride in English history. But there is much to be proud of. The sense of fair play, the checks and balances between the monarchy and the people and the church, the development of the freedoms we enjoy today. It is important that we are reminded of this, especially at a time when our freedoms are being curtailed and history is being erased. What Winston Churchill would make of Britain today I dread to think. All the more reason to listen to his words again.
January 11, 2018
As with all history, there were bits of this that were fascinating and so well told. And there were bits that, for me at least, became too bogged down in details and lost my interest.
But the parts that were interesting and well-told were extraordinary, insightful, and almost lyrical.
Some Favorite Quotes:
it is the primary right of men to die and kill for the land they live in
We walk with shorter paces, but on firmer footholds.
It is all true, or it ought to be; and more and better besides.
Art and culture grew in the track of order.
a treachery to which all adjectives are unequal
Thus from the ground does freedom raise itself unconquerable.
It was a cry of pain and anger from a generation shaken out of submissiveness by changes in their lot, which gave rise alike to new hope and new injustice.
But Death drew his scythe across these prospects.
But the parts that were interesting and well-told were extraordinary, insightful, and almost lyrical.
Some Favorite Quotes:
it is the primary right of men to die and kill for the land they live in
We walk with shorter paces, but on firmer footholds.
It is all true, or it ought to be; and more and better besides.
Art and culture grew in the track of order.
a treachery to which all adjectives are unequal
Thus from the ground does freedom raise itself unconquerable.
It was a cry of pain and anger from a generation shaken out of submissiveness by changes in their lot, which gave rise alike to new hope and new injustice.
But Death drew his scythe across these prospects.
June 15, 2009
While many have found fault with his historical method, others have critiqued his unorthodoxy, Time Herself will -- I believe -- prove the truth in the spirit of Winston's writing if not in the letter. What can I say? For all his many faults, I love him! And despite the shameful national episode of returning his statue, I won't part with my four volume set of Winnie's History of the English Speaking Peoples. Sadly, I have never sat and read them all cover-to-cover, but I have read large sections from each of the volumes. Churchill is witty, wise and incisive with a love for the English speaking peoples, on both sides of the Atlantic(!), borne of his Anglo-American parentage.
If you don't read any other history of Great Britain, read this one.
If you don't read any other history of Great Britain, read this one.
November 26, 2019
This review is for all four books. I read them about 10 years ago, but I thought I would share a basic overview. Without a doubt, these books are among the classics and in the "must read" territory for those that like to study history. I suppose the fact that they are a four volume set might be intimidating for some, but I encourage you not to let that get in the way.
Naturally these books are thorough, and I still have some of their concepts that flash through my head to this day. Churchill does have the ability to weave the fabric of a situation fairly well as a good historical novelist should. I rank his ability in that area as decent. I have read those who do a better job.
I look forward to re-reading these books someday after I have ready a few other extensive comparable histories. I wonder how much of Churchill's presentation will hold up to other works.
Naturally these books are thorough, and I still have some of their concepts that flash through my head to this day. Churchill does have the ability to weave the fabric of a situation fairly well as a good historical novelist should. I rank his ability in that area as decent. I have read those who do a better job.
I look forward to re-reading these books someday after I have ready a few other extensive comparable histories. I wonder how much of Churchill's presentation will hold up to other works.
Want to read
May 22, 2020This book is really excellent. I only read 10% of it, but can say that the writing is superb, the content is interesting, and this is an example of how a history book ought to be written. Thus I wondered why I did not desire to keep reading it (though I enjoyed it while I listened to it), and I have now realised: It is because there are no characters to follow throughout the story. This in no way lessens the book’s quality or reduces its importance. But it’s not what I’m looking for, at least not right now. Moreover, due to the beauty and excellence of language in it, if again I take it up, I’ll likely pick up a good, paper copy. But let it be known that this is a very good narrator (Christian Rodska), and not many could make Sir Winston Churchill’s language comprehensible as an audiobook as this man does.
November 21, 2014
printed 1956...
Narrated by Christian Rodska 2006 17 hours.
Read at least book one in College. I will remember when I finish the audio versions of what I originally read/ My favorite Professor who had such wonderful courses as Rebels, Robbers and Rogues! His best courses were summer and winter break, Since I didn't have anywhere to go, it was always easier to stay at school, and got to take all of his fun courses. One of those was a history of England based on these writings.
Narrated by Christian Rodska 2006 17 hours.
Read at least book one in College. I will remember when I finish the audio versions of what I originally read/ My favorite Professor who had such wonderful courses as Rebels, Robbers and Rogues! His best courses were summer and winter break, Since I didn't have anywhere to go, it was always easier to stay at school, and got to take all of his fun courses. One of those was a history of England based on these writings.
September 7, 2017
Long and tedious reading, yet undoubtedly as accurate as is possible considering the time span.
Churchill is thorough and insightful as a student of history. He explains the true nature of the wars made famous and romanticised in English literature. No wonder Churchill had such a hard time getting the British Parliament to take his warnings seriously about the rise of Nazis. Churchill was too bluntly honest to soften what he recognised as truth.
Churchill is thorough and insightful as a student of history. He explains the true nature of the wars made famous and romanticised in English literature. No wonder Churchill had such a hard time getting the British Parliament to take his warnings seriously about the rise of Nazis. Churchill was too bluntly honest to soften what he recognised as truth.
May 10, 2024
This was a good but challenging book. I read it aloud to my 7th grade son, which aided our digestion of the material, but admittedly there was a lot that went over our heads as we took a deep dive into the Middle Ages. By far, the most rewarding aspect, was learning the background of our western civilization and the development of things like the Magna Carta, common law, trial by jury, and more that were influential in crafting our US constitution and Bill of Rights. We enjoyed the drama of the many battles of the bloodlines but keeping all the families and monarchs straight was an unreasonable expectation. We kept a timeline but should’ve taken better notes. This book made me realize how Shakespeare’s history plays could be extremely entertaining and captivating and made me want to read/watch/listen to them. Overall, Winston Churchill is an excellent writer and I would say the problem with this book lies not with him but with our lack of background knowledge and British vocabulary. I’m glad I read it but it wasn’t completely accessible.
Read
September 17, 2023the book is in small print, old, and smell s dusty-mouldy. Men kill each other for power, land and possessions and everybody on their path. Then start collection taxes. Taxes are good IF you get something in return, but it seems the people didn't get much. I can't finish this. I should've found a cultural history, This is like school history and it is sad.
The one thing that stayed in mind is William the Conqueror's law that if a man rapes a woman , he will be castrated. I think he was on to something.
The one thing that stayed in mind is William the Conqueror's law that if a man rapes a woman , he will be castrated. I think he was on to something.
July 20, 2024
English History, as told by a man who contributed so much to it. It’s like having Julius Caesar’s personal view of the history of the Roman Republic. Starts off very slow with lots of Celts and Druids, but picks up once the Romans leave and the Anglo-Saxons invade. Really contains everything one needs to know about Medieval England in broad strokes. It’s not academically rigorous, but it’s not meant to be. It seems to me that Churchill is culture-building here, trying to give Anglophones a sense of shared history and identity, and I am very much sympathetic to that aim. Highly recommended. Accessible to young readers too I believe.
January 29, 2021
What makes the first volume of Churchill's account so fascinating is not so much that it’s a comprehensive history of English-speaking peoples (it most certainly isn’t, and Churchill even states in the opening Preface that it’s not really meant to be a work of “history,” per se), but that it’s a personal reflection on past events from a key figure of the 20th century (who happens to be a brilliant wordsmith) at a time of great peril for the “English-speaking peoples” -- 1939, which is when Churchill was writing these four volumes that weren’t published until after the war. So many events in England’s past take on new meaning as Churchill relates them, since they somewhat mirror the fears of his contemporaries on the eve of the Second World War: the threat of invasion from multiple fronts on a small island, the brutality of Saxons crossing from the Germanic lands, the struggle to unite a people who are often at odds amongst their own population, the need for a kind of mythic hero who would take up the fight, etc.
Certain figures emerge as defenders and unifiers of the island in the face of great adversity -- a role that Churchill himself would assume contemporaneously: Boudica, the historic Celtic queen (greatly mythologized) who led an uprising against the occupying Romans; Arthur, the mythic Romanized Celt (who may very well have been an historical amalgamation of figures), who took up the hue and cry against barbarian invaders; Alfred the Great, who fought the Viking horde and gave England its first great royal bloodline; Henry Plantagenet, who managed to struggle for unity even when a schism with Rome seemed almost inevitable; Richard Cœur de Lion, whose mythic status was perhaps more important than his actual triumphs occurring largely outside the island and who battled enemies both on the continent and on the home front; Edward I, whose legal reforms and advocacy of English Common Law continues to echo throughout the centuries on both sides of the Atlantic; and Henry V, whose soaring rhetoric and dedication to a medieval form of English empire (Churchill's word) would be obvious models for Churchill in the 20th century.
Interestingly, Churchill saves his grandest praise for Joan of Arc, who fights off the English attempt to wrest France from Charles VII, pushing them off the continent almost for good. In Joan, Churchill sees one who can both unite a country and defend the homeland from a foreign invader. Ironically, she’s not even English. The English are her enemies and persecutors.
Churchill is not without his blindspots. Besides the aforementioned personal preferences for certain historical figures and events over others, he is particularly brutal in describing Edward II, with countless thinly-veiled insults against his manhood due to his alleged homosexuality. But despite these minor faults, the first volume is extraordinarily well written, and as my first encounter with Churchill's writing (beyond his famous wartime speeches, of course), I very quickly came to realize why he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature. I look forward to reading the remaining three volumes.
Certain figures emerge as defenders and unifiers of the island in the face of great adversity -- a role that Churchill himself would assume contemporaneously: Boudica, the historic Celtic queen (greatly mythologized) who led an uprising against the occupying Romans; Arthur, the mythic Romanized Celt (who may very well have been an historical amalgamation of figures), who took up the hue and cry against barbarian invaders; Alfred the Great, who fought the Viking horde and gave England its first great royal bloodline; Henry Plantagenet, who managed to struggle for unity even when a schism with Rome seemed almost inevitable; Richard Cœur de Lion, whose mythic status was perhaps more important than his actual triumphs occurring largely outside the island and who battled enemies both on the continent and on the home front; Edward I, whose legal reforms and advocacy of English Common Law continues to echo throughout the centuries on both sides of the Atlantic; and Henry V, whose soaring rhetoric and dedication to a medieval form of English empire (Churchill's word) would be obvious models for Churchill in the 20th century.
Interestingly, Churchill saves his grandest praise for Joan of Arc, who fights off the English attempt to wrest France from Charles VII, pushing them off the continent almost for good. In Joan, Churchill sees one who can both unite a country and defend the homeland from a foreign invader. Ironically, she’s not even English. The English are her enemies and persecutors.
Churchill is not without his blindspots. Besides the aforementioned personal preferences for certain historical figures and events over others, he is particularly brutal in describing Edward II, with countless thinly-veiled insults against his manhood due to his alleged homosexuality. But despite these minor faults, the first volume is extraordinarily well written, and as my first encounter with Churchill's writing (beyond his famous wartime speeches, of course), I very quickly came to realize why he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature. I look forward to reading the remaining three volumes.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 320 reviews