A History of the English-Speaking Peoples

Product Information

The simultaneous four-volume U.S. first edition is certainly less stately in appearance, though in our opinion perhaps excessively maligned as being an unattractive edition. But that does not make him an unworthy guide through history. In fact, I assert some of the most appealing parts of the narrative are Winston's evaluations of the different characters and events, which he can be relied upon to deliver as they exit the scene. All of these are entertaining and some are downright enlightening. He points out that Charles I, for instance, had genuine qualities as a general, considering he ruled a country that had known seventy years of peace, while Oliver Cromwell is censured because he was the only military dictator England has ever known, ruling with no popular consent by force alone, and parallels are drawn with the twentieth century that I wouldn't have thought of myself. Burr is nothing more than an "evil genius". He has implied sympathy for the Confederacy in the U.S. Civil War, but he does a decent enough job justifying it and clearly isn't a fan of slavery. He also gives a much-needed new perspective on the Indian Mutiny: the British were not the only belligerents who shamed themselves in 1857. I was genuinely interested to see how he would take the U.S. Constitution, but somehow he manages to convincingly portray it as a restatement of British Common Law principles: At first sight this authoritative document presents a sharp contrast with the store of traditions and precedents that make up the unwritten Constitution of Britain. Yet behind it lay no revolutionary theory. It was based not upon the challenging writings of the French philosophers which were soon to set Europe ablaze, but on Old English doctrine, freshly formulated to meet an urgent American need. The Constitution was a reaffirmation of faith in the principles painfully evolved over the centuries by the English-speaking peoples. It enshrined long-standing English ideas of justice and liberty, henceforth to be regarded on the other side of the Atlantic as basically American. A History of the English-Speaking Peoples is a four-volume history of Britain and its former colonies and possessions throughout the world, written by Winston Churchill, covering the period from Caesar's invasions of Britain (55 BC) to the end of the Second Boer War (1902). [1] It was started in 1937 and finally published 1956–1958, delayed several times by war and his work on other texts. The volumes have been abridged into a single-volume, concise edition. August 13, 2022: A History of the English-Speaking Peoples, Volume 1, The Birth of Britain, by Winston S. Churchill (Dodd, Mead & Company, New York, 1956) When I came across words that meant nothing to me, not in my vocabulary, I had to stop, and then look up on my Kindle or computer.

Firstly, he's a whig historian. For Churchill The History of the English-Speaking Peoples is a story of unstoppable progress towards a set destiny of world hegemony and endless greatness. He makes much of habeus corpus, of the spreading out of enlightened British folk across the globe, he recites all of the various constitutional debates that led to English Common Law, and he lovingly charts the growth of Parliament as an institution. It is very triumphalist, and that will bring him censure from more modern historians who aren't so keen on shouting about the British war record and the fact we haven't had a revolution since 1688 and that Anglos have controlled the world since at least 1815. I think they're too pessimistic. It's certainly true that not everything the British have done is worthy of praise, and making excuses for some of the Empire's handiwork is downright shameful to attempt, but I don't think it can be seriously denied that the world is a better place for it, in the end, and the new-founded countries Britain left behind are certainly a proud legacy. Churchill, refreshingly, knows this. One third of the last volume was devoted to the military minutiae of the American Civil War. Social history, the agricultural revolution, and the industrial revolution hardly get a mention. [4] Political opponent Clement Attlee suggested the work should have been titled "Things in history that interested me." [5] and who now preserve, nourish, and develop them in their own ways." (Preface to Volume I of A History of the English-Speaking Peoples)My previous study has concentrated on the religious history of Britain ("church history" in seminary, and personal reading since then). I was a bit surprised at what seemed a minimal treatment of that critical and defining aspect of Britain's history. Guys, applaud, please, I'm getting out of my comfort zone, mysteries. All with Jeff's Yoak's encouragement, and I'll say thanks, Jeff, when I finish. Maybe. Sir Winston S. Churchill, who himself made history as Prime Minister of Great Britain twice, twice (1940–45 and 1951–55.) He began the book in 1939 and delivered the book prior to the outbreak of WWII to his publisher with about half a million words. This book was finally published in 1956. However, this book, A History of the English-Speaking Peoples, Volume I, The Birth of Britain, was the one I read and finally, finished. As with the U.S. first edition, there was also a Canadian Book-of-the-Month Club issue similar in style to the Canadian first edition, but bound instead in red cloth with blue spine panels and no head and foot bands. October 19, 2022: A History of the English-Speaking Peoples, Volume 3, The Age of Revolution, by Winston S. Churchill (Dodd, Mead & Company, Inc., New York, 1957)

I do not normally choose to read a condensed version of any book, but this is the one that happened to show up in my personal library, so ... Anyway, some of my impressions might not apply perfectly (or at all) to the full version. Access-restricted-item true Addeddate 2021-06-02 14:00:49 Associated-names Lessing J. Rosenwald Collection (Library of Congress) Boxid IA40098616 Camera Sony Alpha-A6300 (Control) Collection_set printdisabled External-identifier Given this history was written by a man who was a Anlgo chauvinist and full-throttle behind Britain's ambition on the world stage, the tale stops short of any self-criticism regarding Britain's colonial ambitions. Thus, this book's narrative needs to be taken in context with other works. For instance, there is no reflection on the rightness of what Great Britain's leaders did to grasp control in South Africa and India, for instance. He includes brief histories of Canada and Australia as well, and his glossing over the treatment of both lands' original inhabitants is callous to the extreme. On the other hand, I admit some of the things he wrote did make my modern eyes wince. The warning signs were there from the very second chapter, the account of the Bouadicea rebellion: "No less", according to Tactitus, "than seventy thousand citizens and allies were slain" in these three cities. . . . This is probably the most horrible episode which our Island has known. We see the crude and corrupt beginnings of a higher civilisation blotted out by the ferocious uprisings of the native tribes. Still, it is the primary right of men to die and kill for the land they live in, and to punish with exceptional severity all members of their own race who have warmed their hands at the invaders' hearth. Well, that's nice. It really says it all, doesn't it? The stupid British natives were too bloodthirsty and resisted the loving embrace of the civilised empire come to invade them, but it's OK because everyone has the right to butcher race traitors. Of the Tasmanian Genocide off Australia he mentions only that the native tribes met a "tragic" end and "were extinct by the beginning of the twentieth century". He can't quite bring himself to say they were exterminated by the British in the only successful genocide in history. In fact, of the entire period of colonialism he remarks: The nineteenth century was a period of purposeful, progressive, enlightened, tolerant civilisation. The stir in the world arising from the French Revolution, added to the Industrial Revolution unleashed by the steam-engine and many key-inventions, led inexorably to the democratic age. . . . At the same time the new British Empire or Commonwealth of Nations was based upon government by consent, and the voluntary association of autonomous states under the Crown. Suffice to say, the fourth volume in particular is stuffed full of some -- how can I put it? -- outdated opinions. As a final example, when discussing early trade unionism in America Churchill notes that the organisations attracted "a host of fanatics ranging from suffragists to single-taxers". 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

About the contributors

Fortunately for me I read about ten books on Henry VII, his six wives and society of the period, so the ending of this book, takes me up to very close to that period of British history. This first of four volumes of Churchill’s long history of the English (up until the mid-twentieth century) is essentially a tale of murder and mayhem. The characters may have worn fancy clothing and lived in castles and other mansions, but their behavior, as reported here (perhaps inadvertently), was more suggestive of primitive tribalism.