![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
chickenfeetI recently got hold of a copy of David Carpenter's The Struggle for Mastery, the volume of the new Penguin History of Britain that deals with 1066-1284. I really like it. It was comprehensive in the sense that it gave good coverage to social and economic as well as political issues. More particularly it treated the British Isles in a holistic way (well maybe a bit light on those parts of Scotland beyond the sway of the King of the Scots but generally pretty good). I finished it feeling I had a much better grip on a period I've never really quite understood. Anyhow, I liked the Carpenter enough to want to explore the rest of the series. I'm not sure how many of the volumes have yet made it into paperback, or even print, in the UK, but there were only a few available here so my choice was limited. Susan Brigden's New Worlds, Lost Worlds covering 1485-1603 had pretty stellar reviews. Besides I used to play rugby with her brother when we were at school together so I went with that one.
I had a really mixed reaction. On the one hand it's a really excellent book in its own right. It's particularly strong on the intellectual history of English protestantism and it has very comprehensive coverage of Irish issues. On the other hand it scarcely touches on economic issues and, worse, all but ignores Scotland except insofar as developments in Scotland impinged directly on England. Now I appreciate that Brigden wrote the book she promised to write in her preface, and a fine job she made of it, but what was the series editor (David Cannadine) up to? Either the series is a history of Britain or it's not! And if it is, how on earth can the series editor allow an omission as crucial as the reformation of the Scottish church? I'm frankly flabbergasted.
I have to say I'm wary now about the other volumes. The reviews haven't all been stellar and if there is no consistency in coverage and style, what's the point?
I had a really mixed reaction. On the one hand it's a really excellent book in its own right. It's particularly strong on the intellectual history of English protestantism and it has very comprehensive coverage of Irish issues. On the other hand it scarcely touches on economic issues and, worse, all but ignores Scotland except insofar as developments in Scotland impinged directly on England. Now I appreciate that Brigden wrote the book she promised to write in her preface, and a fine job she made of it, but what was the series editor (David Cannadine) up to? Either the series is a history of Britain or it's not! And if it is, how on earth can the series editor allow an omission as crucial as the reformation of the Scottish church? I'm frankly flabbergasted.
I have to say I'm wary now about the other volumes. The reviews haven't all been stellar and if there is no consistency in coverage and style, what's the point?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-03-09 06:13 pm (UTC)For a second there I thought it was a book about the history of Britain from the viewpoint of a penguin. Or maybe the history of penguins in Britain.
I think that might be a rather different book though.
no subject
Date: 2006-03-09 06:21 pm (UTC)