About book Great Tales From English History, Vol 1 (2004)
TL;DR: Lacey’s work is a fun romp through history, though I had are a few minor problems with his choices.When interpreting a literary work, the reader sometimes must make a distinction between what the author intends and what the author achieves. I think that distinction should be made for Lacey’s work too, as I do not think that they are the same thing.Let me start by talking about what I believe Lacey intended to achieve in his work. I think he wished to set out great, captivating stories from British history. He carefully picked each one for its interest for the general reader because he wanted to ensure that almost any person would find these tales interesting. His choices were made with a fair eye to his project, and I think he accomplished his goal as an author.However, as readers we are still allowed to look beyond the project and see what else Lacey accidentally achieved. In no particular order, here are the consequences of Lacey’s choices:-His work takes on the tone and scope of an informal history of the British Isles. Since he starts at the early age of 7150AD and then progresses through stories that cover the major events of British history, and since he does a fair job of tying those stories together across the ages (the reference notes in the text make it easy to pick up and read any random entry while still getting a pretty good cross-referencing), his work isn’t just Tales from English History it is, rather, the tale of English history. To put that a bit more clearly: If you want to read about the history of England but need a nice starting point to get the overall scope, this is a great volume for you. While the history isn’t by any stretch of the imagination complete (this is simply not his project), it is a nice starting point.-His work also does a fair job of balancing tales that speak to the brave men and women from English history. As a father of a daughter, I always enjoy finding true tales of brave heroines I can share with her; these serve as great role models for her, and these brave ladies demonstrate what is possible. Lacey chooses interesting tales of women who put themselves in danger for their beliefs. This includes obvious choices like Elizabeth I and Queen Victoria, but Lacey also discussed less obvious heroines like Boadicea, Fanny Burney (whose tale of an encounter with cancer is harrowing), Mary Wollstonecraft, and Emily Davison. For a general reader with no knowledge of these women, these tales are welcome additions to the usual male-dominated stories many of us grew up with. In other words, share this book with your daughters.-Now I want to touch on a bit of criticism. As you have seen, Lacey has done a great job of accomplishing certain feats in his book. I must note that maintaining a classless narrative is not one of them. Lacey’s stories all seem to be about the rich, the powerful, or the tragic. While I understand as an intelligent reader that 1) He had limited space and had to make decisions about what to include and leave out; 2) These are the people who shaped English history the most—while I understand both points, I don’t know if I agree with every choice. For instance, there is no story about the hero-explorer John Smith. Smith was crucial to the foundation of the Jamestown colony, and his adventures are legendary. Lacey does include the story of Pocahontas (or at least a strong mention of her in a story), even though she was native to the New World. To put her story in the book but to leave Smith’s out sounds, to me, a bit like the class-bias that Smith himself faced in his lifetime. Likewise, when discussing the Crystal Palace Lacey concentrates upon the queen and her husband rather than Paxton, the architect (who receives a passing comment), and his extraordinary ascension to the position. I will concede that I have heard Lacey has other books in this series and that perhaps this book intended to cover just the major authors/works, but this still stood out to me as a glaring, strange choice for the book.-The book also reads well as informal etymology if you are interested in the subject. Keep in mind that this is not the focus of the book, but there are some nuggets in its pages.-Finally I want to note what I hope is obvious to any potential reader of this book: The stories are short on detail. While reading a few I felt Lacey had missed too much of the real meat of the story. Again, I acknowledge the space constraints at work, but the feeling still tugged at me throughout the book. For anyone who reads a great deal of historical accounts, expect to find at least one story in Lacey’s book that will have you saying, “Yeaaahhhhh…but there’s more to it than that.”On the whole, I have to heartily recommend Lacey’s work. If you enjoy reading about history, or if you want to just read about English history in short bursts that are easy to digest, this book is for you.
Some highlights:* Why do so few post-ice-age ancient human remains survive? Some archaeologists say it’s because relatives ate them.* The Greek navigator Pytheas “almost certainly sailed around the [British] islands and was the first to describe the shape of Britain as a wonky triangle.”* Early feminist hero: King Alfred’s daughter Aethelflaed, Lady of the Mercians, who built ten walled communities and captured Derby and Leicester from the Vikings. Maybe celebrities will start naming their girl babies Aelthelflaed?* King Ethelred, commonly known today as “the Unready,” was actually nicknamed “the Ill-Advised.” Both descriptions fit.* Elmer the Flying Monk? How have I lived this long without ever before finding out about Elmer the Flying Monk? http://www.robertlacey.com/sample-cha...* Folk hero Hereward the Wake had a sword nicknamed Brainbiter.* The White Ship “was the Titanic of the Middle Ages.” England’s crown prince and his half-brother and half-sister died after the ship hit a rock on its maiden voyage. Only one person survived the wreck.* Henry I founded England’s first zoo. Its inhabitants included lions, leopards, and Henry’s favorite--a porcupine.* “If Thomas Becket had been wearing silk underwear when he died, he might never have become a martyr.”* Richard the Lionheart spoke no English. His native language was French.* Henry II nicknamed his youngest son John Lackland because there were no properties for him to inherit. Eventually John became king, and his military record was so poor that his subjects nicknamed him Softsword.* John was also “England’s first king to be recorded as owning a dressing-gown” [bathrobe].* Edward II’s hobbies included swimming, rowing, thatching, building walls, and hammering away at an anvil like a blacksmith. People thought this was weird and inappropriate; after all, a king has people to row for him.I enjoyed the first volume of this so much that I just bought the three-volume version and sent it to my parents. I’m pretty sure this was intended to be for children or young adults, but the U.S. version seems to be marketed to adults. At first I thought this was because most American adults don’t know that much about English history. Then I realized that it’s because most American parents don’t want their children reading about rape, homosexuality, hemorrhoids, beheadings, anal fistulas, and death by meat skewer up the [ahem]. (My parents will read all that quite cheerfully.)
Do You like book Great Tales From English History, Vol 1 (2004)?
Delightful! A cornucopia of interesting and surprising tales from English history in its early viking days to the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth II. What is so fantastic about this book is that is not merely a collection of facts and retelling of events. Each chapter discloses a particular period in British history and reads like a small short story. The author should also be credited for his storytelling style: he writes each piece with whimsy, humor, and precision. I can't say that I was ever lost or confused while reading this book. And I must emphasize that these tales are "SHORT": every chapter is only a couple of pages and never feels either too brief or too heavy, and in the end the pages and stories just fly by. I was only ever bogged down by a handful of stories and ended up skimming through- Robert Lacey does tend to get hung up on politics and wars- but because the book more or less follows British history in chronological order, you do need to at least skim each of the chapters before moving onto the next, otherwise the next tale might not make a whole lot of sense.As Lacey describes in his opening pages, so much of history is just a retelling and reshaping of true events. The tough part is to get as close to the first hand sources as you possibly can in order to get the most truth. Many events and tales in English history- King Arthur and Robin Hood, for example- started off as myths that eventually got accepted as historical fact, and Lacey sets out to debunk a few of these myths by going back to original sources. And his list of sources in the back of the book is awe inspiring! Many of the documents are actually available to the public and online, so you can read more about each tale to your heart's content. Lacey also concludes that history is imperfect and ever changing: "There may be such a thing as pure, true history- what actually, really, definitely happened in the past- but it is unknowable. We can only hope to get somewhere close. The history that we have to make do with is the story that historians choose to tell us, pieced together and filtered through every handler's value system" and he is certainly right on about this when you look at recent events and discoveries. In fact, in the case of Richard III, Lacey will have to adhere to his own statement and republish with updated information. In the book, he claims that the physical appearance of King Richard III as a hunchback was largely made up to portray him as a villain to the public. He even cites modern researchers who found that Richard's "hump" was added to his portraits years after his death and that his body was thrown in the river and never buried under the Greyfriars Church. However, since the discovery of Richard III's remains in the last couple years, we now know for a fact that he did have a curved spine and he was indeed buried where early historians had originally claimed. History buffs, especially those interested in British history, will find this book a great companion to what they already knew- or didn't know- about how England came to be. I also loved Lacey's descriptions of how the English language has developed and changed over time due to the social, political, and economic strife the country has experienced for the last 1000 years or so. It's not necessarily a book of facts, but you will learn the origins of common vocabulary we use everyday, which I find fascinating. I'm sure it was tough for Lacey to choose which tales to include in this book since he was covering such an enormous time period and this might be the reason why such well-known and beloved British heros and heroines only get passing mention- or no mention at all- in the book: sadly, Shakespeare, Jane Austen, the Bronte sisters, Mungo Park, and Charles Dickens didn't make the cut to garner much attention in this volume. But that small nitpicky complaint aside, this is a fantastic book and I highly recommend for any lover of history.
—Michelle
Though this book is nothing more than a short, concise overview of English history from the prehistory until 1381 AD, I still had a blast reading this. Sure, the history isn't really spoken of in an in-depth way, but then I'm sure you shouldn't expect that if you see the magnitude of events that Lacey tries to cover in a relatively thin book!It's not a dry book. It's funny, full of interesting little details. There's something here for everyone. As an orientation for English history, it is very effective. And, should you find a topic that particularly catches your fancy, Mr. Lacey was so kind as to provide us with an extensive bibliography.Quite an interesting book to read, and definitely one to recommend!
—Sandra
I highly recommend this book, it is a very interesting way to learn about history. I really liked how it connected what was happening in a certain time to other things at different times (so things in the past that led to the event or things that happened because of the event or things we still do or say because of the event).There were a few things I wished it would have gone into more, or at all, but I was pleased for the most part.There were a few parts, mainly about the American war, that I didn't think were represented entirely correctly, like a single point was emphasized as almost the entire reason for an event occuring. But I am a US citizen so that could have impacted my view in different ways than others.
—Jenalyn
