25 of 26 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Erudite and highly readable survey of later Georgian England, September 2, 2000
This review is from: A Polite and Commercial People: England 1727-1783 (New Oxford History of England) (Paperback)
First, a few words to place my remarks in context. I'm not a historian (I'm an economist), but I've long enjoyed reading general histories. Indeed, I've read the entire 15-volume Oxford History of England, a series now being replaced by the New Oxford History of which, I believe, "A Polite and Commercial People" is the first volume.
Not being a specialist, I'm in no position to comment on whether or not Langford's book is representative of recent thought on the period. He'll sometimes set out a position with which he disagrees, and then explain his reasons for coming to a different conclusion. In these instances his may or may not be a minority view, but at least he has set out the opposing position with what seems like clarity and fairness. I'm not sure I'd want him to do much more in what is, after all, a book for the general reader.
The "general reader" of old was, of course, notoriously well-read, and at times Langford takes advantage of this assumption. I don't actually have the book handy just now and so can't check chapter and verse, but I think it helps if, for example, you've already heard of Maria Teresa. The author doesn't have time to explain, and a few times I found myself having to make an educated guess but, in 725 pages, this happened quite rarely (a tribute to the author's organisational skill, not to my own reading).
Traditional political history takes up only three chapters which Langford spreads throughout the book covering, respectively, from the accession of George II to the fall of Walpole, to the end of the Seven Years War, and to end of the American War of Independence. I've no idea how innovative or otherwise Langford was in choosing categories for his other chapters, but he manages to make concepts such as "politeness" interesting and coherent enough to serve as their themes. It strikes me that, when political history first began to fall out of favour, it was replaced by rather dull stuff that focussed excessively on, say, education or the poor law. Yes, these topics are dealt with thoroughly in Langford's book but, somehow, he manages to organise and interpret his material in such a way that it has all the narrative virtues we old-fashioned "general readers" used to like in those political histories. (I know that must sound naive to a historian, but these reviews are meant to be helpful to others who might share my failings. Another naive confession: I can't resist drawing a great many parallels between the period Langford describes and, on the other hand, our own times.)
Throughout, the author's style is elegant, varied and energetic without ever seeming affected in the slightest. It is direct, but capable of considerable nuance. I'm a surprisingly slow reader for a person who reads so much, but this really was [cliche alert] a page-turner [/cliche].
Now that I've finished it, I still might not be able to pass a pop quiz on the Gordon Riots, say, or the War of Jenkins Ear. Still, I've been entertained and--if I can put it like this--enlightened by this first volume in the new Oxford series. Bring on fourteen more!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
An outstanding survey of 18th century England, January 20, 2008
In 1934, Oxford University Press published the first volume in the "Oxford History of England" series. As subsequent volumes came out over the next 31 years, they came to serve as indispensable surveys of English history, the natural starting point for anyone interested in England's past and a powerful force influencing our understanding of it. Yet as the state of historical scholarship evolved, gradually the volumes became outdated in terms of their presentation and interpretation of the past. In response, Oxford launched a "New Oxford History of England" series, of which Paul Langford's book was the inaugural title.
In it Langford presents a wide-ranging history of England from the accession of George II to the loss of the American colonies. He presents the era as a chaotic one, with the country still coping with the consequences of the Glorious Revolution, which let a deep impression upon politics and society. Though the aristocracy remained the dominant group in many respects, the author sees the middle class increasingly coming to play a vital role in English life as the century progressed. In an age of commercial prosperity, their"polite" values increasingly contested with those of the upper class, setting the stage for their gradual assertion as the dominant segment of society in the century that followed.
Langford's book is an outstanding survey of Hanoverian England, one that draws upon an impressive range of scholarship. Though his main focus is on the politics and society of the period, very little escapes his coverage, as economics, art, and literature also are addressed within its pages. Though he presumes that his readers possess some prior knowledge of his subject (the mini biographies of people offered in footnotes in the old series are absent here), his analysis and arguments are clear and forcefully made. The understanding he provides of the era makes his book a critical resource on the subject, and a worthy successor volume to those from the venerable old series.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
3.0 out of 5 stars
A little above my head, May 24, 2011
This review is from: A Polite and Commercial People: England 1727-1783 (New Oxford History of England) (Paperback)
This book states that it is intended for the general reader, but from its first pages, it uses terms unfamiliar to me, that I have to guess from the context. Walpole's administration is described as 'the Robinocracy'. What is this intended to mean? Was it a contemporary term? Was 'Robin' based on Walpole's first name? Did it compare Walpole with Robin Hood? Ironically? Did it have no direct connexion with Walpole the person, and describe some aspect of a period that just happened to coincide more or less with his administration? It would be nice to know.
I think this book illustrates the value of Amazon: a traditional professional reviewer would almost by definition also be a scholar of the period, and the term might be so familiar to him that he would never notice it.
I am reasonably well-read, with a considerable interest in English history, but would never have read this book except that I inherited it from my father. He was an Oxford graduate whose main interest in later life was history, but even he gave up after buying the first few books in the new series.
I do get the impression that if I had started off knowing more about the period, the book would have been more interesting. However, I can't say I'm willing to go get a history degree just to enjoy rereading it, well-organized and information-dense as it seems to be.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
