'The Celtic Revolution' shows how the Celtic Empire ruled the world from Spain to Egypt for 2000 years in a way that shaped the way we think and live today.
Simon Young was awarded a starred First in Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic from Cambridge University, as well as the Chadwick Prize for Celtic studies. Since then he has lived in Spain, Ireland and Italy. The author of many academic articles, he has also written about the Dark Ages for History Today, the Spectator, and the Guardian.
A mostly readable and entertaining book which has nonetheless mostly slipped my mind since I read it. The main thesis was that the Celtic tradition — which it has to work to define, given the arguments about such a thing existing at all — drove a surprising amount of the development of modern society. I seem to recall there was something that annoyed me, and I think it was in the section on King Arthur. Just… that whole condescending attitude about the Welsh hope for and belief in the return of Arthur.
While I like that it acknowledges a Celtic identity and influence, I’m not sure I’d recommend this book. There have been some really fascinating books about the Celtic culture, even Nora Chadwick’s outdated The Celts, which I’d recommend more.
Let me start of by saying I love history, the older the better! And while this book was about a subject extremely fascinating to me, it was a chore to get through. I found Simon Young's writing style extremely confusing. The writing is so relaxed, it is like a friend recapping a movie to you; they jump around a bit with details, are unclear who is attacking whom, and throwing backstories in the middle of a battle. Just confusing and frustrating. For some great history, go listent to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts.
The main thesis of this book is an attempt to explain, tour de force style, the history of the celts through to the modern day. In reality there are black spots and bumps to deal with and we never really discuss the 'modern celt' beyond a few sections towards the end. Much more time is devoted to the early and La Tene celts (rightly) and then two long sections about Irish exile monks and Arthurian origins and prophecy.
Its fair to say then this tour de force involves a lot of cherry picking and a lot of connecting of loose ends. It dwells on the histories we actually know about and in a way thats the most interesting thing about it, i.e. that we're somewhat channelled to this way of telling the history because thats what you get when you connect the dots.
I didn't find that entirely satisfactory, but as a popular history book I found it a good wheeze and a good grounding in a high level celtic narrative. I read it following on from Barry Cunliffe's very short history, which I found duller but probably more useful. I think if you're looking for a quick precis and an easy read to get started on the celts, you could do worse than this book.
Knowing very little about Celtic history, I enjoyed the content of this book. I am not sure if the division of eras (Celts as warriors, Celts as monks, and then Celts as the origin of Arthurian legend) is how other scholars would characterise the history. Indeed, I do not know enough about Celtic history to indicate the accuracy of the subject matter - perhaps something to investigate another day.