What do you think?
Rate this book
Scotland: A History from Earliest Times
From the Ice Age to the recent Scottish Referendum, historian and author Alistair Moffat explores the history of the Scottish nation. As well as focusing on key moments in the nation’s history such as the Battle of Bannockburn and the Jacobite Risings, Moffat also features other episodes in history that are perhaps less well documented. From prehistoric timber halls to inventions and literature, Moffat’s tale explores the drama of battle, change, loss and invention interspersed with the lives of ordinary Scottish folk, the men and women who defined a nation.
853 pages, Kindle Edition
First published September 17, 2015
937 people are currently reading
1287 people want to read
About the author
Alistair Moffat
59 books214 followersAlistair Moffat is an award winning writer, historian and former Director of the Edinburgh Festival Fringe and Director of Programmes at Scottish Television.
Moffat was educated at the University of St Andrews, graduating in 1972 with a degree in Medieval History. He is the founder of the Borders Book Festival and Co-Chairman of The Great Tapestry of Scotland.
Moffat was educated at the University of St Andrews, graduating in 1972 with a degree in Medieval History. He is the founder of the Borders Book Festival and Co-Chairman of The Great Tapestry of Scotland.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 69 reviews
February 4, 2022
Page 28. Moffat claimed Cunobelinus, King of the Catuvellauni was defeated by the Romans in 43CE. No... he was already dead. He died in 41CE. His sons, Togodumnus and Caratacus, were defeated by the Romans.
I don't trust history books that are so horrifically historically accurate, and so early on! It was already quite badly written, but that really shocked me. I turned to Goodreads to see if anyone else commented on this, and I saw a review by David Kenvyn listed reels upon reels of historical inaccuracies in this book -n read that review here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
That's HORRIFYING. How can a book be published with so many blatant inaccuracies?
Why should I read a book on such an important topic that hasn't been thoroughly researched? Moffat has zero academic or historic credibility in my eyes, and I wouldn't read such lazy work. To get such a basic date wrong so early on in the book is sheer laziness, but Kenvyn's review shows the depth of Moffat's laziness and that's unforgivable. Scotland's history deserves better than half-arsed historical ramblings (which aren't even well written. It's droll and confusing. There's no structure, and it's clear why he made so many mistakes throughout the book). Such laziness is disrespectful not only to readers but to Scotland and its history.
I don't trust history books that are so horrifically historically accurate, and so early on! It was already quite badly written, but that really shocked me. I turned to Goodreads to see if anyone else commented on this, and I saw a review by David Kenvyn listed reels upon reels of historical inaccuracies in this book -n read that review here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
That's HORRIFYING. How can a book be published with so many blatant inaccuracies?
Why should I read a book on such an important topic that hasn't been thoroughly researched? Moffat has zero academic or historic credibility in my eyes, and I wouldn't read such lazy work. To get such a basic date wrong so early on in the book is sheer laziness, but Kenvyn's review shows the depth of Moffat's laziness and that's unforgivable. Scotland's history deserves better than half-arsed historical ramblings (which aren't even well written. It's droll and confusing. There's no structure, and it's clear why he made so many mistakes throughout the book). Such laziness is disrespectful not only to readers but to Scotland and its history.
February 26, 2018
The problem for a book like this is that it has to be accurate. This one is not. This is probably more to do with the proof-reading and the fact checking than with the author. But it leaves the reader with a difficulty. If you know that some of the facts are inaccurate, you do not know that you can trust any of the others.
To give some examples: Cunobelinus, King of the Catuvellauni, was not defeated by the Romans in 43AD (p28) . He was dead. It was his sons, Togodumnus and Caratacus, who were defeated. It was the disturbances after the death of Cunobelinus that gave the Emperor Claudius his excuse for an invasion. Mary, Queen of Scots, did not marry Francis, the Dauphin of France in 1588 (p210). This would have been difficult given that Mary had been executed at Fotheringhay the previous year, and Francis had been dead for 27 years. What is more annoying is that the correct date for Mary’s widowhood, 1561, is given five pages later. There is also a whole passage about the Romans introducing rabbits, but that they did not reach Scotland until the 12th or 13th centuries. This requires us to believe that it took a thousand years to breed in sufficient numbers to reach Scotland when they breed like, er, rabbits. I was always taught that it was the Normans who introduced rabbits to England at the end of the eleventh century, which means that it took them 100 years or so to reach Scotland
[To be fair, the bones of a rabbit were found at a Roman site in Norfolk in 2014, and it was probably imported alive before it was eaten, but there is no evidence, according to online encyclopaedias, that rabbits were native to the British Isles before being imported by the Normans].
This kind of thing is just sloppy and an embarrassment. It is also a great pity, ranging s it does from the prehistory of what became Scotland through to the last UK election, which followed the Scottish referendum of 2014. First, Moffat demonstrates how the geography shaped Scotland, not just through the firths, the mountains and the sea lochs but through the hills and valleys that became arable land and pasture. It was also the geography, through the creation of coal seams millenia ago, that allowed the industrialisation of the nineteenth century. But it was the people who created what became Scotland and most of them, as is the way of history, have passed unrecorded. It was ordinary people, men and women, who went about their daily lives, that created the country that we now know as Scotland.
Moffat makes the point that there were many possibilities for the historical development of Scotland, and that the country that has emerged was not predetermined. For instance, following their victory over the Northumbrians at Dunnichen Hill, otherwise called Nechtansmere, in 685 the Picts were the dominant force. There was no reason for that not to continue. We do not know why the Pictish kingdom disappeared, but it did and even the language has been lost. The dominant force became the Gaels, who had penetrated the Western Lochs from Ulster a mere 100 or so years before the battle at Dunnichen Hill.
There was no reason for English to become the dominant language. The decisive moment here was when, in 1018, Malcolm II defeated an English army at the Battle of Carham and annexed the Lothians. This introduced an English-speaking population into the realm of Scotland where previously there had been none. Gaelic remained for centuries the language of the majority in Scotland, but at some point English became the language of government. It is also the case that there were other languages spoken in Scotland. The very name Strathclyde reeks of the Welsh (Ystrad Clwyd, which means grey valley). Edinburgh is very descriptive of the castle – the fort in the gorse bushes. And, as Moffat points out, the name William Wallace means William the Welshman.
A latecomer to this linguistic struggle for Scotland was Norse, which was spoken in the Northern and Western Isles following the Viking invasions, and probably along the west coast of Scotland. The Northern Isles did not belong to Scotland until they became the dowry of Margaret of Denmark, when she married King James III. The Western Isles from the time of Somerled to the fifteenth century were effectively an independent princedom.
So what were the decisive moments, those that created the Scotland that we live in today. Moffat indicates that there were five.
The first was possibly the seizing of the throne by Malcolm III, defeating and killing his two predecessors, Macbeth and Lulach, in battle. Malcolm III had been exiled at the court of Edward the Confessor and his wife was Margaret, an English princess, who fled to Scotland to escape the Norman Conquest. Margaret was regarded by the clergy as a great civilising influence in Scotland, and has been canonised. Malcolm III was killed at the Battle of Alnwick. In the subsequent power struggle his son, David, emerged as King of Scots. David was also Earl of Huntingdon, and so began the ties that wound England and Scotland together. David invited Norman knights into Scotland and granted lands to the Balliols, the Comyns and the Bruces who would play a significant role in Scottish history. It was certainly during the rule of the Canmore kings that Gaelic receded into the background and English took over. Moffat guides us through this complicated history with a deft touch. He does not let the intricacies of this story’s development confuse the reader. That is a remarkable achievement.
The second decisive moment was when Alexander III rode off a cliff in the dark because of his desire to visit his new wife. He left no direct heir. The throne was disputed between Balliols and Bruces and a host of others. The nobles of Scotland turned to Edward I of England to preside over the decision-making process. Edward insisted that he was the overlord of Scotland and insisted that John Balliol, the winning candidate, paid fealty to him. Balliol soon found himself in dispute with Edward I, and so began the Scottish War of Independence which ended with the victory of Robert I (the Bruce) at Bannockburn in 1314. What followed was nearly 300 years of guerrilla warfare along the borders. This was the age of the “Auld Alliance” between Scotland and France, both at war with England. This was the age of the Border Reivers, immortalised in the Border Ballads collected by Sir Walter Scott. There were attempts to end this warfare. Henry VII married his daughter, Margaret Tudor, to James IV of Scotland and the two kings signed a “Perpetual Peace”. This did not last beyond the death of Henry VII, and it was not long before Henry VIII and James IV were at war, following Henry VIII’s invasion of France. James IV invaded England and was killed at the Battle of Flodden in 1513, along with most of his nobility. Peace was only assured when Margaret Tudor’s great-grandson, James VI of Scotland became James I of England, following the death of his childless cousin, Elizabeth I.
The third decisive moment was the Reformation. Lowland Scotland became Protestant. It was the Calvinist insistence that there should be a school in every parish, so that children could learn to read the Bible for themselves, that transformed Scotland. The Scots became one of the best educated people in Europe. This led to the Scottish Enlightenment, and the diverse careers of Adam Smith, David Hume, James Watt and Robert Burns amongst many others. It also led to Scots being hired by the East India Company to run the Empire that was acquired after the Battle of Plassey in 1757, and their playing of a significant role in the development of the British Empire as soldiers, officials and traders. One of the things that Moffat could not mention, because the research was published after this book, is that Scots were over-represented amongst those compensated for the abolition of slavery.
This leads on to the fourth significant factor, which was the Act of Union of 1707. Without this, Scots would not have been allowed to work or trade or settle in the English colonies. It was through trade in sugar and tobacco that Glasgow rose to prosperity, and of course these two commodities depended on slave labour for their production. The act of Union has determined the way that Scotland is governed as part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland until now. There was a referendum on Scottish Independence in 2014, but it was lost. The debate about independence, however, is ongoing and it is here that Moffat ends his account of the development of Scotland.
There is one factor that cannot be ignored and which Moffat covers in some detail, and it is the extermination of the Gaelic language and therefore of Gaelic culture. There are no less than 60,000 people who speak the language in Scotland, and they are dying off. This is because the Gaels generally backed the wrong side in the religious and constitutional struggles of the seventeenth century, and they continued to back the House of Stuart even after it had been deposed in both England and Scotland. James VII and II was deposed, because he was a Catholic, in both countries. It is not true that Scotland was Jacobite. It was John Dalrymple, the Master of Stair, who ordered the Massacre of Glencoe, admittedly on instruction from William III. The Massacre was carried out by Scottish troops under the command of Campbell of Glenlyon. It was Scottish troops who fought against the Jacobites at Killiecrankie and Sheriffmuir.
It was Bonnie Prince Charlie who sealed the fate of the Gael. The scare of the 1745 rebellion which ended at Culloden determined the government that the clans should be disarmed and destroyed. There was legislation that set about to do this, and the nobility including the Highland chiefs set about the clearing of the population from the land so that they could profit from the introduction of sheep farming. The Clearnaces were a bloody and terrible chapter in Scottish history. Whole communities were uprooted in the “dance called America” as they were driven off the land and forced into emigration. Thousands moved to the lowlands, and thousands more to Canada and other colonies.
Moffat guides us through all this history with a deftness that is admirable. There are mistakes, such as claiming that the Duke of Cumberland was the brother of George II when he was his son. Or the claim that Thomas Muir was rescued by the Americans before he got to the Australian penal colony at Botany Bay. In fact, he escaped from Botany Bay on an American ship that happened to be passing. The Americans had made no organised attempt to rescue him.
The mistakes are unfortunate because theyt detract from the book. It is a remarkable sweep through thousands of years of Scottish history, and it does set out in a coherent way how Scotland became the nation that it is today, rather than one of the alternatives that were possible at various stages in its development.
To give some examples: Cunobelinus, King of the Catuvellauni, was not defeated by the Romans in 43AD (p28) . He was dead. It was his sons, Togodumnus and Caratacus, who were defeated. It was the disturbances after the death of Cunobelinus that gave the Emperor Claudius his excuse for an invasion. Mary, Queen of Scots, did not marry Francis, the Dauphin of France in 1588 (p210). This would have been difficult given that Mary had been executed at Fotheringhay the previous year, and Francis had been dead for 27 years. What is more annoying is that the correct date for Mary’s widowhood, 1561, is given five pages later. There is also a whole passage about the Romans introducing rabbits, but that they did not reach Scotland until the 12th or 13th centuries. This requires us to believe that it took a thousand years to breed in sufficient numbers to reach Scotland when they breed like, er, rabbits. I was always taught that it was the Normans who introduced rabbits to England at the end of the eleventh century, which means that it took them 100 years or so to reach Scotland
[To be fair, the bones of a rabbit were found at a Roman site in Norfolk in 2014, and it was probably imported alive before it was eaten, but there is no evidence, according to online encyclopaedias, that rabbits were native to the British Isles before being imported by the Normans].
This kind of thing is just sloppy and an embarrassment. It is also a great pity, ranging s it does from the prehistory of what became Scotland through to the last UK election, which followed the Scottish referendum of 2014. First, Moffat demonstrates how the geography shaped Scotland, not just through the firths, the mountains and the sea lochs but through the hills and valleys that became arable land and pasture. It was also the geography, through the creation of coal seams millenia ago, that allowed the industrialisation of the nineteenth century. But it was the people who created what became Scotland and most of them, as is the way of history, have passed unrecorded. It was ordinary people, men and women, who went about their daily lives, that created the country that we now know as Scotland.
Moffat makes the point that there were many possibilities for the historical development of Scotland, and that the country that has emerged was not predetermined. For instance, following their victory over the Northumbrians at Dunnichen Hill, otherwise called Nechtansmere, in 685 the Picts were the dominant force. There was no reason for that not to continue. We do not know why the Pictish kingdom disappeared, but it did and even the language has been lost. The dominant force became the Gaels, who had penetrated the Western Lochs from Ulster a mere 100 or so years before the battle at Dunnichen Hill.
There was no reason for English to become the dominant language. The decisive moment here was when, in 1018, Malcolm II defeated an English army at the Battle of Carham and annexed the Lothians. This introduced an English-speaking population into the realm of Scotland where previously there had been none. Gaelic remained for centuries the language of the majority in Scotland, but at some point English became the language of government. It is also the case that there were other languages spoken in Scotland. The very name Strathclyde reeks of the Welsh (Ystrad Clwyd, which means grey valley). Edinburgh is very descriptive of the castle – the fort in the gorse bushes. And, as Moffat points out, the name William Wallace means William the Welshman.
A latecomer to this linguistic struggle for Scotland was Norse, which was spoken in the Northern and Western Isles following the Viking invasions, and probably along the west coast of Scotland. The Northern Isles did not belong to Scotland until they became the dowry of Margaret of Denmark, when she married King James III. The Western Isles from the time of Somerled to the fifteenth century were effectively an independent princedom.
So what were the decisive moments, those that created the Scotland that we live in today. Moffat indicates that there were five.
The first was possibly the seizing of the throne by Malcolm III, defeating and killing his two predecessors, Macbeth and Lulach, in battle. Malcolm III had been exiled at the court of Edward the Confessor and his wife was Margaret, an English princess, who fled to Scotland to escape the Norman Conquest. Margaret was regarded by the clergy as a great civilising influence in Scotland, and has been canonised. Malcolm III was killed at the Battle of Alnwick. In the subsequent power struggle his son, David, emerged as King of Scots. David was also Earl of Huntingdon, and so began the ties that wound England and Scotland together. David invited Norman knights into Scotland and granted lands to the Balliols, the Comyns and the Bruces who would play a significant role in Scottish history. It was certainly during the rule of the Canmore kings that Gaelic receded into the background and English took over. Moffat guides us through this complicated history with a deft touch. He does not let the intricacies of this story’s development confuse the reader. That is a remarkable achievement.
The second decisive moment was when Alexander III rode off a cliff in the dark because of his desire to visit his new wife. He left no direct heir. The throne was disputed between Balliols and Bruces and a host of others. The nobles of Scotland turned to Edward I of England to preside over the decision-making process. Edward insisted that he was the overlord of Scotland and insisted that John Balliol, the winning candidate, paid fealty to him. Balliol soon found himself in dispute with Edward I, and so began the Scottish War of Independence which ended with the victory of Robert I (the Bruce) at Bannockburn in 1314. What followed was nearly 300 years of guerrilla warfare along the borders. This was the age of the “Auld Alliance” between Scotland and France, both at war with England. This was the age of the Border Reivers, immortalised in the Border Ballads collected by Sir Walter Scott. There were attempts to end this warfare. Henry VII married his daughter, Margaret Tudor, to James IV of Scotland and the two kings signed a “Perpetual Peace”. This did not last beyond the death of Henry VII, and it was not long before Henry VIII and James IV were at war, following Henry VIII’s invasion of France. James IV invaded England and was killed at the Battle of Flodden in 1513, along with most of his nobility. Peace was only assured when Margaret Tudor’s great-grandson, James VI of Scotland became James I of England, following the death of his childless cousin, Elizabeth I.
The third decisive moment was the Reformation. Lowland Scotland became Protestant. It was the Calvinist insistence that there should be a school in every parish, so that children could learn to read the Bible for themselves, that transformed Scotland. The Scots became one of the best educated people in Europe. This led to the Scottish Enlightenment, and the diverse careers of Adam Smith, David Hume, James Watt and Robert Burns amongst many others. It also led to Scots being hired by the East India Company to run the Empire that was acquired after the Battle of Plassey in 1757, and their playing of a significant role in the development of the British Empire as soldiers, officials and traders. One of the things that Moffat could not mention, because the research was published after this book, is that Scots were over-represented amongst those compensated for the abolition of slavery.
This leads on to the fourth significant factor, which was the Act of Union of 1707. Without this, Scots would not have been allowed to work or trade or settle in the English colonies. It was through trade in sugar and tobacco that Glasgow rose to prosperity, and of course these two commodities depended on slave labour for their production. The act of Union has determined the way that Scotland is governed as part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland until now. There was a referendum on Scottish Independence in 2014, but it was lost. The debate about independence, however, is ongoing and it is here that Moffat ends his account of the development of Scotland.
There is one factor that cannot be ignored and which Moffat covers in some detail, and it is the extermination of the Gaelic language and therefore of Gaelic culture. There are no less than 60,000 people who speak the language in Scotland, and they are dying off. This is because the Gaels generally backed the wrong side in the religious and constitutional struggles of the seventeenth century, and they continued to back the House of Stuart even after it had been deposed in both England and Scotland. James VII and II was deposed, because he was a Catholic, in both countries. It is not true that Scotland was Jacobite. It was John Dalrymple, the Master of Stair, who ordered the Massacre of Glencoe, admittedly on instruction from William III. The Massacre was carried out by Scottish troops under the command of Campbell of Glenlyon. It was Scottish troops who fought against the Jacobites at Killiecrankie and Sheriffmuir.
It was Bonnie Prince Charlie who sealed the fate of the Gael. The scare of the 1745 rebellion which ended at Culloden determined the government that the clans should be disarmed and destroyed. There was legislation that set about to do this, and the nobility including the Highland chiefs set about the clearing of the population from the land so that they could profit from the introduction of sheep farming. The Clearnaces were a bloody and terrible chapter in Scottish history. Whole communities were uprooted in the “dance called America” as they were driven off the land and forced into emigration. Thousands moved to the lowlands, and thousands more to Canada and other colonies.
Moffat guides us through all this history with a deftness that is admirable. There are mistakes, such as claiming that the Duke of Cumberland was the brother of George II when he was his son. Or the claim that Thomas Muir was rescued by the Americans before he got to the Australian penal colony at Botany Bay. In fact, he escaped from Botany Bay on an American ship that happened to be passing. The Americans had made no organised attempt to rescue him.
The mistakes are unfortunate because theyt detract from the book. It is a remarkable sweep through thousands of years of Scottish history, and it does set out in a coherent way how Scotland became the nation that it is today, rather than one of the alternatives that were possible at various stages in its development.
July 8, 2017
Another very detailed history of Scotland, clearly by a nationalistic Scot. Moffat has an eye for the broader frame and also looks at social, economical and cultural developments. In the last chapter he’s a bit too anecdotical (on sports and great television shows) and between the lines you can clearly remark his pro-independence stand. Great read, but I am a bit disappointed about the lack of synthesis.
January 5, 2024
DNF @ 30%
I think this book would be great for those who have some knowledge of Scotland's history. Unfortunately, the author quickly and briefly refers to names and events I had no clue what he was talking about, so much so, that I had to constantly google what I was reading. Also, the writing style is very linear and becomes quite boring after a while.
I think this book would be great for those who have some knowledge of Scotland's history. Unfortunately, the author quickly and briefly refers to names and events I had no clue what he was talking about, so much so, that I had to constantly google what I was reading. Also, the writing style is very linear and becomes quite boring after a while.
June 2, 2020
I’ve lived in Scotland for nearly four years, so it was about time I read an actual history book centred on the country. This one was chosen on my last-day-of-the-library panic-borrowing, as it was the most substantial volume of Scottish history on the shelf. I found it a bit challenging to get into, as the pre-history of Scotland (and Britain in general, admittedly) is fairly mysterious. There is limited archaeological evidence and a confusing tapestry of different languages. This poses a challenge for any popular history writing, but could perhaps have been explained more clearly here. I liked the conclusion of chapter four, though:
Once the narrative reached the end of the Middle Ages, it became easier to follow and thus more involving. Given the vast period that Moffat covers, events are often discussed briefly and pen portraits of personalities vaguely sketched. This makes it a useful introduction for people like me, who learned no Scottish history in school and have picked up only scraps from museums, historical novels, and histories of Britain that focus heavily on England. Now I finally have some idea of what the Highland Clearances and Jacobite Rebellion were, as well as the different religious context in Scotland. I also learned some entertaining little facts, for example that Mary Queen of Scots played golf. Likewise, it was pleasing to discover why Edinburgh’s Georgian New Town is elegantly rectilinear, but the roads to the East and West of it are anything but. (The answer: land ownership issues.) The material on changing class dynamics, the relationship between Highlands and Lowlands, and the constitutional relationship with England provided intriguing introductions to complicated issues.
The final chapters naturally reflect upon the political divergence between England and Scotland, which I definitely want to read more detailed analysis of. I appreciated Moffat’s tracing this back through the decades. ‘Scotland: A History From Earliest Times’ was published in 2015 and political divergence has only increased in the last five years. After the EU referendum and 2019 election, Scotland feels like a refuge of relative sanity when compared to England’s descent into poisonous xenophobic neo-nationalism. The great irony, of course, is that the SNP have ‘nationalist’ in their party name and the Conservatives do not. To stave off utter panic about the pandemic, I’m only paying attention to what the Scottish Government are doing and as far as possible pretending that the UK government doesn’t exist. Thus I found this a helpful lockdown read, as it provides some context for where I live. It caused me to reflect on whether I feel Scottish. I’d feel like an interloper if I claimed that, as my accent is very Southern. However, I don’t feel English either and Scotland is definitely my home. I have absolutely no intention of moving back to England and wish more of my family and friends would move to Scotland.
Despite the book's somewhat difficult start, I’ve decided on four stars rather than three as I learned quite a bit and whetted my appetite for more Scottish history. Balancing breadth and depth in a book like this is by no means easy. My main stylistic quibble is the inclusion of little boxes breaking up the text. The literary quotations, on the other hand, are well chosen and enrich the narrative. I smiled at occasional use of, ‘But not for long,’ as this echoed the Horrible Histories TV show. Conveniently enough, a friend lent me Scotland: Her Story prior to lockdown, as Moffat’s book acknowledges his history is largely a litany of male names.
At the outset of the 9th century, Scotland did not yet exist and nor was it inevitable. Many different paths lay open. Our history could have moved in a different direction – given a series of different interactions between people and events, modern Scotland could have understood itself in Norn and been known as Vikland – or perhaps Pictland or Alba or North Anglia or Yr Hen Ogledd, the Old North. But, to understand how history moved in the way that it did, it is very important to observe how these five different speech communities and political entities interacted. And it is equally important not to look backwards and confect a story of how one triumphed over the other, of how one group forged a nation out of the defeat of others. It did not happen that way. Our nation is the sum of Scandinavian Scotland, Pictish Scottish, Irish Scottish, English Scotland, and British Scotland.
Once the narrative reached the end of the Middle Ages, it became easier to follow and thus more involving. Given the vast period that Moffat covers, events are often discussed briefly and pen portraits of personalities vaguely sketched. This makes it a useful introduction for people like me, who learned no Scottish history in school and have picked up only scraps from museums, historical novels, and histories of Britain that focus heavily on England. Now I finally have some idea of what the Highland Clearances and Jacobite Rebellion were, as well as the different religious context in Scotland. I also learned some entertaining little facts, for example that Mary Queen of Scots played golf. Likewise, it was pleasing to discover why Edinburgh’s Georgian New Town is elegantly rectilinear, but the roads to the East and West of it are anything but. (The answer: land ownership issues.) The material on changing class dynamics, the relationship between Highlands and Lowlands, and the constitutional relationship with England provided intriguing introductions to complicated issues.
The final chapters naturally reflect upon the political divergence between England and Scotland, which I definitely want to read more detailed analysis of. I appreciated Moffat’s tracing this back through the decades. ‘Scotland: A History From Earliest Times’ was published in 2015 and political divergence has only increased in the last five years. After the EU referendum and 2019 election, Scotland feels like a refuge of relative sanity when compared to England’s descent into poisonous xenophobic neo-nationalism. The great irony, of course, is that the SNP have ‘nationalist’ in their party name and the Conservatives do not. To stave off utter panic about the pandemic, I’m only paying attention to what the Scottish Government are doing and as far as possible pretending that the UK government doesn’t exist. Thus I found this a helpful lockdown read, as it provides some context for where I live. It caused me to reflect on whether I feel Scottish. I’d feel like an interloper if I claimed that, as my accent is very Southern. However, I don’t feel English either and Scotland is definitely my home. I have absolutely no intention of moving back to England and wish more of my family and friends would move to Scotland.
Despite the book's somewhat difficult start, I’ve decided on four stars rather than three as I learned quite a bit and whetted my appetite for more Scottish history. Balancing breadth and depth in a book like this is by no means easy. My main stylistic quibble is the inclusion of little boxes breaking up the text. The literary quotations, on the other hand, are well chosen and enrich the narrative. I smiled at occasional use of, ‘But not for long,’ as this echoed the Horrible Histories TV show. Conveniently enough, a friend lent me Scotland: Her Story prior to lockdown, as Moffat’s book acknowledges his history is largely a litany of male names.
September 29, 2024
Dit boek heb ik gekocht op vakantie in Schotland, nadat ik impulsief besloot om de medewerkster in de boekenzaak te vragen wat het beste Schotse geschiedenisboek is.
Allereerst vond ik het een boek dat lekker wegleest. De auteur Alistair Moffat verliest zichzelf soms in het verhaal dat hij verteld waardoor je lekker wordt meegenomen in alles wat Schots is. Het enthousiasme is te begrijpen als je bedenkt dat hij zelf Schots is en het boek is daarom ook deels patriottisch geschreven. Helaas zorgt dit er wel voor dat het boek soms van hot naar her gaat, waardoor ik de draad soms kwijt was. Daarom zou ik het 4.5/4 sterren geven.
Maar, helaas zag ik al wat reviews voordat ik het boek uit had en wat blijkt: het boek is niet foutloos. Heel wat Schotten zijn teleurgesteld in het boek omdat simpele geschiedenisfeiten verdraaid of onjuist zijn weergegeven. Iets wat een checker van een boek er makkelijk uit kan filteren. Na wat meer reviews te lezen blijken de fouten vooral klein van aard, waardoor de fouten vooral bijna stilistisch zijn (naamplaatsen/namen van personen door elkaar halen, in plaats van gebeurtenissen echt anders te doen weergeven).
Als toerist en als niet-Schot zijn de fouten dus niet op te merken, hoewel het dus wel echt fout is als geschiedenis boek. Hierdoor geef ik het boek 3 sterren, want het is nog steeds informatief en erg vermakelijk.
Allereerst vond ik het een boek dat lekker wegleest. De auteur Alistair Moffat verliest zichzelf soms in het verhaal dat hij verteld waardoor je lekker wordt meegenomen in alles wat Schots is. Het enthousiasme is te begrijpen als je bedenkt dat hij zelf Schots is en het boek is daarom ook deels patriottisch geschreven. Helaas zorgt dit er wel voor dat het boek soms van hot naar her gaat, waardoor ik de draad soms kwijt was. Daarom zou ik het 4.5/4 sterren geven.
Maar, helaas zag ik al wat reviews voordat ik het boek uit had en wat blijkt: het boek is niet foutloos. Heel wat Schotten zijn teleurgesteld in het boek omdat simpele geschiedenisfeiten verdraaid of onjuist zijn weergegeven. Iets wat een checker van een boek er makkelijk uit kan filteren. Na wat meer reviews te lezen blijken de fouten vooral klein van aard, waardoor de fouten vooral bijna stilistisch zijn (naamplaatsen/namen van personen door elkaar halen, in plaats van gebeurtenissen echt anders te doen weergeven).
Als toerist en als niet-Schot zijn de fouten dus niet op te merken, hoewel het dus wel echt fout is als geschiedenis boek. Hierdoor geef ik het boek 3 sterren, want het is nog steeds informatief en erg vermakelijk.
May 31, 2018
This rather large book which covers Scottish history from the moment it was formed from fire and ice (like a leaf from George R. R. Martin’s epic), to the last referendum for Scottish independence, is poetic, inspiring, shocking, bloody, depressing, humorous and heart-achingly magnificent – often, all at once. Alistair Moffatt has recorded Scottish history from the point of view of the people – not only the lairds and royalty and figures familiar to so many such as Robert the Bruce, William Wallace, and even James VI and I, but also those who first trod its green lands, rocky outcrops and bubbling braes – the Vikings, explorers, soldiers, warriors, crofters, musicians, poets, bards, artists, and so many more. Acknowledging that mostly men populate this history, Moffat is at pains to insert womenfolk into his narrative, such as Sophia Jex-Blake – the first woman to matriculate from Edinburgh School of Medicine and who overcame great obstacles to do so - and that’s refreshing.
Infusing his history with richness and depth and ensuring that myth and facts both collide and yet are treated distinctly as well, Scotland and its myriad faces and peoples are brought to life. Front and centre is the complex and angst-ridden relationship with England. There are gruesome battles, efforts to wipe-out and control vast swathes of territory and clans, as well as the effective attempted genocide of certain Highland clans. Moffat unpacks the thorny politics and questionable negotiations that occur between the English and Scottish – some with self-interest at their heart, others with their country – either way, it’s all here in these remarkable pages. The divisions within Scotland - between north and south, east and west - are also clearly drawn, and often make those that divide England from its northern sister pale by comparison. As Moffat states at one point in the book, the Scots were crueller to each other than the English ever were to them.
It was only in the last couple of centuries, since the reign of the Hanovers started and Queen Victoria purchased Balmoral, that Scotland was embraced – not as it was - but as a reconstructed romantic, mystical land where bagpipes, kilts and dirks and the people that wore and wielded them dwelled. Starting with Sir Walter Scott and his literary efforts, it was continued down through the centuries coming to define and reduce what is Scotland and Scottish. Moffat doesn’t steer away from calling this out, nor acknowledging the contribution such tacky merchandising has made to giving Scotland a unified commercial and sometimes useful (if only to outsiders) identity.
The efforts made by Scottish and English politicians to both erode and grow Scotland’s attempts at independence – even within the Union – is fully explored, from its origins centuries earlier to the last few years. The last chapter particularly, which follows Scottish progress and political machinations from the end of World War II – the sufferings of the people, the decline and growth of particular industries, the raw, blistering fights for power and control, unions, strikes, Thatcherism, etc. are all present and accounted for. So are the many tragedies that afflicted the people over this time – from the catastrophe of the sinking of the Iolaire, to Lockerbie, Dunblane and others, but also the triumphs of sportsmen and women, and the proud disbanding of the Cameronians after 300 years of service.
What I also loved about this book, apart from the ease and joy of being led through such tumultuous history by an erudite guide, was the focus on politics – whether it was the machinations of various kings and queens to wrest control of Scotland to local lads and lasses rising to become MPs and the country’s leaders, but also popular culture. Whether it was the poetry of Robbie Burns – the “heaven-taught ploughman”, or a self-educated collier or crofter, or the first on-stage appearance of Billy Connolly, the contribution actor, Deborah Kerr made to one particular industry, the socio-political impact of the film Trainspotting, or all quirky the side-notes about religious figures, inventors (and Scotland produced some of the greatest, especially during the period now known as the Scottish Enlightenment – something which blossomed as a direct consequence of universal education), artists, the Stone of Destiny, but also the pride Moffat clearly feels (and which imbues the entire book), in being able to say over and over: this was Scotland’s contribution to, not just the UK, but the world. It’s a mighty one indeed, just as this book is a fabulous addition to Scottish history which will be loved by history buffs, Scotophiles (I confess to being one), or someone who just enjoys a great non-fiction book that reads like a wonderful work of fiction – in other words, not dry, but capable of firing the imagination and passion.
Infusing his history with richness and depth and ensuring that myth and facts both collide and yet are treated distinctly as well, Scotland and its myriad faces and peoples are brought to life. Front and centre is the complex and angst-ridden relationship with England. There are gruesome battles, efforts to wipe-out and control vast swathes of territory and clans, as well as the effective attempted genocide of certain Highland clans. Moffat unpacks the thorny politics and questionable negotiations that occur between the English and Scottish – some with self-interest at their heart, others with their country – either way, it’s all here in these remarkable pages. The divisions within Scotland - between north and south, east and west - are also clearly drawn, and often make those that divide England from its northern sister pale by comparison. As Moffat states at one point in the book, the Scots were crueller to each other than the English ever were to them.
It was only in the last couple of centuries, since the reign of the Hanovers started and Queen Victoria purchased Balmoral, that Scotland was embraced – not as it was - but as a reconstructed romantic, mystical land where bagpipes, kilts and dirks and the people that wore and wielded them dwelled. Starting with Sir Walter Scott and his literary efforts, it was continued down through the centuries coming to define and reduce what is Scotland and Scottish. Moffat doesn’t steer away from calling this out, nor acknowledging the contribution such tacky merchandising has made to giving Scotland a unified commercial and sometimes useful (if only to outsiders) identity.
The efforts made by Scottish and English politicians to both erode and grow Scotland’s attempts at independence – even within the Union – is fully explored, from its origins centuries earlier to the last few years. The last chapter particularly, which follows Scottish progress and political machinations from the end of World War II – the sufferings of the people, the decline and growth of particular industries, the raw, blistering fights for power and control, unions, strikes, Thatcherism, etc. are all present and accounted for. So are the many tragedies that afflicted the people over this time – from the catastrophe of the sinking of the Iolaire, to Lockerbie, Dunblane and others, but also the triumphs of sportsmen and women, and the proud disbanding of the Cameronians after 300 years of service.
What I also loved about this book, apart from the ease and joy of being led through such tumultuous history by an erudite guide, was the focus on politics – whether it was the machinations of various kings and queens to wrest control of Scotland to local lads and lasses rising to become MPs and the country’s leaders, but also popular culture. Whether it was the poetry of Robbie Burns – the “heaven-taught ploughman”, or a self-educated collier or crofter, or the first on-stage appearance of Billy Connolly, the contribution actor, Deborah Kerr made to one particular industry, the socio-political impact of the film Trainspotting, or all quirky the side-notes about religious figures, inventors (and Scotland produced some of the greatest, especially during the period now known as the Scottish Enlightenment – something which blossomed as a direct consequence of universal education), artists, the Stone of Destiny, but also the pride Moffat clearly feels (and which imbues the entire book), in being able to say over and over: this was Scotland’s contribution to, not just the UK, but the world. It’s a mighty one indeed, just as this book is a fabulous addition to Scottish history which will be loved by history buffs, Scotophiles (I confess to being one), or someone who just enjoys a great non-fiction book that reads like a wonderful work of fiction – in other words, not dry, but capable of firing the imagination and passion.
May 15, 2024
Royal Reads 2024
think this is the first time I’ve read a book about ancient history that actually discussed the DNA of the various ancient civilizations in this area of the earth. Very fascinating! The various languages and where they are still spoken, the differences in fossils and found objects and carvings. I’m really impressed!
think this is the first time I’ve read a book about ancient history that actually discussed the DNA of the various ancient civilizations in this area of the earth. Very fascinating! The various languages and where they are still spoken, the differences in fossils and found objects and carvings. I’m really impressed!
June 15, 2022
As a person of Scots extraction who has never been there, I wanted to know about my ancestors' stomping grounds. I honestly was most taken by the early chapters, about Doggerland and how the landscape came to be. It mesmerized me. I didn't expect this.
Since I know little about the details of Roman battles ca. double-digits, I was unaware of the inaccuracies so for me they did not take away from the overall narrative.
Of course I was aware of his nationalist overtone but as an American I can hardly throw stones at that. I was fascinated by the inventions and innovations credited to various Scots, and to social influences caused by different political and economic tsunamis... and the endurance of the Scottish people.
By the last couple of chapters, it became tedious for an American. Labor, Conservatives, Football vs Rugby... *yawn* We have an overabundance of such drama in the States so it didn't interest me so much.
Overall a great book for someone looking for the overarching narrative of the land of Scotland.
Since I know little about the details of Roman battles ca. double-digits, I was unaware of the inaccuracies so for me they did not take away from the overall narrative.
Of course I was aware of his nationalist overtone but as an American I can hardly throw stones at that. I was fascinated by the inventions and innovations credited to various Scots, and to social influences caused by different political and economic tsunamis... and the endurance of the Scottish people.
By the last couple of chapters, it became tedious for an American. Labor, Conservatives, Football vs Rugby... *yawn* We have an overabundance of such drama in the States so it didn't interest me so much.
Overall a great book for someone looking for the overarching narrative of the land of Scotland.
October 13, 2025
This proves why readers should be wary when selecting single volume works which purport to condense all of Scottish history into one volume. Too often these are writers with a specialism and they struggle to cover other topics or eras. Other Goodreads reviewers have highlighted the many factual errors Moffat and his editor have allowed to slip through here and they alone make this one to avoid.
If you are serious about Scottish history choose instead a multi-volume approach such as the three iterations of the Edinburgh History of Scotland. If you can really only face a single volume, then Michael Lynch (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...) or Fiona Watson (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...) are better choices.
If you are serious about Scottish history choose instead a multi-volume approach such as the three iterations of the Edinburgh History of Scotland. If you can really only face a single volume, then Michael Lynch (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...) or Fiona Watson (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...) are better choices.
July 6, 2023
We enjoyed listening right up until the end when the author’s political bias became evident. It would be great if historians could report facts and leave personal feelings unwritten.
November 25, 2019
This history of Scotland is readable and interesting, and is particularly strong in the later chapters from 1707 onwards. I was a little disappointed with this, as I'd wanted to gain a better understanding of Scottish history prior to the Act of Union. I did get some knowledge, but the narrative was often disjointed and I struggled to connect the various threads that seemed put together in a rather haphazard way.
October 18, 2017
Except for the fact that the last chapter seemed a long recitation of various election results in the 20th century, I loved this book.
June 25, 2024
Interesting, easy to read, and huge in scope
May 18, 2025
It was hard to follow through some chapters. Also i think the book tend to digress a bit.
April 27, 2023
Good, but not great.
April 28, 2022
I really wanted to love this book, but man is it dense. It packs a ton of history into a relatively short volume (for the subject matter). I think Moffat did touch on most of the highlights of Scottish history, but he made it all feel very dry. The information is there, the drama and readability is not. I made myself finish because I'm not a quitter (unless the book is abysmal, but this one was definitely not that) and I'm glad I did because I do appreciate the history and the time Moffat put into this impressive volume. It was just a chore to get through.
February 28, 2016
I enjoyed this even if at times I found his approach a bit strange. I guess history is often open to interpretation and I am ok with that. A highly interesting book around my favourite country.
February 20, 2025
I need to explain my 5 rating. This book was just what I wanted in preparation for a cruise around Scotland and other parts of the UK. My father's family emigrated from Scotland to Canada in the 19th century, and he was very proud of his heritage. He frequently spoke about "Bonnie Prince Charlie", Robert Burns, and Mary Queen of Scots, and yet I did not much understand the context. This book answered many of my questions and better prepared me for the trip.
That said, many people will not enjoy the book. It is lengthy, full of details, and reads like a textbook in many places. It has a serious flaw in that it does not include a map, so I often had Google Maps open beside me as I read, so that I would have some idea of where these places are. It contains so much information that I am sure I will have difficulty remembering much of it. Fortunately, the book is on my Kindle so I can come back to it as questions arise.
Scotland has a very rich history. I was amazed by how many wars and battles were fought. I was ashamed for the human race as I read about the ghastly ways that people were tortured and executed. At various times, and in various parts of Scotland, it has been influenced (and often controlled) by the Romans, the Picts, the Vikings, the Normans, and the English, to name a few. There was much internal strife, between the Highlanders and the Lowlanders, and between the Protestants and the Catholics. The Scotland that we currently visualize with Highlanders in kilts, is very far from the truth. It was glorified in part by Sir Walter Scott in his books. The truth is that the Highlanders were viewed as a primitive, violent, almost sub-human species, and they were pushed off their land after the final victory over "Bonnie Prince Charlie" and his army. The land eventually reverted to the unspoiled glens that we see today. But much of the significant history of Scotland took place in the lowland areas.
I hope this is enough to whet your appetite. But be prepared for a long and slow read. And the book is not for the faint of heart. But I recommend it to people like myself who really want to know much more about Scotland.
That said, many people will not enjoy the book. It is lengthy, full of details, and reads like a textbook in many places. It has a serious flaw in that it does not include a map, so I often had Google Maps open beside me as I read, so that I would have some idea of where these places are. It contains so much information that I am sure I will have difficulty remembering much of it. Fortunately, the book is on my Kindle so I can come back to it as questions arise.
Scotland has a very rich history. I was amazed by how many wars and battles were fought. I was ashamed for the human race as I read about the ghastly ways that people were tortured and executed. At various times, and in various parts of Scotland, it has been influenced (and often controlled) by the Romans, the Picts, the Vikings, the Normans, and the English, to name a few. There was much internal strife, between the Highlanders and the Lowlanders, and between the Protestants and the Catholics. The Scotland that we currently visualize with Highlanders in kilts, is very far from the truth. It was glorified in part by Sir Walter Scott in his books. The truth is that the Highlanders were viewed as a primitive, violent, almost sub-human species, and they were pushed off their land after the final victory over "Bonnie Prince Charlie" and his army. The land eventually reverted to the unspoiled glens that we see today. But much of the significant history of Scotland took place in the lowland areas.
I hope this is enough to whet your appetite. But be prepared for a long and slow read. And the book is not for the faint of heart. But I recommend it to people like myself who really want to know much more about Scotland.
November 9, 2021
I’ve been studying Scottish history for a few years, as part of an effort to trace my husbands family ancestry. It’s a very confusing story, difficult to keep track of amidst the Gaelic, Scots and English language and overlapping rulers of Britain and Scotland.
There is some incredibly interesting information in this book - but it’s organization, if you can call it that, is bizzare and almost seems stream of conscious at times. It’s almost like talking to someone who keeps saying “oh that reminds me of this one time…”
The information of earlier Scotland is the book’s greatest strength - although in trying to cover so much ground, it is necessarily truncated. The books weakness is trying to cover too much. Ironically it seems to often choose the wrong things. For instance, in the last chapter, trying to cover the time period from WWI to the present, the book chooses to focus on things that were international phenomenon in many cases instead of purely Scottish. For instance, the sections on pop culture in terms of motion pictures and music can easily be true of much of the Western world. Moffat jumps into detail on Scottish politics assuming all of his readers understand the parties and machinations of British government and how Scotland fits in. There is little if any explanation of the system, yet the author gets into the minutia of election returns that seem irrelevant within the larger picture. Moffat himself unmasks his personal feelings about Scotland, socialism, Catholicism, etc throughout the book, mostly near the end, leafing the reader to believe he had an agenda in the information he chooses to focus on.
Overall, the writing is disjointed, poorly edited and unorganized, jumping decades and sometimes centuries in ways that confuse the reader and cause him/her to continue referencing other sections of the book to be sure to understand.
While I did gain some great knowledge in reading Moffat’s history, I would not coun it as the best version of Scottish history I have encountered.
There is some incredibly interesting information in this book - but it’s organization, if you can call it that, is bizzare and almost seems stream of conscious at times. It’s almost like talking to someone who keeps saying “oh that reminds me of this one time…”
The information of earlier Scotland is the book’s greatest strength - although in trying to cover so much ground, it is necessarily truncated. The books weakness is trying to cover too much. Ironically it seems to often choose the wrong things. For instance, in the last chapter, trying to cover the time period from WWI to the present, the book chooses to focus on things that were international phenomenon in many cases instead of purely Scottish. For instance, the sections on pop culture in terms of motion pictures and music can easily be true of much of the Western world. Moffat jumps into detail on Scottish politics assuming all of his readers understand the parties and machinations of British government and how Scotland fits in. There is little if any explanation of the system, yet the author gets into the minutia of election returns that seem irrelevant within the larger picture. Moffat himself unmasks his personal feelings about Scotland, socialism, Catholicism, etc throughout the book, mostly near the end, leafing the reader to believe he had an agenda in the information he chooses to focus on.
Overall, the writing is disjointed, poorly edited and unorganized, jumping decades and sometimes centuries in ways that confuse the reader and cause him/her to continue referencing other sections of the book to be sure to understand.
While I did gain some great knowledge in reading Moffat’s history, I would not coun it as the best version of Scottish history I have encountered.
August 29, 2022
This really does deliver as the title advertises: from the formation of the geological elements of Scotland to the Theresa May era of UK politics. Moffat writes great paragraphs, however his organization of information is all over the place. Like a highly intelligent elderly person telling you a story with amazing detail with thousands of small tangents, the author makes little attempt for his chapters to have a unifying theme other than a general swath of time. I would have liked to have seen section headings within chapters that held together the information in a cohesive way. What we are given instead is a paragraph on sports in the 30s, then industry in the 40s, then back to the 30s for the economy, then musings about politics in the 50s, then for no reason an insert about horse insemination right in the middle of one of these sections. There is no lead-in to these different subjects; they begin as abruptly as I have listed them.
Again, most of the information is very engaging, I just think Moffat could have used an editor to cut and paste chunks together to form a cohesive narrative and maybe done away with the "Fun Fact" inserts and incorporated them into the body of the narrative. The author should have either discussed events chronologically or separated epochs by subject (politics, culture, economy, etc). Or, if everything is going to be interwoven, have a strong thesis that justifies the darting in and out of topics.
One last gripe is that this book is clearly written for an audience very familiar with British geography. The regions, cities, towns, rivers, and glens are rattles off at lightning pace, giving one unfamiliar with Scotland absolutely no idea of the lay of the land. I usually had one hand on the book and another on Google maps to reference.
Ultimately, the book is an ambitious romp through thousands of years of Scottish history that leaves me feeling like I received both too much information and somehow not enough. Three stars for the effort.
Again, most of the information is very engaging, I just think Moffat could have used an editor to cut and paste chunks together to form a cohesive narrative and maybe done away with the "Fun Fact" inserts and incorporated them into the body of the narrative. The author should have either discussed events chronologically or separated epochs by subject (politics, culture, economy, etc). Or, if everything is going to be interwoven, have a strong thesis that justifies the darting in and out of topics.
One last gripe is that this book is clearly written for an audience very familiar with British geography. The regions, cities, towns, rivers, and glens are rattles off at lightning pace, giving one unfamiliar with Scotland absolutely no idea of the lay of the land. I usually had one hand on the book and another on Google maps to reference.
Ultimately, the book is an ambitious romp through thousands of years of Scottish history that leaves me feeling like I received both too much information and somehow not enough. Three stars for the effort.
September 3, 2023
A book that tries to cover all of Scottish history from "earliest times" as the title says. I had a couple of gripes with it.
The first is the format. Huge chapters with no breaks after paragraphs or different sections, just one long narrative for up to 80 pages at a time that made it very challenging to know when to take a break or breather. Often the text would cover kings and battles from one place and time, then jump a hundred years, a couple of hundred miles and you would be left wondering where you were.
It also tries to fit in too much. I appreciate there would probably be critiques of "it missed out XXX" but feel the opposite approach hindered the narrative, with certain historical figures being introduced, described and then killed off in the space of a page, never to be mentioned again.
I think my biggest issue was the lack of general historical thread, with a seemingly random jumble of events put together to make a history. Not nearly enough effort is invested in trying to explain where the idea of "Scots" came into being, or "Scotland" itself as one political entity, and it just feels like a disparate jumble of stories without any real continuity. I have as many questions now as I did going in about when the idea of a Scottish identity actually came into existence, and that feels a pretty unforgivable omission.
I began to enjoy it more when I stopped reading chronologically, and just picked sections I was interested in, although the index was pretty poor so that wasn't always easy. I guess it is almost impossible to index a book with new characters, places, and events on almost every page, often unconnected to what came before and what comes after.
In short, wouldn't recommend. I am going to look for a book specifically on Scottish identity to see if it can answer my questions, but this one really didn't scratch the itch. 1.5/5
The first is the format. Huge chapters with no breaks after paragraphs or different sections, just one long narrative for up to 80 pages at a time that made it very challenging to know when to take a break or breather. Often the text would cover kings and battles from one place and time, then jump a hundred years, a couple of hundred miles and you would be left wondering where you were.
It also tries to fit in too much. I appreciate there would probably be critiques of "it missed out XXX" but feel the opposite approach hindered the narrative, with certain historical figures being introduced, described and then killed off in the space of a page, never to be mentioned again.
I think my biggest issue was the lack of general historical thread, with a seemingly random jumble of events put together to make a history. Not nearly enough effort is invested in trying to explain where the idea of "Scots" came into being, or "Scotland" itself as one political entity, and it just feels like a disparate jumble of stories without any real continuity. I have as many questions now as I did going in about when the idea of a Scottish identity actually came into existence, and that feels a pretty unforgivable omission.
I began to enjoy it more when I stopped reading chronologically, and just picked sections I was interested in, although the index was pretty poor so that wasn't always easy. I guess it is almost impossible to index a book with new characters, places, and events on almost every page, often unconnected to what came before and what comes after.
In short, wouldn't recommend. I am going to look for a book specifically on Scottish identity to see if it can answer my questions, but this one really didn't scratch the itch. 1.5/5
August 28, 2023
This book is terribly written. It's a DNF, but I've persevered for 200 pages.
It should be retitled 'Stuff that Alistair Moffat Finds a Bit Interesting'. Starting a history with Pangea until 'now' is pretty ambitious.
Flailing around from topic to topic seemingly at random is definitely not the way to do it, especially as many of the things said simply aren't very important. I learned that Alistair Moffat is interested in names: etymology and origins. Alistair Moffat has a passing interest in geology.
Alistair Moffat didn't hire an editor. SUB-HEADINGS; that would have helped a great deal. There aren't even paragraph breaks, so this mess of information just smudges together.
I was very interested in reading a history of Scotland. The kings and rulers bit was the most consistent, but it was very hard to follow along, what with all the other crap. If the author would have stuck to one topic, it would have made it all much easier.
Topics even smudge together mid-paragraph. Just a total mess. Avoid like the plague. There was some plague in this book. Apparently, there are one or two historical inaccuracies. I would argue it doesn't matter, since you can't possibly be expected to remember any of the information presented, given how hard it is just to keep track of where you are.
It should be retitled 'Stuff that Alistair Moffat Finds a Bit Interesting'. Starting a history with Pangea until 'now' is pretty ambitious.
Flailing around from topic to topic seemingly at random is definitely not the way to do it, especially as many of the things said simply aren't very important. I learned that Alistair Moffat is interested in names: etymology and origins. Alistair Moffat has a passing interest in geology.
Alistair Moffat didn't hire an editor. SUB-HEADINGS; that would have helped a great deal. There aren't even paragraph breaks, so this mess of information just smudges together.
I was very interested in reading a history of Scotland. The kings and rulers bit was the most consistent, but it was very hard to follow along, what with all the other crap. If the author would have stuck to one topic, it would have made it all much easier.
Topics even smudge together mid-paragraph. Just a total mess. Avoid like the plague. There was some plague in this book. Apparently, there are one or two historical inaccuracies. I would argue it doesn't matter, since you can't possibly be expected to remember any of the information presented, given how hard it is just to keep track of where you are.
August 6, 2025
I really enjoyed this book. It was very informative and witty. A good introduction to this part of the world. There are some time periods that are considerably trickier to follow in audiobook format, which is truly unfortunate as I wanted to understand that portion of Scotland’s history, but the narrative just wasn’t doing it for me. I’ll need to find another source for learning about the political situation of the UK post WW2 to present. Particularly everything around Margaret Thatcher’s time in government seemed out of place. I almost thought my audiobook was skipping, but it wasn’t. Perhaps there are photos in the physical book that mess up the audio book version?
It is also somewhat confusing to keep the early clans and monarchs straight. But that is coming from someone who is not familiar with the names and histories except for the big names in Scotland like Robert de Bruce and Mary Queen of Scots. Having some sort of visual to reference when listening to the audio book might be beneficial in keeping things more organized in your brain.
Despite these limitations to the book, I really enjoyed it and want to read more on this part of the world now. It’s a fascinating read!
It is also somewhat confusing to keep the early clans and monarchs straight. But that is coming from someone who is not familiar with the names and histories except for the big names in Scotland like Robert de Bruce and Mary Queen of Scots. Having some sort of visual to reference when listening to the audio book might be beneficial in keeping things more organized in your brain.
Despite these limitations to the book, I really enjoyed it and want to read more on this part of the world now. It’s a fascinating read!
March 11, 2022
I did it! After the print version sat on my nightstand for three, four or six months, I was tired of the husband's ribbing me about my "Admirable interest in my people's history". I turned to the audio version, to which I listened while gardening or cleaning or sewing or treadmilling. All 23 hours. It was indeed an education. I like that it, a little like Trainspotting, highlights the particular intelligence and energy of the Scots without gratuitously glorifying them. I also like that shout out to Selma, Alabama!!! Never, ever knew that bit! ( I won't spoil it for you!) Very funny, especially at the glossing over and adoption of Highlander ways to every other area and population of Scotland. I cried while weeding and learning about Robert Burns. I was moved to mark January 25, 2023 for a special dinner in his honor. I at least have some context for our familial savagery, and its equal penchant for scholarship. I find genealogy at best interesting, at worst, meaningless and vulgar. So, I won't be investing a lot of energy in Scottish pride (Trainspotting lesson in mind). And yet, some dark corners of the imagination are clearer and I'm so happy I stuck to it. Well worthwhile!!!
July 1, 2025
Its a challenging task to tell a history of Scotland from before humans arrive to the modern day, and the author was not up to it. It's not that there aren't good bits. There are several interesting tid-bits. But the organization is extremely lacking. It has a vague chronologically structure, but the author will take detours in both time and space for the most tenuous of conections. It's almost more like a book of interesting facts about Scotland's history, rather than a history of Scotland. There's places where a new point is introduced without explaining it, only for the author to come back to later.
As other have mentioned fact checking isn't great in several places. There's a bit where he's describing the migration of the neolithic people to scotland, and DNA studies linking them to conentent and it's in this part that the author decides it's time to discuss the introduction of the celtic lanauges in Britian. The neolithic people he was talking about are from about 4000BC and celtic languages wouldn't be spoken till ~1500 BC. The language the neolithic people of Scotland spoke almost certainly wasn't even indo-european.
As other have mentioned fact checking isn't great in several places. There's a bit where he's describing the migration of the neolithic people to scotland, and DNA studies linking them to conentent and it's in this part that the author decides it's time to discuss the introduction of the celtic lanauges in Britian. The neolithic people he was talking about are from about 4000BC and celtic languages wouldn't be spoken till ~1500 BC. The language the neolithic people of Scotland spoke almost certainly wasn't even indo-european.
January 30, 2024
Scotland: A History from Earliest Times
by Alistair Moffat
I read (listened) to this unabridged audiobook following a trip I took there last summer which piqued my interest in that country’s history and literature. It was quite long, encyclopedically covering thousands of years of history and so many topics, and facts that it was difficult to fully digest. A hard copy might serve well for reference, and the listening proved valuable in that it raised a few particular topics which warrant further investigation. I particularly enjoyed references to literature, such as the idea that Walter Scott is regarded as the father of one of my favorite genres: the historical novel. The politics, the “Picts”, the Norse history and mythology, the introduction of Christianity (St. Columba of Ireland), the Stuarts, the chieftains and clans, and how the Roman Empire never quite ventured or established themselves in the highlands, are all topics I might enjoy reading more about.
by Alistair Moffat
I read (listened) to this unabridged audiobook following a trip I took there last summer which piqued my interest in that country’s history and literature. It was quite long, encyclopedically covering thousands of years of history and so many topics, and facts that it was difficult to fully digest. A hard copy might serve well for reference, and the listening proved valuable in that it raised a few particular topics which warrant further investigation. I particularly enjoyed references to literature, such as the idea that Walter Scott is regarded as the father of one of my favorite genres: the historical novel. The politics, the “Picts”, the Norse history and mythology, the introduction of Christianity (St. Columba of Ireland), the Stuarts, the chieftains and clans, and how the Roman Empire never quite ventured or established themselves in the highlands, are all topics I might enjoy reading more about.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 24, 2023
I wanted an overview and as I don't have much reading time I downloaded this.
The reading is not the worst I've heard, but every paragraph was read with the same intonation. If I wanted that I'd use whispersync.
Onto the book: well I left with a much better sense of Scottish history, but laughing at those moments when Moffat hadn't actually read what he'd written. Comments such as, the Glorious Revolution was the first time Scotland had not had a Stuart in charge, are hilarious. His comments on Mary of Scotland are sexist and I laughed like a drain when he described Victoria's claim to Stuart heritage as basically fantasy (the Georgian claim is *from* their Stuart heritage).
But it did the job. Now on to Michael Lynch's Scotland, a New History, which experts tell me is much better.
The reading is not the worst I've heard, but every paragraph was read with the same intonation. If I wanted that I'd use whispersync.
Onto the book: well I left with a much better sense of Scottish history, but laughing at those moments when Moffat hadn't actually read what he'd written. Comments such as, the Glorious Revolution was the first time Scotland had not had a Stuart in charge, are hilarious. His comments on Mary of Scotland are sexist and I laughed like a drain when he described Victoria's claim to Stuart heritage as basically fantasy (the Georgian claim is *from* their Stuart heritage).
But it did the job. Now on to Michael Lynch's Scotland, a New History, which experts tell me is much better.
January 18, 2025
As others have pointed out, Moffat does make a few mistakes with Scottish History, simple facts that could have been better fact-checked, but even this can happen to great writers.
Overall, the book is sometimes dense and requires a certain level of concentration to get through. The biggest thing for me is that the book seems to jump from topic to topic within the chapter, and then back to a previous topic. It can make, at times, a very confusing book. However, I do believe that the book does have value and offers a good starting point for a political, economic, and cultural history all wrapped up in one. The chapters that focus on medieval history seem to be the best, while the more modern eras, the last two chapters, read like a list of elections at times.
In sum, a good beginners history, but be ready to fact-check if need be.
Overall, the book is sometimes dense and requires a certain level of concentration to get through. The biggest thing for me is that the book seems to jump from topic to topic within the chapter, and then back to a previous topic. It can make, at times, a very confusing book. However, I do believe that the book does have value and offers a good starting point for a political, economic, and cultural history all wrapped up in one. The chapters that focus on medieval history seem to be the best, while the more modern eras, the last two chapters, read like a list of elections at times.
In sum, a good beginners history, but be ready to fact-check if need be.
July 28, 2021
This book is at least as much a work of nation-building propaganda as of history. Right from the start there are overblown claims of past Scottish greatness, combined with a weird sense of manifest destiny around Scotland's current borders.
If you want a history of Scotland that is intended to enlighten, rather than to achieve obvious political ends, check out Magnusson's Scotland: The Story of a Nation. If you want a book to give to your kids to persuade them to be die-hard Scottish nationalists, give them this book – that is clearly its intended purpose.
If you want a history of Scotland that is intended to enlighten, rather than to achieve obvious political ends, check out Magnusson's Scotland: The Story of a Nation. If you want a book to give to your kids to persuade them to be die-hard Scottish nationalists, give them this book – that is clearly its intended purpose.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 69 reviews