What do you think?
Rate this book
Offshore Islanders: A History of the English People
A panoramic survey of 2,000 years of English history.
431 pages, Paperback
First published September 7, 1972
17 people are currently reading
422 people want to read
About the author
Paul Johnson
134 books837 followersPaul Johnson works as a historian, journalist and author. He was educated at Stonyhurst School in Clitheroe, Lancashire and Magdalen College, Oxford, and first came to prominence in the 1950s as a journalist writing for, and later editing, the New Statesman magazine. He has also written for leading newspapers and magazines in Britain, the US and Europe.
Paul Johnson has published over 40 books including A History of Christianity (1979), A History of the English People (1987), Intellectuals (1988), The Birth of the Modern: World Society, 1815—1830 (1991), Modern Times: A History of the World from the 1920s to the Year 2000 (1999), A History of the American People (2000), A History of the Jews (2001) and Art: A New History (2003) as well as biographies of Elizabeth I (1974), Napoleon (2002), George Washington (2005) and Pope John Paul II (1982).
Paul Johnson has published over 40 books including A History of Christianity (1979), A History of the English People (1987), Intellectuals (1988), The Birth of the Modern: World Society, 1815—1830 (1991), Modern Times: A History of the World from the 1920s to the Year 2000 (1999), A History of the American People (2000), A History of the Jews (2001) and Art: A New History (2003) as well as biographies of Elizabeth I (1974), Napoleon (2002), George Washington (2005) and Pope John Paul II (1982).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
March 22, 2024
To much information for a good read.
Feels more like a high school history book.
Feels more like a high school history book.
August 12, 2019
An illuminating broad look at the history of the English, filled with unique analysis that has changed the way I think about English and world history. Rather than a blow-by-blow timeline of English history, treat this like a massive thesis, analysing the spirit of the English people, what makes them tick, and how they came to such prominence.
What this means is that while you may enjoy the intense detail that Johnson explores some topics (like Cromwell and Elizabeth), he neglects other aspects (like Victoria).
I found Johnson's modern analysis a slightly less engaging than his pre-19th century analysis, but this may due to my extensive reading of the era coming into contest with his analysis. Don't get me wrong. In general, I agreed with him and really enjoyed a lot of his findings. In fact, I will be discussing them as my own views at conferences in the years to come. But in a way, his modern analysis risks becoming too personal the closer he comes to modern England (the 70s at the time).
Overall, a great book and one I will advise to readers who already have a rudimentary and intermediate knowledge of English history, as this is not an introductory text.
What this means is that while you may enjoy the intense detail that Johnson explores some topics (like Cromwell and Elizabeth), he neglects other aspects (like Victoria).
I found Johnson's modern analysis a slightly less engaging than his pre-19th century analysis, but this may due to my extensive reading of the era coming into contest with his analysis. Don't get me wrong. In general, I agreed with him and really enjoyed a lot of his findings. In fact, I will be discussing them as my own views at conferences in the years to come. But in a way, his modern analysis risks becoming too personal the closer he comes to modern England (the 70s at the time).
Overall, a great book and one I will advise to readers who already have a rudimentary and intermediate knowledge of English history, as this is not an introductory text.
January 4, 2008
In A History of the English People, Paul Johnson recounts the story of the English with both loving admiration and seething disdain; his people are to him "a huge force of good and evil." Most historians have their biases, but they mask them subtly and fairly successfully under the shadow of their academic-style prose; Paul Johnson, however, is so outright with his prejudices in this book that reading it is at times almost comical. Queen Elizabeth, it seems, could do no wrong. If she directed murder, it was "against her will." She "was forced, with great reluctance" to persecute the Catholics and the Puritans, because "both groups, in the end, left her with little alternative." The Queen was a paragon of tolerance, whose greatest achievement was to establish "the religious system of England on a basis of moderation." James, on the other hand, was a "loutish savage." Indeed, Johnson is as expansive in his condemnation of the Stuarts as in his praise for Elizabeth: "Those who decry the influence of personality on history find it hard to argue away the speed, the perverse skill, and the absolute decisiveness with which the Stuarts demolished their English heritage."
Johnson is a clever writer, and he manipulates language effectively. It is not the kind of wordplay one expects to encounter in a history. His descriptions are memorable: the Puritans "oozed hypocrisy,"* America "was the posthumous child of the Long Parliament." Many of the author’s phrases are entertaining because they are tongue-in-cheek. Witch hunters, he tells us, were accused of seeking economic gain, "[b]ut this seems too cruel and cynical even for the English." The reason the English became such a powerful force in history was owing largely to their racism, but "[q]uite when they first took note of the fact that they were the successor-race to the Jews is impossible to determine." "It is a sad comment on human societies," Johnson writes, "that they can usually be persuaded to accept bribery as a system of government, provided the circle of corruption is wide enough."
If the English are not safe from the historian’s barb, we cannot hope that the Americans will be. Indeed, Johnson explodes the romantic view we American’s have of our revolution, but not without a little romanticism of his own. The movement toward independence was, he writes, "an unholy alliance" between landowners and "swarming" lawyers, who united to manipulate the "Boston city mob" so that "America was born in organized violence masquerading as idealism." The "insurgents," he claims, "scalp[ed] and mutilate[d] British redcoats." He compares the American War for Independence to the Communist Revolution in Russia, in which "a small group of single-minded and ruthless men hustled along a multitude." Once the nation was independent, it proved no more capable than England: "Free Americans continued to kill each other in the lapidary shadows of the windy rhetoric from Philadelphia." It is little wonder this volume is so hard to come by in the States. (The book is out of print and the one copy I could secure was literally falling apart in my hands.) Johnson is much more generous in his History of the American People.
A History of the English People is not for the sensitive, or for the unlearned. But it can be thoroughly enjoyed by the well-read and the thick-skinned, and it is, from a purely literary (if not a historical) perspective, the most enjoyable of Johnson’s books.
Johnson is a clever writer, and he manipulates language effectively. It is not the kind of wordplay one expects to encounter in a history. His descriptions are memorable: the Puritans "oozed hypocrisy,"* America "was the posthumous child of the Long Parliament." Many of the author’s phrases are entertaining because they are tongue-in-cheek. Witch hunters, he tells us, were accused of seeking economic gain, "[b]ut this seems too cruel and cynical even for the English." The reason the English became such a powerful force in history was owing largely to their racism, but "[q]uite when they first took note of the fact that they were the successor-race to the Jews is impossible to determine." "It is a sad comment on human societies," Johnson writes, "that they can usually be persuaded to accept bribery as a system of government, provided the circle of corruption is wide enough."
If the English are not safe from the historian’s barb, we cannot hope that the Americans will be. Indeed, Johnson explodes the romantic view we American’s have of our revolution, but not without a little romanticism of his own. The movement toward independence was, he writes, "an unholy alliance" between landowners and "swarming" lawyers, who united to manipulate the "Boston city mob" so that "America was born in organized violence masquerading as idealism." The "insurgents," he claims, "scalp[ed] and mutilate[d] British redcoats." He compares the American War for Independence to the Communist Revolution in Russia, in which "a small group of single-minded and ruthless men hustled along a multitude." Once the nation was independent, it proved no more capable than England: "Free Americans continued to kill each other in the lapidary shadows of the windy rhetoric from Philadelphia." It is little wonder this volume is so hard to come by in the States. (The book is out of print and the one copy I could secure was literally falling apart in my hands.) Johnson is much more generous in his History of the American People.
A History of the English People is not for the sensitive, or for the unlearned. But it can be thoroughly enjoyed by the well-read and the thick-skinned, and it is, from a purely literary (if not a historical) perspective, the most enjoyable of Johnson’s books.
November 17, 2016
Somewhere during the 1970s Paul Johnson changed from thoughtful journalist to troglodyte reactionary. Fortunately this book was written before the change. If you've read any of his other stuff, like Modern Times, or A History of the American People and hated them, be aware that this is a very different book, one that's substantially more interesting than those later rants.
It is NOT a narrative history. That is, it does not simply tell a story moving forward in time, of who did what. Rather it's an interpretive history, explaining something of why things happened, or how what happened was unusual, or how what happened affected the later world in an unexpected way. This means that it requires you have a fairly substantial pre-existing knowledge of English history. He's not going to tell you the difference between a Stuart and a Tudor, or what happened to Charles I and James II --- it's just assumed that you know this.
But if you DO know that background, he puts a fascinating gloss on it. I was particularly interested in his treatment of the 19th C, which I'd always thought of as not especially interesting. Close to our own age, and I assumed I knew the primary contours. But I was, for example, unaware of the vacillation between Empire-building and Commonwealth-building that he paints as the significant feature of the age.
It is NOT a narrative history. That is, it does not simply tell a story moving forward in time, of who did what. Rather it's an interpretive history, explaining something of why things happened, or how what happened was unusual, or how what happened affected the later world in an unexpected way. This means that it requires you have a fairly substantial pre-existing knowledge of English history. He's not going to tell you the difference between a Stuart and a Tudor, or what happened to Charles I and James II --- it's just assumed that you know this.
But if you DO know that background, he puts a fascinating gloss on it. I was particularly interested in his treatment of the 19th C, which I'd always thought of as not especially interesting. Close to our own age, and I assumed I knew the primary contours. But I was, for example, unaware of the vacillation between Empire-building and Commonwealth-building that he paints as the significant feature of the age.
August 23, 2014
Written in the early 1970's this volume paints with a broad brush the history of the "English." It's title suggests that it may be more about the common Englishman people however I found that it mostly described who was ruling the country and what they did. I particularly enjoyed the chapters which describe the period after Roman occupation ceased until the end of Anglo Saxon rule in 1066. Those ~500 years were a vibrant period. For greater detail and depth I recommend "The Life of King Alfred" by Asser and the "Ecclesiastical History of Britain" by Bede.
As always I find myself reading what's available from the library. Most libraries that use the Overdrive ebook service have this text available.
As always I find myself reading what's available from the library. Most libraries that use the Overdrive ebook service have this text available.
September 4, 2018
"Je pozoruhodné, jak málo stop zanechala na anglickém národu stoletá zkušenost s nabytím a ztrátou impéria. Možná na dvě desetiletí propadli Angličané kouzlu svého imperialistického poslání. Během búrských válek však tato nálada opadla a v roce 1918 se zcela vytratila. Mezi dvěma světovými válkami vládli Angličané čtvrtině zeměkoule spíš ze zvyku a přetrvávajícího smyslu pro povinnost než ze záměrného vědomí mise. Likvidace impéria po roce 1945 nechala veřejné mínění zcela chladným. Angličané se svých obrovských zámořských držav vzdali s lhostejností, která měla občas nádech úlevy. Ministři, úředníci, guvernéři a vojenští činitelé dělali dobrá, špatná či morálně neutrální rozhodnutí, aniž by na ně byl vyvíjen jakýkoliv veřejný tlak. Bojotovat, nebo se stáhnout? Odejít, či zůstat? Angličany to opravdu moc nezajímalo.
(...)
Konec impéria se nestal hlavním programovým bodem žádných všeobecných ani doplňkových voleb. Pošetilosti nikdo nepotrestal a úspěchy neodměnil.
(...)
Ze všech záležitostí Commonwealthu se trvalý a zlověstný zájem Angličanů soustředil pouze na jediné: přimět politiky, aby občanům Commonwealthu znemožnili volný vstup do Británie. Tak vyjádřila britská veřejnost mandát ke skončení impéria.
Vůči světovým událostem tohoto strašlivého století zůstali Angličané téměř imunní. Za svůj zásah do evropských záležitostí zaplatili obrovskou cenu. Dvě světové války ani zisk a ztráta nezměrných teritorií nesehrály ovšem nijak významnou roli v pokračujícím rozmachu jejich institucií a v pomalém, téměř nepostřehnutelném vývoji jejich názorů a způsobu života. Ve světe se během posledních sta let rozpadlo Rakousko-Uhersko a Turecko. Rusko, Německo, Francie a Čína zažily invaze a revoluce, tedy zásadní útok na svou spoločenskou strukturu a ústavní pořádek. Japonsko se stalo obětí jaderního útoku, dlouhotrvající okupace a politického experimentu. Ve válečných vlnách zanikly či se naopak zrodily nové národy. Dokonce i Spojené státy náhle zjistily, že je dva největší oceány už nestačí chránit a že tlaky vyvolané jejich působením v zahraničí se projevují narušením klidu na domácí scéně. Angličané však od sebe domácí záležitosti a styky s ostatními národy přísně oddělovali a byli schopni kráčet svou tradiční, typicky ostrovní cestou. Británie dál úzkostlivě lpí na kontinuitě, v jejímž rámci vstřebává všechny změny, a zůstává tak nejstabilnější zemí světa."
Str. 302 - 303.
(...)
Konec impéria se nestal hlavním programovým bodem žádných všeobecných ani doplňkových voleb. Pošetilosti nikdo nepotrestal a úspěchy neodměnil.
(...)
Ze všech záležitostí Commonwealthu se trvalý a zlověstný zájem Angličanů soustředil pouze na jediné: přimět politiky, aby občanům Commonwealthu znemožnili volný vstup do Británie. Tak vyjádřila britská veřejnost mandát ke skončení impéria.
Vůči světovým událostem tohoto strašlivého století zůstali Angličané téměř imunní. Za svůj zásah do evropských záležitostí zaplatili obrovskou cenu. Dvě světové války ani zisk a ztráta nezměrných teritorií nesehrály ovšem nijak významnou roli v pokračujícím rozmachu jejich institucií a v pomalém, téměř nepostřehnutelném vývoji jejich názorů a způsobu života. Ve světe se během posledních sta let rozpadlo Rakousko-Uhersko a Turecko. Rusko, Německo, Francie a Čína zažily invaze a revoluce, tedy zásadní útok na svou spoločenskou strukturu a ústavní pořádek. Japonsko se stalo obětí jaderního útoku, dlouhotrvající okupace a politického experimentu. Ve válečných vlnách zanikly či se naopak zrodily nové národy. Dokonce i Spojené státy náhle zjistily, že je dva největší oceány už nestačí chránit a že tlaky vyvolané jejich působením v zahraničí se projevují narušením klidu na domácí scéně. Angličané však od sebe domácí záležitosti a styky s ostatními národy přísně oddělovali a byli schopni kráčet svou tradiční, typicky ostrovní cestou. Británie dál úzkostlivě lpí na kontinuitě, v jejímž rámci vstřebává všechny změny, a zůstává tak nejstabilnější zemí světa."
Str. 302 - 303.
October 5, 2022
An odd one from Johnson, and one of his earliest, originally titled "The Offshore Islanders" in 1972. The work is a wandering trek through English history that represents a contrarian mind in transition from a kind of liberalism (classical, not social) to the Reagan-Thatcher conservatism of Modern Times. This is definitely not the Johnson you probably admire from that work, or A History of the American People, or Intellectuals. But the prose is typical of Johnson, at least, and on that count I can still recommend it for Johnson completionists.
August 25, 2020
Early English history through the Battle of Hastings was most interesting to me but the entire book was worthwhile and very informative.
The author provides lots of insights and interpretations which are interesting and seem to be well-reasoned. Although this book was written nearly 50 years ago it is remarkable how so many aspects are relevant today. History repeats and repeats and repeats. Unfortunately, we seem to have short memories and fail to heed those lessons.
The author provides lots of insights and interpretations which are interesting and seem to be well-reasoned. Although this book was written nearly 50 years ago it is remarkable how so many aspects are relevant today. History repeats and repeats and repeats. Unfortunately, we seem to have short memories and fail to heed those lessons.
September 7, 2020
Good, filled in some gaps.
July 24, 2024
Absolutely appalling. Couldn’t finish the first chapter. Paul Johnson has ruined my day.
December 6, 2025
Readable and engaging, but a little heavy on authorial dogma.
Want to read
August 16, 2013Otto Scott: "Well, I would like to recommend A History of the English People by Paul Johnson, 1972, paper Harper and Row. It is obviously one of his early works, maybe his first. I don’t know. And I must say that having written on some of the same period or a few of the periods of English history that Johnson is amazing because he intuitively reaches some very discerning elements in the people that he describes in this. And, of course, his summary of some of the Cromwellian conclusions that were reached during the Civil War which was a precursor, a precursor of the American War of Independence, a precursor of the French Revolution, the soviet Revolution, all the revolutions. It is an interesting thing. And Johnson makes it very clear that the Calvinist revolution which was really what the Civil War consisted of, the Calvinist revolution was the one great event which next to Luther and Calvin did more to bring individual liberty and rights to the people than anything else. It... in a way it secularized the Reformation. It brought into the political sphere and into the social sphere the theological rights and privileges which Calvin and Luther had pioneered. And certain elements, for instance, Calvin said the Church had a right to defend its own altars."
May 5, 2014
I started reading this book because of the name of the author was recommended to me by others. This is the first book work by Paul Johnson that I read. It covered a long history of the people in England (don’t let the title mistaken you to think it refer to English people as a whole, such as in America, Canada and Australia, etc). It is a helpful narrative history. One certainly get the sense that Johnson is very proud of England. One thing that raised my eyebrows is his constant reference to Pelagius, and I think he’s overstretching Pelagian contribution to English history.
December 31, 2010
Nice view from a non-historian eyes. It's nice to see an English-man who is aware of his nations faults and openly assaults bad choices and actions (in his opinion bad of course).
At all this book is very readable and thrilling. Enjoyed it very much.
At all this book is very readable and thrilling. Enjoyed it very much.
October 15, 2012
This is along book. I wanted to read a book the full history of England and love Paul Johnson, but this book was just good, not great. Maybe it was partially because my lack of general knowledge of the topic, making it harder to follow all the personalities, but I would still recommend this book.
June 9, 2018
Do polovice dobré, potom sa to bez podrobnejšej znalosti anglickej histórie stane značne nezrozumiteľné a pre laika nudné... znalci anglicej histórie od cca 16ho storočia nech si prihodia 1-2 hviezdy k hodnoteniu, ja to zatiaľ vzdávam.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews