Title: Far from the best
Review: This mish-mash of straight historical narrative (and a history of the "kings and queens" sort and not a social or even economoc history) and historiography is often difficult to follow, much less learn from. What does the use of the work "Britain" by other writers, the general public, or Library of Congress Subject Headings have to do with history? (and as an aside on the last point, there has been long and agonizing debate in library circles about which term should be used and for what geographic part, not a simple error as Davies would like to prove). Why illustrate historical events with romanticized paintings from later times? Why disect other historians' views of history instead of writing something new? Why stud the text with references to contemporary items such as the movie Braveheart or the Irish singing group incorrectly called The Corries? This scatter-shot version of history adds little new information and ignores areas better documented elsewhere.
Is this product review negative?