Before I commence with my review I feel I should state that my knowledge of the history of the Indian sub-continent was limited, at best, prior the reading this book.  However, I am well versed in history in general, and I believe that my readings on other topics have provided me with a valuable frame of reference for my review of Keay's "India: A History".
Without a doubt, Keay set himself a daunting task; "India" the nation-state is the end result of colonial policy and modern politics and does not in and of itself represent the extent of Indian culture or the breadth of its geography.  In effect, Keay undertook a task equivalent to writing a history of pre-European North America in one volume.  One item that will stay with me from this work is just how fractured and variegated the Indian Sub-Continent's people are.  Unfortunately, even after acknowledging the difficulty of the task he set for himself, I am afraid that the author fell short.
It certainly wasn't for lack of effort or detailed historical research.  Quite the contrary, in fact; the reader is pummeled page after page with a barrage of dynasties and kingdoms, that to the non-expert seem to blur into one.  While politics are undeniably critical to any history, Keay all to often ignored cultural and religious developments while examining political ones in excruciating detail.  Of particular note was the scant attention he paid to the evolution of Hinduism.  I realize that this is supposed to be a broad overview, but considering the role Hinduism has played in India's development, I feel an examination of it would have been worth a chapter, at least.
The one area where I felt Keay got things right was the Indian drive for independence from the British.  From about 1850 on, he seems to develop a real passion for the material and injects some vibrancy into what had been a very dry narrative to that point.  While some reviewers have complained of a pro-British bias, I found the writing to be very well balanced, and if anything, nominally pro-Indian.
Unfortunately, even in the modern era, the writing continues to be uneven.  For example, he examines the rise of the Congress Party in great depth, but offers almost no detail on the Indo-Pak wars.  Furthermore, after going to great lengths to discuss India the Sub-Continent (as opposed to the country) Keay has almost nothing to say about Pakistan in the post-partition era.
In the end, this isn't a terrible history, but it is terribly uneven, and incredibly dry.  I definitely took away a greater knowledge of India and a better understanding of its history, but I was left wanting more.  Perhaps that's the nature of any one-volume history, but I think it owes more to Keay's dry delivery and under appreciation of the sub-continent's cultures and religions.  If you're new to Indian history, this probably isn't a bad place to start, but it is by no means a definitive work.
Before I commence with my review I feel I should state that my knowledge of the history of the Indian sub-continent was limited, at best, prior the reading this book. However, I am well versed in history in general, and I believe that my readings on other topics have provided me with a valuable frame of reference for my review of Keay's "India: A History". Without a doubt, Keay set himself a daunting task; "India" the nation-state is the end result of colonial policy and modern politics and does not in and of itself represent the extent of Indian culture or the breadth of its geography. In effect, Keay undertook a task equivalent to writing a history of pre-European North America in one volume. One item that will stay with me from this work is just how fractured and variegated the Indian Sub-Continent's people are. Unfortunately, even after acknowledging the difficulty of the task he set for himself, I am afraid that the author fell short. It certainly wasn't for lack of effort or detailed historical research. Quite the contrary, in fact; the reader is pummeled page after page with a barrage of dynasties and kingdoms, that to the non-expert seem to blur into one. While politics are undeniably critical to any history, Keay all to often ignored cultural and religious developments while examining political ones in excruciating detail. Of particular note was the scant attention he paid to the evolution of Hinduism. I realize that this is supposed to be a broad overview, but considering the role Hinduism has played in India's development, I feel an examination of it would have been worth a chapter, at least. The one area where I felt Keay got things right was the Indian drive for independence from the British. From about 1850 on, he seems to develop a real passion for the material and injects some vibrancy into what had been a very dry narrative to that point. While some reviewers have complained of a pro-British bias, I found the writing to be very well balanced, and if anything, nominally pro-Indian. Unfortunately, even in the modern era, the writing continues to be uneven. For example, he examines the rise of the Congress Party in great depth, but offers almost no detail on the Indo-Pak wars. Furthermore, after going to great lengths to discuss India the Sub-Continent (as opposed to the country) Keay has almost nothing to say about Pakistan in the post-partition era. In the end, this isn't a terrible history, but it is terribly uneven, and incredibly dry. I definitely took away a greater knowledge of India and a better understanding of its history, but I was left wanting more. Perhaps that's the nature of any one-volume history, but I think it owes more to Keay's dry delivery and under appreciation of the sub-continent's cultures and religions. If you're new to Indian history, this probably isn't a bad place to start, but it is by no means a definitive work.