The Normans by R. Allen Brown

The Normans Reviews

• 
  Andrew

  I got through this one halfway before I had to stop. Reading it was like listening to your 80 year old British uncle who was a museum curator most of his life. Often the author would branch off on short tangents citing people, places, and events with which I was very unfamiliar. That's not the author's fault, but this book isn't meant for readers like me with very limited knowledge of British or European history. I would recommend this book to anyone who is already well-versed in the subject, but otherwise leave this one on the shelf a while until you've acquired some context.
• 
  Cath

  Agree with other comments about both the author's pro-Norman stance and his grumpiness about professional trends among historians at the time of this book (about 1984). But I kind of enjoyed the author's obvious pro-Norman position (seemed like he felt the Normans had been getting a raw deal from other historians who, per the author, seemed to unfairly denigrate or ignore Norman achievements) and I also enjoyed the grumpiness. One thing for sure, this author definitely made me want to learn more about the Normans.
• 
  Tanja

  Leider nicht so interessant geschrieben... von langweiliger Jahreszahlen und Namenslistungen bis hin zu wiederholten Zusammenfassungen der Eigenschaften der Normannen nicht wirklich gut lesbar. Dennoch war das Thema interessant für mich als Verknüpfung der Wikingerzeit zu den Kreuzzügen. Lobenswert dass nicht nur gesellschaftliche Aspekte beleuchtet wurden sondern z.B. auch architektonische.
• 
  Keeley

  Overall, Brown's book is a lucid and reasonably well illustrated overview of the development of the Norman states: Normandy, Britain, southern Italy and Sicily, and the Crusader States. Like many historians he has an ax to grind; in this case, he is grumpy about recent (1984) trends in historical scholarship that devalue the Normans and chivalric achievements more generally in favor of sociological analyses that are not big on knights.
  On the plus side, the book is well organized and manages to avoid repetition while dealing with the different spheres of Norman influence. It also makes a pretty strong case, at least to the non-specialist academic reader, for the amazing accomplishments of the Normans in general and the Hauteville family, especially Bohemond, in particular.
  On the minus side, Brown repeatedly asserts that feudalism is a cohesive force (pace his bugaboo historian opponents). He doesn't make a strong effort to prove this, though, and the evidence on offer doesn't make the case on its own. (His beloved Bohemond, for instance, seems to be a pretty divisive force among the Crusaders and between Eastern and Western Christendom, even if he is a rock god at home.) Also, there's a section in the middle of the book where Brown uses the phrase "aristocratic penetration" about 482 times. Once, it is in combination with a "ripe," "fertile," and "wide open" Italy. If Brown had been in his twenties or thirties when writing this book, I would seriously have thought one of his colleagues dared him to publish the word "penetration" as many times as possible. Sadly, he was 60.
• 
  Josh

  This isn't going so well. Brown seems to be a rather biased Francophile (or Normanophile). Histories are never completely objective, at least none that are worth reading, but the constant praise of The Normans in this work detracts from any historical facts presented. It may redeem itself if I can stand to continue, but both are unlikely.
  
  Project tabled -- can't do it. I am convinced that Brown is going to discuss the Norman influence on the Apollo space missions in the 60s.
• 
  Pete daPixie

  Not just Normandy and Norman England but Normans in Italy, Sicily and the Norman 1st Crusade.
• 
  Meredith

  I finally got to meet the guys Anna Komemna drooled over from behind her palace screen!
  
  There is this strand of 'supremacy' that makes me uncomfortable. minus one star.