Product Description

The first serious and sustained attempt to study the remarkable history of the British aristocracy as it has unfolded during the last hundred years. David Cannadine recounts the process by which the notable and nobles lost their wealth, power and prestige. The result is a compelling account of one of the most significant changes to have occurred in modern British history: it is also a riveting human drama, sometimes absurd, sometimes tragic, invariably fascinating.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #537757 in Books
• Published on: 1996-03-08
• Original language: English
• Binding: Paperback
• 832 pages

Customer Reviews

Possibly Cannadine's best work to-date!
David Cannadine

The Decline and Fall of the British Aristocracy

This is an extraordinary book, which seems, inexplicably, to have been disregarded by British readers.

It has much in common with Hennessy's brilliant Whitehall, the definitive history of the senior civil service. Both convey complex theses with great clarity, but neither is an academic "ego-trip". The scholarly niceties are fully, but unobtrusively, observed. Both are formidable-looking tomes, lightened by ingenious communicators who can turn the odd witticism. Most importantly, both illustrate the substructure of overlapping undemocratic, occasionally anti-democratic, governing élites.

In any other modern state, this work would be a significant contribution to historiography. But in Britain, with its "on-the-hoof" constitution, it is vital to a better understanding of government and society. Here élites remain unconscionably influential. It seems scarcely credible that The New York Times Book Review claimed that this area had "never been fully charted before".

However, both Hennessy and Cannadine indulge in the historians' practice of introducing each chapter with a plethora of quotations. Cannadine seems somewhat tongue-in-cheek in his observance of M.R. Cohen's maxim: "the safeguard against bias in writing history,... is not to indulge in useless resolutions to be free of bias...."

Sociologists often remark on the upper-class feudal practice of consolidating power through marriage. Cannadine, almost incidentally, catalogues this convention. Expressions like "chosen people": "Club": "cosy connections": "cousins": "cousinhood": "inherited qualities": "God's elect": "grandson": "kinsman": "landed élite": "patronage": "primogeniture" and "public schools and Oxbridge", proliferate. The term "Godparent/child" connotes life-long, quasi-religious extra-marital relationships with anticipated social and economic advantages.

The major qualification for admission to the "patrician" classes [aristocracy and gentry] was ownership of sufficient land for a country seat, producing the income to support a life of leisure. It is difficult to accept that, within living memory, the aristocracy also "owned" towns like "Down Town L.'a." [Littlehampton]. The "ownership" of Port Talbot or Swansea seems harder to comprehend.

Cannadine brilliantly provides missing pieces of the historic and social jigsaw. He sheds light on the impact of Britain on Ireland but also of Ireland on Britain. Anglo-Irish "gentry" owned a staggering 78.4% of Ireland. Although in Scotland the gentry had almost 93% of land, there were crucial differences. The Anglo-Irish ascendancy was foreign, in culture, religion and origins, apart from a few treacherous renegades who betrayed and robbed their clans to become "native aristocracy". In 19th-century Scotland there was alternative employment, whereas the indigenous Irish grubbed for subsistence as tenants-at-will. The Famine Fields of Connacht and vast fertile ornamental parklands of the "British Junkers" , still witness the massive disparity between those regarded as aborigines and their masters. Nonetheless, Cannadine holds that the relative poverty of the Anglo-Irish gentry fired their military ambitions. They constituted a disproportionate share of Britain's military heroes from Wellington to Montgomery.

The British patrician classes were a homogeneous group, bound by blood, land, religion, education, power and status, who foreseeing their diminishing power, reacted violently. "[And] they were prepared to go to any lengths to prevent Home Rule and support the Ulster Loyalists. As such, their quasi-revolutionary behaviour was an almost complete rejection of the liberal, constitutionalist patrician tradition in British politics. But although the die-hards made a great deal of noise, and attracted much attention, they achieved nothing."

Contemporary Irish history plainly challenges Professor Cannadine's conclusion.

World War II was possibly the last great opportunity for the territorial élite to show its mettle. Many were given positions in local administration. The younger son of the 17th Lord Dunsany [Shakespeare's Dunsinane?], Admiral Sir Reginald Aylmer Ranfurley Plunkett-Ernle-Ernle-Drax was retired as C.-in-C., The Nore in 1941; he became a private in the Home Guard, but wangled a job as Commodore of Convoys.

It was, in particular, the last gasp of the Anglo-Irish Junkers. Admiral of the Fleet the Earl of Cork and Orrery commanded the disastrous expedition to Narvik in 1940, and was retired. He pestered Churchill who "in desperation ordered that he be despatched to oversee the defence of the Shetland Islands." The 6th Lord Gort's contribution to the Dunkirk Spirit should be remembered along with the dash of Allanbrooke, the modesty of Montgomery and the intellect of the younger son of 4th Earl of Caledon, "Churchill's... beau ideal of the gentleman general," Harold Rupert Leofric Alexander.

In Hertfordshire, rather than Ulster, the origin of his title, the 10th Earl of Cavan thought "he would be especially helpful, given his long military experience and expertise as a Master of Foxhounds. He offered his services (along with his horse) as a despatch rider, and at the same time, his chauffeur signed on with the Earl's car. In fact, the former Chief of the Imperial General Staff soon found himself appointed a mere [Home Guard] NCO in charge of the Headquarters Communications Platoon. But later on, he was transferred to London, where he became the chairman of a board to approve officers in the Home Guard for regular commissions," a practice seems to run counter to declared Government policy.

World War II also resulted in a shortage of manpower, leading to the disappearance of the servant class. Two females staffed the great Petworth House. Income taxes rose [as high as 97.5%] and rents were "ruthlessly pegged." Great houses were commandeered by the state. In Derbyshire, army personnel without due deference to their betters left Eggington Hall with all the taps running; the ceilings collapsed and the building had to be demolished. Thus the aristocracy were deprived of their servants, houses and large incomes.

Cannadine's pictorial illustrations add nothing to his work, but the contents of his Appendices are fascinating. There are the expected tables showing membership of Cabinets and lists of landholdings, but also enthralling appendices of ambassadorships, itemising each incumbent's financial standing and family connections. There are records of directorships, and analyses of mayoral appointments in towns [duly classified as small, industrial and seaside] to 1945. Universities' predilection for kow-towing is also duly noted. Professor Cannadine claims that it took a decade to complete this work. How better could a leading historian spend his time?

An interesting romp through the declining fortunes of the aristocracy
Despite its length (709 pages excluding appendices and the index), this a breezy, and largely very readable, account of the decline of the of the British aristocracy from the last quarter of the nineteenth century onwards - in terms of land-holding, wealth, political influence, and social importance. He outlines also the land sales forced on many families from the 1890's onwards and the disappearance of the London palaces of the great aristocrats and the grand country homes, particularly after the second world, war as the lack of servants and the enormous costs of running such establishments took their toll. This all contributed to the decline in `county society'. Whilst many aristocrats could see the way the wind was blowing, others held on to their belief that their privileges remained. One particularly amusing example mentioned by Cannadine is that of Lady Londonderry who wrote to Churchill requesting that war-time travel restrictions be lifted so that her relatives to travel to a family wedding!

The book conveys a large amount of information but in an entertaining style that is anything but that of a dry academic tome and for that reason is does not put off the general reader. In fact I have been spurred to read further on this subject.

I would have given this five stars but for the author's intensely irritating over-use of "and" , "but" or "for" at the beginning of sentences. I found this incredibly frustrating as it became so irritating that it disrupted my reading of the book. Whilst I recognise that it isn't wrong to start sentences in this way, the advice is to do so sparingly. Based on a random selection of pages from the book the author began about a third, possibly more, of his sentences in this way. I would not normally count this sort of thing - it is a testament to how infuriating it was that I took this somewhat unusual step. There were also a few instances where the author mentioned an event several times before explaining what it was and why it was significant - for example the Jameson raid was mentioned several times and about a hundred pages before it was explained even in brief. Another example is the comment about Lord Montagu of Beaulieu: "In other ways - as witness his epitaph - his life was conventionally landed." It would have been useful to include the epitaph but it wasn't there and I could not find it elsewhere in the book.

All said, though, this is a good read, particularly if bad grammar and occasionally sloppy editing do not bother you.