The latest in a very, very long line of books I've read detailing the history of the Kings and Queens of England, I thought I'd give this a go as a more lighthearted and irreverent approach to one of my favourite subjects. I would preface my review with the fact that, while I don't dislike David Mitchell, I'm not the biggest fan of his style of comedy and I'd rather work my brain cells watching his wife present 'Only Connect'. Nevertheless, I thought his wit might suit the historical bent so was willing to give it a try.

It is very, very easy to hear the author speaking to you as you read; his voice in the writing is unmistakable. It's blunt, a little pessimistic and sweary in places, but equally there are a lot of tangents and anecdotes that lead you a bit astray. For that in itself, if you are a fan of his, you will likely love this. It is a refreshing take on the history; as he says, he's not a historian and so sees no need to try and remain objective. As a result, pretty much every ruler gets called out on their bulls**t, their failures are picked over and their triumphs are belittled. 

The issue I had with this style though is, overall, it doesn't feel like there's that much substance to the book. It's not meant to be a history tome, so I wasn't expecting detailed analysis, but there's also not enough comedy to set it squarely in the 'humour' section. I didn't get any 'laugh out loud' moments, and some of the pop culture references are already starting to age, so I'm not entirely sure it'll stand the test of time either. Perhaps I'm just missing the point because of my lack of sense of humour... Maybe if you really are starting out in exploring the topic, this might be a good book for you to begin with - it is clear in setting out the order and the broad brush events of each reign without being bogged down in minutiae, and is certainly an easier introduction to digest than some of the other published works of this type.

The book does focus on England rather than Britain, so don't be shocked when you're 90% of the way through the book and only reading about Henry VIII. On the upside, he does start his book pre-William the Conqueror, even going so far as to briefly discuss those rulers we can't even prove existed (or indeed are flat out myth - Arthur, looking at you). In fact, in the midst of what is generally quite a negative voice, I think he reflects most positively on Harold Godwinson, and his thoughts on the fact that the rulers pre-1066 don't get regnal numbers is a repeated lament throughout. 

It's not bad, it's just not me. So I'll be unhauling this one...