The duty of a historian is simply to understand and then convey that understanding, no more than that.

I feel slightly uneasy at the way historians are consulted as if history is going to repeat itself. It never does.

I believe passionately in preemptive pessimism, especially before a book comes out. I expect the worst both from reviewers and sales, and then, with any luck, I may be proved wrong.

It was only after five years in the army, when I was having to do a very boring job in a very boring place, that I thought: 'Why not try writing a novel?' partly out of youthful arrogance and partly because there had been a long line of writers in my mother's family.

I think it's outrageous if a historian has a 'leading thought' because it means they will select their material according to their thesis

I just love the days when you come out of the archives with half a dozen excellent descriptions or poignant accounts of personal experiences.

When my first novel was published, I went in great excitement round bookshops in central London to see if they had stocked it.