Best selling Irish history book?

gaiscioch

I've been reading a good 1995 review of the Famine by Christine Kinealy where she describes Cecil Woodham-Smith’s The Great Hunger (1962) as 'the best selling Irish history book of all time.' It started me thinking about the issue and other contenders for the position. Where would statistics on such sales be available, especially for a book like Woodham-Smith's which has been on continuous sale for 53 years ago?

I suspect Thomas Cahill, How the Irish Saved Civilisation (1995), Moody & Martin (eds), The Course of Irish History (1967), JJ Lee, Ireland 1912-1985: Politics and Society (1989), and, perhaps, JC Beckett, The Making of Modern Ireland 1603-1923 (1965) and RF Foster, Modern Ireland 1600-1972 (1988) aren't too far behind.

If Declan Kiberd's Inventing Ireland (1995) is considered a history book (cultural history) then that must surely be near the very top in terms of sales. In the same literary history vein, has Daniel Corkery's The Hidden Ireland been out of print even once since 1925?

For the medieval period, I'd propose Kenneth Nicholls seminal masterpiece Gaelic and Gaelicised Ireland in The Middle Ages (1972) for the number one sales spot there.

Or... has one of Tim Pat Coogan's books outsold them all? Anybody have suggestions for the top spots, or ways of finding an answer to this?

Zebra3

Probably Ireland since 1870 or some other book that has been/is on the school ciriculum.

pedroeibar1

Cahill’s book would be a very long way out in front. Two years on the NYT bestseller list would bring sales to over a million copies, plus it has been translated into a dozen languages and was on best-seller lists elsewhere, so I’d guess total sales of at least 2 million. FWIW he also wrote one +/-on how the Jews saved civilization that hit about a million in sales. Not sure if he has planned one on the gentlemen from the Middle East, but their contribution has not been too bad either!

Cahill's book on the Irish was an exception. First runs of history books by known and respected authors are in the few thousands, if lucky. There is little money in most non-fiction, the real money is made in fiction, mainly from the film rights. Coogan appeals to a specific audience, which thankfully is quite small as much of what he dishes up is opinion, not history.

gaiscioch

Zebra3 wrote: »

Probably Ireland since 1870 or some other book that has been/is on the school ciriculum.

Forgot about secondary school sales. That Ireland Since 1870 book was by Mark Tierney if I recall. When I was invigilating years ago in college I had a good chat with my French history lecturer who wrote the second-level history book on Europe and he was telling me the sales allowed him to go off to France for a few years more research. What a life!

pedroeibar1

gaiscioch wrote: »

Forgot about secondary school sales. That Ireland Since 1870 book was by Mark Tierney if I recall. When I was invigilating years ago in college I had a good chat with my French history lecturer who wrote the second-level history book on Europe and he was telling me the sales allowed him to go off to France for a few years more research. What a life!

I’d find that hard to accept because the figures do not stack up.

On average 60k students sit the LC. Even if quarter of them study history, that’s 15k. Assume the history book is the one favoured by most so that makes 8k. Assume the book is on the course for 6 years, so rounded up it makes sales of 50k reduced to 30k (allowing for second-hand sales) Royalties on paperbacks range between 1 and 10%. Assume a SP of €20, so royalties of 5% give €1 per copy or €30k spread over 6 years. Although they are paid semi-annually, that amounts to about €400 a month.

ChicagoJoe

gaiscioch wrote: »

Or... has one of Tim Pat Coogan's books outsold them all? Anybody have suggestions for the top spots, or ways of finding an answer to this?

I'd say his book on Micheal Collins would have been a mega seller all right, possibly the largest, they even based a major movie on it.

ChicagoJoe

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Cahill’s book would be a very long way out in front. Two years on the NYT bestseller list would bring sales to over a million copies, plus it has been translated into a dozen languages and was on best-seller lists elsewhere, so I’d guess total sales of at least 2 million. FWIW he also wrote one +/-on how the Jews saved civilization that hit about a million in sales. Not sure if he has planned one on the gentlemen from the Middle East, but their contribution has not been too bad either!

Cahill's book on the Irish was an exception. First runs of history books by known and respected authors are in the few thousands, if lucky. There is little money in most non-fiction, the real money is made in fiction, mainly from the film rights. Coogan appeals to a specific audience, which thankfully is quite small as much of what he dishes up is opinion, not history.

Says the fella who fails to provide any reliable link to back this up or most of his rants on the forum

pedroeibar1

ChicagoJoe wrote: »

Says the fella who fails to provide any reliable link to back this up or most of his rants on the forum

At times I wonder why I bother.:rolleyes: You and Coogan have much in common, lots of spurious talk, bias and more bluster than factual back-up -

From Cahill’s own site

Published in March of 1995, How the Irish Saved Civilization spent nearly two years on the New York Times Bestseller List, peaking at #2. With over 1,300,000 copies in print, its sales are increasing annually as it is being adopted into Western civilization college courses throughout the USA. It has been published throughout the English-speaking world (UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa), and in translation throughout Latin America (in Portuguese and Spanish), Europe (in Czech, Dutch, German, Italian, Norwegian, Polish, and Spanish), and Asia (in standardized Chinese and Japanese). How the Irish Saved Civilization also became a bestseller in Italy.

The last time Coogan put his head above the parapet was to promote his book on his version of the Famine. He had it handed to him on a plate by a series of historians, who showed that he was writing with an agenda and making wild claims, confusing the USA with Canada and not realising that 1851/2 is in a different decade to 1843
Here is just one post from a thread showing the idiocy of TPC’s claims –

[TPC ]………made several erroneous claims, one being that during the Famine Lord Lansdowne's Kenmare Estate forcefully ‘expatriated tenants to Canada in coffin ships, with inadequate clothing and in poor health, and that the local PP spoke against the practice.’ This is incorrect and totally unrepresentative of what happened. If TPC bothered to read ‘The Lansdowne Estate in Kerry’ by Gerard Lyne he would learn the ignorance of his remarks.
His claims are wrong, because Kenmare emigrants went to Canada AFTER the Famine, starting in 1851, with a 1851/2 total of 1300 landing at Quebec . (see below). The first phase of emigration from the Kenmare Estate was when a small number of emigrants went to the USA in 1843/44, followed by some more in 1845 (many of whom went to grasp the opportunity of a paid passage with cash for seed capital) and the third, the biggest phase went in 1849, when the Famine was over. Many of the last wave were well-to-do, seeking a better life, and had sold their cattle & furniture to have extra cash for when they landed.

You would find sufficient sources quoted in my post above to keep you reading for weeks, - it would be worthwhile because the sources deal in fact, are unbiased and educational. But then I’m not expecting you to seek out the truth, or even bother ……

Ipso

Has anyone read "How the Irish saved Civilisation"?
Sounds a bit the Irish are a great bunch, self back slapping to me.

pedroeibar1

Ipso wrote: »

Has anyone read "How the Irish saved Civilisation"?
Sounds a bit the Irish are a great bunch, self back slapping to me.

Yes, I've read it - it came out when I was living in NYC and you could not escape it on an almost daily basis. It is a bit self-congratulatory, big feel-good factor, lots about the monks and overall quite superficial. An ok read, but most with a basic grasp of Irish history would not be overly impressed. I think I still have it but never was tempted to reread it. It gave the yanks what they wanted and Cahill is a very wealthy guy. He is not a charlatan though and has a very strong academic record.

Would something like F. S. L. Lyons, Ireland since the famine not feature as it was a leaving cert txt book, its the one we did, its an excellent book.

ChicagoJoe

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

At times I wonder why I bother.:rolleyes: You and Coogan have much in common, lots of spurious talk, bias and more bluster than factual back-up -

From Cahill’s own site
The last time Coogan put his head above the parapet was to promote his book on his version of the Famine. He had it handed to him on a plate by a series of historians, who showed that he was writing with an agenda and making wild claims, confusing the USA with Canada and not realising that 1851/2 is in a different decade to 1843
Here is just one post from a thread showing the idiocy of TPC’s claims –

You would find sufficient sources quoted in my post above to keep you reading for weeks, - it would be worthwhile because the sources deal in fact, are unbiased and educational. But then I’m not expecting you to seek out the truth, or even bother ……

My post was about TP Coogan's book on Michael Collins which while you may disagree with some of it's contents, would easily be one of the best selling Irish history books and not the one on the Famine. The link you provided is to a post of your own and your opinion of his famine book which make in fairness you have some valid points, but it doesn't take away from the fact that like him or not, his Michael Collins is surely one of the largest best sellers on an aspect of Irish history regardless.

pedroeibar1

ChicagoJoe wrote: »

My post was about TP Coogan's book on Michael Collins which while you may disagree with some of it's contents, would easily be one of the best selling Irish history books and not the one on the Famine. The link you provided is to a post of your own and your opinion of his famine book which make in fairness you have some valid points, but it doesn't take away from the fact that like him or not, his Michael Collins is surely one of the largest best sellers on an aspect of Irish history regardless.

C'mon Joe, get real, the thread title is “Best Selling Irish History Book”.
I have not read TPC’s book on Collins, so I will not comment on his treatment of the subject matter. However good, bad or indifferent, it is a niche book on a niche topic for a niche market. Common-sense suggests it would never outsell a general title aimed at a non-political audience such as Cahill’s book / audience.

I asked a friend about History in the LC and she tells me that a figure of 10% is nearer the mark, so the numbers I quoted to Gaiscioch above are too high (not that he had the manners to respond anyway!)

Peregrinus

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

I’d find that hard to accept because the figures do not stack up.

On average 60k students sit the LC. Even if quarter of them study history, that’s 15k. Assume the history book is the one favoured by most so that makes 8k. Assume the book is on the course for 6 years, so rounded up it makes sales of 50k reduced to 30k (allowing for second-hand sales) Royalties on paperbacks range between 1 and 10%. Assume a SP of €20, so royalties of 5% give €1 per copy or €30k spread over 6 years. Although they are paid semi-annually, that amounts to about €400 a month.

Interesting.

Couple of points:

1. I think there might be more money in writing Junior Cert texts. Similar numbers sit it, but for a subject like history a much larger proportion would take it (because there are fewer alternatives). Last year 54,000 (out of 59,000) sat history at either higher or ordinary levels.

2. I don't know how many competing textbooks there are for the Junior Cert History course, but let's say you succeed in writing a textbook which dominates the market, and 75% of candidates buy it. That's about 40,000 sales per year.

3. The current edition of "Footsteps in Time", which is a Junior Cert history text, retails for €41. The rival "Living History" is a two volume-work which in total costs €55. "New Complete History", with workbook, is a comparative bargain at €38. Let's say the average price for a junior cert history text is €45.

3. It's my impression that royalty levels on academic texts are higher than for, e.g, fiction. I knew an academic author who was getting 12.5%, though (a) that was a while ago, and (b) it was a very well-established text with regular repeat sales in it's nth edition; he might not have been getting that when the book was first written. Royalty levels for school texts are nevertheless a bit higher than for fiction because most textbooks are commissioned, and so you negotiate the royalties before you write anything, and you won't write anything unless it's going to be worth your while. Lets say 8% for an average.

4. And lets say the book is the dominant book for six years before being superseded.

5. But, wait, second-hand sales! Let's say that each book which is bought new is later on-sold once, or passed to a sibling. Over a six-year period this will only happen once, because the junior cycle is three years long. So in fact only half the students sitting Junior Cert history buy a new textbook.

5. So we have 54,000 x 75% x €45 x 8% x 6 x 0.5, give or take. I make that €437,400, or an annual average of €72,900 over the six years. Not so bad.

Of course, it may be that no one book gets 75% of the market. Perhaps 50% would be closer to the mark. Plus, these books often have multiple authors, so the author's royalties have to get divvied up. Adjusting for all that, an individual author's take could be a good deal lower. Assuming a 50% market share and three authors dividing the royalties equally, I calculate €16,200 per year per author for six years.

The moral? 1. Write junior cert texts, not leaving cert texts. 1. Write them on your own.

pedroeibar1

Very interesting figures P, thanks, hard to argue with them. The only comment I can add is that the (very) few textbook authors I have encountered still treble-job as teachers in regular schools and do extra hours in places like the INstit. of Ed. in addition to 'authoring' - and none drive 'posh' cars. I wonder does textbook writing qualify for the tax exemption for writers or is that limited to 'creative' works?

Arsemageddon

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Very interesting figures P, thanks, hard to argue with them. The only comment I can add is that the (very) few textbook authors I have encountered still treble-job as teachers in regular schools and do extra hours in places like the INstit. of Ed. in addition to 'authoring' - and none drive 'posh' cars. I wonder does textbook writing qualify for the tax exemption for writers or is that limited to 'creative' works?

Text books don't seem to be on the Revenue list of exempt artists

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/artists-exemption-section-195-1997-act.html

Peregrinus

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Very interesting figures P, thanks, hard to argue with them. The only comment I can add is that the (very) few textbook authors I have encountered still treble-job as teachers in regular schools and do extra hours in places like the INstit. of Ed. in addition to 'authoring' - and none drive 'posh' cars. I wonder does textbook writing qualify for the tax exemption for writers or is that limited to 'creative' works?

The artists exemption is only available for "an original and creative work" and, so far as books are concerned, the Revenue used to interpret this to mean "only fiction or poetry". But they seem to have become a bit more flaithiúil in recent years. The list that Arsemageddon links to includes Bertie Ahern - The Autobiography by one Ahern, B which, questions about its accuracy aside, at any rate is not marketed as fiction. More to the point, it also includes works like The Quakers Of County Tipperary 1655-1924 and Ireland - A History, which from the titles look a lot like history books.

Arsemageddon says it includes no school textbooks, but it only lists approvals granted in a particular three-month period (October-December 2014), so it may simply be that no new textbooks were submitted for approval in that period.

Arsemageddon

Peregrinus wrote: »

Arsemageddon says it includes no school textbooks, but it only lists approvals granted in a particular three-month period (October-December 2014), so it may simply be that no new textbooks were submitted for approval in that period.

The list on Revenues website includes all books that have been granted tax-exemption since the start of the scheme. The Oct-Dec 2014 bit refers to books that were added to the overall list during that period.

Peregrinus

My mistake - you're quite right.

Still, when the list includes an academic text like Bartlett's Ireland - A History, there's obviously no general exclusion for scholarly history texts.

I think what may be going on here is that to be "original and creative" a book has to be based on new research, offer an original perspective, and generally make a signficant contribution by casting new light on a subject or changing the existing understanding. The Revenue have issued guidelines addressing this. The end result may be that a survey, summary or synthesis of existing scholarship in history (or any other topic) such as you might expect to find in a school textbook isn't sufficiently "orginal and creative", but something based on new research, or offering a new interpretation, may be.

pedroeibar1

Sort of a blank canvas really..........if a work does not fit under 'creative' it might slip in under 'cultural merit'; although there are several local history books included, I'd guess it would be hard to get Revenue to accept a 'new' twist on for e.g the Thirty Years War.

Peregrinus

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Sort of a blank canvas really..........if a work does not fit under 'creative' it might slip in under 'cultural merit'; although there are several local history books included, I'd guess it would be hard to get Revenue to accept a 'new' twist on for e.g the Thirty Years War.

Perhaps not a "new twist", but certain new research into primary sources.

ChicagoJoe

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

C'mon Joe, get real, the thread title is “Best Selling Irish History Book”.
I have not read TPC’s book on Collins, so I will not comment on his treatment of the subject matter. However good, bad or indifferent, it is a niche book on a niche topic for a niche market. Common-sense suggests it would never outsell a general title aimed at a non-political audience such as Cahill’s book / audience.

Thank you for confirming my point on post no.7 You even admit you have never read the book or even some of it and yet denounce it regardless !!!

pedroeibar1

ChicagoJoe wrote: »

Thank you for confirming my point on post no.7 You even admit you have never read the book or even some of it and yet denounce it regardless !!!

Poor old Joe: you wake up and, still half asleep, add yet another nonsensical post to your growing litany. Read what I wrote, where did I “denounce” TPC’s book? I actually said I would not comment on it. Are you so much in awe of TPC that you think his book on Collins outsold Cahill’s 2 million or so bestseller? :rolleyes:

gaiscioch

Although historical fiction rather than history on an Irish topic, Leon Uris's Trinity was a huge seller internationally back in the 1970s - this source says 8 million copies were sold.