The book, which the publisher assures us is “superbly researched, accessibly written and thoughtfully and convincingly argued”, is clearly aimed at Mr Reid’s fellow enthusiasts, because students and scholars will easily identify the errors and misconceptions.
His aim has been “to provide a less Roman-centred overview of the period”, but he repeatedly laments the lack of archaeological enquiry into indigenous (as opposed to Roman) sites, so that he is dealing essentially with the same material as every other commentator on Roman Scotland. The difference here is in the spin that he applies to the evidence. At least one Amazon reviewer has been convinced, recommending the book “if you are willing to challenge your commonly held misconceptions about Roman-era Scotland”, without realizing that they probably aren’t misconceptions and Mr Reid has craftily set up a series of straw men to rail against.
Early in the book, Mr Reid draws particular attention to “confirmation bias”, where (he explains) “an observer selectively emphasizes data that confirms a particular theory while failing to consider evidence that challenges it” (p. 5). As it turns out, this is rather ironic, as Mr Reid himself, in his zeal to redress the alleged belittling of Caledonian culture by Romanist archaeologists and historians, willfully misrepresents several current theories and omits to mention facts that might prove inconvenient to his theories.
It would be tedious to enumerate them, one by one, but time and again previous writers (unnamed, unreferenced) are pilloried for having formed their opinion based on “a fixed Roman military supremacy viewpoint” (p. 87). We are in the hands, not of a Roman expert, nor even of an Iron Age specialist, but of an enthusiast, albeit a well-read one, but with a very particular axe to grind and a keen flare for debating-society rhetoric. And he doesn’t let facts get in the way of his “informed view”.