Customer Reviews

AN Imperial Possession: Britain in the Roman Empire, 54 BC - AD 409 (Penguin History of Britain)

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This text is written by Dr. David Mattingly, Professor of Roman Archaeology at the University of Leicester, as as part of the 'Penguin History of Britain' series. The intent is to provide a concise history of Britain as a Roman territory and province within the context of imperial Rome.
(detailed here: [...])

Dr. Mattingly is undoubtedly qualified to write such a text. He also works at one of the centers of the latest research in this subject by virtue of his place of employment. His access to archaeological, manuscript, and other evidence is quite obvious in the quality of the research, bibliographical data, and analysis that he provides in this hefty tome. These are its most prominent virtues.

The intended audience, though, is not the average reader. Dr. Mattingly, while well versed in his subject, is not writing with a Carl Sagan sort of easily understood narrative flair. The writing style is more similar to academic journal articles; florid prose, infused with specialist jargon, and with the assumption of basic knowledge of common historiographical and archaeological methodology. In short, it is written for those with at least an undergraduate or gifted amateur education.

This is not necessarily a flaw in itself, but it certainly detracts from a series that is intended for those with at least a slightly-more-than-general interest in the history of Britain. This volume fails to achieve that purpose.

There are a few flaws, though surprisingly few given the scope and size of this volume. The author tends to have a 'nativist' bias in that he considers Britannia as having been unduly harmed in some ways by its association with Rome. The analysis is slanted toward British sensibilities. Any bias is a flaw, but this one is uncomfortably common in academic works on this subject, and there is no reason to perpetuate that perennial problem. He has some significant insights that are readily apparent if one is already familiar with the state of research in this subject, but they are often obscured by the aforementioned tendency toward usage of jargon. He has an excellent understanding of the available evidence and deserves to be better understood by his audience.

I rate this text 4.5 stars as a resource for specialists in the field, 4 stars for those with an active and frequent interest in early British history, and 3 stars for a general audience.