This booklet, Prof Leslie Alcock's Groam House Lecture for 1992, can be strongly recommended to anyone who is seriously interested in finding out about the historical context of the Picts. Those who have read Prof Alcock's previous work will know that he is at pains to de-exoticise the Picts. to rescue them from the freak-show of Early Mediaeval history. In his on-going attempt to overturn what he has labelled the "Foul Hordes Paradigm" he urges us not to focus too narrowly on the Picts, but instead to place them in the broader context of the other Barbarian nations of north-west Europe. This essay accomplishes just that by offering a comparison between the Picts and the peoples with whom they shared northern Britain: their fellow Celts - the indigenous Britons and the immigrant Scots - and the Germanic Angles of Northumbria. An exploration of the similarities and differences between these neighbours will, Prof Alcock maintains: ", help us to understand better what it meant to be a Pict" (5).

The author admits that a comprehensive survey is a Herculean task, well beyond the scope of a public lecture. He limits himself, therefore, to the period after the mid C6th. by which time all the players were already on the scene, and avoids altogether the large and important topic of religion (hence no mention of sculpture), pointing out that the Church is an obvious choice for a future Groam House Lecture.

Although Prof Alcock's study incorporates some historical and linguistic material, the great bulk of his evidence is archaeological. His five chapters cover warfare and fortifications (Ch 2), settlement (Ch 3), and long-distance trade and luxury metalwork (Ch 4). Also included are a brief "outline history" of the period (Ch 1) and a closing section on the practices of kingship, which Alcock considers to be the key to understanding social organisation in North Britain. He leaves it to others to offer a similar treatment using art historical or documentary sources.

The author presents his arguments clearly and concisely, providing full documentation in footnotes for those who wish to pursue the material in greater detail. He covers a great deal of ground and gives the reader much to ponder. Sometimes it is the similarities in material cultures rather than the differences which are more striking. How significant was all this to the peoples concerned, who were clearly in no doubt as to their ethnic affiliation? The author is at times provocative - even if they ultimately come to reject his arguments about the massive silver chains, readers may well be given pause for thought by Alcock's assertion that: a Pictish attribution seems unreasonable " (41).

This most professional-looking volume exhibits even higher production values than its two predecessors: a sharper typeface, foot- rather than end-notes, abundant line drawings and three pages of colour illustrations - and represents excellent value for £3.95. It is virtually free of misprints. One minor niggle is the occasional slight incongruity between captions and figures, the latter mostly reproduced from previous publications, eg the caption to Fig 15 does not seem to correspond to the relative position of the picture. This, however, is a small point, and in each case it is easy enough to work out what is intended.

The author's contention that by focusing too closely on the Picts we are in danger of mistaking the wood for the trees is neatly illustrated by the book's cover. Readers might be forgiven for mistaking the panel, which depicts a mounted warrior in profile above a knot of zoomorphic interlace, for a long-lost Pictish slab. In fact, it is a stele from Thuringia in Germany. The Picts did not have the monopoly on this image but, if in chauvinistic mood, the Pictish enthusiast could claim that, on the basis of this example, the Picts were better at drawing horses!

Katherine Forsyth