I read it recently. Well I skimmed through it. I noticed something about this strange track line running down Knap Hill called 'the devil's trackway' which he said was utterly inexplicable and noone knew anything about. But asking on here it turns out that it's utterly explicable and people do know about it and it's the remains of a thoroughly unmystical and unprehistoric method of getting stuff from the top to the bottom of hills. So that doesn't say much for his/her research on *that* topic. So you wonder about the quality of research in any of the rest of the book do you not. (which was you have to admit, rather full of the usual whoooh mystical druidic yoghurt weaving style flimflam. )
Don't beat about the bush will you Rhiannon. I do want to like books like that but when they refuse to distinguish honestly between what's romantic fantasy and what's 'vibes, man' and what's based on archaeology I can't be bothered with them. I don't mind romantic fantasy or vibes or informed / uninformed speculation as long as it's made clear what it is. Personally speaking.