This new catalogue of Roman and Late Antique lamps from Rhodes follows on the heels of several other recent publications of lamps of the same period from different parts of Greece including Athens, Corinth, and Isthmia.Footnote ² Katsioti's (K.'s) aim is to make available the essential data for the large number of (mainly) pottery lamps which have been found in Rhodes since the mid 1940s, mostly from rescue excavations in and around the city (3). The result is a weighty volume containing catalogue entries for some 1,350 lamps, most accompanied by new color photos. The catalogue is prefaced by a useful account (6–21) of the topography and history of Rhodes during the late Roman and early Byzantine periods focusing particularly on its cemeteries, from which many of the lamps derive. Where possible, specific archaeological contexts are given, citing the original excavation logbooks “in case anyone would like to refer to [them]” (4).

The catalogue itself begins on p. 25 and continues for the next 527 pages, ending with discussion of two copper alloy lamps (551–52). It is arranged according to the regional origin of the lamps, starting with lamps made in Corinth and concluding with a small group of lamps imported from North Africa. In between are seven other regional groups, the largest by far (almost 40 percent) being lamps from Asia Minor. Other groups include lamps from Corinth, Cyprus, Attica and Knidos, and, of course, lamps made in Rhodes itself, although the latter only constitute around 8 percent of the total.

The organization and formatting of the catalogue are generally clear and straightforward. Each group of lamps is prefaced by a detailed introduction outlining the current state of research on the lamp group, supported by exhaustive bibliography. Questions of production origin and chronology are routinely addressed, although often with only the most tentative conclusions, owing to the lack of available evidence. Whenever possible K. makes use of existing fabric studies, while recognizing that the results of such work are not always definitive (510).Footnote ³ The need for further work in this area is often flagged. The lamps are given new catalogue numbers by the author according to their regional group; e.g., A 21 (Attica), AM 56 (Asia Minor), Cy 35 (Cyprus), etc. The storeroom numbers in use by the ephorate are also given (e.g., ΠX 2908, ΠX 1128), with a concordance of the two systems provided for each group. References to individual lamps in the text generally use the ephorate numbers, which means that the reader must nearly always consult the concordance before looking up a lamp in the catalogue. The book would be easier to use if the text and catalogue employed the same numbering system.

Each lamp in the catalogue is accompanied by one or more color photos. On the whole these are helpful, but most are very small. In the many cases where the lamps themselves are worn or poorly molded, the images are hard to read. Larger images might have helped, and perhaps better lighting. Some of the discus scenes described by the author must be taken on trust. Clay color and composition are described in the text, with Munsell numbers also provided; these are of limited value, since the clay on a single lamp can vary considerably from one part to another. The usual measurements are given for each lamp, although oddly the height does not include the handle (5).

The catalogue consists of nine distinct lamp groups: the largest (lamps from Asia Minor) includes more than 500 lamps and lamp fragments; another four groups (Attica, Cyprus, Samos and Rhodes itself) each include 100–200 lamps; there are then four smaller groups (Knidos, the Aegean, Corinth and North Africa), which include 20–50 lamps.

The large group of Asia Minor lamps dates mainly to the 6th c., a time when “Asia Minor lamps make up almost the totality of those in use on Rhodes” (223). The big unanswered question with these Asia Minor lamps is where exactly they were made. The region around Ephesus is seen as a likely source (220), but only with further extensive fabric studies will the picture become clearer. The lamps themselves are generally unremarkable in appearance. Relatively few have figural discus scenes; of these, some show traditional mythological figures (AM 57: Leda and the Swan; AM 63: Heracles) and others, scenes from contemporary life (AM 80: a venator and bear; AM 121: a boat). The figures themselves are sometimes hard to identify, occasionally resulting in a confusing range of alternatives (AM 35: Eros with grapes? a duck? a lyre?; AM 65: a scene of sacrifice? Daniel in the lions’ den?). Most of the Asia Minor lamps, however, are decorated with simple motifs such as crosses, rosettes, and globules, leading the author to conclude that “figurative motifs…are slowly forgotten” (221), a development perhaps dictated more by declining levels of craftsmanship than by changing taste.

The four mid-sized groups (Cypriot, Attic, Rhodian, Samian) each present their own issues and curiosities. Cypriot lamps, often imitations of contemporary Corinthian and Attic lamps, were common imports into Rhodes in the 2nd and 3rd c. Among the Cypriot lamps included here is a small group with discus scenes of public spectacles (Cy 1 to 8). One (Cy 1, used as the book's front cover image) shows a charioteer and quadriga, others amphitheater animals and performers. Among the latter are two (Cy 2, 3) showing “gladiators” and three showing bears and figures who could be venatores or perhaps victims of damnatio. K. points to the popularity of public spectacles in Roman Cyprus as inspiration for these scenes, which may be the case, but similar spectacle imagery is found on lamps throughout the Roman world.Footnote ⁴

By the 4th c. the Rhodian market was dominated by high-quality lamps imported from Attica; according to K., “few lamps of this period came from elsewhere” (93). This situation prevailed until the Vandal assault on Athens in 396 CE, after which the supply of Attic lamps to Rhodes dried up, replaced by locally made imitations. There had always been a small local lamp industry in Rhodes, one which specialized in copying the different types of lamps which found their way to the island on the main shipping routes. This local industry grew stronger during the 4th and early 5th c., starting to produce respectable copies of lamps made in Asia Minor and Attica. One curiosity of this industry is R 85, a locally made lamp that bears a close resemblance to a late 4th/early 5th c. North African lamp. The handle, however, which in this case is applied and folded, is quite different from the North African model. Other imitations of North African lamps are listed as “unplaced” lamps (Un 61 to 88), some, it is suggested, made locally and others originating from unidentified regional workshops.

Bona fide North African lamps did also reach Rhodes, but only in small numbers. Only 22 are included in the catalogue, most of them lamps of Atlante form X, dating from the 5th to 7th c.Footnote ⁵ Lamps of this type were commonly imitated in many parts of the Mediterranean world. A few such imitations are included here, some listed as “Rhodian” lamps, others as “unplaced.” Some of the latter bear a striking resemblance to similar North African-type lamps found in mainland Greece and South Italy, and they may originate from those regions. K. argues for a 6th–7th c. date for these lamps based on associated coin finds (499).Footnote ⁶

Imports from Knidos form a small but noteworthy group. The earliest (Kn 1 to 9) are all lamps with decorated ceramic stands, dating between the mid-1st and mid-2nd c. Of these, the most unusual is Kn 9, part of a lamp with a heart-shaped discus and flared triangular nozzle. The entire lamp is discolored, whether due to conflagration or misfiring is unknown. There appears to be no known parallel for this lamp, which, with its elongated body, is reminiscent of some Ephesian lamps.Footnote ⁷ The sample of Knidian lamps is small but sufficient, the author contends, to demonstrate that production of lamps at Knidos, contrary to the argument made by Bailey, continued without interruption from the 1st to the 7th c.Footnote ⁸

Among the latest lamps included in the catalogue are those labelled as “Samian type,” a type also found in quantity on the nearby island of Kos.Footnote ⁹ Some examples are highly distinctive (e.g., S 71, 72), with a leaf-shaped handle and a wide filling hole on the discus. The origin of these lamps is much debated; they have been found in significant numbers at sites in Samos, but there is as yet no hard evidence that they were produced there. They have often been considered products of Asia Minor, likely originating from Ephesus.Footnote ¹⁰ Ultimately, such questions can only be answered by exhaustive fabric analysis, which at the moment is lacking. A date post 625 CE is confirmed by their presence on the Yassıada wreck.Footnote ¹¹

K.'s analysis of the last group of pottery lamps included in the catalogue, broadly labeled “unplaced lamps of the Greek East,” highlights both the strengths and weaknesses of the volume as a whole. Her attempt to identify these “orphaned” lamps on the basis of the usual criteria (fabric, form, decoration) is typically comprehensive, but this in turn sometimes leads to a bewildering range of alternatives. The scene of a rider on horseback on Un 15 is first said to depict horse racing (509), then later said to show “a beast fighter” or a “gladiator” (517). Depending on which of these interpretations is preferred (and I suspect they are all wrong) the lamp may be an Attic lamp or else a Rhodian imitation of an Attic lamp. Similarly, the bust shown on Un 66 is interpreted as either the empress Fausta, or Serapis, or even St. Peter! All these options are accompanied by a plethora of parallels and comparanda, to a point where one wishes the author would either opt for the “best-case scenario” or simply admit defeat.

Two metal lamps are discussed (but not illustrated)Footnote ¹² at the very end of the catalogue, both found during the period of Italian occupation and both of unknown provenance. Such lamps were clearly luxury items and of considerable value; they may have belonged to church communities (one has a cross-shaped reflector) or to elite households.Footnote ¹³

What impresses one most about the lamps circulating in Rhodes during the centuries covered by this catalogue is their sheer diversity. To a large extent this must reflect patterns of maritime trade which, in the case of Rhodes, was mainly regional, with ships plying the waters between the islands of the Eastern Aegean and the nearby emporia of the Turkish coast. The island of Rhodes, K. suggests, was a secondary player in the world of Mediterranean commerce, making trade “normally a local business affair” (498). But while the lamps and their origins may tell us something about local trade routes, they are unlikely to have formed a significant part of that trade. A small crate of lamps, or even several crates, would have taken up little room on a ship, and their inclusion in a larger mixed cargo was likely a matter of chance. Why, for instance, did little North African pottery reach Rhodes, while significantly more reached nearby Patara?Footnote ¹⁴

The picture of local trade suggested by the Rhodian collection is echoed at other ports in the Roman east. One particularly well-documented example is Berenice in eastern Libya. There, a similar assortment of imported lamps dominated the local market, brought there on ships carrying cargoes from Italy, Greece, and other ports along the North African coast.Footnote ¹⁵ The island of Rhodes was well placed as a port of call for ships passing between the bigger coastal cities of Greece, Turkey, and Cyprus. As the data demonstrates, most of the lamps in use in Rhodes were produced at potteries within easy sailing distance of the island, mostly on the Turkish mainland. Others were imported from further away, from Cyprus and from mainland Greece, but in smaller quantities.

K. deserves much credit for undertaking and completing the daunting task of compiling a fully annotated catalogue of the huge number of lamps and lamp fragments now housed in the storerooms and museums of the Rhodes ephorate. Her attention to detail is impressive as she systematically discusses every feature of every lamp, its form, fabric, decoration, origin, date, etc., all with massive bibliographical support. At times the results may seem a bit overwhelming; nearly 700 pages documenting more than 1,300 lamps. In her quest for comprehensive analysis, K. leaves no lamp unturned, exhaustively pursuing every avenue of petrological, iconographical, and chronological investigation. The result is a rich potpourri of lychnological wisdom. Some of it is arguably redundant, but much of it will be of considerable value not only to those studying other collections of East Roman and Byzantine lamps, but also to those with a more general interest in Late Antique lighting technology.