This book is both an urban history and a political and cultural history of the Mediterranean area from the Bronze Age through Late Antiquity. The primary focus of the book is “the rise of cities around the ancient Mediterranean Sea” (p. 13). Woolf's main argument is that “Cities came late to the Mediterranean world; they were mostly very small, and most people did not live in them. And most cities were created by accident, not as part of a civilizing process planned form the start” (p. 419). The book is erudite, well written and interesting. I focus this review on the urban content, leaving the rest to Classicists to evaluate.

The 20 chapters are arranged in four sections. Part I, ‘An urban animal’, provides theory and historical background. For example, in a chapter on evolutionary and cooperation theory, Woolf suggests that humans are preadapted for urbanism (“Big social brains preadapted us to become urban apes”, p. 38), but the theory then plays little or no role in the book, until it is briefly recapped in the conclusions. Other chapters review early cities around the globe, including the New World, a first in my reading on Classical urbanism! Part I closes with a discussion of the Bronze Age Mediterranean world system.

Part II, ‘An urban Mediterranean’, runs from the Bronze Age through the major Mediterranean empires. Woolf explores several reasons for the growth of cities, including the expansion of networks of exchange and interaction (Chapter 11) and the role of kings (Chapter 12). In this and in Part III, I wish the book's two themes—the urban and the political/cultural—were better balanced. Chapters 12 (‘Cities, state, and kings’) and 13 (‘City and empire’) are typical of the chapters in these sections in that their content is about 10 per cent cities and 90 per cent politics and polities.

Part III, ‘Imperial urbanisms’, runs from the Persian to Roman Empires; this is the heart of the book. We are told (without supporting data) that “Large cities won empires; empires did not (yet) create large cities” (p. 260). Throughout the book, illustrations serve a decorative purpose more than an analytical one, and this becomes frustrating in Chapter 15, on monumentality; I looked in vain for city plans to illustrate points made in the text. Chapter 18 focuses on ecology and population. We are told that “most cities remained small” (p. 371), but no data on the actual sizes of cities are provided. The final section, ‘De-urbanization’, describes aspects of Rome at its height and then moves into the Post-classical period with a discussion of the nature and causes for the decline of Classical cities.

I have a few minor quibbles and a major complaint about this book. The more serious issue is that many statements about cities and urbanism are not backed up by supporting information. Most frustrating are quantitative statements that lack quantitative data. The quotation above about large cities and empires is one example; others include claims that “Bigger cities were the hungriest” (p. 269; does this mean total population or per capita here?); the populations of large cities fluctuated more than smaller cities; and the oft-repeated claim that most cities were small in size (passim). These claims could be supported by a few tables presenting population figures from the published literature (the relevant works are cited in the bibliography). But Woolf eschews this approach. He suggests that “numbers like these [population figures] do not tell us much about what actual ancient cities were like because they conceal huge differences between various parts of the empire” (pp. 371–72). How can a type of evidence conceal things about the past? Perhaps he means that if one were to consider only population data and ignore all other information, one might get a biased picture. No one would disagree with that claim. But his anti-demographic views prevent Woolf from adding richer documentation to his account, they inhibit comparative study, and they leave many of his conclusions—which are typically insightful and interesting—poorly supported.

One minor quibble is an anti-archaeology bias that surfaces now and again. For example, for those cities whose early growth is not documented in the written record, Woolf asserts that the only recourse scholars have is to make “guesses” (p. 390). Another quibble concerns the treatment of inequality and slavery. Woolf says that “The grubby secret of ancient megalopoleis was that they were not inhabited by a privileged and cosmopolitan citizenry, but were largely cities of slaves and former slaves” (p. 397). But there is almost no discussion of slavery in the book; it is not even in the index. Similarly, Woolf claims that the spectacular growth of urban monuments “can only be explained in terms of increased exploitation of the masses” (p. 370), yet the book says next to nothing about such exploitation.

These quibbles are balanced by the positive features of the book. Most powerfully, Woolf shows that Mediterranean urbanism was not just the cities of Rome and Pompeii. Most cities were small, locally oriented and with much variation. Cities functioned to link the local society and economy to broader networks. The roles of city-states, kings and political forces in cities and urbanisation are explored in fascinating detail. I found especially illuminating his contrast of Classical cities with those of the Bronze Age. Decades ago, Bruce Trigger (Reference Trigger1990) asked why Classical cities had so many different types of public buildings compared to, say, Mesopotamian or Egyptian cities. Woolf addresses this in Chapter 15 (‘Cities of marble’). While part of Woolf's explanation focuses on explosive urban growth rooted in economic and political forces, he identifies the participatory nature of government as the key: “The urban monumentality of the ancient Mediterranean was all about participation” (p. 314). I have been puzzling over Trigger's question for many years, and I am very pleased to see finally a reasonable and convincing answer.