K. focuses on a large and significant category of Macedonian monuments, the figured tombstones. The monograph is based upon her doctoral thesis, which was carried out at the University of Oxford, and is an addition to earlier as well as the latest monographs on the funerary sculpture of Macedonia (C. Saatsoglou-Paliadeli, Τα επιτάϕια μνημεία από τη Μεγάλη Τούμπα της Βεργίνας [1984]; M. Lagogianni-Georgakarakos, Die Grabdenkmäler mit Porträts aus Makedonien [1998]; P. Adam-Veleni, Μακεδονικοί βωμοί [2002]; I. Spiliopoulou-Donderer, Kaiserzeitliche Grabaltäre Niedermakedoniens [2002]; T. Stefanidou-Tiveriou, Die lokalen Sarkophage aus Thessaloniki [2014]; V. Allamani-Souri, Επιτύμβιες στήλες και ανάγλυϕα από τη Βέροια και την περιοχή της [forthcoming]).

The analysis of the material is presented in seven chapters (1–7) and an appendix. Chapter 1 refers to the subject, the history of research, the methodology involved as well as the objectives. The chronological frame is, undoubtedly, quite wide, beginning from the fifth century b.c. to the end of the first century b.c. K. accurately notes that the year 148 b.c., despite the fact that it marks the beginning of a new historical era for Macedonia, cannot constitute the terminus ad quem of the study because the material dated prior to this era is quite limited and the distinction between the second century b.c. and the first century b.c. monuments presents difficulties. The distinction between the first century b.c. and the first century a.d. monuments is equally difficult, a fact that has been apparently overlooked by K. This difficulty is attested by the monuments of the catalogue that could be easily placed on the verge of or even within the first century a.d. (e.g. 36, 130, 137, 138, 143, 213). Therefore, on the basis of archaeological criteria, monuments of the first century a.d. should also have been included in the study.

Chapter 2 discusses all types of burial signs encountered in Macedonia before the Classical period (e.g. undecorated stone slabs, statues). Even though it is useful, this general overview does not promote the specific subject of the monograph to a great extent.

The subsequent three chapters (3–5) comprise the main discussion organised chronologically, covering the fifth century b.c., the fourth century b.c. and the period between the third and the first centuries b.c. respectively. It would have been preferable to have the material of the Classical period discussed in one section. Thus, monuments dating on the verge between the fifth and the fourth centuries b.c. or monuments for which two different dates have been proposed (63, 125) would have been treated more properly.

The discussion within the chapters is based on the classification of the material following geographical criteria, which is also adopted in the catalogue. The review of the material in a similar manner in both parts of the book inevitably leads to overlapping and does not offer the possibility for a multifaceted examination. In contrast, the study of the monuments from a different perspective, in one of the two parts of the book, would have been particularly useful. Especially with regards to the analysis part, both typological and iconographic criteria could have been proposed. Besides, the typological classification is imposed by the subject itself, given that the figured tombstones constitute a wider category comprising different types of monuments, such as relief stelai, painted stelai, reliefs intended to be incorporated, which in their turn are classified in various types, for example stelai with pedimental crowning, stelai with palmette crowning etc. Therefore, this sort of typology should have formed the basic frame of the discussion and not have been selected on occasion and in connection with the internal structuring of the subchapters (i.e. subchapters 4.3.1, 4.3.2 and 5.2.4, 5.2.5). In addition, other criteria are also sometimes used for the presentation of the material (e.g. chronological, see subchapters 5.1 and 5.2). The implemented methodology results in the absence of an essential typological and iconographic analysis. The typological and iconographic observations are presented in segments in individual subchapters, whereas, when summarised, their discussion is brief (see e.g. subchapters 3.6, 5.1.2, 5.2.2, 5.2.7). Furthermore, the pose or posture is chosen as a criterion for the categorisation of the figures over the iconographic type (see subchapters 5.2.1, 5.2.2). Hence, a male type with chlamys in stele no. 88 is examined as a variation of the himation types (see p. 69, nos 36, 91, 214) based on the position of his hand. In contrast, extensive subchapters are dedicated to issues widely known in research (see subchapters 4.7, 5.1.3, 5.2.6) without always moving forward the relevant discussion. Finally, an essential weakness of the analysis is the absence of a substantive discussion on dating, where K. could have examined the chronological evolution of the monuments based on her own criteria.

Subchapter 6.2, where information is drawn from inscriptions on names, origin and social status of the owners, is particularly interesting. Next, the phenomenon of ‘heroisation’ (subchapter 6.3) is analysed, based on the references on the inscriptions. Nonetheless, the cohesion of the discussion on the interpretation of the phenomenon is disrupted by the parallel review of the iconography, which should have been examined in previous chapters (4–5).

Following the conclusions (Chapter 7), there is an appendix containing all the sites in Macedonia where cemeteries have been excavated, dating from the Iron Age to the Late Hellenistic era. Few of the monuments in the catalogue are related to these excavations; still, this appendix remains useful to anyone occupied with the archaeology of the Macedonian region.

Τhe catalogue, which includes 216 monuments, constitutes the second part of the book. The classification of the material according to its provenance, according to the geographical regions of ancient Macedonia, is unquestionably helpful in assisting the reader to acquire a comprehensive picture. However, the internal categorisation based on the same criterion is rather problematic since several monuments are of unknown origin or have been found in second use, thus rendering their initial location site unidentified.

Therefore, the classification of monuments according to the place of their second use could be disorientating as far as their initial location site is concerned. For example, stele no. 125, found in debris in the slaughterhouse (sfageia) of modern Thessaloniki, has been classified under the location site ‘sfageia’, which is also marked on the map showing the distribution of the fifth century b.c. monuments (p. 20, map 3). Likewise, monuments of unknown origin found in museums or in collections abroad are occasionally classified on the basis of a potentially speculative origin and sometimes listed at the end of the catalogue as of ‘unknown provenance’ (see e.g. 129, 215).

While the catalogue entries are analytical and contain rich and updated bibliography, they lack dating. In some cases, there are weaknesses in the comprehension of technical features, such as stele no. 154, the second use of which is assumed solely on the grounds of the inscription without indicating the re-carving of the initially plain shaft to shape the relief panel. Finally, there are published monuments not included in the catalogue despite the fact that they were known to K. (Chapter 1, figs 1.1–1.2) or have been included in a publication where she has taken other monuments in her catalogue from (see G. Despinis, T. Stefanidou-Tiveriou, E. Voutyras, Κατάλογος Γλυπτών του Αρχαιολογικού Μουσείου Θεσσαλονίκης ΙΙΙ [2010], cat. nos 374–9).

The book is complemented by five maps, rich inventories and 118 plates with colour and black-and-white photographs. The photographic documentation, which covers more than 90% of the catalogue's material, is undeniably worthy of praise.

K.’s monograph includes a large number of monuments and information, and for that her book will function as a useful means of supporting research. Nevertheless, a different organisation in presenting the material would have provided the opportunity to reach rather more substantial conclusions.