In his book The Lives of Ancient Villages: Rural Society in Roman Anatolia, Peter Thonemann (T.) offers an in-depth analysis of the rural societies in western Anatolia during Roman rule. T. focuses on a region commonly referred to as northeast Lydia or middle Hermus in scholarly literature, uniquely naming it Hieradoumia to highlight its distinct characteristics. His study is grounded in epigraphic records, particularly funerary and propitiatory inscriptions, which reveal social and familial structures and are precisely dated between the 1st and 3rd c. CE. T.'s approach contributes significantly to understanding the differences between urban and rural cultures in the area.

T.'s work stands out from Ratté and Commito's The Countryside of Aphrodisias, which provides a broad historical overview and archaeological discoveries from adjacent Caria, and from Evangelidis's The Archaeology of Roman Macedonia: Urban and Rural Environments, focusing on urbanization and architectural evolution in Northern Greece.Footnote ¹ Unlike Bowes's The Roman Peasant Project, which centers on archaeological exploration in Tuscany, T. gives priority to exploring familial connections and religious influences in Hieradoumia.Footnote ² A notable distinction of T.'s study is its analysis of inscriptions, a vital source of information that is particularly significant considering that much of Hieradoumia's territory remains archaeologically unexplored. Additionally, while Patterson's Landscapes and Cities delves into transformations in Early Imperial Italy's rural and urban landscapes, T.'s unique focus on Anatolia differentiates his work.Footnote ³ His comprehensive view of rural life in the Roman period enriches our understanding of the local society, diverging from the broader geographic and thematic frameworks of similar studies.

The first chapter (1, “Hieradoumia”) evaluates how Romanization reshaped western Anatolia's ethnic and cultural fabric. T. observes a gradual fading of regional and cultural identities, leading to a more homogenized society where social frameworks overshadowed ethnic distinctions. This evolution signifies strengthened social connections and community frameworks, crucial in shaping local identities. The reconstruction of this complex, gradual process is further complicated by the region's rich cultural and linguistic diversity. During the Iron Age, diverse ethnic groups such as Phrygians, Lydians, and possibly Carians inhabited the region. Towards the end of the Hellenistic period, they were joined by immigrants, including Mysians, Macedonians, and Greeks. T. points out the dominance of Greek-Macedonian names in Late Hellenistic inscriptions; however, this might not fully reflect the local cultural dynamics. Western Anatolia, including its hinterlands, was marked by cultural inclusivity and robust local traditions, particularly in Lycia and Caria, shortly before the Hellenistic period. The dual naming practice of the Lycians – employing both a traditional local and a Greek (or Persian) name – reflects the region's complex multicultural identity.Footnote ⁴

The following chapter (2, “Commemorative cultures”) expands on the theme of political development in the area, covering the transition from decentralized rural communities to formally recognized poleis. This political transformation, stemming from the region's integration into the Roman political and economic system, led to changes in regional administrations such as koinon and demos, evolving them into structures with greater self-governance. However, these changes, significant at the political level, did not result in substantial urbanization or civic-culture development for the cities, which remained predominantly administrative centers. The basic social and cultural structures of rural communities remained stable and unchanged, with the city-state lingering on the fringes of social and economic life, which was characterized by a relatively flat social structure. This fact points to a minimal difference between urban and rural culture. A similar development is observable in the inland regions of neighboring Caria, although the process of synoecism began earlier there.Footnote ⁵ Families, including extended kinship groups, served as the fundamental units of social structure, often cohabiting in extensive households. This lifestyle was not only a practical solution for economic efficiency but also reflected the profound cultural and social values of rural life.

Certain changes in political and administrative structures are reflected in hybrid funerary inscriptions, which merged elements of civic decrees with personal tombstones. They represent a transition from Hellenistic honorific decrees to family tombs in the Roman era. These monuments, inspired by Greek cities, testify to the recognition of civic merits through funerals at public expense, statues, or golden wreaths on graves. Their occurrence was not limited to the central Hermus area but is also known from other regions of western Anatolia. Consolatory decrees (psephismata paramythetika), often carved on tombstones, emphasized the societal contributions and personal virtues of the deceased, including a list of awards granted by the city community.Footnote ⁶ In the local Hieradoumian society, the importance of personal merits over legal status was emphasized, as evidenced by the way slaves were perceived and mentioned on tombstones. If they gained a certain level of autonomy or were freed, they were often mentioned on the same level as free citizens. This aspect of social structure indicates that the community had certain flexibility in social status and opportunities for individuals to transcend their original positions, a phenomenon also known from Roman Lycia.Footnote ⁷

Detailed data on the tombstones allow for a thorough demographic analysis of the area (chapter 3, “Demography”). T. points out challenges in interpreting data, including the practice of rounding off the ages of the deceased, which reduces the reliability of age-at-death data. Cultural norms have led to a lack of records on the deaths of infants and children under five years old. This factor could result in an overestimation of average expected lifespan. Despite these limitations, available data suggest that the life expectancy at birth was in line with standards in other areas of the Roman Empire. Seasonal effects on mortality are also examined, with a specific focus on the high mortality of children at the end of summer and young adults in autumn, possibly related to seasonal diseases like tuberculosis. People over 50 had higher mortality rates in colder months, while middle age groups did not show significant seasonal differences. The lowest mortality was recorded from January to May, while the peak was from September to October. T. acknowledges the possibility of seasonal epidemics as a cause of these trends, noting the dry period before autumn rains, which could contribute to the spread of diseases like malaria, typhus, and dysentery. Increases in the number of tombstones during certain periods could indicate epidemics such as the Antonine Plague, with long-term demographic consequences, but conclusions are not definitive.

One of the interesting topics T. discusses is family structures and households in Roman Anatolia. Chapter 4, “Kinship terminology,” is devoted to the analysis of broader family networks, including grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, and uncles. This section provides an in-depth look at the complexity and importance of family and kinship relations in this area. T. points out that these relationships appeared much more complex here than in other parts of the Roman Empire. An interesting aspect of the work is the emphasis on the tradition of broad self-presentation within the household, highlighting the strong importance placed on familial identity and prestige. This phenomenon was widespread, especially in the western part of Hieradoumia, and gradually expanded eastward. Core family relationships, such as those of married couples, their children, parents, and siblings, were important not only for individual identity but also for social cohesion and support in the community. Some terms, also used in other areas like Caria and Cilicia, including the designation for a grandson or granddaughter (kamb(d)ios), may have had roots in older languages like Hittite and Luwian.

The emphasis on family identity and its status within social structures is evident from older funerary scenes in western Anatolia. The familial character of these depictions, visible in Lycian dynastic tombs from the Harpy Tomb to the Nereid Monument, demonstrates the continuity of domestic traditions and their interaction with foreign influences. Similarly, the portrayal of the Hecatomnids in various forms, such as on the sarcophagus and wall paintings found within the Hecatomneum in Mylasa, serves to exemplify this enduring tradition.Footnote ⁸ Furthermore, the motif of the funerary banquet (Totenmahl) in Classical and Early Hellenistic depictions in Lycia is characterized by the intimacy of family scenes, with a larger number of figures, in contrast to Greek representations.Footnote ⁹ As T. emphasizes in the book, epitaphs may have limited explanatory value in reconstructing private life in ancient Anatolia. Since graves were often established with future generations in mind, they do not necessarily accurately reflect the family structure or its dynamics. In Hellenistic Lycian tombs, the right of wider family circles, including wives, children, parents, grandchildren, and sons-in-law, to use the tomb is typically included, indicating more extensive family ties. This approach, however, is not universal, as some tombs were designed only for one or a small number of individuals. Over time, we can observe the gradual inclusion of increasingly broader kinship groups in these inscriptions, which may indicate a gradual formalization of family depictions in the Roman era, accentuating the continuation of the lineage and the importance of family heritage.Footnote ¹⁰

An interesting aspect is the complex and rich kinship terminology in Hieradoumia in the Roman era, which likely dates back to the transition between the Bronze and Iron Ages, or possibly even earlier. In this context, T. highlights the peculiarity of the patrilocal arrangement, where a married women lived in the household of her husband along with his parents and siblings (chapter 5, “Household forms”). This practice differed from family structures common in other parts of the Roman Empire and was likely motivated by economic advantages. Such arrangements allowed for better management and maintenance of family property and inheritance rights, as multiple generations lived under one roof. Despite women leaving their birth families upon marriage, emotional ties to them remained strong. This is evident in epitaphs, where the parents and siblings of the married woman were often mentioned. This phenomenon points to the persistence of emotional bonds and the importance of relationships despite the change in family environment. A more sobering view into these families is provided by propitiatory inscriptions (Beichtinschriften). They reveal the unstable position of older women, especially widows, in relation to younger family members and the relatively weak relationship between a married man and his wife's parents. Disputes often arose within families, usually intergenerational, where the issue of family honor and status played an important role. Strict social and ethical norms of small rural societies limited personal freedoms, and their violation led to public humiliation and ostracism.

Propitiatory inscriptions document various moral or religious offenses, such as theft, promiscuity, violence, or impiety, and the related punishments from the gods, including death or illness of the perpetrator or a family member. They often end with a celebration of divine power and the perpetrator's request for making amends with the gods. A common method was the erection of a stele – a physical monument symbolizing gratitude and praise. T. notes that the family bore collective moral responsibility for the actions of its members, meaning that direct descendants often carried the burden of performing these formal acts of atonement. These inscriptions, therefore, not only served as a vital means of public communication but also played a significant role in the cultural traditions of the time.Footnote ¹¹ T. also emphasizes that during the period when honorific funerary inscriptions were developing, there was a transition from traditional votive and dedicatory stelae to more monumental and complex forms. This development may be linked to the increasing influence of the state on rural communities, reflected in the widespread distribution of various types of inscriptions, especially in densely populated areas.

Collective responsibility in communities points to strong social bonds, despite weaker political-organizational structures. In chapter 6, “The circulation of children,” T. highlights the practice of fostering, which was a significant aspect of local communities and surpassed standard Roman practices. Fostering, involving various arrangements from economic to emotional, was key in maintaining and strengthening family and community ties, going beyond the response to family tragedies. This practice might be similar to later godparenting (synteknia) in the Byzantine Empire, focused more on social cohesion than on addressing personal hardships. Chapter 7, “Beyond the family,” provides a deep insight into social structures that transcended traditional family boundaries. T. focuses on the development of a unique social model in western Asia Minor. This model saw traditional family and state structures supplemented or replaced by various associations like phratrai/phratreiai, symbioseis, speirai, and doumoi. They played significant roles, extending beyond funeral traditions to offer ritualistic, social, and economic support to their members. Extended family groups were integral to these organizations, which often intertwined with religious life and local cults. In some instances, they were synonymous with the village community, while in larger villages, they operated as subgroups.

T. also emphasizes that rural priestly offices were often monopolized by specific family groups, reflecting their significant standing. Sanctuaries served a dual role in society, acting not only as spiritual centers but also as key economic and social institutions (chapter 8, “Rural sanctuaries”). Their primary source of income was lands, often cultivated by “sacred slaves” (hierodouloi), including those from higher social strata. Non-participation in duties related to sanctuaries was perceived as a cause of divine wrath, though many seemingly resisted the pressure. Sanctuaries exerted significant social and economic influence on local families, particularly regarding the donation of lands or other gifts. The absence of a law on tithing to the gods created expectations that many families could not or were unwilling to meet, leading to long-standing disputes and tension between the community and sanctuaries. Conflicts, including the disregard for the rules and authority of sanctuaries, as well as the “gray economy” associated with trading wood and hunting animals from sacred groves, point to social tension and dysfunctions in society. Violent incidents, such as an attack on a sanctuary during a festival in 198 CE, are evidence of serious conflict between religious institutions and residents.

Chapter 9, “Village society,” highlights that sanctuaries not only played a spiritual role but were also key in mediating minor disputes among villagers that were too small to be handled by secular courts. These disputes could involve loan repayments, theft, false oaths, or sexual offenses, but they were most commonly associated with animals. Typical rituals in the sanctuary, like “raising a sceptre” and “depositing a pittakion,” symbolized submitting the dispute to the jurisdiction of the gods. T. also notes that economic transactions, such as lending money or grain, were deeply rooted in local communities. In cases of unpaid debts, citizens often turned to the deities, indicating the absence of effective legal means to enforce payment. The dominant social unit was the village (kome, katoikia), perceived as a unified community with a strong sense of collective identity and mutual responsibility (chapter 10, “City, village, kin-group”). Villages did not view their members as independent individuals, but rather as part of the community, with specific duties and commitments. The final chapter thus provides a valuable insight into how law, economy, and religion intertwined in local society, allowing for a better understanding of the dynamics and structure of rural life in the then Anatolia.

In summary, The Lives of Ancient Villages: Rural Society in Roman Anatolia by Peter Thonemann is an indispensable contribution for anyone interested in the historical dynamics and social structures of ancient Anatolia. T.'s thorough and innovative work, based on epigraphic records, reveals new perspectives and provides deeper insight into rural life during the Roman era, a subject often overshadowed by urban studies. His detailed elaboration of family and community structures, as well as the role of sanctuaries in daily life, underscores significant social and religious aspects that shaped these communities. It also reveals the flexibility and adaptability of societies in response to political and cultural changes and highlights the importance of family cohesion and mutual support. This makes it an invaluable contribution to understanding the complexity of rural societies in Roman times and provides valuable lessons for contemporary studies of ancient societies.