This book is based on M.’s personal investigation of the nineteen Classical and Hellenistic poleis in Arkadia at which he observed visible remains of fortification (except at Megalopolis, for which he accepts earlier reports, no traces being now visible), and, after an introductory section on aims, methods and conclusions, the greater part of the book (pp. 105–394) is taken up with a catalogue of these sites. Triphylia is omitted (very reasonably, given the impending publication of the German Triphylia survey). Also ‘territorial defences’, such as extra-urban forts, are excluded as being beyond the means of the author at present (p. 11). The fourteen other poleis at which fortification is attested but not now visible are also briefly noted and discussed (pp. 395–8). The book is thus a study of the immediate defences of nineteen urban settlements of polis status in Arkadia rather than of how wider territories were protected.

In the description of each site the local topography is set out clearly, with a good analysis of how attempts were made to exploit the terrain to advantage, for instance by using not only rocky terrain but also rivers as protection. ‘Acropolis’ sites are distinguished from ‘uneven’ sites. Dating is clearly a problem, as M. is well aware: Megalopolis and the refoundation of Mantineia in 370 bc are rare cases where the date of construction is well attested. M. uses several different approaches to dating, such as known historical events, masonry style and technical aspects of fortification such as the spacing, size and architecture of towers, the development of gates (with particular attention to posterns), relating them to such developments in Greek warfare as advances in both offensive and defensive catapult technology. His aim is to combine different approaches to dating, each in itself only approximate, to achieve a more precise date.

In such a detailed study of city walls, M. draws heavily on the work of F.E. Winter (especially Greek Fortifications [1971], while naturally aware of later work). Some recent publications, possibly not available when the book went to press, are not mentioned (e.g. several contributions in R. Frederiksen et al., Focus on Fortifications [2016], and especially S. Muth et al. [edd.], Ancient Fortifications [2016]). In the discussion of masonry styles there is no mention of emplekton as defined by L. Karlsson, Fortification Towers and Masonry Techniques in the Hegemony of Syracuse, 405–211 b.c. (1992), pp. 67–79 (where the walls of Megalopolis and Mantineia are cited). On Teuthis (pp. 346–59) M. makes no reference to the 2008 rescue excavation that found part of the foundation of a city wall, with two phases of construction, the first, in pseudo-polygonal style, dated to the fifth century, and the second, in polygonal style, dated as late Classical or early Hellenistic (Chronique des Fouilles online No. 2432).

Given the extent of Arkadia and the number of urban settlements, it is reasonable to concentrate on the walls of towns, omitting outlying forts and watch-towers. However, M.’s decision to concentrate on the walls of poleis leads to much odd and sometimes confused discussion. M. explains that sites ‘whose location and/or polis status is suspect’ (p. 13) are omitted, but the case of Halous shows M.’s difficulties. He writes: ‘While Pausanias is clear about the boundaries of Kleitorian territory to the east and west, nowhere does he mention those to the south. In the absence of any evidence, archaeological or literary, it can be assumed that Halous was a small, yet independent polis and not a dependent polis of Kleitor’ (p. 180), but, leaving aside the danger of making an assumption ‘in the absence of any evidence’, Paus. 8.25.2–3 shows clearly that, on the road from Kleitor to Thelpousa, Halous (also called Oryx) lay in Kleitorian territory before the frontier: see M. Jost, ‘Commentaire’, in M. Casevitz, M. Jost, J. Marcadé, Pausanias. Description de la Grèce. Livre VIII: L'Arcadie (1998) ad loc., noting also that the location of Halous at the fortified site discussed by M. is not certain. In addition M. (p. 187) deduces the polis status of Halous from its inclusion in an epigraphic list of Delphic thearodokoi, but does not mention the problem of the reading on the stone, where a reference to Halous is far from certain.

Omitting poleis whose location is not certain leads to the omission of the two fortified towns in north-central Arkadia which will have been two of the three communities known in antiquity as the Arkadian Tripolis, even if it is impossible to say which two: see E. Meyer, Peloponnesische Wanderungen (1939), pp. 48–59: ‘Die arkadische Tripolis’. Oddly, M. also omits (p. 395 n. 2) Lousoi and Lykosoura because they, ‘although possibly poleis, were primarily concerned with the administration of their associated sanctuary’: this judgement is strange, particularly in the case of Lousoi, and it is anyway not obvious how such a concern would influence fortification.

Generally, M. relies for questions of polis status on the excellent work of T.H. Nielsen (Arkadia and its Poleis in the Archaic and Classical Periods [2002] and ‘Arkadia’ in M.H. Hansen and T.H. Nielsen [edd.], Inventory of Archaic and Classical Poleis [2004], pp. 505–39) but, whereas Nielsen has a long discussion (2002, pp. 414–55) on the complex relations of Megalopolis with the smaller communities that were incorporated in Megalopolis but sometimes regained independence, M. sometimes oversimplifies, clearly assuming that communities incorporated in Megalopolis were abandoned, which Nielsen has shown to be untrue. Thus he suggests (pp. 393–4) that Theisoa (Lavda) may have been abandoned when Megalopolis was founded, with the population returning in the late fourth or early third century. Oddly, M. (p. 358) suggests that ‘perhaps the walls of Teuthis were built during the second half of the fourth century by Megalopolis’, admitting that it is worth studying a subordinate settlement fortified by the controlling polis despite his general concern to show that the towns studied were, at least probably, independent poleis when fortified.

There are also problems with the general conclusions set out towards the end of the first section. For instance, the ‘Geographic Distribution of Sites’ (pp. 61–5) takes no account of the towns listed at pp. 395–8, although in some cases traces of walls were observed by earlier scholars, and thus on the map on p. 66 Heraia and Thelpousa are omitted, leaving a gap in western Arkadia. M. makes clear early on (p. 9) that his comparanda are largely, but not exclusively, limited to other Arkadian sites, and it is certainly valuable to have his comparisons of the Arkadian sites that he studied in detail; however, we know that the architects and craftsmen who built fortifications moved around the Greek world (see I. Pimouguet-Pédarros, Archéologie de la défense. Histoire des fortifications antiques de Carie [époques classique et hellénistique] [2000], pp. 89–90), and technical choices in design need not be explained by purely internal Arkadian developments. Finally, that M. can date seven fortified poleis ‘in the early fourth century bc’, and that six others ‘may also conceivably have been built (or rebuilt) around this time’ is hardly a basis for suggesting (p. 94) that ‘The most probable catalyst for this sudden and widespread regional development is the foundation of the Arkadian League’.

This book's main merit lies in the detailed description of the nineteen Arkadian fortified towns visited by M. and of the terrain on which the fortifications stand.