The book is a well-balanced study of contacts between Anatolian and Greek traditions. After four general and methodological chapters, chapters 5 to 12 explore relevant topics in detail. An impressive bibliography (pp. 285–365) shows Rutherford's vast knowledge.

The overview of Hittite and Greek religion(s) (ch. 2 and 3) is a useful tool for readers as an introduction to both cultures, with the helpful addition of a bibliographical list of translations of Hittite texts (pp. 277–84); but why did the author not also provide a similar list for Greek texts? Comparing these overviews, one quickly observes some differences: Anatolian sources cover the situation in the second millennium bce, while the bulk of the Greek sources refer to the first millennium. The literary genres are also different, with many ritual texts from Anatolia, and literary and poetry texts in Greek. For his comparison, the author is well aware of these differences, as he shows in his methodological approach in ch. 4: he notes correctly (pp. 81 f.) that one must avoid mixing universals (like sacrifice, divination, or purifications) that occur in (almost) all cultures worldwide, with specific localized versions of universals (e.g. burnt offerings, which are known in northern Syria, south-eastern Anatolia and in Greece, but are missing in central Anatolia). In making such comparisons I am more hesitant than the author to use analogies – Rutherford states (p. 84): “If X is associated with Y in one culture, it may be possible to infer by analogy that something like X in another culture was once associated with something like Y.” This may be possible, but often it is not the case (cf. also the gap of time between sources of the second and first millennium) and therefore, Hittite texts do not shed too much light on Greek religion, especially in the field of ritualistic behaviour and actions (contra p. 92). There are three possible origins for similarities: (a) short but intensive contacts in periods of wars or crises; (b) contacts between elites (e.g. political alliances; “royal” marriages); (c) contacts through diplomats, merchants, migrants and maybe even religious specialists (cf. p. 88).

Such methodological considerations form the background to the analyses in the following chapters. Despite contacts between Ahhiyawa (Mycenaean Greece) and the Hittites, the information on Anatolian–Greek religious interactions in the Late Bronze Age is restricted to the passing mention of the deity of Lazpa (Lesbos) and to the god Apaliuna (cf. pp. 105–16). Though the deity of Lazpa was widely known, there is little information about the deity's function. Apaliuna (and Apaluwa) resembles the god Apollon, who was most probably a pre-Greek god in Western Anatolia, but Hittite texts do not provide substantial information about his origin. The so-called Arzawa rituals can be compared with some Greek examples, especially with military rituals documented by Homer and Polyainos. The Greek idea of the pharmakos is comparable with the Anatolian elimination of miasma by a carrier – despite the difference of a human or non-human carrier. This shows Western Anatolia as a contact zone of Anatolian and Greek cultural interaction (cf. pp. 133–43). Another valuable point of comparison – since the early days of Hittitological research – touches the Hittite text “The Song of Going Forth” and Hesiod's Theogony, as the author demonstrates. I also agree with the author that the comparison between the Hittite myth of Illuyanka and the Greek tradition of Typhon is less convincing. Contrary to the Arzawa rituals, these mythological traditions show a contact zone between Greeks, Luwians, and Phoenicians covering the geographical areas of Cilicia, Cyprus, and the (northern) Levant (cf. pp. 144–54). In a further chapter, the author discusses in depth the relationship between the Phrygian “Mother” and the goddesses Kubaba and Cybele – offering three possibilities for explaining the contacts: the Greeks have taken Cybele from the Phrygians; the Greeks identify their own Mother goddess with Cybele as a foreign (Phrygian) goddess; or both the Phrygian and the Greek “Mother Goddess” developed from a single (pre-historic) Mother Goddess. The author's conclusion says that “at the very least it's clear that the Greek conception of an Anatolian mother goddess may represent the superimposition of several different goddess-schemata borrowed at different periods” (p. 183). One can accept this “minimalistic” conclusion which makes obvious that we often cannot reach firm ground in precisely defining the religious interactions between Anatolians and Greeks. Surprisingly few borrowings of divine names are available, and the comparisons between festival traditions made by the author are not very strong in my opinion. Hittite texts provide much information about state and local “non-state” festivals, but as festivals are religious universals, similarities between local festivals are often too general to be taken as examples for mutual contacts (cf. p. 246). In the final chapter, on sacrifices and offerings (pp. 247–71), we find a great deal of important information about Hittite sacrificial practices, which have not yet been deeply studied. Therefore, Rutherford's overview is a very welcome contribution to this field of “Hittite religion” and a stimulus for further studies.

In conclusion: “So there was contact, but little sign of borrowing, at least by the Greeks from the Hittites. If that was all there was to it, this would be a disappointing end to our inquiry. However, the Greek and Hittite religious systems may be able to illuminate each other in other ways, because they are in many respects so similar” (p. 273). The author has presented such mutual illumination, by differentiating well between cases which are obvious on the one side and highly improbable on the other side of a scale. An interesting point – left open for future detailed research – would be an ongoing study of “Greek” religion in Anatolia in “Hellenistic” times – from the point of view how Anatolian traditions continued and how Greek traditions thereby were influenced or changed when they took the “local Hellenistic” form in Anatolia (cf. p. 73–6). This remains a task for the future.