C.’s new study provides a comprehensive survey of the Cypriot alphabetic Greek inscriptions from the area of Paphos. Undoubtedly, it is an important step towards the complete collection of the Greek inscriptions from the island (IG XV forthcoming). The book is subdivided into three parts. The first explores Paphos’ territory and explains how the corpus is organised. The second is a historical survey, which focuses on the Lagid period with some remarks on the final years of the reign of Nicocles, the last βασιλεύς of Paphos. The third and largest section of the book is dedicated to the inscriptions – almost 400 – with ample commentary, followed by conclusions and images of all the included documents. Alphabetic Greek texts first appear during the reign of Nicocles in digraphic inscriptions, and a few imperial dedications to Caracalla are the latest epigraphic documents analysed; so the collection ranges from the fourth century bc to the third century ad. Syllabic inscriptions, which start much earlier and are still employed in the seals of the Paphos Roman archive, are almost completely excluded from consideration.

The choice of organising the corpus on the basis of the political structure of Paphos, instead of following a geographical approach, is innovative and appropriate to this city, since its centre and its territory are not separated in terms of political administration and socio-religious activities. With the advent of Hellenism, particularly during the Ptolemaic and early Roman periods, the new capital – Kato Paphos or Nea Paphos – kept the Palaipaphos sanctuary as the principal holy place of the city. This argument, discussed at length in the introduction, fits well with the archaeological records which date the Palaipaphos sanctuary's floruit from the Hellenistic era onwards. Consequently, separating the capital from its territory would be impractical.

The third section presents a macro-chronological subdivision between the Ptolemaic and Roman inscriptions – respectively units I–V and VI–IX; but in both these parts the sequence of the epigraphic texts does not follow a proper chronological order. Their sorting is based on the pyramidal organisation of the administrative system, a network that emerges from the study of certain specific officials. This structure is ideal for comparing Ptolemaic and Roman political organisation. In the following pages, this administrative-chronological approach is abandoned in favour of a more thematic analysis. Sections X–XVII show a mixture of inscribed votive statuettes along with attestations of cults celebrated in Paphos, mosaics and common inscribed objects, which cannot be catalogued under any specific labels. Although this blend could appear slightly confusing, the content is coherently focused on describing the Paphian socio-religious network.

The study provides a significant fresh appreciation of both the political-administrative structure and the religious network of Hellenistic and Roman Paphos. In the historical account, the most striking innovation consists in identifying some specific local officials and showing the role they played. These offices were particular to Paphos since it held a special status as the headquarters of the Ptolemaic fleet and, later, the capital of the island during the Roman domination. As C. points out, Paphos’ political-administrative system is different from those of the other cities in Cyprus because of the presence of a local court. This statement is an important step forward, which highlights the necessity to define better the political-administrative system of the whole island – still lacking – from the Hellenistic period onwards. In the inscriptions, the presence of a court is testified by the figure of the ὑπομνηματoγράφος, a secretary, in one case also a member of the Dionysiac τεχνίται. This Dionysiac association seems to intervene in the municipal administration, politics and local cults; such an affiliation suggests a link between this organisation and the government.

Contrary to what happened in other Cypriot city-kingdoms, the government and its entourage could directly control the city. Consequently, the role played by local governors diverges from that held in the other polities. For example, the στρατηγοί of Paphos are not civil governors but military officials, gathered in an association, the συναρχία, who could spring into action during periods of political instability.

As far as the Roman period is concerned, C.’s analysis of the Cypriot κοινόν and the distinction between the βουλὴ καὶ δήμος and the πόλις is useful to clarify the administrative framework of Paphos as a Roman province. All these institutions coexist and make important decisions for the city; their presence shows the complexity of the political structure.

C. dates the inscriptions concerning the κοινόν to the first age of the Roman domination or to when the island was returned to Cleopatra by Caesar – as opposed to T.B. Mitford (‘New Inscriptions from Roman Cyprus’, OpArch 6 [1950], 1–95), who proposed 105 bc. Both palaeography and content lead in this direction. These inscriptions provide information about unique officials. For example, according to C., the ἀντιστρατηγός, slightly different from the traditional στρατηγός, could be the local Greek term that translates the Roman propraetor or proconsul. Similarly, the locutio ἐπὶ τῶν μετάλλων would indicate a sort of procurator metallorum. These offices were restricted to a specific period, probably years of political transition. This allows C. to divide the administration of the Roman Republic on Cyprus into two phases: when the island was independent of the continent and Cilicia and when it was administered together with the Anatolian peninsula. This is an important contribution, and it represents a noteworthy progression in the study of Roman Cyprus.

A substantial portion of the book concerns the description of religious practices and the offices held by local priests/priestesses, which previously were only partially known. Along with the worship of several Lagid and Roman sovereigns, the inscriptions reveal the presence of local cults based on legends, a legacy of the Classical period. In the historical account, a few pages are dedicated to the mythical hero Kinyras, the alleged founder of the city according to Apollodorus. Paphos as well as Salamis and other Cypriot polities made use of these legends to legitimise their Greek or local status. Some inscriptions written in the Neo-Paphian syllabary mention an ἀρχός active in the hypogeum temple of Apollo Hyliates, whose worship is linked by C. to the foundation of the city and consequently to the figure of Kinyras. They may be the first evidence of a cult dedicated to the hero and to the local dynasty – constituted by his descendants. According to C., three alphabetic inscriptions prove the relationship between the ἀρχός and the cult of Kinyras. One of them effectively presents an ἀρχὸς τῶν Κινυραδῶν, a chief of the ‘Kinyrads’, a Hellenistic association; but in the others the connection with the mythical hero is based on parts of the text reconstructed in a lacuna. Undoubtedly, Kinyras, along with the local deities of Adonis and Pygmalion, was venerated in Paphos at least from the Classical period onwards. However, it is difficult to link the syllabic inscriptions with this cult, and their ἀρχός with that of the alphabetic documents, since their content does not present any evidence of it and any link to the foundation of Paphos.

C.’s publication and commentary on all the Greek alphabetic inscriptions of Paphos is a significant contribution to future research. As he states in his conclusions, the collection shows a documentary consistency, but a complete outline of the administration and history of the city remains elusive. However, thanks to his meticulous work, the political and religious life of Paphos is now better known as well as the bipolar structure of its territory, organised between the centre, Nea Paphos, and the sanctuary of Aphrodite in its territory.