This book is an important contribution to the history of ethnographic thought, the written record of ethnographic concepts and the development of ‘identity’ in ancient Greece. On the one hand, the study is to be understood as a critical examination of Felix Jacoby's theories of the emergence of the literary genres ‘ethnography’ and ‘historiography’ in Greek antiquity. On the other hand, it is important for S. to demonstrate that ethnographic thinking and an interest in ethnography are deeply embedded in the Archaic Greek world. S.'s study is strongly influenced by the concept of ethnogenesis, now an omnipresent part of most new studies that try to understand the complex process in which way, as well as on which different levels, the identities of various groups developed in ancient Greece. Of course, S. knows very well that a Panhellenic identity is a late product in ancient Greece that was only superficial and vulnerable to many attempts at manipulation. But this does mean that there is no long history of ethnographic thought and ideas in ancient Greece. From early times and already in Archaic Greece, there existed a widespread formation of notions about strangers and other Greeks. These ideas were not fixed in rigid concepts, but were exposed to dynamic processes. Here, S. contradicts, at least in part, structuralist approaches that emphasise how deeply the special historical circumstances in Greece influenced a new design of Panhellenic identity after the Persian Wars. The interactive and mobile world of the Archaic age, strongly influenced by the colonisation activities of the Greeks, is full of ethnographic notions – as S. points out explicitly. In the context of the colonisation activities, Greek culture and their special way of life spread over many parts of the Mediterranean world. In many places, interaction with the indigenous people was necessary for survival, but at the same time the new poleis never lost their links to their mother country. At this point S. emphasises a dialectical ethnographic discourse which was employed very early in Greece. He is able to prove these phenomena both in the available literary sources and in the archaeological record. The ‘Non-Greeks’ were present in the everyday life of Greeks from an early date onwards. S. demonstrates, therefore, a Greek ‘ethnography before ethnography’ in the narratives of Herodotus of Halicarnassus or Hecataeus of Miletus. Although neither author was responsible for the ‘invention’ of the ethnographic tradition, both played a very active role in the refinement of the ethnographic genre due to the impressive intellectual world of the sixth and fifth centuries b.c. to which they belonged.

S. develops his general questions and methodological approaches in detail in Chapter 1. In the following chapter S. proves impressively how broad the Greek knowledge of foreign people and the ‘others’ was in the world of the Mediterranean during pre-Classical times. Very different groups are examined subsequently. The chapter contains detailed arguments with ‘mythical’ groups such as the Cyclops and Amazons, then with historical peoples such as the Scythians, Thracians, Lydians, Egyptians and Ethiopians, and finally pre-Hellenic or early Greek groups like the Pelasgians and Arcadians. This is of course a very wide circle of ‘foreign’ groups. The Greeks had contacts with some of them in the real world, with others only in their imagination. For some readers, it might be a methodological problem that S. does not designate his selection criteria. After reading the relevant chapter one may wonder if there is a common platform on which the different groups, associations, peoples, etc. belong together. As mentioned before – and this is a key result of the present study – Greek ethnography was not invented in the fifth century b.c. specifically under the influence of the confrontation with the Persians. The ‘invention of ethnography among the Greeks’ in the fifth century b.c. is in many ways an idea that was shaped in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries and – as S. proves impressively – in view of the source material of Archaic times it is not necessary to maintain this idea anymore. S. takes up the results from the previous section in the third chapter. Under the headline ‘Mapping Ethnography’ he presents scattered information about foreigners, other Greeks, Non-Greeks and others in systematic studies. The Greek people arranged this material in the course of time according to rational strategies and it was soon recognised in ethnographic writings. S. places the historiographical work of Herodotus at the centre of his attention, who incorporated detailed ethnographic descriptions in his history. In Chapter 4, ‘Mapping Identities’, S. tries to confirm the results obtained so far in four case studies. Here, too, he demonstrates with an astonishing courage his ability to find an innovative access to topics and materials. With Olbia on the Black Sea and the southern Calabria region he considers two areas very distant from the Greek mainland. He is able to demonstrate that the discourse on identity and ethnic differentiation should be comprehended over a long period in these regions. Afterwards S. proves how the great cult centres in Greece, mainly Delphi and Olympia, acted as ‘imagined centers’ especially for the overseas Greeks who used the common Panhellenic sanctuaries and festivals to demonstrate and to maintain their Greekness. In Chapter 5 the main results of the study are summarised in detail. It is amazing that the confrontation with very far-reaching and much-discussed issues is carried out on such a high scientific level in this study. The individual chapters are well prepared with the relevant ancient sources and the modern literature. Of particular importance is the use of archaeological material for the discussion of ethnological problems.

S. has written an important book, and he proves in his study the existence of an archaic ‘ethnography’ in ancient Greece before the ‘ethnography’ à la Herodotus and its impact on Greek identities.