<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.1 20151215//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/archiving/1.1/JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article dtd-version="1.1" article-type="book-review">
    <front>
        <journal-meta>
            <journal-id>TMR</journal-id>
            <journal-title-group>
                <journal-title>The Medieval Review</journal-title>
            </journal-title-group>
            <issn pub-type="epub">1096-746X</issn>
            <publisher>
                <publisher-name>Indiana University</publisher-name>
            </publisher>
        </journal-meta>
        <article-meta>
            <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">21.12.26</article-id>
            <title-group>
                <article-title>21.12.26, Kelly/Burrow (eds.), Urban Interactions</article-title>
            </title-group>
            <contrib-group>
                <contrib contrib-type="author">
                    <name>
                        <surname>Frederick G. Naerebout</surname>
                        <given-names/>
                    </name>
                    <aff>Department of Ancient History, Leiden University, emeritus</aff>
                    <address>
                        <email>frits@naerebout.com</email>
                    </address>
                </contrib>
            </contrib-group>
            <pub-date publication-format="epub" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2022">
                <year>2021</year>
            </pub-date>
            <product product-type="book">
                <person-group>
                    <name>
                        <surname>Kelly, Michael J. and Michael Burrows, eds</surname>
                        <given-names/>
                    </name>
                </person-group>
                <source>Urban Interactions: Communication and Competition in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages</source>
                <series></series>
                <year iso-8601-date="2020">2020</year>
                <publisher-loc>Binghamton, NY</publisher-loc>
                <publisher-name>Gracchi Books, punctum press</publisher-name>
                <page-range>Pp. 437</page-range>
                <price>$26.00 (hardback) $0 at https://punctumbooks.pubpub.org/pub/urban-interactions-edited-by-michael-j-kelly-michael-burrows/release/1 (ebook)</price>
                <isbn>978-195-3035-059 (hardback)</isbn>
            </product>
            <permissions>
                <copyright-statement>Copyright 2021 Trustees of Indiana University. Indiana University provides the information contained in this file for non-commercial, personal, or research use only. All other use, including but not limited to commercial or scholarly reproductions, redistribution, publication or transmission, whether by electronic means or otherwise, without prior written permission of the copyright holder is strictly prohibited.</copyright-statement>
            </permissions>
        </article-meta>
    </front>
    <body>
        <p>Much about this volume appears uncommon, fresh, and refreshing: Gracchi Books is a new
            imprint of Punctum Books, the location of which is given as “Earth, Milky Way”: a
            whimsical way of saying that Punctum Books is dedicated to Open Access publishing--of
            the radical kind advocated by the Radical OA Collective. Since 2011 Punctum, as a
            non-profit corporation, has published a formidable collection of what they themselves
            call “unconventional scholarly work” across many different disciplines, often multi- or
            interdisciplinary. Gracchi Books’ motto is “too many echoes, not enough voices.” One of
            the editors--Burrows--of the work under review has recently finished his PhD (Leeds),
            and it is great that he got this opportunity. The other editor--Kelly--is, relatively
            speaking, more of an old hand, and an interdisciplinary scholar if ever there was one,
            whose published work ranges from philosophy of history to Visigothic Spain.</p>
        <p>The moot question is of course: does this volume live up to the expectations raised by
            the publishing house and by the editors? Is it innovative, multi- and interdisciplinary,
            even unconventional? The blurb on the back of the book promises a volume dedicated to
            addressing “a lacuna in urban history” by bringing a range of different approaches to
            bear on questions of “entanglement and competition.” In order to “elicit the
            interactions between localities,” it will not so much look at urban centres as
            subordinate within larger structures, but as “entities in itself”--which seems somewhat
            contradictory; what is meant is that horizontal connections between communities will be
            more important than the vertical, hierarchical relationships in which they are embedded.
            It wants to examine “how local people thought about, engaged with, and struggled against
            nearby or distant urban neighbours...through a broad geographical range of late ‘Roman’
            provinces and post-‘Roman’ states.” </p>
        <p>I will come to an answer straight away: no, this volume is not the innovative,
            ground-breaking collection of papers that one might have been led to expect. The
            individual papers are not multi-, let alone interdisciplinary, and definitely not
            unconventional. They are very valuable: the authors are all competent and unlock a lot
            of hard-to-find scholarship, especially a wealth of archaeological publications, much in
            French and even more in Spanish, not easily accessible to everybody. But it is exactly
            for this same reason that I have characterized these papers as not innovative and
            conventional: we are presented with lengthy historical and archaeological exposés
            summarizing a lot of literature. Thus, we have a potted history of Nicomedia by Dimitris
            J. Kyrtatas, much archaeological information about Reccopolis and other towns in the
            Meseta by Javier Martínez Jiménez, even more archaeological detail about Augusta Emerita
            by Pedro Mateos Cruz, about two insulae in Ostia by Michael Mulryan, and about Toledo by
            Isabel Sánchez Ramos. The other papers may dedicate a larger part of their text to
            analysis, but still present quite a lot of empirical evidence, historical and/or
            archaeological. I repeat: this is all valuable, especially the archaeology. But we are
            entitled to ask what the authors <italic>do</italic> with all this source material.</p>
        <p>Before answering that question, we should have a look at the preface by Kelly and the
            introduction by Ian Wood (the recently retired early medieval specialist from Leeds, and
            the PhD supervisor of Kelly--there is a strong Leeds connection to this collection which
            is not explained). Kelly and Wood escape more or less from the criticism above. Kelly’s
            preface is not the usual thing with some technical information and acknowledgements, but
            a spirited account of the rivalry between Jamona (Ciudadela/Ciutadella) and Magona
            (Mahón) on Menorca, and of resulting tensions within those communities. He argues
            convincingly that written accounts are normative, rather than descriptive: they urge
            people on to despise, diminish or even kill their neighbours, but the facts on the
            ground may be quite different. Nevertheless, the written/spoken word may create the
            divisions that it purported to describe. Ian Wood in his introduction picks up on this
            theme, and elaborates on the fuzzy edge between competition and cooperation, referring
            to Regine Le Jan’s concept of<italic>coopétition</italic>. Alas, no other author in this
            volume returns to that. Otherwise, Wood summarizes the individual papers and tries to
            tie them together. He singles out religion as the main force driving late antique
            changes and developments, but urges us not to reduce the whole complicated story of the
            period to the establishment of the Church, even it was the dominant party.</p>
        <p>Preface and introduction, interesting and readable as they are, do not, however, run very
            deep conceptually. Methodological issues are raised only by Michael Mulryan, in
            discussing the interplay of space and human agents and in rejecting the dichotomy of
            public and private as unhelpful, and to some extent by Douglas Underwood, with some
            consideration of horizontal interactions as compared to centre-periphery models. In sum
            total, that is quite underwhelming. Even a basic issue such as ethnicity (talking about
            Late Antiquity/Early Middle Ages one would think ethnic markers, self-identification,
            ethnogenesis and so on, to be important issues) is hardly problematized: the scare
            quotes around Roman--as quoted above from the back of the book--are sensible enough, but
            return only once, in the paper by Javier Martínez Jiménes (208). He is also the only one
            to discuss ethnicity more generally. Michael Burrows seems to want to put ethnicity and
            faith aside, while concentrating “on the city as an aspect of identity” (69). There is
            no denying that everything from a local sense of belonging to outright
                <italic>campanilismo</italic> is an important part of an individual’s identity, but
            ethnicity (or faith) cannot simply be put aside: they should be got out of the way,
            which asks for discussion. Also, the perennial question of what can be called “urban”
            and what that implies is completely avoided. Conceptually, almost everything in these
            papers is taken for granted. I am not implying that all relevant debates should be
            redone, merely that they be referred to.</p>
        <p>According to the subtitle, the volume deals with communication and competition between
            cities and within cities. Again, neither of these are problematized. Communication is
            too ambiguous or pluriform a concept: everything that happens between and in cities can
            be called communication, so every paper here is about communication. That cities trade
            with other cities (Mark Lewis Tizzoni, Douglas Underwood) is to be expected. Of course,
            the specifics are interesting, but what do we learn by labelling the mere existence of
            trade routes, or of a road network in general, which might not even be a real network
            travelled by real people but a textual artefact (Ann Christys), as examples of
            “communication”? </p>
        <p>Competition, however defined, is much better graspable than the equivocal
            “communication.” Lisa Kaaren Bailey speaks of the 5th-century sermon by an anonymous
            author (she includes a full translation) in which Lyon’s martyrs (the purported victims
            of the 177 persecution) are set up as superior to the Holy Innocents of Bethlehem. Baily
            explains this rivalry as a means to the end of building unity in Lyon and relocating
            Lyon in a wider landscape. She interestingly adds that the sermon is an argument in
            favour of this competitive train of thought and does not necessarily reflect a local
            consensus: this takes us back to the preface where Kelly pointed out the normative
            nature of many accounts of antagonism. Michael Burrows discusses the rivalry between
            Tours and Bourges: which episcopal see is the most important, who has got the most
            important saint, which town is favoured by secular power? As Gregory of Tours is our
            only source, Burrows admits that it is difficult to distinguish between Gregory’s
            personal antipathies and genuine popular hostility towards another town. One wonders how
            this proviso relates to his statement about the plausibility of “pre-hegemonic [i.e.,
            before Roman imperial times] antagonistic rivalries re-emerging in the late antique
            context”: that implies a real antagonism which dates to before the Roman conquest, and
            was temporarily repressed; however, only Avaricum (Bourges) is the continuation of a
            Celtic <italic>oppidum</italic>; Caesarodunum (Tours) is a new foundation. Dimitris J.
            Kirtatas notices that in Nicomedia we can see tensions between pagans and Christians,
            but also between the one pagan sect and the other, and between different groups of
            Christians. He also notes Nicomedia’s enmity against Nicaea: both towns vie for primacy
            (it is Nicaea that gets the very first church council, not Nicomedia). Javier Martínez
            Jiménez discusses competition between cities in the Meseta: which one had the most
            powerful saint; which could establish itself as the royal seat. Otherwise, tensions
            arise between elite and non-elite elements within the cities, and between Christians and
            Jews (alas merely mentioned in passing). Isabel Sánchez Ramos hypothesizes that
            diversity within the Visigothic kingdom of Toledo, such as competing episcopal
            administrations, did not undermine but stimulated unification of the kingdom. On the one
            hand she tries to develop this by looking at councils, coinage and taxation, but on the
            other she rather weakens her argument by pointing out how Toledo’s position in the
            hierarchy of settlements in Roman days laid the basis for its pre-eminence in the inner
            Carthaginiense in Late Antiquity. If this is so, how much need was there to stimulate
            unification of the kingdom around Toledo? Apart from these examples, we find little
            competition mentioned in these papers. </p>
        <p>So, if there is little methodology, some competition, but not too much, and a lot of
            communication with little or no explanatory value, what do these papers argue? There is
            one theme that keeps recurring: (dis)continuity. After decades of debate about Late
            Antiquity in general, and about the fate of the cities of the Roman Empire when that
            empire ceases to exist in particular, that is a subject bound to crop up. It is stressed
            repeatedly that change should not be seen as decline, that the transformations that
            cities are undergoing show their continued vitality or vibrancy. Even if there is
            discontinuity in some aspects, there is still overall continuity. The view of Late
            Antiquity permeating this volume is definitely the view that has been in the ascendancy
            since Peter Brown started to break down the barriers between Late Antique and Early
            Medieval. It is certainly the view that informs Ian Wood’s introduction with its talk of
            change being constant, and of survival and re-invigoration. One may ask whether the
            archaeology on display in these papers really bears this out. That is difficult to say:
            for instance the general encroachment of private occupation on public space, a recurring
            theme (<italic>pace</italic> Mulryan, and even he does not escape from using
            “private”--though within quotes--space versus communal space, 293), can be interpreted
            in different ways: vitality is one, but decay or dilapidation another. The unmitigated
            opinion expressed in this volume says: vitality. </p>
        <p>Other changes frequently mentioned are, obviously, Christianization, which impacted urban
            landscapes and urban life (nothing new here; Pedro Mateos Cruz interestingly speaks of
            Christian building programs as the creation of new public spaces after the old ones were
            abandoned), and the centres of power shifting across the map. Several authors focus on
            the Germanic successor states, and there is some reference to Islam; there is little
            explicit attention paid to the other side of the coin, that is the end of Roman
            political dominance (a subject approached intelligently and with much nuance, however,
            by Mark Lewis Tizzoni). Physical changes in the urban fabric that are repeatedly
            mentioned are the refashioning, destruction and/or spoliation of religious and
            entertainment buildings of Roman imperial date--again, one can question how to interpret
            this.</p>
        <p>In conclusion: this is a collection of papers that does not live up to its title and to
            the expectations raised by the words of publisher/editors and the preface and
            introduction. It simply is not very exciting: “too many echoes, not enough voices.”
            Notwithstanding, it contains a lot of valuable information, especially about the late
            antique archaeology of the western Mediterranean (the geographical range is rather more
            limited than the “broad geographical range” promised: Kelly’s preface, titled “Iberian
            rivalries” sets the tone. Of the ten papers, four deal with the Iberian peninsula, three
            with Gaul, one with Carthage, one with Ostia, and one with Nicomedia). If only it had
            been titled something like “Urban Transformations and Urban Life in Late Antiquity and
            the Early Middle Ages, mainly in the Western Mediterranean,” one could praise it for
            bringing together a lot of evidence not easily accessible. One might still criticize its
            lack of methodological rigour and its somewhat superficial analysis, but there would not
            be a lot of unfulfilled promises to complain about. Better to claim too little and be
            seen to surpass oneself, than claim too much and fall short. In that way, all the good
            things here run the risk of being overlooked, which would be a pity.</p>
        <p> </p>
        <p><bold>Table of Contents</bold></p>
        <p>Michael J. Kelly--Preface: Iberian Rivalries</p>
        <p>Ian Wood--Introduction</p>
        <p>Lisa Kaaren Bailey--“The Innocence of the Dead Crowned You, the Glory of the Triumphant
            Crowned Me”: The Strange Rivalry between Bethlehem and Lyon in <italic>Eusebius
                Gallicanus </italic>Sermon 11</p>
        <p>Michael Burrows--Tours vs. Bourges: The Secular and Ecclesiastical Discourse of
            Inter-City Relationships in the Accounts of Gregory of Tours</p>
        <p>Ann Christys--Did All Roads Lead to Córdoba under the Umayyads?</p>
        <p>Dimitris J. Kyrtatas--Religious Conflict in Roman Nicomedia</p>
        <p>Javier Martínez Jiménez--Reccopolitani and Other Town Dwellers in the Southern Meseta
            during the Visigothic Period of State Formation</p>
        <p>Pedro Mateos Cruz--Augusta Emerita in Late Antiquity: The Transformation of Its Urban
            Layout During the Fourth and Fifth Centuries CE</p>
        <p>Michael Mulryan--The So-Called “Oriental Quarter” of Ostia: Regions III.XVI-VII, a
            Neighborhood in Late Antiquity</p>
        <p>Isabel Sánchez Ramos--Looking through Landscapes: Ideology and Power in the Visigothic
            Kingdom of Toledo</p>
        <p>Mark Lewis Tizzoni--Locating Carthage in the Vandal Era</p>
        <p>Douglas Underwood--Good Neighbors and Good Walls: Urban Development and Trade Networks in
            Late Antique South Gaul</p>
    </body>
</article>