Seven years after the publication of the first volume, which contained the inscriptions from Ankyra dated before the third century a.d., we have now the second volume of the Ankyran corpus, containing the inscriptions from the third to the tenth centuries, although most of them belong to the period between the third and the sixth centuries. The book contains 238 inscriptions, 142 of which were not previously published. Stephen Mitchell, who started to work on Ankyran inscriptions in the 1970s, tell us that David French, who died in 2017, was able to see the complete manuscript of the book before publication, though his contribution is smaller than in the first volume. The first volume included an introductory chapter on travellers and scholars in Ankara, and hence the introductory parts of the present volume are shorter, to avoid reiteration. The introductory chapter covers late antique and Byzantine Ankara, including discussion of imperial politics, ecclesiastical disputes and church councils, a chronology of late Roman inscriptions, funerary traditions and monuments in Late Antiquity, Christianity, society, onomastics and defensive structures. After a bibliography, chs 3 and 4 cover the post-third-century inscriptions of Ankyra. Ch. 5 collects Ankyrans abroad, and ch. 6 consists of addenda and corrigenda to the first volume. The final two chapters contain a comprehensive index and concordance of publications.

At the congress of Sivas (ancient Sebaste) in 1919, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, together with delegates from several cities of Anatolia, had many good reasons to choose Ankara (ancient Ankyra) as the headquarters of the national struggle. It was the safest location against foreign threats, located as it was in the middle of Anatolia, while also being not far from İstanbul, the western front, and other occupied territories in Anatolia. It allowed connections with harbours on the Black Sea (İnebolu) and Mediterranean (Antalya), as well as use of the railway and communication network. Such geographical and strategical reasons eventually led to the choice of Ankara as the capital of the modern Turkish Republic in 1923. Similar strategic and political features already existed in antiquity. Ankara was one of the most important power centres in the east (ch. 1), due to its significant location on the main road network. The roads leading to Paphlagonia and Black Sea in the north, Pontus and Armenia in the north-east, Kappadokia and the Euphrates to the south-east, Lykaonia and Mediterranean to the south and Phrygia and Asia to the south-west all departed from this hub, creating a foremost importance especially in military terms. Thanks to its strategic location on the main road from Constantinople to Antioch, Ankyra maintained its importance during Late Antiquity and the medieval period, although it was captured by the Sassanians (in 622) and exposed to Arab raids from the seventh to the ninth centuries. After 859, when Michael III and Basil constructed the citadel, Ankyra became the strongest fortified city in northern Anatolia. As M. and F. observe, church inscriptions indicate that the city remained secure and wealthy in the ninth and tenth centuries. However, there is a notable decrease in the number of military inscriptions after the fourth century, when Ankyra was still the capital of Galatia. Following the creation of dioceses in 313, Ankyra became the seat of the vicarius of Pontica. Three important inscriptions of this period contain dedications for Constantine in 324, two erected by the praetorian prefect Fl. Constantius (inscriptions nos 329–330), one by the vicarius of Pontica Lucilius Crispus (331). These inscriptions erected by senior civilian officials show the importance of the city, previously under the control of Licinius.

The inscriptions are presented in six sections: fourteen inscriptions from fortifications, five imperial inscriptions (Constantine–Arcadius), fifteen building inscriptions, three remarkable collections of biblical exempla (two previously unpublished), 150 funerary inscriptions and eight medieval inscriptions from the imperial temple and churches. Around 19 per cent of the inscriptions in the first volume are precisely dated; far fewer of the inscriptions published here can be dated exactly, including the three dedications to Constantine in 324 (329–331), one for Julian in 362 (332) and one for Arcadius and Honorius between 395 and 402 (333). The next precisely datable inscriptions are from 859, when the citadel was constructed by the emperor Michael III and/or his protospatharius Basil (324–328). Though some other texts can be dated roughly, most (c. 90 per cent) cannot. The funerary inscriptions are divided into three groups: the first contains fifteen inscriptions dated between 250 and 450, and the latter two the more numerous grave monuments dated to the late fifth or sixth centuries, separated into larger and smaller monuments. The fourth-century epigraphic documents on public buildings (mostly fortifications) do not bear any sign of Christianity, while a Justinianic inscription above the city gate refers to Ankyra as the city of the Virgin Mary (323). The earliest evidence for church building dates to 358, when the synod of bishops who constituted the first draft of the Homoian Creed was organised there by Basil. The earliest epigraphic evidence for monastic institutions seems to come from the late fifth or sixth century. Secular professions can be traced in a small number of inscriptions, including a goldsmith (384), a silversmith (275), a linen-merchant (383), a marble worker (424), a vicarian official (433) and an infantryman (385). The onomastic repertoire is more or less similar to the picture in the rest of Anatolia.

All the inscriptions are well described, translated, and receive thorough commentaries, together with discussions of their dating. The book completes the Ankyran corpus of inscriptions, and is evidently a product of great effort and time; it is now the most comprehensive work on late Roman Ankyra.