A few years ago, the technical writings of the Roman land surveyors (Agrimensores) were obscure objects of study. More recently there has been a steady stream of books, articles, conferences and collaborative protects devoted to illuminating the importance of these writings for Roman history and society. This owed much to the pioneering work of Oswald Dilke; his The Roman Land Surveyors (1971) made the subject comprehensible and available to a wider audience, while F. T. Hinrichs’ Die Geschichte der gromatischen Institutionen. Untersuchungen zu Landverteilung, Landvermessung, Bodenverwaltung und Bodenrecht im römischen Reich (1974) produced a masterly exposition of Roman land measurement, and F. Castagnoli's Le ricerche sui resti della centuriazione (1958) offered a superb introduction, outstanding for its clarity and common sense, to the identification of the remains of ancient field systems. The writings of the agrimensores now receive the attention they deserve, given their multiple areas of scholarly interest: colonial foundations, land division techniques, administrative structures and record-keeping, land disputes and the law, the role of the emperor, the education and provenance of surveyors, astronomy, mathematics, Roman technical vocabulary and the Latin language, not to mention the history of the manuscripts and the copying of the texts in the scriptoria of the great monasteries.

This addition to the subject includes text, translation into German and a selective commentary on Hyginus, On the Establishment of Limites, concentrating on philological issues, the history of the MSS and various editions, the scientific background of orientation and cosmology and the legal context of the measurement of land. There is a short glossary and an excellent presentation of the beautiful manuscript illustrations from MSS A and P; reproductions of this quality make a significant contribution to the study of the texts.

Lindermann discusses the content and structure of the treatise of Hyginus, who remains a mysterious figure (probably living in the second half of the first century a.d.), including a survey of the history of the text and an assessment of its relationship to other surveying texts (19–22). He emphasises the connection between the text and the illustrations, which in his view are not merely decorative but can contribute to construing the text; he therefore argues convincingly that they should be placed in the text where appropriate (35–8). Overall, it is likely that Hyginus’ work was primarily intended as a handbook for those with a special knowledge of or interest in surveying.

Knobloch argues that Hyginus’ method is different from earlier and later writers on land survey, through his astronomical understanding and precise scientific methodology, which formed the basis for measuring limites and designating centuriae. Surveyors worked on the basis that the earth was spherical but also geocentric; the sphere of the earth was divided into five zones, an idea based on the work of Eratosthenes. Centuriation could be orientated from some appropriate landmark or from compass points; this required a portable sundial (gnomon) and the measurement of shadows. Hyginus is critical of surveyors who used the sun's rising or setting as the basis for their orientation; it should start from the sun's mid-point at the sixth hour, that is, midday (73–5).

More could be said about the training and education of surveyors. It is, after all, interesting that Hyginus quotes Vergil as an authority on the five zones of the celestial sphere with their corresponding five zones on earth (Georgics 1.233–51) and Lucan for the inhabitants of the fourth zone (Civil War 3.247–8). And where did land surveyors receive their education in mathematics (for measuring distance, calculating area, and conducting orientation), and in cosmology or astronomy? Surveyors were presumably expected somehow to obtain a wide general knowledge of the type that Vitruvius said was essential for architects (De Architectura 1.1.3–10).

Möller examines legal and juristic aspects in Hyginus, and identifies three important themes: the status of limites as boundaries which formed the basis of land division and provided roads and access; the organisation of plots of land in which the map or plan (forma) was very important; the differing legal character of pasture land and forests, with the complication of servitudes allowing rights of pasture for communities and neighbouring landholders. M. accepts that Hyginus is interested in the big picture of land settlement and encompasses the entire process for setting up or extending a settlement, but thinks that his real passion was in establishing boundary lines as an exercise in the science of land measurement; he was less interested in disputes and the complicated history of plots of land, which through private transactions of various kinds got new owners (101). But Hyginus was certainly interested in boundary marking and disputes (cf. C. Thulin, Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum (1913), 138.19–20 and 145.20–21), and we do not know if he wrote other works dealing with these issues.

A wider approach would be useful to establish the context of the increasingly professional status of land surveyors, who eventually could be sued if they produced misleading or inaccurate information. A factor in this development was their public role assisting magistrates responsible for founding or re-founding settlements and establishing boundaries. After the age of frequent colonial foundations, surveyors will have been much more involved in settling private disputes, but they had a crucial role, often on the emperor's instructions, in adjudicating land ownership and jurisdiction between communities in the light of changes in a community's status, requiring an understanding of the layout of fields, earlier decisions, and consultation of records. Territorial boundaries were important because communities drew taxes, resources and public services from those in the area they controlled.

Overall, in my view a lemmatised, detailed commentary would be better for surveying technicalities and legal issues. Nevertheless, this is a welcome addition to current research. With its sumptuous presentation and clearly argued if rather limited approach, it will form a valuable part of the still incomplete mosaic of land survey studies.