development of the four to five Classical Greek to Roman city-states of the island. Of these, perhaps the most inter- esting turned out to be an ancient Pronnoi city. Already we can see a central aspect of Klavs’ ap- proach to his field project, an adventure into a little- known ‘small world’, where it was unclear what could emerge and hence which methodologies would be ap- propriate. On Kephallenia he seems to be more akin to a rigorous Indiana Jones than a David Clarke or Lewis Binford. He begins by reviewing the historic or semi-historic sources for the island. There follows a typical Klavs ex- cursus on Homer and Ithaka. Did Odysseus dwell on that tiny, next door island just 100 km 2 , rather than fertile 800 km 2 Kephallenia? Klavs favours a single unit of power combining both islands, perhaps also with part of the ad- jacent Mainland Peloponnese. Then where might lie the palatial base of Odysseus? In South-East Kephallenia in the area of later Pronnoi city, and here recently a large Mycenaean tholos tomb had been found. The historic confinement of Ithaka for Odysseus’ hero cult he attrib- utes to the expansion of Corinthian colonial and com- mercial interests, where that islet and its channel were of strategic importance. Christina Souyoudzoglou-Hay- wood offers an informed view of Klavs’ ideas on Homer (Souyoudzoglou-Haywood, present volume). But already we see a central theme of Klavs’ model for the island, a minor plaything in the schemes of greater powers. Klavs now illustrates the known sites on the island before the Danish Project began its survey in the East and south of Kephallenia (1991-1994 and 1996-1998 sup- plementary fieldwork) (Fig. 3). This key and useful map shows the areas the team walked, extensively (grey) and intensively (black – a more typical 10-20 m between field- walkers). These ‘lumps and sausages’ as they appear on the map, were chosen as they were areas of easier access and visibility or of archaeological and historical impor- tance. In the spirit of independent discovery Klavs rather ABSTRACT Klavs Randsborg undertook major and influential re- search in many epochs and countries. The present article focuses on his contribution to the landscape and town- scape history of Greece through his impressive and thor- ough researches on the Ionian island of Kephallenia. INTRODUCTION Klavs and I met at a conference in the mid-1990s when I was preparing an article comparing surface surveys across Greece (Bintliff 1997). He corrected my summary of his island of Kephallenia project (note 1), and later he kindly sent me the impressive two-volume publication, which I will discuss in this article (Randsborg 2002). A couple of years ago we met once more at another confer- ence, and I was amazed to hear of his new project in West Africa. I want to share something personal with you here; it seems appropriate. He seemed quite mystical during our conversation, asked me if I was a Christian, and when I said yes, replied that there was something spiritually important we shared. We will all miss his adventurous, ir- repressibly wide-ranging intellect and physical presence. WHY KEPHALLENIA? OVER VIEW OF SURVEY RESULTS Why Kephallenia, or indeed Greece (Fig. 1)? In his In- troduction, Klavs tells us that this field project “was an important part of the then European activities of the Dan- ish director, who in the 1990s was focused mainly on the development of the material world from the late 2 nd mil- lennium BC to about the turn of the 1 st millennium BC”. It was also the first project under the newly-founded Dan- ish Institute in Athens (Fig. 2). Actually it turned out that too little data were availa- ble from the Survey to enlighten us on the transition from the Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age, but instead far more, and rich, evidence became available regarding the KLAVS AND THE KEPHALLENIA PROJECT John Bintliff